As soon as I save the thumbnail image I knew this was BS, didn't even need to watch the video.
That tiny fan is supposed to be more efficient than a huge wind turbine ? lol
Reynolds Number alone is reason enough that larger blade diameter = more efficient.
Case in point, model aircraft jet engines have very marginal Reynolds Number/efficiency, it's amazing they work at all.
Compare that to the full size ones which are WW2 era technology. You'd think someone who designed jet engines would know about this.
It's a problem that in our marketing lead, computer rendered, social media driven world, basic engineering is now far, far down the list of "skills"
For example, at a basic level, just because some device is optimum in one type of application makes it in no-way optimum for another. The windscammer says "i looked at jet engine technology" because they are very efficient, but so what? Let me give you an example: The wheels on your push bike are really efficient. Super light, and have very low rolling resistance. Ok, that's great, lets fit them to you car because that must be good right, i mean they are terrific on a bike. Of course, as soon as you let the car off the jack the wheel will collapse, and even if they don't, as soon as you turn the first corner they will fail because bike wheels don't take lateral loads.
So to suggest a turbine blade design used in a ultra high performance heat engine is in any way "optimum" for a wind turbine should immediately raise peoples suspicions. As you say, a jet turbine disc operates at vastly different reynolds numbers and critically requires matching stators to optimise the AoA for it to actually work.