This is all very different from the small-scale beginnings of the wind industry. In 1979, Vestas' first turbine was the V10-30kW model, which produced about 40,000 kWh. That is to say, the V164 is expected to produce 750 times as much energy as the V10.

Another way of looking at this is to consider Altamont Pass, Calif., the world's largest wind farm with over 5,000 turbines when it was built in the 1980s. The entire combined annual energy production of Altamont is 1.1 TWh. The citizens of California could get the same amount of energy from just 36 of the new turbines. Thirty-six machines would replace 5,000.

Target: Northern Europe

But the V164 is not likely to be serving the needs of Californians or any other Americans any time soon. It is aimed squarely at the British, German and other Northern European markets. While American policy makers dither about what to do with renewables, which (ironically) many see as "small scale," our British cousins are moving forward at full steam.

The U.K. is already number one in the world in wind energy capacity with over 1,300 MW installed and another 1,100 MW under construction. But this is just the beginning. The government's policy is to meet 20 percent of its electrical needs with wind by 2020, and about 35 percent with wind by 2030. The Crown Estate Round 3 and Scottish waters projects, if they succeed in adding another 38,000 MW in the coming years, will enable Britain to reach or surpass this target.

The scale of these offshore projects is mind-boggling. There is a single project in Crown Estate 3, in the zone of Norfolk Bank and known as the East Anglia Array, which is planned to be 7,200 MW. Even if they use the V164, this project would require 1,028 machines, and it would supply enough energy for nearly three million households.

By comparison, a typical nuclear power plant is 1,000 MW and the largest coal-fired power plant in the world, Nanticoke Generating Station, in Ontario, Canada, puts a maximum of 3,640 MW. Even allowing for differences in capacity factor (i.e., the wind does not blow all the time), the East Anglia Array will dwarf almost all conventional power plants.

Needless to say, such an undertaking will cost a lot of money and will bring with it a great deal of risk. How did our normally conservative British cousins (and they have a Conservative government at the moment) come to radical idea of relying on offshore wind as their number one energy option in the coming decades?

Two years ago, it was anything but clear. Some argued that nuclear was the best option; others argued for onshore wind or other options. But in the national conversation about Britain's energy future, it became clear to the majority that as North Sea oil and gas fade away, the best option was to replace North Sea oil and gas with North Sea wind -- domestic, clean and job-producing.