Articles | Volume 6, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1363-2021
© Author(s) 2021. 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-6-1363-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
03 Nov 2021
Research article |
| 03 Nov 2021
| 03 Nov 2021
Assessing boundary condition and parametric uncertainty in numerical-weather-prediction-modeled, long-term offshore wind speed through machine learning and analog ensemble
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA
Weiming Hu
Department of Geography, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA
Mike Optis
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USA
Guido Cervone
Department of Geography, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Stefano Alessandrini
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
Related authors
Nicola Bodini, Emina Maric, Ulrike Egerer, Grant Buster, Luke Lavin, Pavlo Pinchuk, Brandon Benton, and David D. Turner
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 3919–3948, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3919-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3919-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
To plan a reliable United States power grid, engineers need continuous weather data. Because the previous standard record ended in 2013, we created a new, easy-to-use weather database by repackaging complex weather forecasting models onto the same historical grid. We compared our data against real-world observations nationwide, finding it is highly accurate. This provides a seamless, reliable new standard to help plan the future of our national energy system.
Bianca Adler, Laura Bianco, David D. Turner, Joseph Olson, Xia Sun, Joshua Gebauer, Nicola Bodini, Stefano Letizia, and James M. Wilczak
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 8627–8649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-8627-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-8627-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate operational forecasts of temperature and wind in the coastal marine boundary layer are important for a wide range of applications. Leveraging data that were collected along the United States northeast coast during a multi-year period for the Third Wind Forecast Improvement project, we investigated the performance of the operational forecast model and identified systematic errors in wind and temperature forecasts that are now being addressed by the model developers.
Nicola Bodini, Grant Buster, and David D. Turner
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-680, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-680, 2026
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Alaska's power systems depend on weather, yet weather stations there are few and far between. We turned seven years of hourly output from a national weather forecast model into an easy-to-use record of wind and temperature across Alaska, and checked it against measurements from more than 150 sites. The data generally match observations well, and are freely available to support energy planning, resilient power grids, and artificial intelligence research in this remote region.
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 García-Santiago, Jonas Schulte, Knut S. Seim, M. Paul van der Laan, Kisorthman Vimalakanthan, and Adam Wise
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 3107–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3107-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3107-2026, 2026
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.
Lindsay M. Sheridan, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Tien Manh Nguyen, Yi-Leng Chen, William I. Gustafson Jr., Ye Liu, Feng Hsiao, Rob K. Newsom, Preston Spicer, Evgueni Kassianov, Mikhail Pekour, Nicola Bodini, and Mark Severy
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2257–2285, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2257-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2257-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Wind simulations can contain significant errors, which can lead to inaccurate estimates of wind energy generation. Using observations from a floating lidar off Hawai'i, we hypothesize and establish that distinct simulation datasets will exhibit diverse ranges of errors in this offshore environment. The most commonly used simulation dataset produces the largest wind speed biases due to underestimation of fast wind speeds and misrepresentation of how wind speed varies throughout the day and night.
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.
Aliza Abraham, Nicola Bodini, Nicholas Hamilton, Brian Hirth, John Schroeder, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-82, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-82, 2026
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Thunderstorms can cause sudden changes in wind speed and direction called "wind ramps". While wind turbines are designed to withstand simplified versions of such wind ramps, this paper shows that real wind ramps are much more variable and complex than those prescribed in the design standard. This variability makes it difficult for wind farm operators to predict the conditions that each wind turbine will experience, adding uncertainty to the prediction of wind farm power.
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
Revised manuscript accepted 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.
Yelena Pichugina, Alan W. Brewer, Sunil Baidar, Robert Banta, Edward Strobach, Brandi McCarty, Brian Carroll, Nicola Bodini, Stefano Letizia, Richard Marchbanks, Michael Zucker, Maxwell Holloway, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 417–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-417-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-417-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
The truck-based Doppler lidar system was used during the American Wake Experiment (AWAKEN) to obtain the high-frequency, simultaneous measurements of the horizontal wind speed, direction, and vertical velocity from a moving platform. The paper presents the unique capability of the novel lidar system to characterize the temporal, vertical, and spatial variability in winds at various distances from operating turbines and obtain quantitative estimates of wind speed reduction in the waked flow.
