Layout comparison
Candidate turbine positions are compared against spacing, wake, access, and terrain constraints.
Micrositing
Micrositing for new builds, repowering, and cluster projects. The work compares turbine positions, wake scenarios, terrain constraints, and energy impact so the layout can be defended before it is locked.
Candidate turbine positions are compared against spacing, wake, access, and terrain constraints.
Alternative row spacing, boundary setbacks, and turbine-count scenarios are tested before a final choice is made.
The recommendation is written so a developer, EPC, or investor can see the tradeoff without rebuilding the model.
Yes. WRA answers how much energy the site can produce. Micrositing answers which layout produces the best defendable result.
Yes. Repowering often changes rotor diameter, hub height, spacing, and the wake picture. The layout needs to be re-tested, not simply redrawn.
That is the ideal use case. Micrositing is most valuable before the layout is frozen and before the financing case is locked.
Send the site location, turbine assumptions, stage, and any known constraints. The review can be scoped quickly.