Bright Ideas, Risky Realities: What Solar Installations Aren’t Telling You
Christopher L. Phillips
Director of Engineering, SnapRISK
Solar adoption across the United States continues to accelerate, particularly within municipalities and public-sector portfolios. Photovoltaic (PV) systems are widely viewed as long-term investments in sustainability and energy independence.
However, field data and international experience suggest a growing gap between perception and reality.
While PV systems are often considered low-maintenance, the industry is already seeing measurable increases in system degradation and fire-related incidents—particularly in roof-mounted arrays. In Europe, which is several years ahead in installation maturity, over 150 PV-related fires were recorded within a two-year period, with a portion directly attributed to the solar systems themselves. The U.S. is following a similar trajectory, with comparable equipment, installation practices, and aging conditions.
Why These Failures Are Occurring
PV-related losses are rarely driven by a single failure point. Instead, they develop from compounding conditions:
- Installation quality variability driven by rapid market expansion
- Aging components exposed to thermal cycling, UV degradation, and environmental stress
- Lack of maintenance, often due to the assumption that systems require minimal oversight
- Limited accountability from third-party installers post-installation
In many cases, systems are monitored for power output—but not for degradation or failure conditions.
The Hidden Nature of PV Risk
One of the most critical challenges is that many failure conditions are not visible through standard inspection methods.
Thermal stress, high-resistance connections, and component failures often develop within wiring, combiner boxes, and module connections. These conditions can only be reliably identified through infrared (IR) thermography. As highlighted in the presentation, “the naked eye can’t see the problems,” and overheating components can exceed safe operating temperatures long before failure occurs. Many thermographers are primarily trained for AC structures, leaving them underprepared to recognize DC-specific anomalies in photovoltaic arrays.
Additionally, PV systems introduce a unique hazard: they remain energized when exposed to sunlight, even during emergency response scenarios. This creates ongoing ignition potential and complicates firefighting efforts.
Key Risk Indicators Observed in the Field
Field evaluations consistently identify early-stage warning signs, including:
- Thermal anomalies in combiner boxes and connections
- Improper or degraded wiring exposed to sunlight
- Cramped or poorly installed electrical components
- Environmental degradation from debris, vegetation, or animal activity
- Lack of diagnostic capability in older systems
These are not isolated findings—they are recurring conditions across both rooftop and ground-mounted systems.
Implications for Public-Sector Risk Management
For municipalities, school districts, and risk pools, the challenge is not whether to deploy solar, but how to manage it effectively.
PV systems introduce additional electrical, structural, and fire risk considerations. Roof assemblies, insulation, and penetrations can significantly influence fire spread, while limited access and constant energization complicate emergency response.
Without structured evaluation and maintenance, these systems can increase exposure to property loss, business interruption, and operational disruption.
A Proactive Path Forward
Effective PV risk management requires a disciplined, condition-based
- Implement monthly visual inspections and annual engineering reviews
- Maintain vegetation control and environmental management
- Ensure compliance with current electrical and fire codes
- Establish coordinated emergency response plans
The focus must shift from confirming system operation to identifying how systems are degrading over time.
Conclusion
Solar energy is a critical component of modern infrastructure—but it is not without risk.
Understanding how PV systems fail, and more importantly, how those failures develop, is essential to protecting assets and ensuring long-term performance.
Clean energy should not introduce new vulnerabilities. With the right data, diagnostics, and oversight, it doesn’t have to.
Christopher L. Phillips
Director of Engineering, SnapRISK
With nearly four decades of experience in property loss control and risk engineering, Christopher L. Phillips brings a rare depth of expertise to solar risk assessment and public asset protection. As Director of Engineering at SnapRISK, he leads comprehensive evaluations of high-value facilities across a wide spectrum of industries- from power generation and utilities to municipal infrastructure.
Currently with 39 years of Highly Protected Risk (HPR) property loss control experience, Chris has helped organizations with complex global manufacturing and industrial operations evaluate and strengthen their risk portfolios. His work focuses on identifying emerging threats across both property and equipment breakdown exposures and developing practical strategies to mitigate potential losses.
Chris holds a BS in Marine Engineering from the California Maritime Academy.
