>>12206252>>12206252>to complicated and reliant on weatherit is actually simpler to build and design solar farms because no moving parts, large foundations etc and we can predict solar radiation better than wind speed (wind speed requires specific measurements in exact spots etc). And both of them are weather specific, blade pitch doesn't give you that much of a range.
>well placed windfall will generate power constantly, outputs ac and doesn't require significant maintenancewind turbine outputs ac because of power electronics built-in (even asynchronous generators, PMGs require inverters), same as solar plants that have inverters for ac
and wind turbines do require regular maintenance, actually maintenance is how big dogs like Vestas make money
>solar panels lose 40% of their efficiency in the first decade plus complicated sun tracking systems.no they dont, its 20% in 20 years, manufacture guarantee
and vast majority of big plants dont use tracking
>it's cloudythe annual energy production is very predictable with solar and for momentary events we can downregulate with inverters, or have a grid/energy storage backup
i worked in the wind turbine industry for 5 years and love turbines with all my heart, but neither wind nor solar are feasible as sole energy sources, and as a supplementary source solar is just better
also, you don't consider the fact that for nationwide production you don't have to have big ass parks
if every household puts a couple of panels on the roof it is already a big chunk, good luck doing that with turbines (yes, small wind turbines are a thing and, no, putting them next to your house is a bad idea 90% of the time)
