After the surprise of such astronomical figures, we can try to see what this could mean, on three points: the resource, the method, the principle.
Firstly, regarding the Jet Stream resource, two lines of research have led to opposing conclusions, and have been doing so for some time. I am not aware of any more recent work on this subject.
The total wind energy in the jet streams is roughly 100 times the global energy demand.
Jet stream wind power as a renewable energy resource: little power, big impacts
L. M. Miller, F. Gans, and A. Kleidon
We will therefore be cautious, and say that between the maximum height achievable by conventional wind turbines (200-300 m) and 10,000 m altitude, the margin can be considerable.
AWE can therefore count on a great thickness of winds.
Secondly, let’s look at the method.
-
"Kite Pros know how to do it, with “rag-and-string-only”
To my knowledge, the size records have been obtained with flexible kites, so by using “rag-and-string-only”. But we are in the order of a few thousand m² and for static kites, which would give at best a few hundred kW (10 m/s wind speed), and a few MW for a wing in crosswind flight. -
" A single vast kite Network can in principle power the world."
We will focus on the supposed benefit of the kite network before advancing anything.
To start I’m waiting to see a kite network heating @dougselsam 's house in winter.
Other methods than kite networks can exist, such like AWES farm in bumper car mode. The supposed advantage also remains to be demonstrated.
Thirdly, about the main principle: “It’s simply sailing-in-the-sky on a grand scale.”
This seems like a good principle. Even a small kite has a tether of 100 m long and more. We take up space, so we must make it profitable by sweeping the largest wind frontal airspace possible.
Don’t forget that a kite is not a turbine: let’s not forget the conversion system.
Before thinking big in the realization (heating a house), try to reheat a coffee.