scholarly journals Assessing the reliability of wind power operations under a changing climate with a non-Gaussian bias correction

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiachen Zhang ◽  
Paola Crippa ◽  
Marc G. Genton ◽  
Stefano Castruccio
Energy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 189 ◽  
pp. 116212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Gruber ◽  
Claude Klöckl ◽  
Peter Regner ◽  
Johann Baumgartner ◽  
Johannes Schmidt

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 4880-4893 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiwen Wang ◽  
Chen Shen ◽  
Feng Liu ◽  
Xiangyu Wu ◽  
Chen-Ching Liu ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Hiep Van Nguyen ◽  
Pham Xuan Thanh ◽  
Nguyen Duc Nam ◽  
Nguyen Xuan Anh ◽  
Pham Le Khuong ◽  
...  

In this study, the WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model was used to simulate and investigate diurnal and annual variations of wind speed and wind power density over Southern Vietnam at 2‐km horizontal resolution for two years (2016 and 2017). The model initial and boundary conditions are from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) Final Analyses (FNL). Observation data for two years at 20 m height at Bac Lieu station were used for model bias correction and investigating diurnal and annual variation of wind speeds. The results show that the WRF model overestimates wind speeds. After bias correction, the model reasonably well simulates wind speeds over the research area. Wind speed and wind power density show much higher values at levels of 50–200 m above ground levels than near ground (20 m) level and significantly higher near the coastal regions than inland. Wind speed has significant annual and diurnal cycles. Both annual and diurnal cycles of wind speeds were well simulated by the model. Wind speed is much stronger during daytime than at nighttime. Low-level wind speed reaches the maximum at about 14 LT to 15 LT when the vertical momentum mixing is highly active. Wind speeds over the eastern coastal region of Southern Vietnam are much stronger in winter than in summer due to two main reasons, including (1) stronger large-scale wind speed in winter than in summer and (2) funnel effect creating a local maximum wind speed over the nearshore ocean which then transports high-momentum air inland in winter.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Gruber ◽  
Luis Ramirez Camargo ◽  
Johannes Schmidt

<p>Climate data sets are widely used for renewable power simulation. While previous generations of global reanalysis data including MERRA-2 and ERA-Interim have been widely assessed for their suitability to simulate variable renewable power systems, more recent datasets such as ERA5 and ERA5-Land lack validation, particularly in regions outside of Europe.</p><p>Here, we assess the accuracy and bias of wind power simulation using ERA5 wind speeds in Brazil and New Zealand as well as solar photovoltaic power simulation accuracy using ERA5-Land solar radiation and temperature data in Chile. We compare the performance of ERA5 and ERA5-Land to MERRA-2 based renewable power generation. The reference data sets are capacity factors derived from data measured at individual installations in each country and the performance indicators include the pearson’s correlation coefficient, mean bias error (MBE) and root mean square error (RMSE). For wind power simulation, we also assess a bias correction method using the Global Wind Atlas.</p><p>Since models applying the resulting datasets are based on different spatial and temporal scales, we also aim at finding a relation between the spatial and temporal resolution and simulation quality. We assess the simulation results applying spatial aggregation ranging from individual installations to the country level and temporal aggregation varying from hours to months. This aids to evaluate the reliability of the simulated renewable power generation time series on various spatiotemporal scales for future simulation efforts.</p><p>Overall, we find that both datasets, ERA5 and ERA5-Land, perform well in wind and solar photovoltaic power simulations. For wind power simulation, ERA5 shows improved performance compared to MERRA-2 based wind power simulation, while for solar photovoltaic the improvements of ERA5-Land compared to MERRA-2 are minor. Correlation of wind power generation is around 0.8 without correction and MBEs around -0.1. Mean bias correction with the Global Wind Atlas does not consistently improve simulation results. For the solar photovoltaic power simulation, we find correlations above 0.75, while the MBE is between -0.05 and 0.1.</p>


Climate ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olle Räty ◽  
Jouni Räisänen ◽  
Thomas Bosshard ◽  
Chantal Donnelly

2012 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. George ◽  
Jeroen M. Stil ◽  
Ben W. Keller

AbstractDetection thresholds in polarized intensity and polarization bias correction are investigated for surveys where the polarization information is obtained from rotation measure (RM) synthesis. Considering unresolved sources with a single RM, a detection threshold of 8 σQU applied to the Faraday spectrum will retrieve the RM with a false detection rate less than 10−4, but polarized intensity is more strongly biased than Ricean statistics suggest. For a detection threshold of 5 σQU, the false detection rate increases to ∼4%, depending also on λ2 coverage and the extent of the Faraday spectrum. Non-Gaussian noise in Stokes Q and U due to imperfect imaging and calibration can be represented by a distribution that is the sum of a Gaussian and an exponential. The non-Gaussian wings of the noise distribution increase the false detection rate in polarized intensity by orders of magnitude. Monte Carlo simulations assuming non-Gaussian noise in Q and U give false detection rates at 8 σQU similar to Ricean false detection rates at 4.9 σQU.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pradeebane Vaittinada Ayar ◽  
Mathieu Vrac ◽  
Alain Mailhot

AbstractClimate simulations often need to be adjusted (i.e., corrected) before any climate change impacts studies. However usual bias correction approaches do not differentiate the bias from the different uncertainties of the climate simulations: scenario uncertainty, model uncertainty and internal variability. In particular, in the case of a multi-run ensemble of simulations (i.e., multiple runs of one model), correcting, as usual, each member separately, would mix up the model biases with its internal variability. In this study, two ensemble bias correction approaches preserving the internal variability of the initial ensemble are proposed. These “Ensemble bias correction” (EnsBC) approaches are assessed and compared to the approach where each ensemble member is corrected separately, using precipitation and temperature series at two locations in North America from a multi-member regional climate ensemble. The preservation of the internal variability is assessed in terms of monthly mean and hourly quantiles. Besides, the preservation of the internal variability in a changing climate is evaluated. Results show that, contrary to the usual approach, the proposed ensemble bias correction approaches adequately preserve the internal variability even in changing climate. Moreover, the climate change signal given by the original ensemble is also conserved by both approaches.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Espen Benth ◽  
Anca Pircalabu
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document