Solar or Wind: Which Renewable Is Right for Your Business?

Both solar and wind are proven renewable options for businesses. But there’s no universal 'best' answer, each comes with trade-offs that depend heavily on your site, your energy profile and your long-term strategy.

Solar is often cheaper and easier to install, particularly for businesses with large rooftops or car parks. Wind, on the other hand, can be more efficient, producing more energy per unit and generating power at night, but it usually faces tougher planning hurdles and more complex maintenance.

That’s why making the right choice isn’t about gut feel or a headline cost per MWh. It’s about weighing up a broader set of factors from upfront capex and payback to permitting, land use, maintenance and how well the technology matches your actual energy consumption.

The radar graph below shows how solar and wind stack up across these categories, offering a quick way to spot their relative strengths and weaknesses.

Comparing Solar and Wind in Practice

When we run the numbers with clients, solar often dominates in areas like upfront costs, land efficiency and ease of deployment. A rooftop system can be modular, scaling with demand, and is widely accepted by stakeholders from planning authorities to employees. Wind, by contrast, usually offers a higher capacity factor, meaning you get more power per unit of capacity and crucially, it can generate at night.

But higher efficiency doesn’t automatically mean it’s the better option. A project that looks strong on paper can still be derailed by permitting delays, unsuitable site conditions, or an energy load profile that doesn’t line up with when the turbine is producing power. 

Key Takeaways from the Comparison

• Solar dominates in capex, O&M, payback, land use, maintenance, modularity, and ESG acceptance.
• Wind is stronger on efficiency/capacity factor as it produces more power per unit, and can generate at night.
• Permitting is a major hurdle for wind, dragging its score down relative to solar.
• Businesses with large rooftops or parking can extract much higher value from solar. Wind only makes sense if your site has strong wind resources and you can navigate planning hurdles.

It’s also important to consider grid connection and load profile. Exporting surplus electricity can attract low tariffs or run into grid constraints. Aligning generation with your actual usage hours often delivers the best value. With True, you can model these variables in seconds, stress-test different scenarios and see not just the technical feasibility but the commercial return.

Case Study

True Group works with companies that all have different energy demands, operations and geographical constraints. One customer, with an annual daytime usage of around 1 GWh (1,000,000 kWh), asked us: “What’s the best renewable option for us?”

Our analysis showed the following:

• With a UK-specific yield of ~950 kWh/kWp/yr, a system of about 600 kWp was required. A roof mounted solar array of this size typically avoids planning requirements and enables fast deployment. This represented a gross investment of just under £500,000 and could generate close to the customer’s full annual daytime demand.
• Wind sizing: At typical UK onshore capacity factors of 25–35%, a turbine rated between 0.3–0.4 MW would be required to meet the same 1 GWh target. This made the project medium-scale, introducing more complex planning and permitting requirements. However, wind power offered several compelling advantages: it can generate electricity overnight, performs particularly well during the winter months and provides opportunities to export surplus energy, potentially unlocking an additional revenue stream for the business.
• Grid comparison: At prevailing business tariffs, the customer was paying significantly more per MWh for grid electricity than the lifetime cost of self-generated energy. The business case for renewables was therefore not only about sustainability, but also about procurement value and locking in lower, more predictable energy costs.

For this business, accommodating this solar panel capacity across their available roof space was both feasible and practical. In contrast, the planning complexity and associated risks of installing a turbine made wind less attractive. Local wind conditions were also minimal, limiting the potential return. Solar, on the other hand, offered a guaranteed match to their daytime load and delivered clear long-term savings compared to grid electricity. Ultimately, they chose a solar-first strategy for a reliable and scalable solution to cut both costs and emissions.

Where True Makes the Difference

Making these trade-offs without the right tools can be complex. That’s where True comes in:

• See the numbers clearly: Compare solar vs wind vs PPAs in terms of capex, ROI, carbon savings, and supplier performance — all in one place.
• Model your exact load profile: Ensure generation matches your actual consumption, not just an average forecast.
• Stress-test the options: Factor in permitting hurdles, land availability, and long-term maintenance.
• De-risk decision-making: Backed by expert guidance and real-time procurement data.

Whatever your portfolio and energy demand looks like, talk to True Group. Our experts can guide you through the trade-offs and direct you to the renewable solution that best fits your business.