Articles | Volume 10, issue 1
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-59-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-59-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
08 Jan 2025
Research article |
| 08 Jan 2025
| 08 Jan 2025
The effects of wind farm wakes on freezing sea spray in the mid-Atlantic offshore wind energy areas
David Rosencrans
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, 80303, USA
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, 80401, USA
Julie K. Lundquist
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, 80303, USA
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, 80401, USA
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 21218, USA
Mike Optis
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, 80401, USA
Veer Renewables, Courtenay, V9N 9B4, Canada
Nicola Bodini
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, 80401, USA
Related authors
Daphne Quint, Julie K. Lundquist, and David Rosencrans
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-48, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-48, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind farms will be built along the east coast of the United States. Low-level jets (LLJs) – layers of fast winds at low altitudes – also occur here. LLJs provide wind resources and also influence moisture and pollution transport, so it is important to understand how they might change. We develop and validate an automated tool to detect LLJs, and compare one year of simulations with and without wind farms. Here, we describe LLJ characteristics and how they change with wind farms.
Nicola Bodini, Mike Optis, Stephanie Redfern, David Rosencrans, Alex Rybchuk, Julie K. Lundquist, Vincent Pronk, Simon Castagneri, Avi Purkayastha, Caroline Draxl, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Ethan Young, Billy Roberts, Evan Rosenlieb, and Walter Musial
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 1965–2006, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1965-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1965-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This article presents the 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23), an updated resource for offshore wind information in the US. It replaces the Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) Toolkit, offering improved accuracy through advanced weather prediction models. The data underwent regional tuning and validation and can be accessed at no cost.
David Rosencrans, Julie K. Lundquist, Mike Optis, Alex Rybchuk, Nicola Bodini, and Michael Rossol
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 555–583, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The US offshore wind industry is developing rapidly. Using yearlong simulations of wind plants in the US mid-Atlantic, we assess the impacts of wind turbine wakes. While wakes are the strongest and longest during summertime stably stratified conditions, when New England grid demand peaks, they are predictable and thus manageable. Over a year, wakes reduce power output by over 35 %. Wakes in a wind plant contribute the most to that reduction, while wakes between wind plants play a secondary role.
Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Julie K. Lundquist, David Rosencrans, Nicola Bodini, and Mike Optis
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 2085–2098, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Numerical weather prediction models are used to predict how wind turbines will interact with the atmosphere. Here, we characterize the uncertainty associated with the choice of turbulence parameterization on modeled wakes. We find that simulated wind speed deficits in turbine wakes can be significantly sensitive to the choice of turbulence parameterization. As such, predictions of future generated power are also sensitive to turbulence parameterization choice.
William Radünz, Bruno Carmo, Julie K. Lundquist, Stefano Letizia, Aliza Abraham, Adam S. Wise, Miguel Sanchez Gomez, Nicholas Hamilton, Raj K. Rai, and Pedro S. Peixoto
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-166, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-166, 2025
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
This study investigates how simple terrain can cause significant variations in wind speed, especially during specific atmospheric conditions like low-level jets. By combining simulations and observations from a real wind farm, we found that downstream turbines generate more power than upstream ones, despite wake effects only impacting the upstream turbines. We highlight the crucial role of the strong vertical wind speed gradient in low-level jets in driving this effect.
Robert S. Arthur, Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Gabriel Rios, Sonia Wharton, Julie K. Lundquist, and Jerome D. Fast
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-137, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-137, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
This paper evaluates a new model configuration for wind energy forecasting in complex terrain. We compare model results to observations in the Altamont Pass (California, USA), where wind channeling through a mountain pass leads to increased energy production. We show evidence of improved wind speed and turbulence predictions compared to a more established modeling approach. Our work helps to ensure the robustness of the new model configuration for future wind energy applications.
Aliza Abraham, Matteo Puccioni, Arianna Jordan, Emina Maric, Nicola Bodini, Nicholas Hamilton, Stefano Letizia, Petra M. Klein, Elizabeth Smith, Sonia Wharton, Jonathan Gero, Jamey D. Jacob, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob K. Newsom, Mikhail Pekour, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-148, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-148, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
This study is the first to use real-world atmospheric measurements to show that large wind plants can increase the height of the planetary boundary layer, the part of the atmosphere near the surface where life takes place. The planetary boundary layer height governs processes like pollutant transport and cloud formation, and is a key parameter for modeling the atmosphere. The results of this study provide important insights into interactions between wind plants and their local environment.
