Seriously? The ratio is less than 5% off from a direct 1:1. If someone asks for a ratio, you can unironically tell them "build the same of each" and it would serve them well the entire game.[you have similar complexities of balancing solar panels vs accumulators.
But this is clearly false. The player's supply of fuel changes constantly, as coal deposits clean out and oil wells get tapped. Even at extreme endgame after all wells are dry, fuel storage has to be monitored so that it doesn't develop a negative trend.If you set it up with oil based fuel to begin with, it's as "plop and forget" as solar.
Solar has no trends, no long term storage and no real disasters to speak of. It works from day 1 and every day thereafter. If a player runs short of solar the problem is both shown very immediately and is fixed in quick order.
The reduced pollution is an AMAZING benefit. Monster evolution is based on pollution, so removing one of the major pollutors will reduce enemy aggression dramatically.Solar requires more tech. Requires significantly more resources. Requires SIGNIFICANTLY more factory setup for the production chain. Requires VASTLY increased land allotment. And only benefit is less pollution from the panels while the entire factory chain producing those parts still pollutes a decent amount.
The cost of solar is too high for any speed run benefit, and the payoff doesn't happen for at least a handful of game days. If a person is blasting through the game then solar doesn't have any benefit to them. If someone is marathoning then they'll get paid back many times over in terms of raw resources, difficulty reduction and ease of setup. The value of solar only GROWS as the game advances almost indefinitely, so it is NOT POSSIBLE to have both a reasonable cost early solar AND a reasonably useful but limited late solar. Many mechanics will not allow it, especially with accumulators.