> The turbine will produce about three megawatts of energy on average which, when working at full capacity, is enough to power 2,400 U.S. homes for one month.
The "for one month" makes no sense here, but if you drop it the math checks out.
Megawatts are a unit of power. Think of the size of the engine in a car.
Megawatt-hours are a unit of energy. Think of the size of a fuel tank.
Both units are useful: if you run a 1 MW load (a synonym, mostly, for power) for an hour, you'll use one MWh of energy, and have to fuel or pay equivalently.
But increasing the size of your gas tank won't make your car more powerful, and increasing the engine size won't let you drive further between fuel stops.[1]
That serious information outlets still confuse the terms is a bit sad really.
_______________________________
Notes:
1. Pedants, I love you, welcome to Costco. But I'm excluding second-order effects, which tend regardless to be in the opposite directions.
Additionally, it won’t work at full capacity all of the time. The capacity factors as seen in actual existing commercial installations usually range betweeen 40% and 60%, so the average power output here will be rather 1-1.7 MW instead of 3 MW
Where in Europe? There's a variance in the average consumption of over 400% depending on the weather. France uses much less energy than the US on average, but Sweden uses more.
We see the same variance regionally within the US as well. Canadians use more energy per capita than folks in the US. Cold and hot states dominate energy consumption per capita.
The US does have larger homes and more wealth and does tend to consume more energy per capita across similar environments -- but regional weather patterns create far, far larger differences in energy consumption than any other factor.
We could just as easily say that Europe shouldn't be used as a benchmark as the weather is too nice, on average.
The "for one month" makes no sense here, but if you drop it the math checks out.