At EcoGen America, we aim to make solar energy easier to understand by providing clear, reliable, and unbiased information. Our content is designed to help homeowners make informed decisions, not to push them toward a specific provider.
We are not solar installers. Every piece of content we publish is designed to prioritize accuracy over persuasion.
This page explains our editorial standards. We are applying them to new and updated content while reviewing older articles; the byline, review details, sources and dates on each article show the work recorded for that page.
How Our Content Is Created
Our editorial process focuses on accuracy, relevance and usefulness to homeowners.
We start by identifying topics based on real questions homeowners are asking, along with broader trends in the solar market. This allows us to focus on information that is both timely and useful.
Before writing begins, we conduct research using a combination of market data, publicly available information on incentives and tax credits, and insights into how solar systems are priced and financed. The goal is to ground each piece in real-world data rather than opinion.
Our writers then turn this research into clear, easy-to-understand content. We prioritize practical explanations and structured formats that help users quickly find the answers they need.
Each piece is reviewed for clarity, structure, and how effectively it answers the user’s question.
Accuracy is a key part of our process. We review financial information, incentive details, and technical explanations to ensure they reflect current conditions and are presented correctly.
Before publication, each piece undergoes a final editorial review to ensure clarity, consistency, and completeness.
Ongoing Updates
The solar industry changes frequently, especially when it comes to incentives and regulations. For that reason, we regularly review and update our content to reflect the most current information available.
Who Contributes to Our Content
Our content is created through collaboration between writers, editors, and SEO specialists, supported by real-world insights from the solar market.
Our About page introduces the team. Author profiles describe each contributor’s relevant experience. Writing, editing and specialist review are different responsibilities: where an article names a reviewer, that credit applies to the review described on that article. A tax review does not establish that the same person checked an installer ranking or an engineering assumption. Expert-review credits must reflect work actually performed.
Editorial Independence
Maintaining trust requires independence. Our educational content is not influenced by specific solar providers, and we do not accept compensation in exchange for favorable placement within our guides.
Our priority is to present information in a way that allows users to make their own informed decisions.
Sources and Data Integrity
We base our content on publicly available data, government programs, and industry insights. We distinguish modeled estimates, marketplace quotes and completed-installation prices so readers can understand what a number measures.
For incentive eligibility and utility rules, we prioritize program administrators and official documents. Equipment claims should link to manufacturer specifications or other attributable evidence. Reading specifications is not hands-on testing. Installer checks use identifiable records; the Verified Installer methodology explains the separate requirements behind a badge.
Our Solar Cost Research
The EcoGen Solar Database supports the September 2026 EcoGen Solar Cost Index, built by our data and analytics team, led by Trevor Guilday. The model starts with the Q1 2025 Solar Photovoltaic System Cost Benchmarks from the Department of Energy’s National Laboratory of the Rockies (formerly NREL). This separates equipment, field labor and other system costs.
We adjust labor costs using Bureau of Labor Statistics state wages for solar installers, with electrician wages as the fallback. U.S. Energy Information Administration electricity-use data and local sunlight inform the representative system size. EcoGen’s proprietary cost model is calibrated against current marketplace quotes from across the country.
We then compare the estimates with installed prices in the 21 states covered by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s 2026 transacted-price data. The national figure is the plain average of the 50 states and Washington, DC. See the full cost methodology for how the figures are calculated and how to interpret a state’s row.
The cost-model version and payback assumptions are separate. An article should identify the inputs it actually uses; a new method edition does not mean every older article has been recalculated. Savings examples should explain system size, price, production, electricity rates, export compensation and any incentive or financing assumptions. Estimates are not personalized quotes or guarantees.
Commercial Relationships
Our free content is supported by homeowner introductions to solar providers. Read how we make money and see our partners. Companies cannot pay to change our editorial conclusions or rankings. Commercial participation, an installer-verification badge and an editorial recommendation serve different purposes.
Tools and Editorial Accountability
Whether work involves manual research, software or AI assistance, the author and editor remain responsible for checking material claims and calculations. Automated output is not a factual source or evidence of firsthand experience. Content must not imply that a writer installed, tested or reviewed something when that work did not take place.
Corrections and Feedback
We take responsibility for the accuracy of the information we publish. If information becomes outdated or an error is identified, we update it as quickly as possible.
If you notice something that needs correction, we encourage you to reach out. Feedback helps us improve the quality and reliability of our content.
To flag an issue, use our contact page and include the article URL, the statement in question and a supporting source. Material corrections should explain what changed; a cosmetic edit should not be presented as a new factual review.