Lindsay M. Sheridan, Jiali Wang, Caroline Draxl, Nicola Bodini, Caleb Phillips, Dmitry Duplyakin, Heidi Tinnesand, Raj K. Rai, Julia E. Flaherty, Larry K. Berg, Chunyong Jung, and Ethan Young
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-115, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-115, 2024
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Three recent wind resource datasets are assessed for their skills in representing annual average wind speeds and seasonal, diurnal, and inter-annual trends in the wind resource to support customers interested in small and midsize wind energy.
Daphne Quint, Julie K. Lundquist, and David Rosencrans
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-48, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-48, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind farms will be built along the east coast of the United States. Low-level jets (LLJs) – layers of fast winds at low altitudes – also occur here. LLJs provide wind resources and also influence moisture and pollution transport, so it is important to understand how they might change. We develop and validate an automated tool to detect LLJs, and compare one year of simulations with and without wind farms. Here, we describe LLJ characteristics and how they change with wind farms.
Daphne Quint, Julie K. Lundquist, Nicola Bodini, and David Rosencrans
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-53, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-53, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind farms along the US east coast can have limited effects on local weather. Studying this, we used a weather model to compare conditions with and without wind farms near Massachusetts and Rhode Island. We analyzed changes in wind, temperature, and turbulence. Results show reduced wind speeds near and downwind of wind farms, especially during stability and high winds. Turbulence increases near wind farms, affecting boundary-layer height and wake size.
Nicola Bodini, Mike Optis, Stephanie Redfern, David Rosencrans, Alex Rybchuk, Julie K. Lundquist, Vincent Pronk, Simon Castagneri, Avi Purkayastha, Caroline Draxl, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Ethan Young, Billy Roberts, Evan Rosenlieb, and Walter Musial
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 1965–2006, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1965-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1965-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This article presents the 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23), an updated resource for offshore wind information in the US. It replaces the Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) Toolkit, offering improved accuracy through advanced weather prediction models. The data underwent regional tuning and validation and can be accessed at no cost.
Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob Newsom, Colleen Kaul, Stefano Letizia, Mikhail Pekour, Nicholas Hamilton, Duli Chand, Donna M. Flynn, Nicola Bodini, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-29, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-29, 2024
Revised manuscript accepted for WES
Short summary
Short summary
The growth of wind farms in the central United States in the last decade has been staggering. This study looked at how wind farms affect the recovery of wind wakes – the disturbed air behind wind turbines. In places like the US Great Plains, phenomena such as low-level jets can form, changing how wind farms work. We studied how wind wakes recover under different weather conditions using real-world data, which is important for making wind energy more efficient and reliable.
Lindsay M. Sheridan, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, William I. Gustafson Jr., Ye Liu, Brian J. Gaudet, Nicola Bodini, Rob K. Newsom, and Mikhail Pekour
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 741–758, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-741-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-741-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
In 2020, lidar-mounted buoys owned by the US Department of Energy (DOE) were deployed off the California coast in two wind energy lease areas and provided valuable year-long analyses of offshore low-level jet (LLJ) characteristics at heights relevant to wind turbines. In addition to the LLJ climatology, this work provides validation of LLJ representation in atmospheric models that are essential for assessing the potential energy yield of offshore wind farms.
David Rosencrans, Julie K. Lundquist, Mike Optis, Alex Rybchuk, Nicola Bodini, and Michael Rossol
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 555–583, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
The US offshore wind industry is developing rapidly. Using yearlong simulations of wind plants in the US mid-Atlantic, we assess the impacts of wind turbine wakes. While wakes are the strongest and longest during summertime stably stratified conditions, when New England grid demand peaks, they are predictable and thus manageable. Over a year, wakes reduce power output by over 35 %. Wakes in a wind plant contribute the most to that reduction, while wakes between wind plants play a secondary role.
Nicola Bodini, Simon Castagneri, and Mike Optis
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 607–620, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-607-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-607-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has published updated maps of the wind resource along all US coasts. Given the upcoming offshore wind development, it is essential to quantify the uncertainty that comes with the modeled wind resource data set. The paper proposes a novel approach to quantify this numerical uncertainty by leveraging available observations along the US East Coast.
Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Julie K. Lundquist, David Rosencrans, Nicola Bodini, and Mike Optis
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 2085–2098, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Numerical weather prediction models are used to predict how wind turbines will interact with the atmosphere. Here, we characterize the uncertainty associated with the choice of turbulence parameterization on modeled wakes. We find that simulated wind speed deficits in turbine wakes can be significantly sensitive to the choice of turbulence parameterization. As such, predictions of future generated power are also sensitive to turbulence parameterization choice.
