Given that they are operating in a harsh environment (especially salt air) this must be a factor. I also haven't seen any discussion of their ability to withstand severe weather. It is one thing to immobilize the rotor during high wind conditions, but what happens during a hurricane or other strong storm.
Even a stationary rotor will be subjected to strong forces. I'm not saying that these factors haven't been considered, just that we non-experts haven't seen citations to the studies. Policies not Politics ---- Daily Landscape
Lifespan onshore is 20-25 years; for now, the same is expected offshore. In both cases, that includes major refurbishing or all-out repowering (putting bigger turbines on the same spot) after 10-15 years. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Please don't think anyone's questioning your judgement at all; we're just curious. Come, my friends, 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world.
I guess lifespan affects more the top than the other part, hence somewhat dismishing the global risk.
per 1MW, you'll typically have turbine + tower: EUR 1M foundations : EUR 0.5M cable : EUR 0.5-1M other: 0.5-1.5M (electrical equipement, onshore cable, development, finance) In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
So the sexy "engineering" operational risk (turbine+blade stress) is limited to about 20-30% even if it falls down to replacing the whole top, with a premature replacement if needed probably bringing better efficiency and increase in life span.
The rest of the technology has been in place for a while for offshore oil and regular eletrical stuff so I think not really in the "risky" category.
