Articles | Volume 11, issue 7
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2723-2026
© Author(s) 2026. 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-11-2723-2026
© Author(s) 2026. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
30 Jul 2026
Research article |
| 30 Jul 2026
| 30 Jul 2026
Slow wake recovery and low turbulence behind wind farms parameterized in mesoscale simulations
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
Jens H. Kasper
Physics of Fluids Group, Max Planck Center for Complex Fluid Dynamics, J. M. Burgers Center for Fluid Dynamics, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
Richard J. A. M. Stevens
Physics of Fluids Group, Max Planck Center for Complex Fluid Dynamics, J. M. Burgers Center for Fluid Dynamics, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
Julie K. Lundquist
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
National Laboratory of the Rockies, Boulder, CO, USA
Related authors
Nicola Bodini, Patrick Moriarty, Regis Thedin, Paula Doubrawa, Cristina Archer, Myra Blaylock, Carlo Bottasso, Bruno Carmo, Lawrence Cheung, Camille Dubreuil, Rogier Floors, Thomas Herges, Daniel Houck, Ali Kanjari, Colleen M. Kaul, Christopher Kelley, Ru LI, Julie K. Lundquist, Desirae Major, Anh Kiet Nguyen, Mike Optis, Luan R. C. Parada, Alfredo Peña, Julian Quick, David Ricarte, William C. Radünz, Raj K. Rai, Oscar Garcia Santiago, Jonas Schulte, Knut S. Seim, M. Paul van der Laan, Kisorthman Vimalakanthan, and Adam Wise
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-34, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-34, 2026
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting wind farm energy production is challenging because wind patterns are complex. We tested 16 different models against real data from a major field experiment to see which worked best. Surprisingly, the most expensive and detailed models were not always more accurate than simpler ones. We found that feeding models better weather data was the most effective way to improve accuracy. These results help the industry choose the right tools for designing more efficient wind farms.
William C. 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., 10, 2365–2393, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-2365-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-2365-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We explore how simple terrain influences spatial variations in wind speed and wind farm performance during a low-level jet. Using simulations, field observations, and turbine production data, we find that downstream turbines produce more power than upstream ones, despite being subjected to wake effects. This counterintuitive result arises because the low-level jet and winds near turbine rotors are highly sensitive to topographic features, leading to stronger winds at the downstream turbines.
Aliza Abraham, Matteo Puccioni, Arianna Jordan, Emina Maric, Nicola Bodini, Nicholas Hamilton, Stefano Letizia, Petra M. Klein, Elizabeth N. Smith, Sonia Wharton, Jonathan Gero, Jamey D. Jacob, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob K. Newsom, Mikhail Pekour, William Radünz, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1681–1705, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1681-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1681-2025, 2025
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.
Adam S. Wise, Robert S. Arthur, Jeffrey D. Mirocha, Julie K. Lundquist, and Fotini K. Chow
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2543–2565, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2543-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2543-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
At night, wind farms can experience a wide range of intermittent wind events that can affect how much power is produced. We modeled a specific type of intermittent wind event that happens as the atmosphere gets colder and colder throughout a night. We identified a threshold to determine when these events impact wind farms and ultimately found that mainly the front of a wind farm tends to be most impacted by these sorts of events.
Valeria Vasquez-Barros, Nicola Bodini, Seth Zippel, Anthony Kirincich, and Julie K. Lundquist
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-115, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-115, 2026
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind turbines operate more than 100 meters above the ocean, but atmospheric conditions are often measured only near the sea surface. Using observations from an offshore research platform, we found that surface measurements frequently do not represent the conditions experienced by turbines because the lower atmosphere can become decoupled. These results highlight the need for measurements throughout the turbine height to improve wind energy forecasting and operations.
Nathan J. Agarwal, Julie K. Lundquist, Timothy W. Juliano, and Alex Rybchuk
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2369–2403, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2369-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2369-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Models of wind behavior inform offshore wind farm site investment decisions. Here we compare a newly developed model to another, historically used model based on how these models represent winds and turbulence at two North Sea sites. The best model depends on the site. While the older model performs best at the site above a wind farm, the newer model performs best at the site that is at the same altitude as the wind farm. We support using the new model to represent winds at the turbine level.
Miguel Sanchez-Gomez, Georgios Deskos, Mike Optis, Julie K. Lundquist, Michael Sinner, Geng Xia, and Walter Musial
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2009–2036, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2009-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2009-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Mesoscale simulations with the Fitch wind farm parameterization were compared to large-domain large-eddy simulations for three planned offshore wind farms under varied atmospheric conditions. Mesoscale runs captured key wake deficit patterns and stability effects in the wind farm wake evolution but underestimated power losses from internal wakes, especially in aligned winds or stable conditions. Results highlight mesoscale strengths for large-scale wakes and limits for turbine-level losses.
