| > Why do they need recoveries if not for maintenance? Upgrades. Was already answered. > Why did they need to cut the cost of maintenance if no costly maintenance were needed? To improve the ROI. If maintenance is needed, it will be cheaper going forward. How often the average turbine will require maintenance is harder to determine based on the information available. We know it might be somewhere between a few years and ~6 years. > How is this not literally validating GPs comment? It does not say anything about maintenance being required or costly. > Anyone can say "the new ones won't need maintenance and the only reason we took them out was to improve them", but they could've worked on better ones and deployed them without removing existing ones. That requires more investment (the things ain't cheap), and it does not show whether successful maintenance is possible or how expensive/cumbersome that maintenance would be, which are very important pieces of information for determining ROI. |