Another awful piece of Wind Energy reporting

I interrupt this series of Bible comments to point out another classic poor piece of reporting, part of which is because of a poor quote and part of which shows plain misunderstanding about Wind Energy usage in the UK. I refer to this story about the Delabole wind farm redevelopment in Cornwall, particularly the quote by Chris Huhne, "Wind is an abundant, clean, home-grown alternative to fossil fuels" and then the usual cheap piece of technical data, "Potential electricity generated at the site will increase to 9.2 megawatts, enough to power 7,000 homes."
Firstly, Chris, wind is generally abundant and clean but this is such a poor painting of the subject. Despite being abundant, there is very little energy in wind because the mass of air is so low. In other words, you need a very large piece of equipment to generate the same electricity as a much smaller water or steam powered alternative. In general, the water/steam equivalent is the same size as just the generator part of the wind turbine. Secondly, to say it is an alternative with no qualification makes people think we could get a lot of our energy from wind, something which is simply not true. Wind farm output fluctuates massively over short and long periods of time and there is no way to make up this slack in a short time when there is demand for electricity. I won't even mention the fact that the financial side of things never adds up: "free energy" which costs millions in installation costs and doesn't last forever (Delabole is only 20 years old and already being replaced).
The main problem is the use, again, of sloppy and incorrect information about the capacity of these plants. Despite the unfortunate use of the word "potential" which in energy usually refers to stored energy sources like water, I'll assume they mean maximum output, it is unclear exactly what they are claiming. Energy demand is measured in Watt-Seconds or more commonly Kilowatt Hours so saying that the output is 9.2 megawatts doesn't really say anything. Is this average or maximum ('potential')? If it is maximum the figure is useless because when it produces nothing in very high or low wind speeds, then it powers no houses and if it is an average, it is still useless for the same reasons (i.e. sometimes it could power 20000 houses and at other times none).
The only obvious use I can see for wind turbines with their erratic output is to crack water into hydrogen which can then be stored and used for power or to fuel cars but while the popular press reports poor technical articles, the general population genuinely (and understandably) wonder why we haven't built loads of them.
Oh yeah and 7000 houses is hardly any since it works out at £1690 per house for the installation and this doesn't include things that were already installed.