Site screening
Utility-Scale Solar Site Selection
A practical workflow for comparing candidate solar sites using land, grid, access, terrain, environmental and development evidence.
Why this workflow matters
Solar site selection is a staged decision process, not a search for the parcel with the highest irradiation. A credible comparison records what is known, what is missing and which issues can stop or materially reshape development.
Questions to answer
- Is the developable area large and coherent enough?
- Can the project reach a credible grid connection point?
- Do access, terrain or environmental constraints fragment the layout?
- Which evidence must be verified before land commitments?
Recommended workflow
- 1Define the technology, target capacity and minimum usable area.
- 2Map the boundary and screen environmental, water, terrain and infrastructure context.
- 3Separate fatal flaws from mitigable constraints and information gaps.
- 4Rank candidates using consistent assumptions and record the next investigation for each.
Evidence to collect
- ✓ Verified candidate boundaries and land-control status
- ✓ Current planning and environmental datasets
- ✓ Grid connection options and indicative distance
- ✓ Access, terrain, drainage and receptor observations
Decision-ready outputs
- → Comparable candidate-site scorecard
- → Fatal-flaw and information-gap register
- → Prioritized site-investigation plan
Market application
- Portugal, Spain, Italy and Germany apply different national, regional and municipal planning controls; EU-wide layers are an initial evidence layer only.
- Grid feasibility must be checked through the relevant transmission or distribution system operator, including queue, capacity, studies and connection route.
- Cadastral boundaries, land rights, local setbacks and permit status require current national or competent-authority evidence.
Worked example
Fictional two-site comparison
- Basis
- Site A has stronger irradiation but fragmented land and an unverified grid route. Site B has lower resource, a coherent boundary and clearer access evidence.
- Screening response
- Advance both only far enough to test the controlling uncertainty: grid and land continuity for Site A, grid capacity for Site B. Do not select on irradiation alone.
- Limitation
- The example demonstrates decision logic and does not represent a real project or market recommendation.
Authoritative starting points
Use these primary sources to begin verification, then obtain the current competent-authority evidence for the project market.
- European Commission — INSPIRE Geoportal ↗
Discovery of official European spatial datasets and metadata
- European Commission — Environmental Impact Assessment ↗
EU environmental-assessment framework and Member State implementation context
- ENTSO-E — Ten-Year Network Development Plan ↗
European transmission-development context; not project-specific connection capacity
- European Commission JRC — PVGIS ↗
Solar-resource and indicative PV performance context
Review status: SolarDev AI internal methodology review; independent technical review not yet published.