Slope and aspect at LiDAR resolution
Where the data exists, which is increasingly most of the developed world.
Industries · Resource · Whitepaper
Siting is a terrain argument.
Wind, solar and hydro development is a sequence of geospatial arguments: is the resource there, can the site be reached, what does the ground do, and who else has a claim on it. Every one of those is a layer question, and most of them need to be answered in the field.
01 / Problem statement
What actually goes wrong.
Renewable siting fails in the gap between a desktop study and a site visit.
The resource is modeled, the constraints are physical. A wind resource map says the wind is there. It does not say the ridge access road cannot carry a blade transporter, or that the only viable route crosses a riparian reserve.
Constraint layers come from a dozen custodians. Protected areas, raptor corridors, aviation obstacle limitation surfaces, cultural heritage, grid capacity and land tenure each sit with a different authority, at a different resolution, under a different license. Assembling them is most of the work.
Field verification happens with no signal. A ridge in a viable wind regime is, almost by definition, a place with no cellular service. The desktop study has to travel to the site intact.
02 / Mechanism
How NavTrax addresses each one.
Each entry names the mechanism rather than the benefit, so it can be evaluated rather than believed.
- Terrain derivatives for siting
- Slope, aspect and hillshade derived from the best available DEM — 1 m LiDAR where USGS 3DEP has flown, Copernicus DEM elsewhere — which is what determines whether a pad and a crane path are buildable.
- Insolation and wind context
- Copernicus and NASA products for the resource, with the model vintage stated so a 2011-vintage surface is not mistaken for current.
- Constraint layer assembly
- Protected areas from WDPA, wildlife corridors, offshore wind farm boundaries, submarine cables and EEZ limits, each carrying its custodian and license.
- Transport feasibility routing
- A constraint-based route with a maximum grade and a surface preference is the closest honest proxy for whether an abnormal load can reach a pad — and it is computable before the survey.
- Solar analysis service
- A dedicated inference service produces site-level solar analysis, so the resource question has an answer that is not a screenshot of a national map.
- Offline field verification
- The whole constraint stack downloads as a region. A surveyor on the ridge sees the same layers as the desktop, with the same vintages.
03 / Capabilities
In the field, this is what you have.
Transport-feasibility routing
Maximum grade and surface as hard constraints.
Constraint stack with provenance
Every layer carrying its custodian, vintage and license, so the study is defensible.
Offshore context
Wind farm boundaries, submarine cables, bathymetry, EEZ limits and shipping lanes on one chart.
Solar site analysis
From a dedicated inference service rather than a national average.
Field capture against the study
Structured observations tied to the constraint layer they contradict or confirm.
04 / Reference
| Question | Layer | Custodian | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the resource there? | Insolation / wind products | Copernicus, NASA | Model vintage stated |
| Is the ground buildable? | Slope, aspect from DEM | USGS 3DEP, Copernicus | 1 m where flown |
| Can a blade get there? | Roads plus grade constraint | OSM, transport layers | Routed, not assumed |
| Who else has a claim? | WDPA, tenure, heritage | IUCN, national | License per layer |
| Offshore feasibility? | Bathymetry, cables, EEZ | GEBCO, TeleGeography, VLIZ | One chart |
| Grid proximity? | Transmission layers | Regional operators | Organization layer |
05 / Process
Traced, node by node.
The desktop study travels to the ridge.
Custom layer publishing is Pro. Industry modules and workflows are Elite.