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.
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, Ethan Young, and Rao Kotamarthi
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1551–1574, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1551-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1551-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Three recent wind resource datasets are assessed for their skills in representing annual average wind speeds and seasonal, diurnal, and interannual trends in the wind resource in coastal locations to support customers interested in small and midsize wind energy.
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.
Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob K. Newsom, Colleen M. Kaul, Stefano Letizia, Mikhail Pekour, Nicholas Hamilton, Duli Chand, Donna Flynn, Nicola Bodini, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 361–380, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-361-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-361-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how atmospheric phenomena affect the recovery of wind farm wake – the disturbed air behind turbines. In regions like Oklahoma, where wind farms are often clustered, understanding wake recovery is crucial. We found that wind farms can alter phenomena like low-level jets, which are common in Oklahoma, by deflecting them above the wind farm. As a result, the impact of wakes can be observed up to 1–2 km above ground level.
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.
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.
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, Emina Maric, Ulrike Egerer, Grant Buster, Luke Lavin, Pavlo Pinchuk, Brandon Benton, and David D. Turner
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 3919–3948, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3919-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3919-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
To plan a reliable United States power grid, engineers need continuous weather data. Because the previous standard record ended in 2013, we created a new, easy-to-use weather database by repackaging complex weather forecasting models onto the same historical grid. We compared our data against real-world observations nationwide, finding it is highly accurate. This provides a seamless, reliable new standard to help plan the future of our national energy system.
Francesco De Martin, Christopher Rozoff, Andrea Zonato, Stefano Alessandrini, and Silvana Di Sabatino
Weather Clim. Dynam., 7, 2015–2042, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-2015-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wcd-7-2015-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Most convective storm losses occur in urban areas, raising the question of whether cities can intensify severe storms, such as supercells. We found that cities can weaken an approaching supercell by reducing low-level moisture, but can also trigger a new one downwind. More urban vegetation reduces city effects on storm evolution, while building height has little impact. This conceptual model improves understanding of supercell–city interactions and supports advances in early warning systems.
Bianca Adler, Laura Bianco, David D. Turner, Joseph Olson, Xia Sun, Joshua Gebauer, Nicola Bodini, Stefano Letizia, and James M. Wilczak
Geosci. Model Dev., 19, 8627–8649, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-8627-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-19-8627-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Accurate operational forecasts of temperature and wind in the coastal marine boundary layer are important for a wide range of applications. Leveraging data that were collected along the United States northeast coast during a multi-year period for the Third Wind Forecast Improvement project, we investigated the performance of the operational forecast model and identified systematic errors in wind and temperature forecasts that are now being addressed by the model developers.
Nicola Bodini, Grant Buster, and David D. Turner
Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-680, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2026-680, 2026
Preprint under review for ESSD
Short summary
Short summary
Alaska's power systems depend on weather, yet weather stations there are few and far between. We turned seven years of hourly output from a national weather forecast model into an easy-to-use record of wind and temperature across Alaska, and checked it against measurements from more than 150 sites. The data generally match observations well, and are freely available to support energy planning, resilient power grids, and artificial intelligence research in this remote region.
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 García-Santiago, Jonas Schulte, Knut S. Seim, M. Paul van der Laan, Kisorthman Vimalakanthan, and Adam Wise
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 3107–3135, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3107-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-3107-2026, 2026
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.
Lindsay M. Sheridan, Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Tien Manh Nguyen, Yi-Leng Chen, William I. Gustafson Jr., Ye Liu, Feng Hsiao, Rob K. Newsom, Preston Spicer, Evgueni Kassianov, Mikhail Pekour, Nicola Bodini, and Mark Severy
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 2257–2285, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2257-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-2257-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
Wind simulations can contain significant errors, which can lead to inaccurate estimates of wind energy generation. Using observations from a floating lidar off Hawai'i, we hypothesize and establish that distinct simulation datasets will exhibit diverse ranges of errors in this offshore environment. The most commonly used simulation dataset produces the largest wind speed biases due to underestimation of fast wind speeds and misrepresentation of how wind speed varies throughout the day and night.
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.