Vincent Pronk, Nicola Bodini, Mike Optis, Julie K. Lundquist, Patrick Moriarty, Caroline Draxl, Avi Purkayastha, and Ethan Young
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 487–504, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-487-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-487-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we have assessed to which extent mesoscale numerical weather prediction models are more accurate than state-of-the-art reanalysis products in characterizing the wind resource at heights of interest for wind energy. The conclusions of our work will be of primary importance to the wind industry for recommending the best data sources for wind resource modeling.
Nicola Bodini, Weiming Hu, Mike Optis, Guido Cervone, and Stefano Alessandrini
Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 1363–1377, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1363-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1363-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
We develop two machine-learning-based approaches to temporally extrapolate uncertainty in hub-height wind speed modeled by a numerical weather prediction model. We test our approaches in the California Outer Continental Shelf, where a significant offshore wind energy development is currently being planned, and we find that both provide accurate results.
Mithu Debnath, Paula Doubrawa, Mike Optis, Patrick Hawbecker, and Nicola Bodini
Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 1043–1059, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1043-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1043-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
As the offshore wind industry emerges on the US East Coast, a comprehensive understanding of the wind resource – particularly extreme events – is vital to the industry's success. We leverage a year of data of two floating lidars to quantify and characterize the frequent occurrence of high-wind-shear and low-level-jet events, both of which will have a considerable impact on turbine operation. We find that almost 100 independent long events occur throughout the year.
Hannah Livingston, Nicola Bodini, and Julie K. Lundquist
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-68, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2021-68, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary
Short summary
In this paper, we assess whether hub-height turbulence can easily be quantified from either other hub-height variables or ground-level measurements in complex terrain. We find a large variability across the three considered locations when trying to model hub-height turbulence intensity and turbulence kinetic energy. Our results highlight the nonlinear and complex nature of atmospheric turbulence, so that more powerful techniques should instead be recommended to model hub-height turbulence.
Mike Optis, Nicola Bodini, Mithu Debnath, and Paula Doubrawa
Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 935–948, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-935-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-935-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind turbines are huge, with rotor blades soon to extend up to nearly 300 m. Accurate modeling of winds across these heights is crucial for accurate estimates of energy production. However, we lack sufficient observations at these heights but have plenty of near-surface observations. Here we show that a basic machine-learning model can provide very accurate estimates of winds in this area, and much better than conventional techniques.
Nicola Bodini and Mike Optis
Wind Energ. Sci., 5, 1435–1448, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-1435-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-1435-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
Calculations of annual energy production (AEP) and its uncertainty are critical for wind farm financial transactions. Standard industry practice assumes that different uncertainty categories within an AEP calculation are uncorrelated and can therefore be combined through a sum of squares approach. In this project, we show the limits of this assumption by performing operational AEP estimates for over 470 wind farms in the United States and propose a more accurate way to combine uncertainties.
Nicola Bodini, Julie K. Lundquist, and Mike Optis
Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4271–4285, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4271-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4271-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
While turbulence dissipation rate (ε) is an essential parameter for the prediction of wind speed, its current representation in weather prediction models is inaccurate, especially in complex terrain. In this study, we leverage the potential of machine-learning techniques to provide a more accurate representation of turbulence dissipation rate. Our results show a 30 % reduction in the average error compared to the current model representation of ε and a total elimination of its average bias.
Nicola Bodini and Mike Optis
Wind Energ. Sci., 5, 489–501, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-489-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-489-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
An accurate assessment of the wind resource at hub height is necessary for an efficient and bankable wind farm project. Conventional techniques for wind speed vertical extrapolation include a power law and a logarithmic law. Here, we propose a round-robin validation to assess the benefits that a machine-learning-based approach can provide in vertically extrapolating wind speed at a location different from the training site – the most practically useful application for the wind energy industry.
Cited articles
Alexander, M. and Scott, J.: The influence of ENSO on air-sea interaction in the Atlantic, Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 46-1–46-4, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL014347, 2002.
Archer, C. L., Colle, B. A., Veron, D. L., Veron, F., and Sienkiewicz, M. J.: On the predominance of unstable atmospheric conditions in the marine boundary layer offshore of the U.S. northeastern coast, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 8869–8885, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024896, 2016.
Archer, C. L., Wu, S., Ma, Y., and Jiménez, P. A.: Two Corrections for Turbulent Kinetic Energy Generated by Wind Farms in the WRF Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 148, 4823–4835, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-20-0097.1, 2020.
Atkinson, B. W. and Wu Zhang, J.: Mesoscale shallow convection in the atmosphere, Rev. Geophys., 34, 403–431, https://doi.org/10.1029/96RG02623, 1996.
Battisti, L., Fedrizzi, R., Brighenti, A., and Laakso, T.: Sea ice and icing risk for offshore wind turbines, Proceedings of the OWEMES, Civitavecchia, Italy 22 April 2006, 20–22, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228552784_Sea_ice_and_icing_risk_for_offshore_wind_turbines (last access: 8 November 2023), 2006.
Beiter, P., Musial, W., Duffy, P., Cooperman, A., Shields, M., Heimiller, D., and Optis, M.: The Cost of Floating Offshore Wind Energy in California Between 2019 and 2032, Technical Report, National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL/TP-5000-77384, https://doi.org/10.2172/1710181, 2020.
Bodini, N., Lundquist, J. K., and Kirincich, A.: U.S. East Coast Lidar Measurements Show Offshore Wind Turbines Will Encounter Very Low Atmospheric Turbulence, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46, 5582–5591, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL082636, 2019.
Bodini, N., Optis, M., Redfern, S., Rosencrans, D., Rybchuk, A., Lundquist, J. K., Pronk, V., Castagneri, S., Purkayastha, A., Draxl, C., Krishnamurthy, R., Young, E., Roberts, B., Rosenlieb, E., and Musial, W.: The 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23), Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 16, 1965–2006, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-16-1965-2024, 2024.
BOEM: Renewable Energy GIS Data, BOEM [data set], https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/mapping-and-data/renewable-energy-gis-data, (last access: 13 October 2019), 2024.
Chapman, D. C., Barth, J. A., Beardsley, R. C., and Fairbanks, R. G.: On the Continuity of Mean Flow between the Scotian Shelf and the Middle Atlantic Bight, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 16, 758–772, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0485(1986)016<0758:OTCOMF>2.0.CO;2, 1986.
Cohen, J., Zhang, X., Francis, J., Jung, T., Kwok, R., Overland, J., Ballinger, T. J., Bhatt, U. S., Chen, H. W., Coumou, D., Feldstein, S., Gu, H., Handorf, D., Henderson, G., Ionita, M., Kretschmer, M., Laliberte, F., Lee, S., Linderholm, H. W., Maslowski, W., Peings, Y., Pfeiffer, K., Rigor, I., Semmler, T., Stroeve, J., Taylor, P. C., Vavrus, S., Vihma, T., Wang, S., Wendisch, M., Wu, Y., and Yoon, J.: Divergent consensuses on Arctic amplification influence on midlatitude severe winter weather, Nat. Clim. Change, 10, 20–29, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0662-y, 2020.
Copernicus Marine Service: Global Ocean OSTIA Sea Surface Temperature and Sea Ice Analysis, Copernicus Marine Service [data set], https://doi.org/10.48670/moi-00165, 2024.
Contreras Montoya, L. T., Lain, S., and Ilinca, A.: A Review on the Estimation of Power Loss Due to Icing in Wind Turbines, Energies, 15, 1083, https://doi.org/10.3390/en15031083, 2022.
Dehghani-Sanij, A. R., Dehghani, S. R., Naterer, G. F., and Muzychka, Y. S.: Sea spray icing phenomena on marine vessels and offshore structures: Review and formulation, Ocean Eng., 132, 25–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.01.016, 2017.
Donlon, C. J., Martin, M., Stark, J., Roberts-Jones, J., Fiedler, E., and Wimmer, W.: The Operational Sea Surface Temperature and Sea Ice Analysis (OSTIA) system, Remote Sens. Environ., 116, 140–158, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.10.017, 2012.
Ferrel, W: An essay on the winds and the currents of the ocean, Nashv. J. Med. Surg., 11, 288–375, https://empslocal.ex.ac.uk/people/staff/gv219/classics.d/ferrel-nashville56.pdf (last access: 5 April 2024), 1856.
Ferrier, B. S., Jin, Y., Lin, Y., Black, T., Rogers, E., and DiMego, G.: Implementation of a new grid-scale cloud and precipitation scheme in the NCEP Eta model, Amer. Meteor. Soc. Conf. on Weather Analysis and Forecasting, San Antonia, Texas, 19, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284777388_Implementation_of_a_new_grid-scale_cloud_and_precipitation_scheme_in_the_NCEP_Eta_model (last access: 16 November 2023), 2002.
Fitch, A. C., Olson, J. B., Lundquist, J. K., Dudhia, J., Gupta, A. K., Michalakes, J., and Barstad, I.: Local and Mesoscale Impacts of Wind Farms as Parameterized in a Mesoscale NWP Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 140, 3017–3038, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-11-00352.1, 2012.
Fitch, A. C., Lundquist, J. K., and Olson, J. B.: Mesoscale Influences of Wind Farms throughout a Diurnal Cycle, Mon. Weather Rev., 141, 2173–2198, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-12-00185.1, 2013.
Gao, L. and Hong, J.: Wind turbine performance in natural icing environments: A field characterization, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 181, 103193, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2020.103193, 2021.
Gao, L. and Hu, H.: Wind turbine icing characteristics and icing-induced power losses to utility-scale wind turbines, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2111461118, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2111461118, 2021.
Geerts, B., Giangrande, S. E., McFarquhar, G. M., Xue, L., Abel, S. J., Comstock, J. M., Crewell, S., DeMott, P. J., Ebell, K., Field, P., Hill, T. C. J., Hunzinger, A., Jensen, M. P., Johnson, K. L., Juliano, T. W., Kollias, P., Kosovic, B., Lackner, C., Luke, E., Lüpkes, C., Matthews, A. A., Neggers, R., Ovchinnikov, M., Powers, H., Shupe, M. D., Spengler, T., Swanson, B. E., Tjernström, M., Theisen, A. K., Wales, N. A., Wang, Y., Wendisch, M., and Wu, P.: The COMBLE Campaign: A Study of Marine Boundary Layer Clouds in Arctic Cold-Air Outbreaks, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 103, E1371–E1389, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0044.1, 2022.
Glossary – NOAA's National Weather Service: https://forecast.weather.gov/glossary.php?letter=f, last access: 12 April 2023.
Golbazi, M., Archer, C. L., and Alessandrini, S.: Surface impacts of large offshore wind farms, Environ. Res. Lett., 17, 064021, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac6e49, 2022.
Gómez, B. and Miguez-Macho, G.: The impact of wave number selection and spin-up time in spectral nudging, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 143, 1772–1786, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3032, 2017.
Gryning, S.-E., Batchvarova, E., Brümmer, B., Jørgensen, H., and Larsen, S.: On the extension of the wind profile over homogeneous terrain beyond the surface boundary layer, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 124, 251–268, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-007-9166-9, 2007.
Guest, P. and Luke, R.: The Power of Wind and Water, Mariners Weather Log, https://www.vos.noaa.gov/MWL/dec_05/ves.shtml (last access: 2 April 2024), 2005.
Hall, T. and Booth, J. F.: SynthETC: A Statistical Model for Severe Winter Storm Hazard on Eastern North America, J. Climate, 30, 5329–5343, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0711.1, 2017.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Hirahara, S., Horányi, A., Muñoz-Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Abdalla, S., Abellan, X., Balsamo, G., Bechtold, P., Biavati, G., Bidlot, J., Bonavita, M., De Chiara, G., Dahlgren, P., Dee, D., Diamantakis, M., Dragani, R., Flemming, J., Forbes, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A., Haimberger, L., Healy, S., Hogan, R. J., Hólm, E., Janisková, M., Keeley, S., Laloyaux, P., Lopez, P., Lupu, C., Radnoti, G., de Rosnay, P., Rozum, I., Vamborg, F., Villaume, S., and Thépaut, J.-N.: The ERA5 global reanalysis, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 146, 1999–2049, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803, 2020.
Hersbach, H., Bell, B., Berrisford, P., Biavati, G., Horányi, A., Muñoz Sabater, J., Nicolas, J., Peubey, C., Radu, R., Rozum, I., Schepers, D., Simmons, A., Soci, C., Dee, D., and Thépaut, J.-N.: ERA5 hourly data on pressure levels from 1940 to present, Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S) Climate Data Store (CDS) [data set], https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6, 2023.
Hirsch, R. M., Slack, J. R., and Smith, R. A.: Techniques of trend analysis for monthly water quality data, Water Resour. Res., 18, 107–121, https://doi.org/10.1029/WR018i001p00107, 1982.
Hussain, M. M. and Mahmud, I.: pyMannKendall: a python package for non parametric Mann Kendall family of trend tests, Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1556, https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01556, 2019.
Iacono, M. J., Delamere, J. S., Mlawer, E. J., Shephard, M. W., Clough, S. A., and Collins, W. D.: Radiative forcing by long-lived greenhouse gases: Calculations with the AER radiative transfer models, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 113, D13103, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD009944, 2008.
