Doesn't make sense. Care to explain? Are you saying it takes less energy to take an object from 0 to 10m/s than it requires to take it from 10m/s to 20m/s?
E = 1/2 m*v^2
dE = E1 - E0 = 1/2(10^2) - 1/2(0^2) = 50J
dE = E2 - E1 = 1/2(20^2) - 1/2(10^2) = 200 - 50 = 150J
v = sqrt(2*E) = sqrt(200) = 14.1m/s
You can find plenty of examples but that's about it. Ex: You hold a gun in your hand and shoot it, the gun kicks back because momentum is concerved. But, the bullet is a lot more dangerous than the gun because while it has the same momentum it's got a lot more energy. Now, it hits a bullet proof vest. The vest still hits the person wearing the vest but because it obsorbed the energy it feels like a strong punch instead of making a hole in them.
A second gust at 10 m/s is NOT enough to further accelerate the balloon to 20 m/s. Because the wind and the balloon are now travelling at the same speed. It follows intuitively that the second gust should contain more kinetic energy than the first gust.