Nicola Bodini, Joseph Olson, Brian Gaudet, Giacomo Valerio Iungo, Mojtaba Shams Solari, Sayahnya Roy, Julie K. Lundquist, Nathan Agarwal, Timothy A. Myers, Bianca Adler, Jeffrey D. Mirocha, Eric James, Laura Bianco, James M. Wilczak, and David D. Turner
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 1949–1961, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-1949-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-1949-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
To improve offshore wind forecasts, the Third Wind Forecast Improvement Project monitored the United States east coast for 18 months. We compiled a daily log of weather events using advanced scanners and expert notes. This public dataset identifies important wind patterns, helping scientists test computer models and choose specific cases to study.
Nicola Bodini, Patrick Moriarty, Regis Thedin, Paula Doubrawa, Cristina Archer, Myra Blaylock, Carlo Bottasso, Bruno Carmo, Lawrence Cheung, Camille Dubreuil, Rogier Floors, Thomas Herges, Daniel Houck, Ali Kanjari, Colleen M. Kaul, Christopher Kelley, Ru LI, Julie K. Lundquist, Desirae Major, Anh Kiet Nguyen, Mike Optis, Luan R. C. Parada, Alfredo Peña, Julian Quick, David Ricarte, William C. Radünz, Raj K. Rai, Oscar Garcia Santiago, Jonas Schulte, Knut S. Seim, M. Paul van der Laan, Kisorthman Vimalakanthan, and Adam Wise
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-34, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-34, 2026
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Predicting wind farm energy production is challenging because wind patterns are complex. We tested 16 different models against real data from a major field experiment to see which worked best. Surprisingly, the most expensive and detailed models were not always more accurate than simpler ones. We found that feeding models better weather data was the most effective way to improve accuracy. These results help the industry choose the right tools for designing more efficient wind farms.
Nathan J. Agarwal and Julie K. Lundquist
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 883–910, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-883-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-883-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Areas with hills and valleys can be either beneficial or challenging for wind energy applications, depending on the wind patterns. Unfortunately, predicting wind patterns in these areas is also challenging, and investing in measurement towers to improve wind forecasts can be expensive. We evaluate ways in which wind farm developers and other stakeholders interested in improving atmospheric forecasts in these areas can do so in a more cost-effective way.
Kira Gramitzky, Florian Jäger, Doron Callies, Tabea Hildebrand, Julie K. Lundquist, and Lukas Pauscher
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 861–882, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-861-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-861-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study introduces an extended sea surface levelling method for the accurate offshore calibration of scanning lidars. This method can determine the alignment of the laser beam, including any vertical shift, and is independent of the scan pattern. Tests using real measurement data and a detailed uncertainty study confirm its reliability. The study offers a versatile calibration approach and improves confidence in offshore wind measurements with scanning lidars.
Nicola Bodini, Aliza Abraham, Paula Doubrawa, Stefano Letizia, Julie K. Lundquist, Patrick Moriarty, and Ryan Scott
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-33, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-33, 2026
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Wind turbines create "wakes" of slowed air that reduce power for nearby turbines. To help improve wind energy models, we analyzed data from a large field experiment. We focused on a single day with changing weather patterns. We found that even simple terrain features interacted with the wind to create large variations in power output – up to 80 percent – across a wind farm. This detailed dataset provides a real-world case needed to validate and improve wind energy design tools.
Branko Kosović, Sukanta Basu, Jacob Berg, Larry K. Berg, Sue E. Haupt, Xiaoli G. Larsén, Joachim Peinke, Richard J. A. M. Stevens, Paul Veers, and Simon Watson
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 509–555, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-509-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-509-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Most human activity happens in the layer of the atmosphere which extends a few hundred meters to a couple of kilometers above the surface of the Earth. The flow in this layer is turbulent. Turbulence impacts wind power production and turbine lifespan. Optimizing wind turbine performance requires understanding how turbulence affects both wind turbine efficiency and reliability. This paper points to gaps in our knowledge that need to be addressed to effectively utilize wind resources.
Georgios Deskos, Jiali Wang, Sanjay Arwade, Murray Fisher, Brian Hirth, Xiaoli Guo Larsén, Julie K. Lundquist, Andrew Myers, Weichiang Pang, William J. Pringle, Robert Rogers, Miguel Sanchez-Gomez, Chao Sun, Atsushi Yamaguchi, and Paul Veers
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-32, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-32, 2026
Revised manuscript accepted for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Wind energy is increasingly built in coastal and offshore areas exposed to powerful tropical storms. This paper explains why current wind turbine design approaches are often insufficient for these conditions and identifies what must change to improve resilience. By combining insights from weather modeling, engineering, and risk analysis, we highlight key gaps in data and standards, and show how addressing them can enable safer more reliable wind energy in storm-prone regions.
Anna Voss, Konrad B. Bärfuss, Beatriz Cañadillas, Maik Angermann, Mark Bitter, Matthias Cremer, Thomas Feuerle, Jonas Spoor, Julie K. Lundquist, Patrick Moriarty, and Astrid Lampert
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 71–88, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-71-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-71-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
This study analyzes onshore wind farm wakes in a semi-complex terrain with data conducted with the research aircraft of TU Braunschweig during the American WAKE experimeNt (AWAKEN). Vertical profiles of temperature, humidity, and wind give insights into the stratification of the atmospheric boundary layer, while horizontal profiles downwind of wind farms reveal an amplification of the reduction in wind speed in a semi-complex terrain, in particular at a distance of 10 km.
