IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i3p1110-d741001.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Decision Process for Choosing the Wind Resource Assessment Workflow with the Best Compromise between Accuracy and Costs for a Given Project in Complex Terrain

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Barber

    (Institute for Energy Technology, Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Oberseestrasse 10, 8640 Rapperswil, Switzerland)

  • Alain Schubiger

    (Institute for Energy Technology, Eastern Switzerland University of Applied Sciences, Oberseestrasse 10, 8640 Rapperswil, Switzerland)

  • Sara Koller

    (Meteotest AG, Fabrikstrasse 14, 3012 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Dominik Eggli

    (Meteotest AG, Fabrikstrasse 14, 3012 Bern, Switzerland)

  • Alexander Radi

    (Enercon GmbH, 14 E Rue des Clairières, 44840 Les Soriniéres, France)

  • Andreas Rumpf

    (Hochschule Esslingen, Kanalstr. 33, 73728 Esslingen am Neckar, Germany)

  • Hermann Knaus

    (Hochschule Esslingen, Kanalstr. 33, 73728 Esslingen am Neckar, Germany)

Abstract

In wind energy, the accuracy of the estimation of the wind resource has an enormous effect on the expected rate of return of a project. For a given project, the wind resource assessor is faced with a difficult choice of a wide range of simulation tools and workflows with varying accuracies (or “skill”) and costs. There is currently no guideline or process available in the industry for helping with the decision of the most “optimal” choice—and this is particularly challenging in mountainous (or “complex”) terrain. In this work, a new decision process for selecting the Wind Resource Assessment (WRA) workflow that would expect to deliver the best compromise between skill and costs for a given wind energy project is developed, with a focus on complex terrain. This involves estimating the expected skill and cost scores using a set of pre-defined weighted parameters. The new process is designed and tested by applying seven different WRA workflows to five different complex terrain sites. The quality of the decision process is then assessed for all the sites by comparing the decision made (i.e., choice of optimal workflow) using the expected skill and cost scores with the decision made using the actual skill and cost scores (obtained by comparing measurements and simulations at a validation location). The results show that the decision process works well, but the accuracy decreases as the site complexity increases. It is therefore concluded that some of the parameter weightings should be dependent on site complexity. On-going work involves collecting more data from a large range of sites, implementing measures to reduce the subjectivity of the process and developing a reliable and robust automated decision tool for the industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Barber & Alain Schubiger & Sara Koller & Dominik Eggli & Alexander Radi & Andreas Rumpf & Hermann Knaus, 2022. "A New Decision Process for Choosing the Wind Resource Assessment Workflow with the Best Compromise between Accuracy and Costs for a Given Project in Complex Terrain," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-24, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:1110-:d:741001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/3/1110/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/3/1110/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Małgorzata Łatuszyńska & Kesra Nermend, 2022. "Energy Decision Making: Problems, Methods, and Tools—An Overview," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-5, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:3:p:1110-:d:741001. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.