Comparison of Fixed Metal Structures and Tracker Systems for Solar Power Plants in Europe
Solar power plants can be installed on two main types of support structures: fixed (stationary) metal structures or solar tracking systems. In the first case, panels are mounted at a fixed angle, typically optimized to face south (in the Northern Hemisphere). In the second case, panels are installed on moving mechanisms (trackers) that adjust their position throughout the day to follow the sun’s movement. The choice between these two approaches affects energy production efficiency, project costs, and investment payback periods. This article will examine the advantages and disadvantages of each system, compare their electricity generation potential, analyze differences in capital costs, and determine in which regions of Europe tracker systems are most suitable.
A solar power plant with fixed panels in an open area. Such stationary structures are simpler and cheaper but collect less solar energy at sunrise and sunset when the angle of sunlight is not optimal.
Fixed (Stationary) Structures
Fixed supports are stable metal structures on which solar panels are mounted at a constant tilt angle. This angle is determined during installation according to the site’s latitude: panels are oriented south and tilted at an angle that ensures maximum annual energy production (usually close to the site’s latitude). Stationary systems do not have moving parts, meaning the panels remain fixed throughout the day and year (in some cases, the angle may be adjusted manually on a seasonal basis, but this is rarely done in large solar power plants).
Advantages of Fixed Systems
• Lower cost and simplicity. Fixed structures are easier to construct and cheaper to purchase since they do not contain expensive moving components or motors. Fewer components also mean lower maintenance costs in the long run. The simplicity of the structure reduces the risk of malfunctions— the absence of moving parts eliminates failures related to mechanical wear.
• Denser panel placement. Fixed installations allow for denser panel placement on a given land area since they do not require space for movement throughout the day. This means that more peak capacity (kW) of panels can be installed on the same area compared to trackers. As a result, for land-constrained sites, a stationary system can provide a higher overall energy yield by incorporating more modules.
• Resistance to weather conditions. Because the panels do not move, fixed structures typically withstand extreme weather conditions—strong winds, snowfalls, and dust storms—better. They are securely anchored and do not require complex sensor or controller systems to react to wind (whereas trackers must enter protective mode in high winds, adjusting their angle to reduce wind resistance). In cold regions with heavy snowfall, fixed panels can be installed at a steeper angle to help snow slide off more quickly or to facilitate manual cleaning, whereas moving trackers are harder to maintain in such conditions.
Disadvantages of Fixed Systems
• Lower energy production. The main drawback is that the panels are always oriented at a single angle, so they receive optimal sunlight only during certain hours of the day. In the morning and evening, the angle of sunlight is far from optimal, leading to significant energy losses. As a result, fixed systems generate less electricity per installed kilowatt of panels than tracker-based systems. Estimates suggest that stationary installations may produce 15–25% less energy than equivalent single-axis tracker systems, depending on climate and location.
• Peak load on the grid. Since fixed panels are oriented for average sun positioning, they produce peak generation at noon. At this time, many solar power plants produce energy simultaneously, which can lead to grid congestion or a drop in wholesale electricity prices (a phenomenon known as the “duck curve”). The lack of generation in the morning and evening means that stationary systems contribute less to covering peak evening demand. (Trackers partially address this issue by extending generation into morning and evening hours.)
• Topographical limitations. On highly uneven terrain (hills, steep slopes), installing fixed systems may require custom designs for each panel row or significant land leveling work. Although trackers also have limitations on uneven land, fixed systems cannot adapt their tilt angle to different land slopes, so some panels in such areas may not be optimally positioned for sunlight.
Tracker Systems (Sun-Tracking Systems)
Trackers are movable support systems equipped with mechanisms that rotate solar panels to follow the sun’s movement. The most common type is single-axis trackers (HSAT – Horizontal Single-Axis Trackers), which rotate panels around a single horizontal axis from east to west. These systems allow panels to remain nearly perpendicular to the sun throughout the day. There are also dual-axis trackers, which adjust both tilt angle and azimuth for even more precise sun tracking throughout the day and year. However, dual-axis systems are significantly more expensive and complex, so they are rarely used in large commercial solar power plants.
Advantages of Tracker Systems
• Higher electricity production. The primary advantage of trackers is increased efficiency. Thanks to dynamic sun tracking, solar panels receive direct sunlight for longer periods during the day, significantly boosting generation. On average, a single-axis tracker system can produce 15–25% more energy per year compared to a fixed system. In Southern and dry climates, the increase can reach ~30%, while in cloudier regions, it ranges from 10–15%. Studies indicate that single-axis trackers yield approximately 25% more energy in Central Europe and up to 30% more in Southern Europe. Even in northern latitudes, the benefit is significant—for example, in Scandinavia, sun-tracking modules can potentially generate up to 50% more annually than fixed ones, though absolute solar radiation levels are lower.
• Lower Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE). Although trackers are more expensive to install, the additional energy they generate often reduces the cost of electricity over the project’s lifecycle. Higher generation means that the investment “pays off” through a greater volume of electricity sales. As a result, the LCOE for a large solar plant with trackers can be lower than that of a fixed system.
• More consistent generation throughout the day. Trackers extend electricity production in the morning and evening when fixed panels produce little energy. This helps balance energy generation beyond midday peaks, making solar power plants more effective in supplying electricity during demand periods.
Disadvantages of Tracker Systems
• Higher initial investment. Tracker systems are more expensive due to motors, drives, sensors, and reinforced structures. Estimates suggest that implementing trackers increases capital costs by approximately 10–15% compared to a stationary system.
• More complex maintenance and risk of failure. Moving parts require regular maintenance and increase operational costs slightly. Mechanical failures, especially in extreme weather conditions, can lead to downtime and repair expenses.
• Vulnerability to extreme weather. Trackers are more sensitive to strong winds, snow, and dust storms. They often enter protective mode in high winds by shifting panels to a horizontal position, temporarily reducing generation.
The choice between fixed metal structures and tracker systems depends on a balance between cost and performance. Fixed systems are ideal when low initial costs, simplicity, and reliability are priorities. They are optimal for small-scale projects, challenging terrains, or very harsh climates, as well as for maximizing land use efficiency. Solar trackers, on the other hand, are well-suited for large-scale commercial solar farms, particularly in high-insolation regions. Although they require higher investment and maintenance, they generate significantly more electricity, which often justifies the cost over time.
In Europe, there is no one-size-fits-all answer—each project must consider local conditions, investment budgets, and long-term profitability. However, the trend shows that with technological improvements and cost reductions, the share of tracker-based systems is increasing. Investors increasingly choose trackers to maximize solar energy output efficiently and profitably in the long run.
