There is nothing particularly new about a ducted fan, or ducted turbine. The efficiencies claimed for this are nonsense - but probably true in a very limited sense. I don't doubt that they could achieve a 600% increase in wind velocity, but that is not the same as saying it is 600% more efficient, in fact I am certain it is substantially less efficient.
The effect of all that ducting is to allow a smaller turbine - all that extra hardware in the ducts allows you to reduce the length of the blades. But is that less expensive than longer blades? One thing I am certain of is that it lowers the overall efficiency of the unit because you lose a lot of energy changing the direction of the wind and doing the other things required to make this work. For example, there have to be one way air valves (or flaps) that shut off the downwind 'collectors', since they would otherwise create negative pressure and lower the effective power delivered to the turbine. Those valves, even in open position, will also lower the final pressure delivered to the turbine. Shoving wind into pipes is never going to be very efficient.
But while I'm making the point that in any meaningful way the efficiency claims are almost certainly bogus - that really has very little relevance. Who cares if it isn't mechanically efficient -
is it economical? Like
solar panels I'd much rather have units that are only 2% efficient than 17% efficient panels that cost 100 times as much. I'm no more worried about a 'wind spill' than a '
solar spill' so the efficiency of the unit is pretty much moot compared to its economics.
Having the turbine and major moving parts at ground level is a big benefit. As is the unidirectional design. But those features are also present in Darrieus and Savonius wind turbines with a lot less complication. Is this design any better? I'm a little dubious, but it all comes down to cost.