Haven't studied this much, but on the surface it seems to combine most of the worst aspects of both solar and wind - requires large dedicated land usage while only working during the day like solar, simultaneously combined with expensive and maintenance intensive large rotating equipment like wind turbines. In most areas, I'd guess choosing the better of solar or wind would be cheaper and at least as efficient.
Also, at least in the U.S., only a very select set of specified technologies have been eligible for renewable energy tax credits ~ and I'd bet this isn't one of them.
Solar seems one of the better forms of energy generation. The major negatives seem to be no power generation at night, and the large land requirements, and the cost of the solar panels themselves.
The day/night issue is what it is, unfortunately.
We're getting better at recycling used solar panels, and I think that will improve as time goes by.
As far as the land usage goes, done smartly, it's not as large of an impact as it seems at first glance. Large swaths of urban parking lots can have solar installed, as can pretty much any home or business building.
Farms are a prime candidate for solar panels. Some food plants are shade loving, and having spaced out solar panels that provide some shade during the day can allow them to grow, and decrease water usage. This is already being done.