Alectrona
AftercareYou own the array, the savings have quietly slipped, and you cannot tell whether something is broken or it was simply a poor quarter for sun. A performance audit answers that one question for the owner: is the asset generating what it should, and if not, where has the missing generation gone?
These are representative example reviews, not yet-collected customer feedback. They are written to illustrate the kind of feedback Alectrona aims to earn and are shown as design placeholders while we gather and verify reviews from our first commercial clients. Alectrona is the commercial solar trading brand of RVTC LTD.
What set Alectrona apart was the documented design pack. We had quotes from three installers, but only Alectrona handed us a full set of drawings, a single-line diagram and a design referencing BS 7671 and the G99 connection process. The whole thing read like an engineering submission rather than a sales brochure. Our M&E consultant reviewed it and signed it off without a single query. That gave the board the confidence to release the capital.
Other firms priced our roof off a satellite image and a desktop guess. Alectrona flew an in-house drone survey, fully insured and flown by a qualified commercial drone pilot, and built a 3D model of the actual roof. It picked up plant, vents and a parapet line that a flat aerial photo had completely missed, which changed the panel layout. I would rather find that out at design stage than on the day the scaffold goes up. The accuracy of that survey is the reason I trusted everything that followed.
As a finance director I was wary of being oversold a system bigger than we could use. Alectrona modelled the array against our actual half-hourly consumption data rather than an annual total, so it is sized to what we genuinely draw on site during the day. They were honest that exporting surplus is worth far less than self-consumption, and built the design around that. The capital case stacked up because the engineering was honest, not because the numbers were inflated.
We were undecided between buying outright, leasing and a PPA. Alectrona laid out all three side by side with the pros and cons of each against our balance sheet, instead of pushing the one that pays them best. They were clear about where a PPA makes sense and where capex wins, and pointed us at our own accountant for the tax treatment. The survey and design took a little longer than I expected, but the thoroughness was worth the wait. Genuinely consultative.
The install crew were tidy and well run, and worked to a clear CDM 2015 plan with a proper site induction and RAMS. What impressed me most was the handover. We received a full commissioning pack with the IEC 62446-1 test results, certification, O&M documentation and an as-built record for our maintenance team. As the people who have to live with this asset for the next twenty years, having that paperwork in order matters enormously. Nothing was left loose.
I expected the usual hard sell and got the opposite. After surveying our site Alectrona told us one roof section was not worth covering because of shading, and that a smaller, well-sited array was the better investment than filling every square metre. There was no commission-driven upselling and no pressure. For a six-figure capital project, that straight talk is exactly what you want from the people advising you. We will be using them again on our second site.
A solar system that was switched on and then left alone looks healthy from the ground. The panels are up, the inverter shows a light, the meter ticks over. None of that tells a finance or facilities director whether the asset is still earning what it was bought to earn. Underperformance is quiet by nature: a dead string the inverter keeps reporting around, an inverter derating on heat, shading that crept in as a tree or a neighbouring unit grew, soiling nobody has cleaned, a monitoring feed that died a year ago. The bill drifts back up, but nothing flags as a fault.
This audit is aimed squarely at that owner's problem. It is for a live system you already operate, and its job is to separate a real, fixable loss from an ordinary weak-light period, then put a cause and a priority against anything that is genuinely wrong. The diagnostics run through Solar Tech Support, the group's independent, brand-agnostic diagnostics and repair arm, so the read is on the equipment in front of us whoever made it and whoever installed it. If you are buying, funding or disputing a system rather than running one you own, the broader independent audit is the document written for that, and this page stays out of its way.
Half-hourly load modelled in PV*SOL before anything is specified.
The hardest part of judging an owned system from the bill alone is that solar output swings with the weather and the season, so a genuine fault and a run of dull months can look identical on a meter. An owner needs to know which one they are looking at before spending a penny putting it right.
That is the question we settle first. We establish what a correctly working version of your system should have produced over the period in question, built from your real site rather than a generic yield-per-kWp rule of thumb: the array size and orientation, the pitch of each roof plane, the shading as it stands today and the location, run as a half-hourly model of the year. Set against your actual generation over the same window, that tells you whether the shortfall is real or whether the system did about what the weather allowed. Where the data only covers part of the period, we say what can and cannot be concluded from it rather than filling the gap with an invented figure.
Solar output swings with the weather and the season, so a genuine fault and a run of dull months can look identical on a meter. The audit settles which one you are looking at before you spend a penny putting it right, by setting a model of your own roof against your actual generation over the same window.
Actual generation sits well below what a correctly working version of your system should have produced, so the gap is genuine and the rest of the audit goes looking for where it went.
Actual generation roughly agrees with the model, so the system did about what the conditions allowed and the asset is sound. You have spent a little to confirm it.
When the loss is real, it is rarely one dramatic failure. It is usually a handful of smaller losses stacking up, and the value to an owner is naming each one and ranking it, so a limited maintenance budget goes to the change that buys back the most generation. We attribute the shortfall across the usual commercial-roof causes.