Aliza Abraham, Nicola Bodini, Nicholas Hamilton, Brian Hirth, John Schroeder, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-82, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2026-82, 2026
Revised manuscript under review for WES
Short summary
Short summary
Thunderstorms can cause sudden changes in wind speed and direction called "wind ramps". While wind turbines are designed to withstand simplified versions of such wind ramps, this paper shows that real wind ramps are much more variable and complex than those prescribed in the design standard. This variability makes it difficult for wind farm operators to predict the conditions that each wind turbine will experience, adding uncertainty to the prediction of wind farm power.
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
Revised manuscript accepted 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.
Yelena Pichugina, Alan W. Brewer, Sunil Baidar, Robert Banta, Edward Strobach, Brandi McCarty, Brian Carroll, Nicola Bodini, Stefano Letizia, Richard Marchbanks, Michael Zucker, Maxwell Holloway, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 11, 417–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-417-2026, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-11-417-2026, 2026
Short summary
Short summary
The truck-based Doppler lidar system was used during the American Wake Experiment (AWAKEN) to obtain the high-frequency, simultaneous measurements of the horizontal wind speed, direction, and vertical velocity from a moving platform. The paper presents the unique capability of the novel lidar system to characterize the temporal, vertical, and spatial variability in winds at various distances from operating turbines and obtain quantitative estimates of wind speed reduction in the waked flow.
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.
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, Ethan Young, and Rao Kotamarthi
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 1551–1574, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1551-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-1551-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Three recent wind resource datasets are assessed for their skills in representing annual average wind speeds and seasonal, diurnal, and interannual trends in the wind resource in coastal locations to support customers interested in small and midsize wind energy.
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.
Rajesh Kumar, Piyush Bhardwaj, Cenlin He, Jennifer Boehnert, Forrest Lacey, Stefano Alessandrini, Kevin Sampson, Matthew Casali, Scott Swerdlin, Olga Wilhelmi, Gabriele G. Pfister, Benjamin Gaubert, and Helen Worden
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 17, 1807–1834, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1807-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-17-1807-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We have created a 14-year hourly air quality dataset at 12 km resolution by combining satellite observations of atmospheric composition with air quality models over the contiguous United States (CONUS). The dataset has been found to reproduce key observed features of air quality over the CONUS. To enable easy visualization and interpretation of county-level air quality measures and trends by stakeholders, an ArcGIS air quality dashboard has also been developed.
Raghavendra Krishnamurthy, Rob K. Newsom, Colleen M. Kaul, Stefano Letizia, Mikhail Pekour, Nicholas Hamilton, Duli Chand, Donna Flynn, Nicola Bodini, and Patrick Moriarty
Wind Energ. Sci., 10, 361–380, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-361-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-10-361-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
This study examines how atmospheric phenomena affect the recovery of wind farm wake – the disturbed air behind turbines. In regions like Oklahoma, where wind farms are often clustered, understanding wake recovery is crucial. We found that wind farms can alter phenomena like low-level jets, which are common in Oklahoma, by deflecting them above the wind farm. As a result, the impact of wakes can be observed up to 1–2 km above ground level.
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.
Enrico Ferrero, Bianca Tenti, and Stefano Alessandrini
Adv. Sci. Res., 21, 19–25, https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-21-19-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/asr-21-19-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
A new plume rise scheme based on heat transport by particles was presented: the entrainment is simulated by the mixing of two fluids (air and plume particles) with different temperatures and the resulting temperature is given by Richmann's law. The new algorithm is compared with the one that is currently included in SPRAY-WEB by Alessandrini et al. (2013). The new scheme seems to behave better when the ambient wind speeds are higher, but the asymptotic behavior is correct even with lower speeds.
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.
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.
Marco Tedesco, Paolo Colosio, Xavier Fettweis, and Guido Cervone
The Cryosphere, 17, 5061–5074, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5061-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-17-5061-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a technique to improve the outputs of a model that calculates the gain and loss of Greenland and consequently its contribution to sea level rise. Our technique generates “sharper” images of the maps generated by the model to better understand and quantify where losses occur. This has implications for improving models, understanding what drives the contributions of Greenland to sea level rise, and more.
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.
