You can go back through comment I have posted and learn a bit about my thoughts on real materials. FPR/Fiberglass/Composit blade on an airplane have little relationship to turbines blades except the medium they run in.
An airplane in heavy use gets used 2,000 hours a year, a wind-turbine 8760. Mst propeller airplanes get a thurough 100 hour check.
The 'elliptically furling' windmills commonly seen here get 2-3 flexes a revolution in a partially furled load. The first large windturbines using 'plastics' were failures. Eventually, enough engineering and money was thrown in to make Variable Pitch mills reliable enough to run plastic blades (I am using the term plastic to refer to all the managrie of crap that everyone claims is better than the original carbon-fiber building material, wood.) If you care you can pour through the thousands of pages of fatigues studies on windturbine blased out there, I have.
I could be pursuaded to embrace a properly designed plastic blade. In fact, I have worked on building such blades and their molds. First, prototypes will need to be made to assure the design is good. Then, engineering studies must be done for the layup schedule. From there a cost can be determined and blades be properly made from the mold. The engineering and mold costs for a 12' turbine have been quoted in excess of $10,000.
I doubt there is anyone who will claim to understand the aerodybamics of an elliptically furling HAWT. It is complex for only the power producing segment of the envelope. Few have ventured beyond that point.
Good luck,
Ron