William C. 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., 10, 2365–2393, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-2365-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-2365-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We explore how simple terrain influences spatial variations in wind speed and wind farm performance during a low-level jet. Using simulations, field observations, and turbine production data, we find that downstream turbines produce more power than upstream ones, despite being subjected to wake effects. This counterintuitive result arises because the low-level jet and winds near turbine rotors are highly sensitive to topographic features, leading to stronger winds at the downstream turbines.
Geng Xia, Mike Optis, Georgios Deskos, Michael Sinner, Daniel Mulas Hernando, Julie Kay Lundquist, Andrew Kumler, Miguel Sanchez Gomez, Paul Fleming, and Walter Musial
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-154, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2025-154, 2025
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines energy losses from cluster wakes in offshore wind farms along the U.S. East Coast. Simulations based on real lease projects show that large wind speed deficits do not always cause equally large energy losses. The energy loss method revealed wake areas up to 30 % larger than traditional estimates, underscoring the need to consider both wind speed deficit and energy loss in planning offshore wind development.
Aliza Abraham, Matteo Puccioni, Arianna Jordan, Emina Maric, Nicola Bodini, Nicholas Hamilton, Stefano Letizia, Petra M. Klein, Elizabeth N. Smith, Sonia Wharton, Jonathan Gero, Jamey D. Jacob, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob K. Newsom, Mikhail Pekour, William Radünz, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1681–1705, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1681-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1681-2025, 2025
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.
Daphne Quint, Julie K. Lundquist, Nicola Bodini, and David Rosencrans
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1269–1301, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1269-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1269-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Offshore wind farms along the US East Coast can have limited effects on local weather. To study these effects, we include wind farms near Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and we test different amounts of turbulence in our model. We analyze changes in wind, temperature, and turbulence. Simulated effects on surface temperature and turbulence change depending on how much turbulence is added to the model. The extent of the wind farm wake depends on how deep the atmospheric boundary layer is.
Robert S. Arthur, Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Gabriel Rios, Sonia Wharton, Julie K. Lundquist, and Jerome D. Fast
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1187–1209, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1187-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1187-2025, 2025
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 gap leads to increased energy production. We demonstrate that the new model configuration performs similarly to a more established approach, with some evidence of improved wind speed predictions, and provide guidance for future model testing.
Daphne Quint, Julie K. Lundquist, and David Rosencrans
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 117–142, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-117-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-117-2025, 2025
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 1 year of simulations with and without wind farms. Here, we describe LLJ characteristics and how they change with wind farms.
David Rosencrans, Julie K. Lundquist, Mike Optis, and Nicola Bodini
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 59–81, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-59-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-59-2025, 2025
Short summary
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.
Rachel Robey and Julie K. Lundquist
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 1905–1922, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1905-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1905-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Measurements of wind turbine wakes with scanning lidar instruments contain complex errors. We model lidars in a simulated environment to understand how and why the measured wake may differ from the true wake and validate the results with observational data. The lidar smooths out the wake, making it seem more spread out and the slowdown of the winds less pronounced. Our findings provide insights into best practices for accurately measuring wakes with lidar and interpreting observational data.
Jules Colas, Ariane Emmanuelli, Didier Dragna, Philippe Blanc-Benon, Benjamin Cotté, and Richard J. A. M. Stevens
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 1869–1884, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1869-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1869-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
We studied wind turbine noise propagation in a hilly terrain through numerical simulation in different scenarios. The sound pressure levels obtained for a wind turbine in front of a 2D hill and a wind turbine on a hilltop are compared to a baseline flat case. The source height and wind speed strongly influence sound propagation downwind. Topography influences the wake shape, inducing changes in the sound propagation that modify the sound pressure level and amplitude modulation downwind.
Davide Selvatici and Richard J. A. M. Stevens
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-60, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-60, 2024
Manuscript not accepted for further review
Short summary
Short summary
The Actuator Line Method is to date one of the most adopted models for wind turbines in numerical simulations, yet it is known to overestimate the loading at the blade tips. We developed an extremely efficient correction methodology that is able to retrieve the loading distribution of Blade Element Method with tip correction independently on the turbine adopted, or on the chosen inflow velocity, making it possible to be used for simulations of 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.
Miguel Sanchez Gomez, Julie K. Lundquist, Jeffrey D. Mirocha, and Robert S. Arthur
Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1049–1069, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1049-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1049-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
The wind slows down as it approaches a wind plant; this phenomenon is called blockage. As a result, the turbines in the wind plant produce less power than initially anticipated. We investigate wind plant blockage for two atmospheric conditions. Blockage is larger for a wind plant compared to a stand-alone turbine. Also, blockage increases with atmospheric stability. Blockage is amplified by the vertical transport of horizontal momentum as the wind approaches the front-row turbines in the array.