Cited articles
Alessandrini, S., Sperati, S., and Pinson, P.: A comparison between the ECMWF
and COSMO Ensemble Prediction Systems applied to short-term wind power
forecasting on real data, Appl. Energ., 107, 271–280,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.02.041, 2013. a, b
Alessandrini, S., Delle Monache, L., Sperati, S., and Cervone, G.: An analog
ensemble for short-term probabilistic solar power forecast, Appl. Energ.,
157, 95–110, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.011,
2015a. a
Alessandrini, S., Delle Monache, L., Sperati, S., and Nissen, J.: A novel
application of an analog ensemble for short-term wind power forecasting,
Renew. Energ., 76, 768–781,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.11.061, 2015b. a
Alessandrini, S., Sperati, S., and Delle Monache, L.: Improving the analog
ensemble wind speed forecasts for rare events, Mon. Weather Rev., 147,
2677–2692, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-19-0006.1, 2019. a, b, c
Archer, C. L., Colle, B. A., Delle Monache, L., Dvorak, M. J., Lundquist, J.,
Bailey, B. H., Beaucage, P., Churchfield, M. J., Fitch, A. C., Kosovic, B.,
Lee, S., Moriarty, P. J., Simao, H., Stevens, R. J. A. M., Veron, D., and Zack, J.: Meteorology for coastal/offshore wind energy in the United States:
Recommendations and research needs for the next 10 years, B.
Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95, 515–519,
https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00108.1, 2014. a
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 US northeastern coast, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 121, 8869–8885, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JD024896,
2016. a
Arcos Jiménez, A., Gómez Muñoz, C., and García Márquez,
F.: Machine learning for wind turbine blades maintenance management,
Energies, 11, 13, https://doi.org/10.3390/en11010013, 2018. a
Arrillaga, J. A., Yagüe, C., Sastre, M., and Román-Cascón, C.: A
characterisation of sea-breeze events in the eastern Cantabrian coast (Spain)
from observational data and WRF simulations, Atmos. Res., 181,
265–280, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2016.06.021, 2016. a
Bodini, N., Optis, M., Rossol, M., and Rybchuk, A.: US Offshore Wind Resource data for 2000–2019, OpenEI [data set], https://doi.org/10.25984/1821404, 2021a. a
Bodini, N.: nbodini/ML_UQ_offshore: ML_UQ_offshore (Version v1), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5618470, 2021b. a
Bodini, N. and Optis, M.: The importance of round-robin validation when assessing machine-learning-based vertical extrapolation of wind speeds, Wind Energ. Sci., 5, 489–501, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-5-489-2020, 2020. a
Bodini, N., Lundquist, J. K., and Optis, M.: Can machine learning improve the model representation of turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate in the boundary layer for complex terrain?, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 4271–4285, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-4271-2020, 2020. a
Brandily, T.: Levelized Cost of Electricity 1H 2020: Renewable Chase
Plunging Comodity Prices, Tech. rep., Bloomberg New Energy Finance Limited, available at:
https://www.bnef.com/core/lcoe?tab=Forecast LCOE (last access: 27 October 2021), 2020. a
Brower, M.: Wind Resource Assessment: A Practical Guide to Developing a Wind
Project, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey,
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118249864, 2012. a
Buizza, R., Leutbecher, M., and Isaksen, L.: Potential use of an ensemble of
analyses in the ECMWF Ensemble Prediction System, Q. J.
Roy. Meteor. Soc., 134, 2051–2066,
https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.346, 2008. a, b
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management: Outer Continental Shelf Renewable Energy
Leases Map Book, Tech. rep., Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, available at: https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/renewable-energy-program/Mapping-and-Data/Renewable_Energy_Leases_Map_Book_March_2019.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021),
2018. a
Carbon Trust Offshore Wind Accelerator: Carbon Trust Offshore Wind
Accelerator Roadmap for the Commercial Acceptance of Floating LiDAR
Technology, Tech. rep., Carbon Trust, available at:
https://prod-drupal-files.storage.googleapis.com/documents/resource/public/Roadmap for Commercial Acceptance of Floating LiDAR REPORT.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021),
2018. a
Carvalho, D., Rocha, A., Gómez-Gesteira, M., and Santos, C. S.: Sensitivity
of the WRF model wind simulation and wind energy production estimates to
planetary boundary layer parameterizations for onshore and offshore areas in
the Iberian Peninsula, Appl. Energ., 135, 234–246,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.082, 2014a. a
Carvalho, D., Rocha, A., Gómez-Gesteira, M., and Silva Santos, C.: WRF
wind simulation and wind energy production estimates forced by different
reanalyses: Comparison with observed data for Portugal, Appl. Energ.,
117, 116–126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.12.001, 2014b. a
Cervone, G., Clemente-Harding, L., Alessandrini, S., and Delle Monache, L.:
Short-term photovoltaic power forecasting using Artificial Neural Networks
and an Analog Ensemble, Renew. Energ., 108, 274–286,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.02.052, 2017. a
Clifton, A., Kilcher, L., Lundquist, J., and Fleming, P.: Using machine
learning to predict wind turbine power output, Environ. Res.
