A farmer sued a solar company, claiming that the design of the photovoltaic trackers ruined his harvest due to lack of light. To resolve the dispute, a forensic team reconstructed the terrain in 3D using ArcGIS Pro, PVsyst, and Rhino with Ladybug. The digital twin allowed simulating the exact annual solar irradiance, considering the real topography and the movement of the panels. This case marks a milestone in the use of digital twins as expert evidence in legal conflicts.
Building the digital twin: data integration and simulation 🌱
The process began with ArcGIS Pro to extract a high-resolution digital elevation model (DEM) of the affected terrain. On that basis, the solar trackers with their variable tilt angles were modeled in Rhino, using the Honeybee plugin to define the optical properties of the panels. Historical radiation data was imported from PVsyst, which also provided the annual solar path. The simulation combined the topography with the dynamic shading of the trackers, calculating the accumulated irradiance on each square meter of the crop. The results were visualized in Twinmotion to generate an interactive expert report that the judge could virtually tour.
The digital twin as an impartial witness in the courtroom ⚖️
This case demonstrates that a digital twin is not just a design tool, but a forensic witness capable of isolating complex variables such as irregular topography and moving trackers. By faithfully replicating real conditions, the simulation proved that the solar design reduced irradiance in critical plots below the minimum threshold for the crop. The company accepted an out-of-court settlement. The digital twin is thus consolidated as a technical standard to prevent future agrivoltaic conflicts.
Question: How can a digital twin accurately model the dynamic shadow paths of photovoltaic trackers to determine legal responsibilities in an agrivoltaic lawsuit?
(PS: don't forget to update the digital twin, or your real twin will complain)