how big of a solar array would it take to equal a 2500kw wind turbine,if both produced there full capacity?

Question

for a one year period,if both were equally optimised,then how many typical single family homes's could be powered?how do you figure out how much physical space do each or both require,if the turbine has 80' blade's and is mounted on a 140m tower?

Answer 1

Total solar energy at the Earths surface is somewhere around 1kw/m² but typical solar conversion is only about 20% efficient, so I'd guess about 12,500 m² of solar cell surface area (that's a square about 112 meters on a side).


Doug

Answer 2

The peak solar power in Arizona in summer is 1120 Watts per square meter. If the solar array was 100% efficient and at 90 Degrees to the sun then for about 1 hour each day the array would put out 2500Kw. It would be 2232 Meters Squared. A little over 47 x 47 Meters.

Answer 3

More information is needed to answer this question properly. What you are trying to figure out is not a problem. Space requirements for each are already known but vary according to location and terrain. Optimization of each is possible but probably not comparable because they both would be optimized under different environmental conditions. Also, there are different technologies available for both, particularly the solar array you discuss. I can only assume you are talking about photovoltaic cells. They differ, but the key to power generation is in total sunlight hours rather than how much space is taken up by the array. The keys to wind power generation are consistency of wind speed and direction. The key to powering homes is continuous power. Herein lies the difficulty with switching to wind and solar, the sun has to be shining and the wind blowing for them to produce power, and we can't guarantee those things.

Answer 4

That's a pretty big generator. Probably enough for 600 homes (at an average of 35 A each). The equivalent solar array (at 3 Watts/sq ft) would be about 1,000,000 square ft or 94,000 sq m

Answer 5

doug donaghue has the right idea, but I've heard it's more like 12 to 15% efficiency. That increases the area to 17,000 to 21,000 m^2, or a square that is between 130 to 145 m on a side. Either way, it would have to be HUGE.