Lett., 8, 024009, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024009,
2013. a
Deepwater Wind: Block Island Wind Farm, available at: https://dwwind.com/project/block-island-wind-farm (last access: 27 October 2021), 2016. a
Delle Monache, L., Eckel, F. A., Rife, D. L., Nagarajan, B., and Searight, K.:
Probabilistic weather prediction with an analog ensemble, Mon. Weather
Rev., 141, 3498–3516, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-12-00281.1,
2013. a, b
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. a
Fabre, S., Stickland, M., Scanlon, T., Oldroyd, A., Kindler, D., and Quail, F.:
Measurement and simulation of the flow field around the FINO 3 triangular
lattice meteorological mast, J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerod., 130, 99–107,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2014.04.002, 2014. a
Friedman, J. H.: Stochastic gradient boosting, Comput. Stat. Data
An., 38, 367–378, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9473(01)00065-2,
2002. a
Gelaro, R., McCarty, W., Suárez, M. J., Todling, R., Molod, A., Takacs, L.,
Randles, C. A., Darmenov, A., Bosilovich, M. G., Reichle, R., Wargan, K., Coy, L., Cullather, R., Draper, C., Akella, S., Buchard, V., Conaty, A., da Silva, A. M., Gu, W., Kim, G.-K., Koster, R., Lucchesi, R., Merkova, D., Nielsen, J. E., Partyka, G., Pawson, S., Putman, W., Rienecker, M., Schubert, S. D., Sienkiewicz, M., and Zhao, B.: The
modern-era retrospective analysis for research and applications, version 2
(MERRA-2), J. Climate, 30, 5419–5454,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1, 2017. a
Gentine, P., Pritchard, M., Rasp, S., Reinaudi, G., and Yacalis, G.: Could
machine learning break the convection parameterization deadlock?, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 45, 5742–5751, https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078202,
2018. a
Gorton, A.: Atmosphere to Electrons (A2e), buoy/lidar.z06.00, Maintained
by A2e Data Archive and Portal for U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renew. Energ., Tech. rep., Pacific Northwest
National Lab (PNNL), Richland, WA, United States, https://doi.org/10.21947/1669352,
2020. a
Hahmann, A. N., Vincent, C. L., Peña, A., Lange, J., and Hasager, C. B.: Wind
climate estimation using WRF model output: method and model sensitivities
over the sea, Int. J. Climatol., 35, 3422–3439,
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4217, 2015. a, b, c
Hahmann, A. N., Sīle, T., Witha, B., Davis, N. N., Dörenkämper, M., Ezber, Y., García-Bustamante, E., González-Rouco, J. F., Navarro, J., Olsen, B. T., and Söderberg, S.: The making of the New European Wind Atlas – Part 1: Model sensitivity, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 5053–5078, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-5053-2020, 2020. a
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. a
Holstag, E.: Improved Bankability, The Ecofys position on Lidar Use, Ecofys
report, 2013. a
Hong, S.-Y., Noh, Y., and Dudhia, J.: A new vertical diffusion package with an
explicit treatment of entrainment processes, Mon. Weather Rev., 134,
2318–2341, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR3199.1, 2006. a
Hu, W.: Parallel Analog Ensemble, GitHub [code], available at: https://weiming-hu.github.io/AnalogsEnsemble,
last access: 27 October 2021. a
Hu, W., Cervone, G., Clemente-Harding, L., and Calovi, M.: Parallel Analog
Ensemble – The Power Of Weather Analogs, NCAR Technical Notes NCAR/TN-564+
PROC, p. 1, https://doi.org/10.5065/P2JJ-9878, 2021a. a
Hu, W., Cervone, G., Young, G., and Monache, L. D.: Weather Analogs with a
Machine Learning Similarity Metric for Renewable Resource Forecasting, arXiv [preprint], arXiv:2103.04530, 9 March 2021b. a
JCGM 100:2008: Evaluation of measurement data – Guide to the expression of
uncertainty in measurement, Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, 2008. a
Johnson, C., White, E., and Jones, S.: Summary of Actual vs. Predicted Wind
Farm Performance: Recap of WINDPOWER 2008, in: AWEA Wind Resource and Project
Energy Assessment Workshop, available at:
http://www.enecafe.com/interdomain/idlidar/paper/2008/AWEA workshop 2008 Johnson_Clint.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021),
2008. a
Junk, C., Delle Monache, L., Alessandrini, S., Cervone, G., and Von Bremen, L.:
Predictor-weighting strategies for probabilistic wind power forecasting with
an analog ensemble, Meteorol. Z., 24, 361–379,
https://doi.org/10.1127/metz/2015/0659, 2015. a, b
Kirincich, A.: A Metocean Reference Station for offshore wind Energy research
in the US, J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1452, 012028,
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1452/1/012028, 2020. a
Levene, H.: Robust tests for equality of variances, Contributions to
probability and statistics, Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling,
279–292, https://doi.org/10.2307/2285659, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, 1961. a
Mattar, C. and Borvarán, D.: Offshore wind power simulation by using WRF in
the central coast of Chile, Renew. Energ., 94, 22–31,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.005, 2016. a
Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M., Barnett, D. N., Jones, G. S., Webb, M. J.,
Collins, M., and Stainforth, D. A.: Quantification of modelling uncertainties
in a large ensemble of climate change simulations, Nature, 430, 768–772,
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02771, 2004. a
Musial, W., Heimiller, D., Beiter, P., Scott, G., and Draxl, C.: Offshore wind
energy resource assessment for the United States, Tech. rep., National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO, United States, available at: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy16osti/66599.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021), 2016. a
Nakanishi, M. and Niino, H.: An improved Mellor–Yamada level-3 model with
condensation physics: Its design and verification, Bound.-Lay.
Meteorol., 112, 1–31,
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BOUN.0000020164.04146.98, 2004. a
Neumann, T., Nolopp, K., and Herklotz, K.: First operating experience with the
FINO1 research platform in the North Sea; Erste Betriebserfahrungen mit der
FINO1-Forschungsplattform in der Nordsee, DEWI-Magazin, Germany, 2004. a
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. a
OceanTech Services/DNV GL: NYSERDA Floating Lidar Buoy Data, OceanTech Services/DNV GL [data set], available at:
https://oswbuoysny.resourcepanorama.dnvgl.com (last access: 27 October 2021), 2020. a
Olsen, B. T., Hahmann, A. N., Sempreviva, A. M., Badger, J., and Jørgensen, H. E.: An intercomparison of mesoscale models at simple sites for wind energy applications, Wind Energ. Sci., 2, 211–228, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2-211-2017, 2017. a, b
Optis, M. and Perr-Sauer, J.: The importance of atmospheric turbulence and
stability in machine-learning models of wind farm power production, Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev., 112, 27–41,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.031, 2019. a
Optis, M., Rybchuk, O., Bodini, N., Rossol, M., and Musial, W.: 2020 Offshore
Wind Resource Assessment for the California Pacific Outer Continental Shelf,
Tech. rep., National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO, United
States, available at: https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77642.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021), 2020. a, b, c
Optis, M., Bodini, N., Debnath, M., and Doubrawa, P.: New methods to improve the vertical extrapolation of near-surface offshore wind speeds, Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 935–948, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-935-2021, 2021a. a
Optis, M., Kumler, A., Brodie, J., and Miles, T.: Quantifying sensitivity in
numerical weather prediction-modeled offshore wind speeds through an ensemble
modeling approach, Wind Energ., 24, 957–973, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2611,
2021b. a, b
Papanastasiou, D., Melas, D., and Lissaridis, I.: Study of wind field under sea
breeze conditions; an application of WRF model, Atmos. Res., 98,
102–117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.06.005, 2010. a
