scholarly journals A sensitivity study of the WRF model in offshore wind modeling over the Baltic Sea

2021 ◽  
pp. 101229
Author(s):  
Huidong Li ◽  
Björn Claremar ◽  
Lichuan Wu ◽  
Christoffer Hallgren ◽  
Heiner Körnich ◽  
...  
Energy Policy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 775-782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanerva Sunila ◽  
Claire Bergaentzlé ◽  
Bénédicte Martin ◽  
Ari Ekroos

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 3670
Author(s):  
Christoffer Hallgren ◽  
Johan Arnqvist ◽  
Stefan Ivanell ◽  
Heiner Körnich ◽  
Ville Vakkari ◽  
...  

With an increasing interest in offshore wind energy, focus has been directed towards large semi-enclosed basins such as the Baltic Sea as potential sites to set up wind turbines. The meteorology of this inland sea in particular is strongly affected by the surrounding land, creating mesoscale conditions that are important to take into consideration when planning for new wind farms. This paper presents a comparison between data from four state-of-the-art reanalyses (MERRA2, ERA5, UERRA, NEWA) and observations from LiDAR. The comparison is made for four sites in the Baltic Sea with wind profiles up to 300 m. The findings provide insight into the accuracy of reanalyses for wind resource assessment. In general, the reanalyses underestimate the average wind speed. The average shear is too low in NEWA, while ERA5 and UERRA predominantly overestimate the shear. MERRA2 suffers from insufficient vertical resolution, which limits its usefulness in evaluating the wind profile. It is also shown that low-level jets, a very frequent mesoscale phenomenon in the Baltic Sea during late spring, can appear in a wide range of wind speeds. The observed frequency of low-level jets is best captured by UERRA. In terms of general wind characteristics, ERA5, UERRA, and NEWA are similar, and the best choice depends on the application.


Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (16) ◽  
pp. 4883
Author(s):  
Kamila Pronińska ◽  
Krzysztof Księżopolski

A key question for European energy transition is which forms of renewable energy technologies will play a central role in this process. The recent dynamic growth in offshore wind power together with the vast wind energy potential of the European seas, including the Baltic Sea, make this technology an increasingly attractive and viable option. Considering the high installation and connection costs, government support is considered essential for the development of offshore wind power. The aim of this article is to analyze Poland’s public policy tools, which govern offshore wind farm development, and to present them from a wider geostrategic perspective. Authors identify, classify, and evaluate individual public policy tools with the use of multi-criteria and multi-dimensional methods while explaining their impact on offshore wind development in Poland. The analysis of the individual tools has shown that the currently applied tools give a high probability of achieving public policy objectives. The characteristics of the applied tools prove that vital decisions on offshore wind energy have been made concerning the need for decarbonization but also regarding wider geostrategic calculations. Given the changing security dynamics in the Baltic Sea region, we highlight potential geostrategic risks to the implementation of offshore wind projects.


1985 ◽  
Vol 1985 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-104
Author(s):  
Caroline L. F. Webb

ABSTRACT The Schwedeneck-See oilfield is the first offshore exploration and production operation to be developed in German waters. Due to the close proximity to the shore of the two fixed and unmanned production platforms, there is a strong emphasis on protective and preventive measures against pollution damage to the heavily used beaches and nearshore waters. This paper reviews the important features of a sensitivity study and shoreline mapping project conducted as part of the contingency arrangements for coastal protection along 62 km of the Baltic Sea. “Sensitive areas” were identified according to coastal use, and areas of risk highlighted on the basis of oil spill trajectories. The main shore types were classified on a scale from 1 to 10 in terms of potential vulnerability to oil spill damage and anticipated difficulties for access and cleanup operations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 170 ◽  
pp. 315-326
Author(s):  
Anna Sobotka ◽  
Marcin Rowicki ◽  
Krzysztof Badyda ◽  
Piotr Sobotka

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 1205-1226
Author(s):  
Christoffer Hallgren ◽  
Stefan Ivanell ◽  
Heiner Körnich ◽  
Ville Vakkari ◽  
Erik Sahlée

Abstract. With a rapidly increasing capacity of electricity generation from wind power, the demand for accurate power production forecasts is growing. To date, most wind power installations have been onshore and thus most studies on production forecasts have focused on onshore conditions. However, as offshore wind power is becoming increasingly popular it is also important to assess forecast quality in offshore locations. In this study, forecasts from the high-resolution numerical weather prediction model AROME was used to analyze power production forecast performance for an offshore site in the Baltic Sea. To improve the AROME forecasts, six post-processing methods were investigated and their individual performance analyzed in general as well as for different wind speed ranges, boundary layer stratifications, synoptic situations and in low-level jet conditions. In general, AROME performed well in forecasting the power production, but applying smoothing or using a random forest algorithm increased forecast skill. Smoothing the forecast improved the performance at all wind speeds, all stratifications and for all synoptic weather classes, and the random forest method increased the forecast skill during low-level jets. To achieve the best performance, we recommend selecting which method to use based on the forecasted weather conditions. Combining forecasts from neighboring grid points, combining the recent forecast with the forecast from yesterday or applying linear regression to correct the forecast based on earlier performance were not fruitful methods to increase the overall forecast quality.


2020 ◽  
Vol 211 ◽  
pp. 103397
Author(s):  
Erik Gustafsson ◽  
Bo G. Gustafsson

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document