Each loss is sized as far as the evidence allows and put in priority order, so the report reads as a plan an owner can act on rather than a list of complaints.
Most of this can be settled from the system's own evidence, which keeps the audit cheap for an asset you already own. We start with the data the system holds: the metering, the inverter logs and channel-level records, and whatever monitoring history exists. For many systems that is enough to locate the loss, because a dead string or a derating inverter leaves a clear signature once you know the shape of a healthy curve.
Where the data cannot settle it, we go to the roof. Our own qualified, insured pilot can fly the array to read the shading and the panel condition from the air without a roof-access scaffold, and where a fault needs confirming at the panel or string, that hands-on work runs through Solar Tech Support. The rule is to use the cheapest accurate method first and escalate to a site visit only where the question genuinely needs one, so you are not paying for a survey to find something the data already told us.
The deliverable is a plain written account of what your system should produce, what it does produce, and what stands between the two, with each loss attributed, sized where the data allows, and a recommended fix in priority order. If the system is healthy and the shortfall is just expected degradation and weather, we say so, and you have spent a little to confirm the asset is sound. If a single connector or one failed inverter channel is the problem, we say that rather than reaching for a wholesale replacement.
That honesty holds because the diagnostics arm has no incentive to condemn working kit. We do not quote a fabricated uptime or recovery percentage to flatter the report or alarm you into action; we report what the data supports, and where economic figures come into it they are confirmed against a model of your own site, never a published rate. From there you can act with us, with your existing maintainer, or by taking the report elsewhere. A common next step, where the audit shows the system needs ongoing attention, is to move it onto operations and maintenance so the next bit of drift is caught early rather than at the next audit.
A performance audit is the owner's operational diagnostic of a live system you already run: is it generating what it should, is a shortfall a real fault or just the weather, and where is the loss. It is narrow, generation-focused and written for you to act on. An independent audit is the broader, third-party assessment, usually commissioned by a buyer, a funder or a party to a dispute, and it covers design intent, as-built and safety as well as performance, written so it can be handed to someone else. If you own the asset and just want to know why the savings are short, this is the right tool. If money is changing hands or there is a disagreement, the independent audit is the one written for that.
By comparing like with like. We build what your system should have produced over the period in question from your real roof, the array size, the orientation and pitch of each plane, the shading as it stands today and the location, run as a half-hourly model. We then set your actual generation over the same window against it. If the two roughly agree, the system did about what the conditions allowed and the asset is sound. If actual sits well below the model, the gap is a real loss and the rest of the audit goes looking for where. Where the data only covers part of the period, we tell you what can and cannot be concluded rather than inventing a figure.
Yes, and a dead monitoring feed is often part of the reason the underperformance went unnoticed. We work from whatever data does exist: the meter readings, the inverter's own logs, and any historical records still on the system. Where the gaps leave a question open, we confirm it directly, from the inverter on site or by flying the array. Restoring the monitoring so the system can be watched again is usually one of the recommendations that comes out of the audit.
No. The diagnostics run through Solar Tech Support, which is independent and brand-agnostic and has no reason to condemn working kit to sell a new system. Most underperformance traces to specific, fixable causes: a dead string, one failed inverter channel, soiling, a shading change. The report names what is actually wrong and what it will take to put right, in priority order, with no obligation to have us do the work. If the only thing the data shows is normal degradation, we tell you the system is healthy.
The report is yours to act on. You can have us carry out the fixes, take it to your existing maintainer, or use it however you choose. If the audit shows the system needs regular attention, the natural next step is to put it onto operations and maintenance, where planned inspection and independent monitoring catch the drift early rather than waiting for the next audit. If the system turns out to be orphaned, with its original installer gone, a system takeover is the route that puts it right and gives it an accountable owner again.
We do not publish a fixed figure, because the work scales with how far the evidence has to go to settle the question. Most audits are answered from the system's own data, the metering, the inverter logs and channel records and whatever monitoring history exists, which keeps a desk-based read on a system you already own inexpensive. The cost rises only where the data cannot settle it and the array needs flying or a hands-on check at the panel or string through Solar Tech Support. We scope it against your system and the question you need answered, and price it in writing before any work starts. Where the audit turns up a recoverable loss and you want the economics of fixing it, those figures are modelled against your own site and are indicative rather than promised; the wider cost picture sits on commercial solar cost and funding routes on commercial solar finance.
It depends on whether the system's own data answers the question or the roof has to be read directly. A desk-based audit run from the metering, inverter logs and monitoring history is the quicker route, because a dead string or a derating inverter leaves a clear signature once the model of a healthy curve is set against your actual generation. Where the data leaves a question open, we escalate to a drone survey of the array, flown by our own qualified, insured pilot without waiting on roof-access scaffold, or to a hands-on check through Solar Tech Support, and that adds the time to arrange site access. We give you a realistic timeframe when we scope the work, and the modelling itself needs enough generation history to compare like with like rather than a single weak quarter.
We fly your roof, model your half-hourly load, and come back with a designed system and a price you can take to the board. Engineer-led from the first call to the final handover, and the years after it.