Parker, W. S.: Ensemble modeling, uncertainty and robust predictions, WIRES Clim. Change, 4, 213–223,
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.220, 2013. a
Peña, A., Floors, R., and Gryning, S.-E.: The Høvsøre tall
wind-profile experiment: a description of wind profile observations in the
atmospheric boundary layer, Bound.-Lay. Meteorol., 150, 69–89,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-013-9856-4, 2014. a
Ruiz, J. J., Saulo, C., and Nogués-Paegle, J.: WRF Model Sensitivity to
Choice of Parameterization over South America: Validation against Surface
Variables, Mon. Weather Rev., 138, 3342–3355,
https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3358.1, 2010. a
Rybchuk, A., Optis, M., Lundquist, J. K., Rossol, M., and Musial, W.: A Twenty-Year Analysis of Winds in California for Offshore Wind Energy Production Using WRF v4.1.2, Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-50, in review, 2021. a
Salvação, N. and Soares, C. G.: Wind resource assessment offshore the
Atlantic Iberian coast with the WRF model, Energy, 145, 276–287,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.12.101, 2018. a
Sidel, A., Hu, W., Cervone, G., and Calovi, M.: Heat Wave Identification Using
an Operational Weather Model and Analog Ensemble, in: 100th American
Meteorological Society Annual Meeting,
available at: https://ams.confex.com/ams/2020Annual/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/371727 (last access: 27 October 2021),
2020.
a, b
Siuta, D., West, G., and Stull, R.: WRF Hub-Height Wind Forecast Sensitivity
to PBL Scheme, Grid Length, and Initial Condition Choice in Complex Terrain,
Weather Forecast., 32, 493–509, https://doi.org/10.1175/WAF-D-16-0120.1, 2017. a
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 3, Tech. Rep. NCAR/TN-475+STR, Mesoscale and
Microscale Meteorology Division, National Center for Atmospheric Research,
Boulder, Colorado, USA, https://doi.org/10.5065/D68S4MVH, 2008. a
Steele, C. J., Dorling, S. R., von Glasow, R., and Bacon, J.: Idealized WRF model sensitivity simulations of sea breeze types and their effects on offshore windfields, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 13, 443–461, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-443-2013, 2013. a
Stiesdal, H.: Midt i en disruptionstid, Ingeniøren,
available at: https://ing.dk/blog/midt-disruptionstid-190449 (last access: 27 October 2021), 2016. a
Truepower, A.: AWS Truepower Loss and Uncertainty Methods, Albany, NY, available at:
https://www.awstruepower.com/assets/AWS-Truepower-Loss-and-Uncertainty-Memorandum-5-Jun-2014.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021),
2014. a
Ulazia, A., Saenz, J., and Ibarra-Berastegui, G.: Sensitivity to the use of
3DVAR data assimilation in a mesoscale model for estimating offshore wind
energy potential. A case study of the Iberian northern coastline, Appl.
Energ., 180, 617–627, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.033, 2016. a
van Hoof, J.: Unlocking Europe's offshore wind potential, Tech. rep.,
PricewaterhouseCoopers B.V., available at:
https://www.pwc.nl/nl/assets/documents/pwc-unlocking-europes-offshore-wind-potential.pdf (last access: 27 October 2021),
2017. a
Vanvyve, E., Delle Monache, L., Monaghan, A. J., and Pinto, J. O.: Wind
resource estimates with an analog ensemble approach, Renew. Energ., 74,
761–773, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.08.060, 2015. a
White, E.: Continuing Work on Improving Plant Performance Estimates, in: AWEA
Wind Resource and Project Energy Assessment Workshop, 2008. a
Xingjian, S., Chen, Z., Wang, H., Yeung, D.-Y., Wong, W.-K., and Woo, W.-C.:
Convolutional LSTM network: A machine learning approach for precipitation
nowcasting, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,
802–810, 2015. a
Zhu, Y.: Ensemble forecast: A new approach to uncertainty and predictability,
Adv. Atmos. Sci., 22, 781–788,
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02918678, 2005. a
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.
We develop two machine-learning-based approaches to temporally extrapolate uncertainty in...
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint