Turbines have gone from 1-2MW to 10-16MW
Capacity factors have gone from 20% to 50%-60%
Annual additions gave gone from sub-GW to 70GW last year
And with turbine spacing of 1km you can actually do stuff with the land in between.
On the other hand, transmission projects still take 10-20 years, and new transmission projects are often over booked by 300%-400% before they are even started.
Okay, but GP's point was that these bigger turbines need to be spaced further apart instead, so we can place fewer of them. That we could build bigger turbines was not in question I think. Do you happen to know whether the MW per km² increased more than the 30% expected amount that GP cited?
And regarding doing things between the turbines, I wasn't "awake" yet in 2006 so I don't remember how it was then, but were they ever placed so close together that you couldn't have farmland in between turbines? The problem seems to be that people don't want to live near them and find nature filled with wind turbines ugly, not so much that you can't do anything else in between.
(Just to note, I don't find them that ugly (even if, of course, nature would be prettier without them... but that's not an option) and I also didn't find them to be very loud when I visited some nearby wind turbines. Perhaps it's different at night when it's all quiet, but personally I don't think I'd mind living next to one. The blades are a bit scary though, I can't help but imagine the consequences if one of them lets loose... but that's like being afraid of air travel I guess.)
What will be a problem if our energy consumption increases by an order of magnitude or two, and we take all of it from the wind. Currently, the entire question is about financial ROI.
> but were they ever placed so close together that you couldn't have farmland in between turbines?
Not since the modern turbines were invented. The first ones were placed in somewhat compact lines, with enough spacing between the turbine lines that you could raise a few lines of any crop. (The lines can't be too close anyway, as that would reduce the turbine efficiency and harm financial ROI.)
Electric cars are ridiculously efficient. A 100kwh tesla drives approx 500km. So 50km/day/car needs just 10kwh. The UK also has 2 persons per car (plus additional cats and dogs..)
So just the on-shore book projection is already enough AND only requires a tenth of the turbines.
Lets keep nuclear as well. Invest in efficiency. Lots of hard work ahead.
But we are probably closer to "problem solved" than to "civilization collapse". Cheers.
For what it's worth "In 2019, the average car in the UK drove 7,400 miles"[0] which works out to 33 km/day/car. It's probably much less now due to working from home (and fuel shortages, and the collapse of the supply chain...)
[0] https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/cheap-car-insurance/average-car...