English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-12-22 05:39:02 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Earth Sciences & Geology

Thanks

A link to an article would be helpfull too.

2007-12-22 05:46:53 · update #1

5 answers

Solar cells are expensive. So expensive that they pay for themselves just about the time that their useful life is over. The margins are very small, primarily because they capture only about 15-20% of the solar energy that hits them.

Wind turbines, by contrast, can capture over 80% of the available wind energy.

2007-12-22 05:44:13 · answer #1 · answered by Keith P 7 · 3 0

Because the cost per megawatt, ie, return on investment, is better at this time for wind than for solar.

That may change in the future, though. Nanosolar of San Jose claims their new solar panels can be mf'd for less than $1 per watt of generating capacity. This would bring total SYSTEM investment to under $2 per watt of installed capacity, beating wind and competing with new fossil fuel plants.

2007-12-22 05:50:18 · answer #2 · answered by MVB 6 · 1 0

The economics are better. It costs $10 a watt to install solar electric power, and you can get at most 2 kWh of power per year per installed watt. That much juice is worth about 25 cents, so you are better off leaving your money in a savings account.

2007-12-22 05:46:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Wind turbine power plants are more econmical as they can work even at night time whereas solar power plants work only for half day that too when there is no cloud cover.

2007-12-22 06:05:22 · answer #4 · answered by Arasan 7 · 3 1

1

2017-01-31 15:24:18 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers