Wind power is much larger than PV solar at present. That does not mean the future capacity is more, it means wind has been developed longer. See:
http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_installed_capacity.asp#yearly It is fun to watch the changing graphic map chart at the top right of this page. In 2012, total installed nameplate capacity was 60 GW. With a capacity factor of 30% that's ~18 GW. It produced 3% of U.S. electricity. Compare that to nukes, which are left on all the time to produce baseline electricity. They produce 19% of U.S. electricity. They have roughly 100 GW of capacity. The numbers are in reasonable agreement. They produce 6.3 times more electricity than wind, and they have about 5.5 times more capacity. At the rate wind is expanding it will not take centuries to catch up with nuclear power. It is increasing at around 13 GW nameplate per year, or about 4 nukes. See: http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/pdfs/2012_annual_wind_market_report.pdf Once wind reaches parity with nukes, at ~20% of capacity, it will become more difficult to integrate into the network. That's what EPRI said 10 years ago. I believe that wind installations do not degrade as quickly as PV solar. The turbines last longer, and continue to produce efficiently. They last 20 to 30 years. The big expense in making them is for the towers. You can leave the towers and replace only the turbine and blades. - Jed
