Clayton, you seem to misinterpret the learning or experience curve concept, first codified by a Lockheed engineer in the 1920s. The curve shows a consistent, inverse relationship between unit cost of production and cumulative production volume. This was of great importance to aircraft manufacturers and other military contractors in that period because it enabled them to formulate bids on government contracts that were at once affordable for the customer and profitable for the vendor.
The algorithm only properly applies to increasing production of the same product. It is presumed to reflect that with more experience, a firm's workers and managers incrementally figure out ways to reduce waste and improve efficiency of a particular production process,
That is, the theorem applies to process improvement, not to technology and product innovation. It has only limited relevance at best to apparent price declines of some renewable energy products.
In the case of solar PV panels, much if not most of the price decline in the last several years was driven by 'dumping' of surplus Chinese products below production costs. Grievances filed under WTO rules have led to corrective tariffs in the US and elsewhere which are projected to raise PV panel prices by around 14%.
As for wind power generation, much if not most of the decline in cost per MW has been driven by continual innovations in wind turbine technology:
Rapid technical innovation and resulting short product lifecycles are the antithesis of the experience curve, not examples of it.
The idea had some currency in the immediate post-War mass-production industrial economy. It is far less relevant in the postindustrial economy of this century:
And none of that alters the fact that wind and solar, as intermittent sources, are inherently inferior to fossil fuels and other conventional sources of 'dispatchable' (reliable) power generation. As Schalk indicates, those remain the kind of dense, reliable, and affordable energy sources still needed to "kick start" economies and furthermore to grow them.
Accelerated innovation and shortened product lifecycles that characterize the postindustrial economy may make Tesla's mega battery factory in Nevada (heavily subsidized by the state, like most of Tesla's business) a white elephant. Better, more cost-effective storage technologies than Lithium batteries, now in the innovation pipeline, may make the Tesla battery factor look more like a Kodak film lab.
Even more progess will be needed though to make energy storage cheap and reliable enough to make intermittent energy sources like wind and solar truly competitive.