PowerVeritas
Services / S/02PowerVeritas Ltd

Technical Due Diligence.

Independent engineering assessment for acquisitions, refinancing, end of warranty, and life extension. Scope matched to commercial need.

S/02.1

Core scope & optional modules

Every TDD starts with the same three core workstreams. Optional modules are selected to match the commercial question, because a refinancing, an acquisition, and a life-extension decision each need different emphasis.

Core scope
  • 01Production history & loss attributionReconstruction of site production, with losses quantified by cause across wind, availability, curtailment and underperformance.
  • 02Data quality & reconciliationCompleteness, consistency, reliability and cross-check of available SCADA and metered data.
  • 03Risk registerEngineering risks surfaced through the engineering scope performed (core reviews plus any optional modules selected), ranked and described for investor use.
Optional modules
  • M01Power curve health checkPer turbine performance assessment identifying underperformance, faults, and sensor issues that warrant engineering follow up.
  • M02Curtailment analysisSeparating grid, noise, bat and sector curtailment, quantified in MWh and revenue.
  • M03Budget re-forecastingP50/P90 production re-forecast using operating history.
  • M04Design envelope complianceSite-specific wind conditions vs. design basis, for life-extension or uprate cases. Indicative check; not a load assessment.
  • M05Component health & reliabilitySite-level review of component condition and failure rate trends, using SCADA and operational data.
  • M06O&M contract technical reviewEngineering assessment of O&M contract terms, performance guarantees, and technical risk allocation, highlighting clauses that affect asset value or operational flexibility. Complements legal review. Informed by experience monitoring a large renewables fleet.
Deliverable A

Executive TDD report

Engineering assessment covering core workstreams and any optional modules commissioned. Executive summary, findings by workstream, ranked risk register, and supporting charts. Suitable for board, lender, and investment committee submission.

Deliverable B

Diagnostic evidence pack

Detailed analytical findings with supporting charts, data tables, and methodology notes. Written for the buyer's technical team and any third-party reviewers.

Deliverable C

Data export

Underlying analytical outputs including production reconciliation and loss attribution data, plus module-specific outputs where applicable. Provided in Excel for integration with the buyer's own analysis.

S/02.2

Sample analytical output.

TDD findings only stand up if the underlying analysis can be inspected. The two illustrative figures below are from a real site, showing how site production is reconstructed and reconciled to actuals with each loss quantified by cause, and how turbine selection for analysis is supported by a transparent data-quality view, so reviewers can see what was included and why.

Step 01 / Production history & loss attribution
Loss attribution waterfall, one operating month
Waterfall chart showing site production reconciliation: budget plus or minus wind resource, wake, density, turbulence and other atmospheric effects to give a theoretical maximum, then minus downtime, grid curtailment, internal curtailment, data gap and unattributed losses to give actual production.
Budgeted production is reconciled to actual through wind, atmospheric, downtime and curtailment effects. Each step is quantified in MWh so the largest drivers are visible at a glance and the residual is explicit, not buried.
Step 02 / Data quality & reconciliation
Per-turbine data quality & reference turbine selection
Two-panel chart: left panel shows each turbine's power ratio (actual divided by design curve) with the interquartile range highlighted; right panel shows the percentage of clean data per turbine with a minimum threshold line at twenty percent. Selected turbines are highlighted in dark navy.
Turbines are scored on power ratio (actual vs design curve) and proportion of clean data. Outliers and low-data units are flagged before any cohort analysis, and the selection used downstream is shown explicitly so reviewers can see what was included and why.

Common questions.

When should an owner commission a Technical Due Diligence?

Technical Due Diligence is appropriate for any decision requiring defensible independent technical verification of a wind asset. The most common triggers are acquisitions and refinancing. TDD is equally valuable at end of warranty, when considering life extension or repowering, during major contract renegotiation, and ahead of insurance renewal. Scope is modular and matched to the commercial question.

Why do I need a technical review of my O&M contract?

A technical review brings data and engineering depth that a legal or commercial review cannot. It examines how availability, lost production, and performance guarantees are actually calculated, and whether the methodology unnecessarily advantages the O&M contractor. It also draws on operational experience of where contracts have failed in practice, often with considerable financial implications. The review provides factual engineering input alongside any commercial or legal review, particularly valuable at renewal, re-tender, dispute, or end of warranty.

Want to review a site or portfolio?

Book a call → Email PowerVeritas