IEA: Available Technologies for Wind Energy in Cold Climates – report, https://iea-wind.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/
Lehtomaki-et-al.-2018-Available-Technologies-for-Wind-Energy-in-Cold-Climates-report-2-nd-edition-2018.pdf (last access: 8 March 2024), 2018.
ISO: Atmospheric Icing of Structures, Geneva, Switzerland, ISO-12494:2017, https://cdn.standards.iteh.ai/samples/72443/
2fb2033c3f844304b66281607516ec58/ISO-12494-2017.pdf (last access: 24 April 2024), 2017.
Kain, J. S.: The Kain–Fritsch Convective Parameterization: An Update, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 43, 170–181, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2004)043<0170:TKCPAU>2.0.CO;2, 2004.
Kraegel, L.: Destination likely sank after accumulating ice in heavy freezing spray, report says, https://www.ktoo.org/2018/07/16/destination-likely-sank-
after-accumulating-ice-in-heavy-freezing-spray-report-says/ (last access: 12 April 2023), 2018.
Kraj, A. G. and Bibeau, E. L.: Phases of icing on wind turbine blades characterized by ice accumulation, Renew. Energ., 35, 966–972, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.09.013, 2010.
Line, W. E., Grasso, L., Hillger, D., Dierking, C., Jacobs, A., and Shea, S.: Using NOAA Satellite Imagery to Detect and Track Hazardous Sea Spray in the High Latitudes, Weather Forecast., 37, 351–369, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-21-0137.1, 2022.
Madi, E., Pope, K., Huang, W., and Iqbal, T.: A review of integrating ice detection and mitigation for wind turbine blades, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 103, 269–281, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.12.019, 2019.
Martini, F., Contreras Montoya, L. T., and Ilinca, A.: Review of Wind Turbine Icing Modelling Approaches, Energies, 14, 5207, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14165207, 2021.
Monahan, E. C. and MacNiocaill, G.: Oceanic Whitecaps And Their Role in Air-Sea Exchange Processes, D Reidel Publishing Company, e-ISBN-13: 978-94-009-4668-2, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4668-2, 1986.
Monahan, E. C., Fairall, C. W., Davidson, K. L., and Boyle, P. J.: Observed inter-relations between 10 m winds, ocean whitecaps and marine aerosols, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 109, 379–392, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.49710946010, 1983.
Monin, A. S. and Obukhov, A. M.: Basic laws of turbulent mixing in the surface layer of the atmosphere, Tr. Akad. Nauk SSSR Geophiz. Inst., 24, 163–187, 1954.
Musial, W., Spitsen, P., Duffy, P., Beiter, P., Marquis, M., Hammond, R., and Shields, M.: Offshore Wind Market Report, 2022 edn., NREL/TP-5000-83544, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, United States, https://doi.org/10.2172/1893268, 2022.
Nakanishi, M. and Niino, H.: An Improved Mellor–Yamada Level-3 Model: Its Numerical Stability and Application to a Regional Prediction of Advection Fog, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 119, 397–407, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-005-9030-8, 2006.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory: 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23), Open Enegy Data Initiative [data set], https://doi.org/10.25984/1821404, 2020.
Nilsen, T.: Icing believed to cause sinking of fishing boat in Barents Sea, 17 missing, https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/2020/12/
icing-believed-cause-sining-fishing-boat-barents-sea-17-missing (last access: 12 April 2023), 2020.
Niu, G.-Y., Yang, Z.-L., Mitchell, K. E., Chen, F., Ek, M. B., Barlage, M., Kumar, A., Manning, K., Niyogi, D., Rosero, E., Tewari, M., and Xia, Y.: The community Noah land surface model with multiparameterization options (Noah-MP): 1. Model description and evaluation with local-scale measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 116, D12109, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD015139, 2011.
NTSB: NTSB announces the probable cause of the sunken Scandies Rose, https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2021/06/29/ntsb-announce-probable-cause-sunken-scandies-rose/ (last access: 12 April 2023), 2021.
Novacheck, J., Sharp, J., Schwarz, M., Donohoo-Vallett, P., Tzavelis, Z., Buster, G., and Rossol, M.: The Evolving Role of Extreme Weather Events in the U.S. Power System with High Levels of Variable Renewable Energy, NREL/TP-6A20-78394, 1837959, MainId:32311, https://doi.org/10.2172/1837959, 2021.
NREL: 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23), https://doi.org/10.25984/1821404, 2020.
Nygaard, N. G.: Wakes in very large wind farms and the effect of neighbouring wind farms, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 524, 012162, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/524/1/012162, 2014.