Paul Veers, Katherine Dykes, Sukanta Basu, Alessandro Bianchini, Andrew Clifton, Peter Green, Hannele Holttinen, Lena Kitzing, Branko Kosovic, Julie K. Lundquist, Johan Meyers, Mark O'Malley, William J. Shaw, and Bethany Straw
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 2491–2496, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2491-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2491-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Wind energy will play a central role in the transition of our energy system to a carbon-free future. However, many underlying scientific issues remain to be resolved before wind can be deployed in the locations and applications needed for such large-scale ambitions. The Grand Challenges are the gaps in the science left behind during the rapid growth of wind energy. This article explains the breadth of the unfinished business and introduces 10 articles that detail the research needs.
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.
Rachel Robey and Julie K. Lundquist
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 4585–4622, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4585-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4585-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Our work investigates the behavior of errors in remote-sensing wind lidar measurements due to turbulence. Using a virtual instrument, we measured winds in simulated atmospheric flows and decomposed the resulting error. Dominant error mechanisms, particularly vertical velocity variations and interactions with shear, were identified in ensemble data over three test cases. By analyzing the underlying mechanisms, the response of the error behavior to further varying flow conditions may be projected.
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.
Adam S. Wise, James M. T. Neher, Robert S. Arthur, Jeffrey D. Mirocha, Julie K. Lundquist, and Fotini K. Chow
Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 367–386, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-367-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-367-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Wind turbine wake behavior in hilly terrain depends on various atmospheric conditions. We modeled a wind turbine located on top of a ridge in Portugal during typical nighttime and daytime atmospheric conditions and validated these model results with observational data. During nighttime conditions, the wake deflected downwards following the terrain. During daytime conditions, the wake deflected upwards. These results can provide insight into wind turbine siting and operation in hilly regions.
Cited articles
Abkar, M., Bae, H. J., and Moin, P.: Minimum-dissipation scalar transport model for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows, Phys. Rev. Fluids, 1, 041701, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.1.041701, 2016a. a
Abkar, M., Sharifi, A., and Porté-Agel, F.: Wake flow in a wind farm during a diurnal cycle, J. Turbul., 17, 420–441, https://doi.org/10.1080/14685248.2015.1127379, 2016b. a
Adams, A. S. and Keith, D. W.: Are global wind power resource estimates overstated?, Environ. Res. Lett., 8, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015021, 2013. a
Agarwal, N. J., Lundquist, J. K., Juliano, T. W., and Rybchuk, A.: A North Sea in situ evaluation of the Fitch wind farm parameterization within the Mellor–Yamada–Nakanishi–Niino and 3D planetary boundary layer schemes, Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2369–2403, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2369-2026, 2026. a
Albertson, J. D. and Parlange, M. B.: Surface length scales and shear stress: Implications for land‐atmosphere interaction over complex terrain, Water Resour. Res., 35, 2121–2132, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999WR900094, 1999. a
Ali, K., Schultz, D. M., Revell, A., Stallard, T., and Ouro, P.: Assessment of Five Wind-Farm Parameterizations in the Weather Research and Forecasting Model: A Case Study of Wind Farms in the North Sea, Mon. Weather Rev., 151, 2333–2359, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-23-0006.1, 2023. a, b, c, d
Allaerts, D. and Meyers, J.: Boundary-layer development and gravity waves in conventionally neutral wind farms, J. Fluid Mech., 814, 95–130, https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2017.11, 2017. a
Baidya Roy, S., Pacala, S. W., and Walko, R. L.: Can large wind farms affect local meteorology?, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 109, D19101, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004763, 2004. a, b
Bak, C., Zahle, F., Bitsche, R., Kim, T., Yde, A., Henriksen, L. C., Hansen, M. H., Blasques, J. P. A. A., Gaunaa, M., and Natarajan, A.: The DTU 10-MW Reference Wind Turbine, in: Danish Wind Power Research, Roskilde, Denmark, https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/fi les/55645274/The_DTU_10MW_Reference_Turbine_Christian_Bak.pdf (last access: 23 July 2026), 2013. a, b
Barthelmie, R. J., Frandsen, S. T., Nielsen, M. N., Pryor, S. C., Rethore, P. E., and Jørgensen, H. E.: Modelling and measurements of power losses and turbulence intensity in wind turbine wakes at Middelgrunden offshore wind farm, Wind Energy, 10, 517–528, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.238, 2007. a
Barthelmie, R. J., Hansen, K., Frandsen, S. T., Rathmann, O., Schepers, J. G., Schlez, W., Phillips, J., Rados, K., Zervos, A., Politis, E. S., and Chaviaropoulos, P. K.: Modelling and Measuring Flow and Wind Turbine Wakes in Large Wind Farms Offshore, Wind Energy, 12, 431–444, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.348, 2009. a
