Compare three solar plans for your jobsite quickly. See savings, payback, and carbon. Decide with clear metrics, not guesswork today.
Enter three scenarios to compare. Use the grid layout on large, medium, and mobile screens.
This sample reflects a typical commercial roof comparison.
| Scenario | Size (kW) | Cost ($/kW) | Prod (kWh/kW-yr) | Incentive (%) | O&M ($/kW-yr) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario A | 50 | 1100 | 1400 | 10 | 18 |
| Scenario B | 75 | 1000 | 1450 | 8 | 17 |
| Scenario C | 100 | 950 | 1500 | 6 | 16 |
Start by defining what the solar system replaces on your construction site. Use the delivered utility rate, include demand riders if they affect energy cost, and choose an analysis period aligned with equipment life. This calculator assumes all production offsets grid purchases at the stated rate, so keep net metering limits and curtailment rules consistent across scenarios.
For each scenario, enter the same type of system size basis and cost scope. Installed cost per kilowatt should include modules, structure, electrical balance, permitting, and commissioning. Production in kilowatt-hours per kilowatt-year should come from a site-specific model using tilt, azimuth, shading, and weather. Keep degradation realistic and apply a single replacement event where major inverter work is expected.
The model builds annual net cashflow from energy savings minus O&M and replacement costs. Net system cost is reduced by incentives and tax credits entered as percentages, producing a conservative starting investment. NPV discounts each year using your selected discount rate, IRR estimates the break-even return, and payback is the first time cumulative cashflow becomes positive.
Use NPV to select the strongest value option when capital is constrained. Use LCOE to compare long-run energy cost when tariffs or escalation assumptions vary. If two scenarios have similar NPV, prefer the one with lower replacement exposure and steadier annual cashflows, because construction schedules can amplify downtime risk and maintenance access costs. Run a quick sensitivity by changing escalation and discount within realistic ranges. If rankings flip, treat the project as rate-sensitive and consider securing a fixed-price energy contract or adding contingency to the installed cost line before finalizing your recommendation.
After running comparisons, export CSV for bid books and internal reviews. Export PDF for client sign-off and funding discussions. Record key assumptions beside the output table: utility rate, escalation, discount, and replacement year. This creates a defensible narrative that aligns engineering expectations with procurement and site operations.
It is the scenario with the highest net present value under your discount rate. Higher NPV means greater value today after discounting future savings and costs.
IRR needs a cashflow pattern that crosses zero in present value terms. If cashflows do not change sign appropriately, or have multiple sign changes, a single meaningful IRR may not exist.
Use your organization’s hurdle rate or weighted cost of capital, adjusted for project risk. A higher discount rate reduces the value of future savings and typically favors faster-payback options.
No. It values energy using a single $/kWh rate. If demand charges are material, translate them into an effective blended rate or run a separate demand impact study.
Use modeled annual production per installed kW from a site-specific tool, accounting for shading and weather. Avoid optimistic assumptions; accurate production is usually more important than minor cost differences.
They reduce the starting investment by percentage inputs: incentive first, then tax credit on the reduced base. This is a simplified treatment suitable for comparisons, not a tax filing.
Important Note: All the Calculators listed in this site are for educational purpose only and we do not guarentee the accuracy of results. Please do consult with other sources as well.