This article was produced in partnership with FM
Mary Rieck sometimes fires ice balls at solar panels.
No, she is not part of an underground group of militant vigilante climate change deniers. This unusual pursuit forms part of her role as principal underwriter for renewable energy, pharmaceuticals and molten materials at FM, where understanding exactly when glass breaks under hail impact determines millions in insurance coverage decisions.
"Our research team works closely with underwriting to develop tools that reflect real-world risks," Rieck explained. "They've tested solar panels by shooting ice balls at them to understand breakage thresholds."
The approach reflects a broader shift in renewable energy insurance, where engineering analysis increasingly drives underwriting strategy rather than traditional actuarial models alone.
Rieck's background in chemical engineering shapes her analytical approach to risk assessment in ways that extend far beyond reviewing policy applications and loss data.
"Underwriting is more analytical than people realise," she said. "My engineering background helps me understand the technical aspects of risk and apply judgement to data trends."
This technical foundation proves essential when supply chain disruptions create new risk factors. Transformer lead times have stretched significantly, forcing underwriters to recalibrate their exposure calculations and coverage terms.
"If I see a new trend, I have to decide if it's a blip or something that requires a change in our approach," Rieck noted.
Her role involves developing strategy across FM's renewable energy portfolio by understanding potential loss scenarios based on engineering input, then building underwriting approaches that balance profitability with sustainability.
Where many insurance providers assess renewable energy risks at the account level, FM begins its analysis at individual sites. This granular approach allows underwriters to evaluate specific equipment, maintenance practices, and operational resilience.
"We work closely with engineers who provide us with detailed site assessments—what equipment is in use, how it's maintained, and how resilient it is," Rieck said. "They help us understand what could go wrong and how likely it is."
The depth of this analysis becomes apparent when considering hail damage to solar installations, the sector's biggest risk factor. FM's underwriters examine not only the hail zone classification but also panel glass thickness, stowing strategies, operator training levels, and automation systems.
"If a hailstorm hits a solar farm, will the glass break? That depends on the panel's make and model, the thickness of the glass, and whether the site has a good stowing strategy," she explained.
For wind projects, the analysis focuses on matching turbine classifications to wind zones and spare parts management. Since blade losses represent common events, underwriters assess recovery timeframes and parts availability.
Battery energy storage systems present different challenges, with fire prevention taking priority. Space separation limits fire spread, while off-gas detection systems can identify thermal runaway conditions before fires develop.
FM's research capabilities extend into climate modelling, producing hail maps and other analytical tools that inform underwriting decisions. This research directly influences coverage terms and pricing structures.
The ice ball testing programme exemplifies this approach. By understanding breakage thresholds, underwriters can predict how much power damaged panels might still produce and set appropriate coverage triggers.
"I think of underwriting as trying to predict the future," Rieck said.
This predictive capability becomes particularly valuable as climate patterns shift and extreme weather events increase in frequency and intensity. Traditional loss models may not capture emerging risks, making engineering-based analysis increasingly important.
The engineering focus enables more sophisticated risk pooling, where clients with similar loss prevention measures are grouped together rather than being averaged across broader categories.
"Insurance is about pooling risk, but we make sure clients are pooled with their true peers—those who've taken similar steps to mitigate risk," Rieck explained. "That way, a well-managed site isn't subsidising one that hasn't invested in prevention."
This approach addresses a longstanding industry challenge where well-managed projects effectively cross-subsidise poorly managed ones through averaged pricing. By creating more homogeneous risk pools, insurers can offer fairer pricing while maintaining profitability.
The tension between providing adequate coverage and maintaining profitable operations remains the sector's central challenge. Lender requirements often drive coverage levels, while underwriting discipline determines long-term sustainability.
"We want to provide enough coverage to meet client and lender needs, but we also have to stay profitable," Rieck said. "Strong underwriting, backed by engineering, helps us find that balance."
Rather than expecting perfect risk management, the approach focuses on identifying clients committed to loss prevention and helping them improve their risk profiles over time.
The industry continues developing more sophisticated risk categories based on site-specific data, enabling increasingly tailored coverage and pricing structures.
"We're getting better at risk differentiation," Rieck observed. "We're developing more nuanced categories based on site-specific data."
This evolution reflects broader changes in the renewable energy sector, where standardised approaches give way to customised solutions based on detailed technical analysis.
For Rieck, the ongoing challenge centres on finding mutually beneficial outcomes rather than managing unknown risks.
"It's not the unknown—it's the challenge of finding that mutual win," she said. "We know what can go wrong, but how do we provide enough insurance at a sustainable price? That's the puzzle we're always trying to solve."
