Bruce,
Yes that's the intent. Thanks for the added interpretation.
topspeed,
Continue exploring - you want to keep trying stuff and figuring it out. I'm all in support of that.
The report from the Laval students is just a simulation. No tests. And goofy data because they are doing something not connected with real machinery but more related to comparing different computer algorithms. They had no intent to publish data about the capabilities of any wind turbine, so don't use their results to say that.
It makes you look bad.
Perhaps an example from my own experience will help. I use software a lot like what the Laval students have. I've built simulations of structures, and managed a team of others developing air flow simulations. When these simulation are not yet finished, but start to run for the first time, the mistakes haven't been cleaned out yet, and you can generate a lot of beautiful garbage. When the first results come in, and we look over what they tell us, believe me, I do not get into a panic that airplanes will start falling out of the sky just because my broken simulation says it's wings generate 1/2 the lift they are supposed to. I can look out the window and see one of them on final approach to the airport. It's my sim that's pumping out crap. Fix the simulation.