Overland, J. E.: Prediction of Vessel Icing for Near-Freezing Sea Temperatures, Weather Forecast., 5, 62–77, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0434(1990)005<0062:POVIFN>2.0.CO;2, 1990.
Overland, J. E., Pease, C. H., Preisendorfer, R. W., and Comiskey, A. L.: Prediction of Vessel Icing, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 25, 1793–1806, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(1986)025<1793:POVI>2.0.CO;2, 1986.
Parent, O. and Ilinca, A.: Anti-icing and de-icing techniques for wind turbines: Critical review, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 65, 88–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2010.01.005, 2011.
Platis, A., Siedersleben, S. K., Bange, J., Lampert, A., Bärfuss, K., Hankers, R., Cañadillas, B., Foreman, R., Schulz-Stellenfleth, J., Djath, B., Neumann, T., and Emeis, S.: First in situ evidence of wakes in the far field behind offshore wind farms, Sci. Rep.-UK, 8, 2163, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20389-y, 2018.
Powers, J. G., Klemp, J. B., Skamarock, W. C., Davis, C. A., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Coen, J. L., Gochis, D. J., Ahmadov, R., Peckham, S. E., Grell, G. A., Michalakes, J., Trahan, S., Benjamin, S. G., Alexander, C. R., Dimego, G. J., Wang, W., Schwartz, C. S., Romine, G. S., Liu, Z., Snyder, C., Chen, F., Barlage, M. J., Yu, W., and Duda, M. G.: The Weather Research and Forecasting Model: Overview, System Efforts, and Future Directions, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 1717–1737, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-15-00308.1, 2017.
Pronk, V., Bodini, N., Optis, M., Lundquist, J. K., Moriarty, P., Draxl, C., Purkayastha, A., and Young, E.: Can reanalysis products outperform mesoscale numerical weather prediction models in modeling the wind resource in simple terrain?, Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 487–504, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-487-2022, 2022.
Quint, D., Lundquist, J. K., Bodini, N., and Rosencrans, D.: Meteorological Impacts of Offshore Wind Turbines as Simulated in the Weather Research and Forecasting Model, Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-53, in review, 2024.
Rajewski, D. A., Takle, E. S., Lundquist, J. K., Oncley, S., Prueger, J. H., Horst, T. W., Rhodes, M. E., Pfeiffer, R., Hatfield, J. L., Spoth, K. K., and Doorenbos, R. K.: Crop Wind Energy Experiment (CWEX): Observations of Surface-Layer, Boundary Layer, and Mesoscale Interactions with a Wind Farm, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 655–672, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00240.1, 2013.
Redfern, S., Optis, M., Xia, G., and Draxl, C.: Offshore wind energy forecasting sensitivity to sea surface temperature input in the Mid-Atlantic, Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1–23, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1-2023, 2023.
Rosencrans, D.: mid-Atlantic_turbines, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7374283, 2022.
Rosencrans, D.: mid-Atlantic_namelists, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10476276, 2024.
Rosencrans, D., Lundquist, J. K., Optis, M., Rybchuk, A., Bodini, N., and Rossol, M.: Seasonal variability of wake impacts on US mid-Atlantic offshore wind plant power production, Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 555–583, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-555-2024, 2024.
Ross, D. B. and Cardone, V.: Observations of oceanic whitecaps and their relation to remote measurements of surface wind Speed, J. Geophys. Res., 79, 444–452, https://doi.org/10.1029/JC079i003p00444, 1974.
Russell, L. M.: Sea-spray particles cause freezing in clouds, Nature, 525, 194–195, https://doi.org/10.1038/525194a, 2015.
Schneemann, J., Rott, A., Dörenkämper, M., Steinfeld, G., and Kühn, M.: Cluster wakes impact on a far-distant offshore wind farm's power, Wind Energ. Sci., 5, 29–49, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-29-2020, 2020.
Shcherbina, A. Y. and Gawarkiewicz, G. G.: A coastal current in winter: 2. Wind forcing and cooling of a coastal current east of Cape Cod, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 113, C10014,https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JC004750, 2008a.
Shcherbina, A. Y. and Gawarkiewicz, G. G.: A coastal current in winter: Autonomous underwater vehicle observations of the coastal current east of Cape Cod, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 113, C07030, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JC004306, 2008b.
Siedersleben, S. K., Lundquist, J. K., Platis, A., Bange, J., Bärfuss, K., Lampert, A., Cañadillas, B., Neumann, T., and Emeis, S.: Micrometeorological impacts of offshore wind farms as seen in observations and simulations, Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 124012, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaea0b, 2018.
