{"id":107442,"date":"2024-09-26T10:58:16","date_gmt":"2024-09-26T14:58:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/\/?p=107442"},"modified":"2024-09-26T11:00:45","modified_gmt":"2024-09-26T15:00:45","slug":"why-solar-shade-analysis-is-so-subjective-how-to-fix-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/\/2024\/09\/why-solar-shade-analysis-is-so-subjective-how-to-fix-it\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Solar Shade Analysis is so Subjective & How to Fix It"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

Takeaway:<\/strong> Solar Contractors often rely on potentially outdated or incomplete satellite, aerial, or LiDAR imagery for shade analysis. This results in subjective modeling that is inaccurate, expensive to fix, and in the case of lease agreements, can result in financing delays or cancellations. Leveraging drones with mobile apps in the sales process fixes this friction\u2014real-time, on-site data is objective and delivers completely accurate layouts and production simulations that inform all financing agreements.<\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The majority (66.4%) of Designers are stuck revising at least a quarter of projects<\/a>, with each revision costing hundreds to thousands of dollars; nearly one-tenth of Designers have to revise every single project<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Related, around one-third of arrays modeled with satellite imagery had a greater than 10% delta between estimated and actual production<\/a>, resulting in a far lower offset for homeowners and considerable change orders.<\/p>\n

Why does this happen? One of the biggest drivers for inaccurate designs is due to three words: subjective shade analysis<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Previously, Contractors leveraged the relatively cumbersome and risky (e.g. roof climbs) incumbent<\/a> handheld tools like the SunEye and Pathfinder. This drove Contractors to alternatives, creating an opportunity for remote tools. Contractors then became reliant on remote imagery due to its speed and ease of use \u2014 despite its inherent inaccuracies. As a result, Designers began making subjective assumptions for critical shade analysis inputs.<\/p>\n

Note:<\/strong> It doesn\u2019t need to be this way anymore \u2014 not only do new technologies make objective shade analysis possible, but inexpensive, faster, and accessible. More below.<\/p>\n

What causes the subjectivity in shade analysis?<\/h3>\n

Many solar contractors minimize cost outlays by deferring a site survey truck roll until after a signed agreement; therefore, they rely on remote imagery for initial shade estimates and sales figures.<\/p>\n

This is where subjectivity creeps in.<\/p>\n

Remote imagery, such as from satellites, airplanes, or LiDAR data sets, is 2D (except LiDAR), outdated, often blurry, and sometimes doesn\u2019t even exist. This forces Designers to manually extrude and plot property features based on their best guess, including:<\/p>\n