Blahak, U., Goretzki, B., and Meis, J.: A simple parameterization of drag forces induced by large wind farms for numerical weather prediction models, in: Proceedings of European wind energy conference and exhibition, 1, 4577–4585, http://proceedings.ewea.org/ewec2010/allfi les2/757_EWEC2010presentation.pdf (last access: 23 July 2026), 2010. a
Bodini, N., Zardi, D., and Lundquist, J. K.: Three-dimensional structure of wind turbine wakes as measured by scanning lidar, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 2881–2896, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-2881-2017, 2017. a, b
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. a
Boettcher, M., Hoffmann, P., Lenhart, H. J., Schlünzen, K. H., and Schoetter, R.: Influence of large offshore wind farms on North German climate, Meteorol. Z., 24, 465–480, https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2015/0652, 2015. a
Boussinesq, M. J.: Théorie de l'écoulement tourbillonnant et tumultueux des liquides, Gauthier-Villars et fils, Paris, France, https://archive.org/details/thbeoriedelbeco01bousrich/page/1/ (last access: 23 July 2026), 1897. a
Cal, R. B., Lebrón, J., Castillo, L., Kang, H. S., and Meneveau, C.: Experimental study of the horizontally averaged flow structure in a model wind-turbine array boundary layer, J. Renew. Sustain. Ener., 2, 0–25, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3289735, 2010. a
Calaf, M., Meneveau, C., and Meyers, J.: Large eddy simulations of fully developed wind-turbine array boundary layers, Phys. Fluids, 22, 015110, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3291077, 2010. a, b
Cañadillas, B., Foreman, R., Barth, V., Siedersleben, S., Lampert, A., Platis, A., Djath, B., Schulz-Stellenfleth, J., Bange, J., Emeis, S., and Neumann, T.: Offshore wind farm wake recovery: Airborne measurements and its representation in engineering models, Wind Energy, 23, 1249–1265, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2484, 2020. a
Du, B., Ge, M., Li, X., and Liu, Y.: A Meso-Microscale Coupled Wind Farm Parameterization, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 191, 35, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-025-00928-7, 2025. a
Du, B., Li, Q., Ge, M., Li, X., and Liu, Y.: Gaussian-based multicolumn spatial distribution method for wind farm parameterizations, Physical Review Fluids, 11, 023801, https://doi.org/10.1103/5lsj-m746, 2026. a, b
Englberger, A., Lundquist, J. K., and Dörnbrack, A.: Changing the rotational direction of a wind turbine under veering inflow: a parameter study, Wind Energ. Sci., 5, 1623–1644, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-1623-2020, 2020. a
Eriksson, O., Lindvall, J., Breton, S. P., and Ivanell, S.: Wake downstream of the Lillgrund wind farm – A comparison between LES using the actuator disc method and a wind farm parametrization in WRF, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 625, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/625/1/012028, 2015. a
Fischereit, J., Brown, R., Larsén, X. G., Badger, J., and Hawkes, G.: Review of mesoscale Wind-Farm Parametrizations and their applications, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 182, 175–224, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-021-00652-y, 2022a. a, b
Fischereit, J., Schaldemose Hansen, K., Larsén, X. G., van der Laan, M. P., Réthoré, P.-E., and Murcia Leon, J. P.: Comparing and validating intra-farm and farm-to-farm wakes across different mesoscale and high-resolution wake models, Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 1069–1091, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-1069-2022, 2022b. a, b
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, 2013a. a, b
Fitch, A. C., Olson, J. B., and Lundquist, J. K.: Parameterization of Wind Farms in Climate Models, J. Climate, 26, 6439–6458, https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00376.1, 2013b. a
Gadde, S. N. and Stevens, R. J. A. M.: Effect of Coriolis force on a wind farm wake, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1256, 012026, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1256/1/012026, 2019. a
Gadde, S. N., Stieren, A., and Stevens, R. J. A. M.: Large-Eddy Simulations of Stratified Atmospheric Boundary Layers: Comparison of Different Subgrid Models, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 178, 363–382, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-020-00570-5, 2021. a
García-Santiago, O., Badger, J., Hahmann, A. N., Volker, P. J. H., Ott, S., van der Laan, M. P., and Kelly, M.: A wind-farm wake-turbulence parameterization for the WRF model (EWP v2.0), EGUsphere [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2144, 2026. a
García-Santiago, O., Hahmann, A. N., Badger, J., and Peña, A.: Evaluation of wind farm parameterizations in the WRF model under different atmospheric stability conditions with high-resolution wake simulations, Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 963–979, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-963-2024, 2024. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m
Haupt, S. E., Kosovic, B., Shaw, W., Berg, L. K., Churchfield, M., Cline, J., Draxl, C., Ennis, B., Koo, E., Kotamarthi, R., Mazzaro, L., Mirocha, J., Moriarty, P., Muñóz-Esparza, D., Quon, E., Rai, R. K., Robinson, M., and Sever, G.: On bridging a modeling scale gap: mesoscale to microscale coupling for wind energy, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 100, 2533–2550, https://doi.org/10.1175/bams-d-18-0033.1, 2019. a
Haupt, S. E., Kosović, B., Berg, L. K., Kaul, C. M., Churchfield, M., Mirocha, J., Allaerts, D., Brummet, T., Davis, S., DeCastro, A., Dettling, S., Draxl, C., Gagne, D. J., Hawbecker, P., Jha, P., Juliano, T., Lassman, W., Quon, E., Rai, R. K., Robinson, M., Shaw, W., and Thedin, R.: Lessons learned in coupling atmospheric models across scales for onshore and offshore wind energy, Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 1251–1275, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-1251-2023, 2023. a
Hsieh, A. S., Cheung, L. C., Blaylock, M. L., Brown, K. A., Houck, D. R., Herges, T. G., DeVelder, N. B., Maniaci, D. C., Yalla, G. R., Sakievich, P. J., Radunz, W. C., and Carmo, B. S.: Model intercomparison of the ABL, turbines, and wakes within the AWAKEN wind farms under neutral stability conditions, J. Renew. Sustain. Ener., 17, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0211729, 2025. a, b
Iungo, G. V., Wu, Y. T., and Porté-Agel, F.: Field measurements of wind turbine wakes with LiDARs, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 274–287, https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00051.1, 2013. a, b
Ivanova, L. A. and Nadyozhina, E. D.: Numerical simulation of wind farm influence on wind flow, Wind Eng., 24, 257–269, https://doi.org/10.1260/0309524001495620, 2000. a
Jimenez, A., Crespo, A., Migoya, E., and Garcia, J.: Large-eddy simulation of spectral coherence in a wind turbine wake, Environ. Res. Lett., 3, 015004, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/3/1/015004, 2008. a
Juliano, T. W., Kosović, B., Jiménez, P. A., Eghdami, M., Haupt, S. E., and Martilli, A.: “Gray Zone” simulations using a three-dimensional planetary boundary layer parameterization in the Weather Research and Forecasting model, Mon. Weather Rev., 150, 1585–1619, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-21-0164.1, 2022. a
Kasper, J. H. and Stevens, R. J. A. M.: From turbine-scale to wind farm-scale wake recovery: Understanding the transition, J. Renew. Sustain. Ener., 18, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0285347, 2026. a, b
Keith, D. W., DeCarolis, J. F., Denkenberger, D. C., Lenschow, D. H., Malyshev, S. L., Pacala, S., and Rasch, P. J.: The influence of large-scale wind power on global climate, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 101, 16115–16120, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0406930101, 2004. a
Khanjari, A., Feroz, A., and Archer, C. L.: An analytical formulation for turbulence kinetic energy added by wind turbines based on large-eddy simulation, Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 887–905, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-887-2025, 2025. a, b
Kosović, B., Munoz, P. J., Juliano, T. W., Martilli, A., Eghdami, M., Barros, A. P., and Haupt, S. E.: Three-dimensional planetary boundary layer parameterization for high-resolution mesoscale simulations, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1452, 012080, https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1452/1/012080, 2020. a
Lanzilao, L. and Meyers, J.: Wind-farm wake recovery mechanisms in conventionally neutral boundary layers, J. Fluid Mech., 1015, A5, https://doi.org/10.1017/jfm.2025.10320, 2025. a
Lee, J. C. Y. and Lundquist, J. K.: Evaluation of the wind farm parameterization in the Weather Research and Forecasting model (version 3.8.1) with meteorological and turbine power data, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 4229–4244, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-10-4229-2017, 2017. a
Lundquist, J. K., DuVivier, K. K., Kaffine, D., and Tomaszewski, J. M.: Costs and consequences of wind turbine wake effects arising from uncoordinated wind energy development, Nat. Energ., 4, 26–34, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0281-2, 2019. a, b, c, d
Malyshev, S. L., Pacala, S. W., Keith, D. W., Denkenberger, D. C., Baidya Roy, S., and Shevliakova, E.: Climate response to large-scale wind farms, in: AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, vol. 2003, A31E–0104, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252851455_Climate_Response_to_Large-Scale_Wind_Farms (last access: 23 July 2026), 2003. a
Mangara, R. J., Guo, Z., and Li, S.: Performance of the wind farm parameterization scheme coupled with the weather research and forecasting model under multiple resolution regimes for simulating an onshore wind farm, Adv. Atmos. Sci., 36, 119–132, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-018-8028-3, 2019. a, b
Mellor, G. L. and Yamada, T.: Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems, Rev. Geophys., 20, 851–875, https://doi.org/10.1029/RG020i004p00851, 1982. a
Mirocha, J. D., Rajewski, D. A., Marjanovic, N., Lundquist, J. K., Kosović, B., Draxl, C., and Churchfield, M. J.: Investigating wind turbine impacts on near-wake flow using profiling LiDAR data and large-eddy simulations with an actuator disk model, J. Renew. Sustain. Energ., 7, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4928873, 2015. a, b
Mirocha, J. D., Churchfield, M. J., Muñoz-Esparza, D., Rai, R. K., Feng, Y., Kosović, B., Haupt, S. E., Brown, B., Ennis, B. L., Draxl, C., Sanz Rodrigo, J., Shaw, W. J., Berg, L. K., Moriarty, P. J., Linn, R. R., Kotamarthi, V. R., Balakrishnan, R., Cline, J. W., Robinson, M. C., and Ananthan, S.: Large-eddy simulation sensitivities to variations of configuration and forcing parameters in canonical boundary-layer flows for wind energy applications, Wind Energ. Sci., 3, 589–613, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-3-589-2018, 2018. a
Montavon, C., Rodaway, C., Gunn, K., Smith, G., Dunsmore, D., Hoyo, M. D., and Sinclair, K.: Cluster wakes and their effect on a wind farm annual energy production, Tech. Rep. 1, DNV-RWE, Whitepaper, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35980.73605, 2024. a, b
Nakanishi, M. and Niino, H.: Development of an Improved Turbulence Closure Model for the Atmospheric Boundary Layer, J. Meteorol. Soc. Jpn., 87, 895–912, https://doi.org/10.2151/jmsj.87.895, 2009. a, b, c
Olson, J. B., Angevine, W. M., Turner, D. D., Sun, X., Simonson, J. M., Evans, C., Kenyon, J. S., Li, H., Schnell, J., Puhales, F. S., Cherubini, T., Li, W., and Zhang, M.: A Description of the MYNN-EDMF Turbulence Scheme, Tech. Rep. NOAA Technical Memorandum OAR GSL-77, NOAA Global Systems Laboratory, https://doi.org/10.25923/rahr-sj70, 2026. a, b
Ouro, P., Ghobrial, M., Ali, K., and Stallard, T.: Numerical modelling of offshore wind farm cluster wakes, Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 215, 115526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2025.115526, 2025. a
Pan, Y. and Archer, C. L.: A hybrid wind-farm parametrization for mesoscale and climate models, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 168, 469–495, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-018-0351-9, 2018. a, b
Peña, A., Mirocha, J. D., and van der Laan, M. P.: Evaluation of the Fitch Wind-Farm Wake Parameterization with Large-Eddy Simulations of Wakes Using the Weather Research and Forecasting Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 150, 3051–3064, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-22-0118.1, 2022. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i
Peña, A., Kosović, B., and Mirocha, J. D.: Evaluation of idealized large-eddy simulations performed with the Weather Research and Forecasting model using turbulence measurements from a 250 m meteorological mast, Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 645–661, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-645-2021, 2021. a
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., 8, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20389-y, 2018. a, b
Porté-Agel, F., Bastankhah, M., and Shamsoddin, S.: Wind-Turbine and Wind-Farm Flows: A Review, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 174, 1–59, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-019-00473-0, 2020. a
Pryor, S. C. and Barthelmie, R. J.: Power production, inter- and intra-array wake losses from the U.S. East coast offshore wind energy lease areas, Energies, 17, https://doi.org/10.3390/en17051063, 2024. a
Pryor, S. C., Shepherd, T. J., Volker, P. J., Hahmann, A. N., and Barthelmie, R. J.: ”Wind Theft” from onshore wind turbine arrays: Sensitivity to wind farm parameterization and resolution, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 59, 153–174, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-19-0235.1, 2020. a, b, c
Quint, D., Lundquist, J. K., Bodini, N., and Rosencrans, D.: Simulated meteorological impacts of offshore wind turbines and sensitivity to the amount of added turbulence kinetic energy, Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1269–1301, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1269-2025, 2025. a
Radünz, W. C.: Supporting material for Slow wake recovery and low turbulence behind wind farms parameterized in mesoscale simulations, Zenodo [data set], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21628778, 2026. a
Rai, R. K., Berg, L. K., Kosović, B., Haupt, S. E., Mirocha, J. D., Ennis, B. L., and Draxl, C.: Evaluation of the impact of horizontal grid spacing in terra incognita on coupled mesoscale-microscale simulations using the WRF framework, Mon. Weather Rev., 147, 1007–1027, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-18-0282.1, 2019. a
Redfern, S., Olson, J. B., Lundquist, J. K., and Clack, C. T. M.: Incorporation of the rotor-equivalent wind speed into the weather research and forecasting model's wind farm parameterization, Mon. Weather Rev., 147, 1029–1046, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-18-0194.1, 2019. a
Rozema, W., Bae, H. J., Moin, P., and Verstappen, R.: Minimum-dissipation models for large-eddy simulation, Phys. Fluids, 27, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4928700, 2015. a
Rybchuk, A., Juliano, T. W., Lundquist, J. K., Rosencrans, D., Bodini, N., and Optis, M.: The sensitivity of the Fitch wind farm parameterization to a three-dimensional planetary boundary layer scheme, Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 2085–2098, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022, 2022. a
Shepherd, T. J., Barthelmie, R. J., and Pryor, S. C.: Sensitivity of wind turbine array downstream effects to the parameterization used in WRF, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 59, 333–361, https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-19-0135.1, 2020. a
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, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaea0b, 2018a. a, b
Siedersleben, S. K., Platis, A., Lundquist, J. K., Lampert, A., Bärfuss, K., Cañadillas, B., Djath, B., Schulz-Stellenfleth, J., Bange, J., Neumann, T., and Emeis, S.: Evaluation of a Wind Farm Parametrization for Mesoscale Atmospheric Flow Models with Aircraft Measurements, Meteorol. Z., 27, 401–415, https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2018/0900, 2018b. a, b
Siedersleben, S. K., Platis, A., Lundquist, J. K., Djath, B., Lampert, A., Bärfuss, K., Cañadillas, B., Schulz-Stellenfleth, J., Bange, J., Neumann, T., and Emeis, S.: Turbulent kinetic energy over large offshore wind farms observed and simulated by the mesoscale model WRF (3.8.1), Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 249–268, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-249-2020, 2020. a, b, c, d, e, f
Skamarock, W. C., Klemp, J. B., Dudhia, J., Gill, D. O., Barker, D. M., Duda, M. G., Huang, X.-Y., Wang, W., and Powers, J. G.: A Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 4. Tech. Note NCAR TN-475+STR, Tech. rep., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, ISBN NCAR/TN-468+STR, https://doi.org/10.5065/D6DZ069T, 2019. a, b
Stevens, R. J. A. M. and Meneveau, C.: Flow structure and turbulence in wind farms, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 49, 311–339, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-010816-060206, 2017. a, b
Stevens, R. J. A. M., Graham, J., and Meneveau, C.: A concurrent precursor inflow method for Large Eddy Simulations and applications to finite length wind farms, Renew. Energ., 68, 46–50, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.01.024, 2014. a
Stieren, A. and Stevens, R. J. A. M.: Impact of wind farm wakes on flow structures in and around downstream wind farms, Flow, 2, https://doi.org/10.1017/flo.2022.15, 2022. a, b, c, d
Stieren, A., Kasper, J. H., Gadde, S. N., and Stevens, R. J. A. M.: Impact of negative geostrophic wind shear on wind farm performance, PRX Energy, 1, 1, https://doi.org/10.1103/prxenergy.1.023007, 2022. a, b
Stipa, S., Ajay, A., and Brinkerhoff, J.: The actuator farm model for large eddy simulation (LES) of wind-farm-induced atmospheric gravity waves and farm–farm interaction, Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 2301–2332, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2301-2024, 2024. a, b
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. a, b, c
van der Laan, M. P. and Sørensen, N. N.: Why the Coriolis force turns a wind farm wake clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere, Wind Energ. Sci., 2, 285–294, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-285-2017, 2017. a
van der Laan, M. P., Baungaard, M., and Kelly, M.: Brief communication: A clarification of wake recovery mechanisms, Wind Energ. Sci., 8, 247–254, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-8-247-2023, 2023. a, b, c
van Stratum, B., Theeuwes, N., Barkmeijer, J., van Ulft, B., and Wijnant, I.: A One‐Year‐Long Evaluation of a Wind‐Farm Parameterization in HARMONIE‐AROME, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 14, https://doi.org/10.1029/2021MS002947, 2022. a, b
Veers, P., Dykes, K., Lantz, E., Barth, S., Bottasso, C. L., Carlson, O., Clifton, A., Green, J., Green, P., Holttinen, H., Laird, D., Lehtomäki, V., Lundquist, J. K., Manwell, J., Marquis, M., Meneveau, C., Moriarty, P., Munduate, X., Muskulus, M., Naughton, J., Pao, L., Paquette, J., Peinke, J., Robertson, A., Rodrigo, J. S., Sempreviva, A. M., Smith, J. C., Tuohy, A., and Wiser, R.: Grand challenges in the science of wind energy, Science, 366, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2027, 2019. a
Veers, P., Dykes, K., Basu, S., Bianchini, A., Clifton, A., Green, P., Holttinen, H., Kitzing, L., Kosovic, B., Lundquist, J. K., Meyers, J., O'Malley, M., Shaw, W. J., and Straw, B.: Grand Challenges: wind energy research needs for a global energy transition, Wind Energ. Sci., 7, 2491–2496, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2491-2022, 2022. a
Vermeer, L. J., Sørensen, J. N., and Crespo, A.: Wind turbine wake aerodynamics, Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 39, 467–510, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-0421(03)00078-2, 2003. a, b, c
Volker, P. J. H., Badger, J., Hahmann, A. N., and Ott, S.: The Explicit Wake Parametrisation V1.0: a wind farm parametrisation in the mesoscale model WRF, Geosci. Model Dev., 8, 3715–3731, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-3715-2015, 2015. a, b, c
Vollmer, L., Sengers, B. A. M., and Dörenkämper, M.: Brief communication: A simple axial induction modification to the Weather Research and Forecasting Fitch wind farm parameterization, Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 1689–1693, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1689-2024, 2024. a, b, c, d
Wang, C. and Prinn, R. G.: Potential climatic impacts and reliability of very large-scale wind farms, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 2053–2061, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-2053-2010, 2010. a
Wu, C., Wang, Q., Luo, K., and Fan, J.: A coupled turbine-interaction wind farm parameterization in the Weather Research and Forecasting model, Energ. Convers. Manage., 283, 116919, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.116919, 2023. a, b
Wyngaard, J. C.: Toward numerical modeling in the “Terra Incognita”, J. Atmos. Sci., 61, 1816–1826, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0469(2004)061<1816:TNMITT>2.0.CO;2, 2004. a
Xie, S. and Archer, C.: Self‐similarity and turbulence characteristics of wind turbine wakes via large‐eddy simulation, Wind Energy, 18, 1815–1838, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1792, 2015. a
Short summary
Wind farms extract energy from the wind, creating slower, more turbulent flows that can affect other farms downstream. Using high-fidelity simulations for comparison, we find that mesoscale simulations that parameterize wind farms at coarser resolution may underestimate how quickly the wind recovers downstream. This slow recovery results from missing sharp wind gradients and low turbulence. Improving these aspects can help better predict wind energy production over long distances.
Wind farms extract energy from the wind, creating slower, more turbulent flows that can affect...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint