You’ve done it. After countless hours of research and development, you’ve created a groundbreaking solar module—one with higher efficiency, a novel cell structure, or a more durable design. It performs beautifully in your lab. But as you prepare to take it to market, you face a question that can make or break your innovation: Will anyone insure it?
For large-scale solar projects, this question is anything but rhetorical. Investors, banks, and asset owners depend on insurance policies and technical due diligence reports from firms like Munich Re and DNV to mitigate risk. Without their stamp of approval, financing a project that uses your new module technology becomes nearly impossible.
The solar industry’s pace of innovation is staggering. The International Technology Roadmap for Photovoltaics (ITRPV) predicts that by 2033, over 68% of all modules will be n-type, with technologies like TOPCon and HJT rapidly displacing the old guard. But this incredible progress also creates an „experience gap“—insurers and their technical advisors have limited field data on these new designs and material combinations.
How do they bridge this gap? With a rigorous, non-standard set of tests that go far beyond basic certifications. This is where a bankability data package becomes your passport to commercial success.
Why Standard Certifications (IEC) Are Just the Starting Line
Every commercially available solar module must pass standard certifications like IEC 61215 (performance) and IEC 61730 (safety). These tests are crucial; they confirm the module is well-constructed and safe to operate. From an insurer’s perspective, however, they are simply the ticket to the game, not the way you win.
IEC tests are a baseline, designed to detect early-life failures—not to predict how a module will perform after 15, 20, or 25 years in the harsh reality of a desert or a tropical climate. Underwriters need to understand long-term degradation, material stability, and potential failure modes that only emerge under prolonged stress.
This is why they demand data from extended reliability tests—think of them as standard IEC tests on steroids.
Standard tests provide a snapshot; extended tests create a forecast. For an insurer underwriting a multi-million-dollar, 25-year solar farm, that forecast is everything.
The Bankability Gap: What Insurers and Technical Advisors Really Want to See
When a technical advisor like DNV or a reinsurer like Munich Re evaluates a new module, they aren’t just looking at a model number. They’re dissecting its very DNA. Their goal is to build a risk profile based on a specific, unchangeable recipe: your Bill of Materials (BOM).
The BOM is the exact list of every component in your module: the specific type of glass from a specific supplier, the precise encapsulant (e.g., POE or EVA), the cell technology, the backsheet, and even the junction box. In the eyes of an underwriter, changing a single component creates an entirely new module, potentially voiding all existing test data.
To approve a specific BOM, advisors require a comprehensive data package that demonstrates reliability under extreme conditions. This typically includes:
- Extended Damp Heat (DH2000/DH3000): While standard IEC requires 1000 hours, insurers want to see data from 2000 or even 3000 hours. This assesses the long-term resilience of encapsulants and backsheets against the moisture and heat that cause delamination and corrosion.
- Extended Thermal Cycling (TC400/TC600): Instead of the standard 200 cycles, performing 400 or 600 cycles reveals weaknesses in solder joints and interconnections—the kind that lead to power loss over decades of daily temperature swings.
- Potential-Induced Degradation (PID) Testing: This test is performed at higher temperatures and for longer durations than the IEC standard to ensure the module can resist voltage-related degradation, a critical issue in high-voltage utility-scale systems.
- Mechanical Load and Hail Impact Tests: Data showing resilience beyond the standards gives confidence in the module’s durability against wind, snow, and extreme weather events.
Achieving this level of detail requires [INTERNAL LINK: /services/material-testing-lamination-trials|anchor: structured lamination trials] to validate how every component interacts under stress, because simply testing parts in isolation isn’t enough.
Building Your Bankability Data Package: A Practical Checklist
Satisfying the world’s most stringent technical advisors is a methodical process. It’s not about running a few tests; it’s about creating a verifiable story of your module’s long-term stability.
-
Finalize Your Exact Bill of Materials (BOM)
Before you begin any testing, lock in your BOM. Every supplier for your glass, cells, encapsulant, and backsheet must be finalized and documented. This ensures the modules you test are identical to the modules you will eventually ship. -
Manufacture Representative Prototypes
Handmade lab samples won’t cut it. Insurers need data from modules built on equipment that mirrors an actual production line. The thermal and pressure profiles of an industrial laminator, for example, are fundamentally different from those of a small lab press. The goal is to [INTERNAL LINK: /services/prototyping-module-development|anchor: build and test new module prototypes] that accurately reflect the quality and consistency of future mass production. -
Execute a Custom Extended Reliability Test Plan
Work with a qualified testing lab to design and execute a sequence of extended tests based on your module’s technology and intended application. A bifacial module with a new POE encapsulant intended for desert installations will require a different test plan than a conventional module for rooftop use. Executing these [INTERNAL LINK: /services/quality-reliability-testing|anchor: extended reliability testing protocols] is non-negotiable for securing approval from top-tier underwriters. -
Document Everything Meticulously
The final output isn’t just a spreadsheet of pass/fail results. It’s a comprehensive report that includes:
- The complete and detailed BOM.
- A description of the manufacturing process and parameters used.
- Pre- and post-test characterization data (IV curves, EL images, visual inspection).
- A full analysis of the test results, signed by the testing authority.
This complete package provides the objective, third-party proof insurers need to confidently back your technology.
The Cost of Getting It Wrong
Entering the utility-scale market without a robust bankability data package is a recipe for significant setbacks. Innovators often face:
- Delayed Project Financing: Banks will simply refuse to fund projects using modules that haven’t been vetted by their trusted technical advisors.
- Higher Insurance Premiums: Even if an insurer agrees to cover the project, they will price the lack of data as higher risk, leading to expensive premiums that damage project economics.
- Limited Market Access: Your module may be shut out of the most lucrative segment of the market—large-scale solar deployments.
In today’s competitive solar landscape, proving reliability is every bit as important as achieving high efficiency. The innovators who succeed are those who plan for bankability from day one.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
How early should I start thinking about a bankability data package?
As soon as you have a stable Bill of Materials. Extended reliability tests can take several months to complete, so building this timeline into your product development roadmap is critical for avoiding go-to-market delays.
Can I just use reliability data from my material suppliers?
Supplier data is a great starting point for selecting components. However, insurers and technical advisors need to see test data on the final, integrated module. What ultimately determines long-term reliability is how the glass, encapsulant, cells, and backsheet interact during lamination and under environmental stress.
What’s the difference between bankability and certification?
Certification (like IEC) is a standardized, public requirement that proves a product meets minimum safety and design criteria. Bankability is a private, in-depth risk assessment performed by or for financial institutions to determine if a product is a sound long-term investment. A product can be certified but not considered bankable if it lacks sufficient reliability data.
How long does this entire process usually take?
The timeline depends heavily on the specific test plan. A full sequence including DH2000 and TC600 can take anywhere from three to six months, and that doesn’t include prototype manufacturing or final reporting. Planning well in advance is essential.
Your Next Step Toward Insurability
Navigating the complex requirements of technical advisors and insurers can feel daunting, but it’s a mandatory step for any serious player in the solar industry. Building a robust data package is a direct investment in your product’s credibility and market access.
The critical first step is understanding how these tests apply to your specific technology. If you’re ready to bridge the gap between innovation and bankability, [INTERNAL LINK: /contact|anchor: discuss your project with a process specialist] to map out a clear path forward.