Stull, R. B.: An Introduction to Boundary Layer Meteorology, Springer Science & Business Media, https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2PjrCAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR10&dq=An+Introduction+to+Boundary+Layer+Meteorology+stull&ots=BdY_2W6EQ2&sig=eLIi5IVaua4aeHUWQt-NfG0IkTM#v=onepage&q=An%20Introduction%20to%20Boundary%20Layer%20Meteorology%20stull&f=false (last access: 18 August 2022), 1988.
SWAN Team: Scientific and Technical Documentation (SWAN Cycle III version 41.31A), Delft University of Technology, https://swanmodel.sourceforge.io/download/zip/swantech.pdf (last access: 25 October 2023), 2020.
Tewari, M., Chen, F., Wang, W., Dudhia, J., LeMone, M., Mitchell, K., Ek, M., Gayno, G., Wegiel, J., and Cuenca, R. H.: (PDF) Implementation and verification of the united NOAH land surface model in the WRF model, Proceedings of the 20th conference on weather analysis and forecasting/16th conference on numerical weather prediction, Seattle, Washington, 14 January 2004, 14, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286272692_Implementation_and_verification_of_the_united_NOAH_land_surface_model_in_the_WRF_model (last access: 12 April 2023), 2004.
Thompson, G., Field, P. R., Rasmussen, R. M., and Hall, W. D.: Explicit Forecasts of Winter Precipitation Using an Improved Bulk Microphysics Scheme. Part II: Implementation of a New Snow Parameterization, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 5095–5115, https://doi.org/10.1175/2008MWR2387.1, 2008.
Tolman, H., Abdolali, A., Accensi, M., Alves, J.-H., Ardhuin, F., Babanin, A., Barbariol, F., Benetazzo, A., Bidlot, J., Booij, N., Boutin, G., Bunney, C., Campbell, T., Chalikov, D., Chawla, A., Cheng, S., Collins III, C., Filipot, J.-F., Flampouris, S., and Liang, Z.: User manual and system documentation of WAVEWATCH III (R) version 6.07, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336069899_User_manual_and_system_documentation_of_WAVEWATCH_III_R_version_607 (last access: 5 October 2023), 2019.
Tomaszewski, J. M. and Lundquist, J. K.: Simulated wind farm wake sensitivity to configuration choices in the Weather Research and Forecasting model version 3.8.1, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 2645–2662, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-2645-2020, 2020.
U.S. Navy: U.S. Navy Cold Weather Handbook for Surface Ships, Surface Ship Survivability Office, https://media.defense.gov/2021/Feb/25/2002588484/-1/-1/0/CG%20070%20-%20US%20NAVY%20COLD%20WEATHER%20HANDBOOK.PDF (last access: 18 April 2024), 1988.
Vavrus, S., Walsh, J. E., Chapman, W. L., and Portis, D.: The behavior of extreme cold air outbreaks under greenhouse warming, Int. J. Climatol., 26, 1133–1147, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1301, 2006.
Wallace, J. M. and Hobbs, P. V.: Atmospheric Science: An Introductory Survey, 2nd edn., Elsevier, University of Washington, ISBN: 978-0-12-732951-2, 2006.
Wei, K., Yang, Y., Zuo, H., and Zhong, D.: A review on ice detection technology and ice elimination technology for wind turbine, Wind Energy, 23, 433–457, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2427, 2020.
Winters, A. C., Bosart, L. F., and Keyser, D.: Antecedent North Pacific Jet Regimes Conducive to the Development of Continental U.S. Extreme Temperature Events during the Cool Season, Weather Forecast., 34, 393–414, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-18-0168.1, 2019.
Xia, G., Zhou, L., Freedman, J. M., Roy, S. B., Harris, R. A., and Cervarich, M. C.: A case study of effects of atmospheric boundary layer turbulence, wind speed, and stability on wind farm induced temperature changes using observations from a field campaign, Clim. Dynam., 46, 2179–2196, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2696-9, 2016.
Short summary
The US offshore wind industry is growing rapidly. Expansion into cold climates will subject turbines and personnel to hazardous icing. We analyze the 21-year icing risk for US east coast wind areas based on numerical weather prediction simulations and further assess impacts from wind farm wakes over one winter season. Sea spray icing at 10 m can occur up to 67 h per month. However, turbine–atmosphere interactions reduce icing hours within wind plant areas.
The US offshore wind industry is growing rapidly. Expansion into cold climates will subject...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint