Thanks for putting the yale climate link. One thing to note is that the person launches into a tirade against coal, calling it dirty etc without any proof and then goes into CO2 as the major GHG (which it is, but things are also complicated with CFCs, methane etc). I would tend to ignore anything coming out from Yale or Harvard or Oxford or Cambridge. Just pinch your nose at their stinking analysis and move forward.
First of all, I am not coal proponent. I am a nuclear energy proponent. Second, I did investigate wind turbine for personal use like this
https://www.tesup.us/product-page/atlas ... for-houses, and later installed lots of PV (Solar). Accounting for 5 Hr of Solation and ensuring that all the roof area is best utilized. I prefer to have Solar over Wind. For very good reasons.
So yes, wind power is an exotic hobby. Germany cut over to wind and now is buying coal based power, gas peakers and the worst of it all, nuclear power from France. Germans are strategically stupid.
----
Pratushji, thanks for the link. As I read it, it shows that Wind farms generate only 35% of installed capacity. So Vips'ji here is my own analysis (hopefully better than that of the yale elite)
Let's say that wind power generates at 1/3rd (33%) of installed capacity (Link by Pratyush'ji already indicates it at 35%, so we can use 1/3rd of install capacity). That means, 2/3rds of the rest comes from other sources. Like Coal. Or Gas based. Which generates CO2
Right off the gate, wind power is now only 33% less GHG (CO2) generator. That is, if your installed capacity is 100 MW, the 66 MW comes from coal or gas based power generators. Remember, you cannot promise your customer 100 MW and deliver only 33 MW. It is like ordering a plate of idly with 3 idlis and you get only 1. The restaurant owner cannot say, we cooked only 1 idli.
Now here is the rub. The wind power is very very very erratic. At least with Sun, it rises every day. So one can calculate average Solation (incidence of solar energy per day) and plan accordingly. Wind is not like that. It is very erratic. Even at places where Wind flows regularly.
So how can wind power serve as base load or peak load? Unless it is backed up by a power grid which is always power deficient. In India it still works, since if wind power comes online, areas with power deficiency gets an extra hour or two of electricity. Otherwise that area is load shed, since there is not sufficient base load to go along and not enough of peakers (gas based which are costly anyway). Think of hot sunny days when A/Cs have to run. With wind power coming online, some areas will get 20 hrs of electricity rather than 18 hrs of electricity. But again per capita power consumption is already very low in India and hence every drop of power counts.
----
I would like to break "Power" down into 3 parts:
1. Installation
2. Generation
3. Distribution
Wind power generation is tricky. That is, it cannot be counted for base load or peak load. Sometimes it will jeapordize the grid itself.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49309691.
The sun does shine brightly on summer days and when the A/Cs have to run, the PVs will produce energy. Peak demand, peak output. That is an example of power is available for utilization while it is needed the most. Wind does not behave like that.
Coming to installation, the best wind farms are actually offshore. Areas which are not readily accessible. The largest off-shore wind farm with >1000 MW capacity is spread over ~400 sq km
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/huge-of ... -says.html.
Imagine setting up concrete bases some ~100 kms out in the sea and running the cables back. Just for the steel, high quality coal is used to reduce the iron oxide to iron and generate tons of CO2 in the process. Same with making cement and concrete and the energy cost to install all that several kilometers out at sea.
And how does one maintain those wind farms spread across 400-600 square kms? The CO2 emitted while doing the maintenance over 20 years life time itself can be used to generate some energy locally.
In the Indian case, one can argue that the dry mountain ranges of Sahyadri with black rock solid basalt cliffs can provide solid foundation into which the base of wind mill can be drilled into. Over 100s of kilometers one has to cart equipment up the range, install and later maintain it. What is the cost consideration and what is the CO2 emission for the energy spent in setting it up?
Lastly distribution. The best locations for generating power from wind is not necessary the places which can also house both residential and commercial power consumers. Imagine a floating population of Mumbai spanning 600 sq. km out there in the middle of sea some 80-100 kms offshore.
All the above require some more number crunching, but wind power is going to be niche and will *not* replace the "dirty coal power" anytime soon or even later. In effect the 33% CO2 advantage one gains with wind power is quickly dispensed in installation and maintenance cost (cement, steel, carbon fibre, turbines, magnets etc).
---
For the Indian conditions, every village with a bio-gas plant coupled with roof top solar will go a long way to address the power deficit locally. And a smart grid can provide the energy necessary using base load from both coal and nuclear power.
) and then we need to be careful and creative to see what the overall thermal & mechanical energy efficiency end to end. For example, what do you need to produce X tons of bio methane if you started on a new earth like planet? 
