Repowering

20–40% more yield from your existing system — at a fraction of the cost of a new installation.

Key Takeaways

5 Min. Lesezeit

5 Punkte anzeigen

1. 20–40% more yield Module and inverter upgrades increase annual yield by 20–40% at 30–50% lower investment than a new system, with typical payback in 2–4 years.
2. Ideal after 8–15 years Systems from 100 kWp with 8–15 years of operation are prime candidates, as module degradation after 10 years typically reaches 10–15% of rated output.
3. Up to 60-70% more per m² Replacing 250 Wp poly modules with 500+ Wp bifacial mono modules delivers up to 60-70% more energy output per m² without new substructure or roof penetrations.
4. Honest, independent advice If an inverter upgrade alone is sufficient, we will say so. Every recommendation comes with a yield comparison old vs. new and a CHF payback calculation.
5. Minimal operational downtime A 200–500 kWp system requires only 2–4 weeks of implementation time, with partial operation maintained throughout and a written performance guarantee after completion.

Many industrial solar systems installed 8-15 years ago today operate well below their current technology potential: outdated modules, aging inverters and suboptimal string configurations leave significant yield potential untapped that can be unlocked with today’s technology.

Repowering is neither dismantling nor new construction. It is the strategic modernisation of your existing solar infrastructure: new high-performance modules on the proven substructure, a state-of-the-art SiC inverter, optimised cabling — and the result is 20–40% more annual yield. As a manufacturer-independent specialist in industrial repowering projects from 100 kWp, we accompany you from the potential analysis to commissioning — with a performance guarantee and an investment calculation in black and white before you decide.

When does repowering pay off?

Repowering is particularly cost-effective when several of these criteria apply:

• System older than 8 years

  Module degradation progresses steadily; after 10 years, 10–15% power loss is typical.

• Inverter at end of service life

  Typically 10–12 years; replacement alone delivers 2–3% additional yield through modern SiC technology.

• Declining yields despite a good location

  Yield monitoring shows deviations from target.

• Roof renovation planned

  Leverage synergies: modules are removed anyway, upgrade at the same time.

• Higher module outputs available

  Old 250 Wp polycrystalline modules vs. new 500+ Wp bifacial monocrystalline modules: up to 60–70% more output per m².

Our preliminary study clarifies specifically for your system which measures deliver what additional yield — with a yield comparison old vs. new and a full payback calculation.

Our repowering process

From analysis to guaranteed performance

1

Potential analysis & condition assessment

We conduct thermographic inspection, string measurement and a complete yield analysis — actual yield versus target based on your location. The result: a clear yield comparison old vs. new with concrete CHF figures for investment, additional yield and payback period. You decide afterwards.

2

Tailored modernisation plan

We document the ROI of each component individually: when is module replacement worthwhile, when is an inverter upgrade alone sufficient? The recommendation follows the most economically sensible outcome for your system — manufacturer-independent. Optionally, we plan battery storage, e-mobility or ZEV as part of your overall energy strategy.

3

Implementation with minimal operational disruption

For a 200–500 kWp system, we typically plan 2–4 weeks of implementation time. We work in sections so that part of the system continues to produce electricity during the work. Turnkey from building permit to commissioning — without interface risk for you.

4

Monitoring & performance guarantee

After repowering, we actively monitor the system and measure the actual additional yield. Our performance guarantee is in writing: if the guaranteed yield increase is not achieved, we act at our own expense.

Repowering vs. new system: what makes more economic sense?

Repowering vs. Complete New Build

Merkmal	Complete New Build	Repowering
Lower investment costs (30–50% less)
Shorter payback period (2–4 vs. 4–6 years)
Existing substructure & cabling usable
Minimal permit effort
Operational disruption only 2–4 weeks
Completely new system performance (100% new baseline)
Ideal for systems 20+ years with roof renovation need
Ideal for systems 8–15 years, good substructure
Repowering recommended for systems from 100 kWp with 8–15 years of operation and intact roof structure. Complete new build is more cost-effective for systems 20+ years or with roof renovation. Investment costs and payback periods are based on typical Swiss I&C projects 2023–2024.

Reference example: Balteschwiler AG with 3’092 kWp demonstrates what bespoke planning and turnkey implementation can deliver — on time, without operational disruption.

Typical measures and technical details

Module replacement delivers the greatest leverage: old 250 Wp polycrystalline modules are replaced by new 500+ Wp bifacial monocrystalline modules. Per square metre of roof surface, you extract up to 60-70% more energy — without new penetrations or a new substructure. Adapter kits ensure compatibility with existing mounting systems.

Inverter upgrade with SiC technology delivers 2–3% additional yield through higher efficiency alone: modern silicon carbide inverters achieve efficiencies of 98–99% compared to 95–96% with older IGBT technologies. Multi-MPPT inverters also optimise significantly better for shaded systems. String rewiring eliminates mismatch losses — a typical problem with heterogeneous systems after 10+ years of operation. Repowering is also the ideal time for battery storage or ZEV integration: the synergies during ongoing work reduce the additional effort to a minimum.