— In Development · AI Financing Advisor

Solar purchasing, without the salesperson.

Solar installations are still sold the way cars were in 1985 — a rep shows up, runs the numbers on their terms, and asks you to decide on the spot. I designed a conceptual AI-powered financing advisor that removes that bottleneck entirely: giving homeowners a transparent, self-directed path to understand their options, compare financing scenarios, and begin an application from home, on their timeline, without pressure.

Role
Product Design · Interaction Design
Status
Conceptual · In Development
Context
Solar Fintech · Consumer
Platform
Web (Desktop)
— Problems to solve
01
Opaque sales process
Solar is sold through door-to-door reps and in-home consultations. Pricing, terms, and recommendations vary by rep. There's no independent channel to explore options without starting a sales engagement.
02
Financing confusion
Loan, lease, and cash options have meaningfully different long-term outcomes, but the difference isn't explained — it's just presented. Users can't evaluate tradeoffs without a financial advisor or a spreadsheet.
03
No self-service path
Every step — from initial quote to financing application — requires a human intermediary. Customers who prefer to research and decide independently have no alternative.
04
Low trust in recommendations
When a recommendation does come, it arrives without explanation. Buyers don't know if the suggested option is best for them or best for the rep's commission — and there's no way to ask.
— Design walkthrough
Design
Financing
Application
Install

I can help you understand your financing options or explain your recommendation.

Recommended for your home

15-Year Solar Loan

$42,000
estimated lifetime savings
Compared to continuing utility payments over 25 years
$142 / month · 5.9% APR · +$45 net monthly benefit
Why this recommendation
Monthly payment is below estimated utility savings
Strong long-term savings outcome
Matches your usage and goals
01 — Advisor Interface
One screen. One recommendation. The salesperson, replaced.
The advisor interface lives on a single screen split into two zones: a calm AI advisor on the left and a structured decision panel on the right. The left handles questions — natural language, suggested, or free-form. The right handles the decision: recommendation, reasoning, and application path. The design is deliberately unhurried. There are no tabs, no feature list to scroll through. If you have a question, ask it. If you're ready to decide, everything you need is already on screen.
Design
Financing
Application
Install

Why is the loan better than paying cash?

Cash gives you the best long-term return — $58K vs $42K — but requires $20,860 upfront. The loan lets you start saving from day one with no out-of-pocket cost, and you still own the system.

If liquidity matters to you, the loan is the better call.

Compare financing options
Loan Recommended
$142 /mo
5.9% APR +$45 net monthly benefit
25-year lifetime savings
$42,000
Best balance of savings and affordability
Lease
$110 /mo
No ownership of system Lower monthly, limited long-term value
25-year lifetime savings
$24,000
Lower upfront cost, lower long-term benefit
Cash
$20,860 one-time
Highest immediate cost Maximum long-term savings
25-year lifetime savings
$58,000
Highest upfront cost, strongest long-term return
Why this recommendation
Best balance between monthly affordability and long-term savings
Avoids large upfront capital requirement
Maintains ownership while optimizing cash flow
02 — Option Comparison
All three paths — without turning into a table
When users want to explore, the three financing options sit side by side in a structured card format. Each card shows monthly cost, lifetime savings, and a one-line summary. The recommended option is highlighted — not buried. The comparison avoids becoming a feature matrix. It stays focused on the two questions users actually care about: what do I pay monthly, and how much do I save over 25 years. The AI response on the left updates in context — answering the user's specific question without leaving the decision panel.
Design
Financing
Application
Install

Ready to start your application when you are. You can always come back to review options.

Projected savings over time
Cumulative net benefit
Break-even Year 4 $42,000 Today Year 25
Ready to apply for the 15-Year Solar Loan?
Takes about 10 minutes. Soft credit check — no impact to your score.
03 — Financial Impact + Application Path
Break-even in year 4. The long view, made visible.
A single growth curve shows cumulative savings over 25 years. One annotation — the break-even point at year 4 — makes the most important milestone immediately legible without requiring the user to do any math. The $42,000 endpoint anchors the decision. The savings chart does the work of justifying the recommendation — grounding the monthly cost in long-term outcome before the user has to commit. The soft credit check callout removes a common hesitation before it becomes one.
— Design principles
01
One recommendation, not a menu
Presenting three options without guidance shifts cognitive load to the user. The advisor leads with a single recommendation and explains why — making comparison a choice, not a requirement.
02
AI as advisor, not chatbot
The conversation panel is a supporting element, not the interface. It handles questions contextually while the structured decision panel anchors the experience — matching how people actually make high-stakes financial decisions.
03
Transparency earns trust
Every recommendation includes a "Why this" section written in plain language. No financial jargon, no hiding the reasoning. Users who understand why a recommendation was made are more likely to act on it.
04
Reduce density, not information
The design uses space, hierarchy, and sequencing to surface what matters at each step — not by cutting information, but by deciding what to show first. The savings chart appears after the recommendation, not before.
— Reflection

The salesperson's job wasn't to sell. It was to explain.

This project started with a simple observation: the solar buying process hasn't changed since solar became affordable. Door-to-door sales persists — not because it's better for the buyer, but because there's been no real alternative. The hardest design problem wasn't information architecture. It was trust. Financial recommendations only land if the user believes the system is working in their interest. Every decision in this design — leading with savings instead of product names, explaining reasoning in plain language, leading with the financial picture before the application path — was made to earn that trust before asking for a commitment.

Back to portfolio →