Articles | Volume 7, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022
https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-7-2085-2022
Research article
 | 
21 Oct 2022
Research article |  | 21 Oct 2022

The sensitivity of the Fitch wind farm parameterization to a three-dimensional planetary boundary layer scheme

Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Julie K. Lundquist, David Rosencrans, Nicola Bodini, and Mike Optis

Related authors

Evaluating mesoscale model predictions of diurnal speedup events in the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area of California
Robert S. Arthur, Alex Rybchuk, Timothy W. Juliano, Gabriel Rios, Sonia Wharton, Julie K. Lundquist, and Jerome D. Fast
Wind Energ. Sci. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-137,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-2024-137, 2024
Preprint under review for WES
Short summary
The 2023 National Offshore Wind data set (NOW-23)
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
Seasonal variability of wake impacts on US mid-Atlantic offshore wind plant power production
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
A Twenty-Year Analysis of Winds in California for Offshore Wind Energy Production Using WRF v4.1.2
Alex Rybchuk, Mike Optis, Julie K. Lundquist, Michael Rossol, and Walt Musial
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-50,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2021-50, 2021
Preprint withdrawn
Short summary

Related subject area

Thematic area: Wind and the atmosphere | Topic: Wind and turbulence
The actuator farm model for large eddy simulation (LES) of wind-farm-induced atmospheric gravity waves and farm–farm interaction
Sebastiano Stipa, Arjun Ajay, and Joshua Brinkerhoff
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 2301–2332, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2301-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2301-2024, 2024
Short summary
Understanding the impact of data gaps on long-term offshore wind resource estimates
Martin Georg Jonietz Alvarez, Warren Watson, and Julia Gottschall
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 2217–2233, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2217-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2217-2024, 2024
Short summary
Converging profile relationships for offshore wind speed and turbulence intensity
Gus Jeans
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 2001–2015, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2001-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-2001-2024, 2024
Short summary
A simple steady-state inflow model of the neutral and stable atmospheric boundary layer applied to wind turbine wake simulations
Maarten Paul van der Laan, Mark Kelly, Mads Baungaard, Antariksh Dicholkar, and Emily Louise Hodgson
Wind Energ. Sci., 9, 1985–2000, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1985-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-1985-2024, 2024
Short summary
Influences of lidar scanning parameters on wind turbine wake retrievals in complex terrain
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

Cited articles

Archer, C. L., Colle, B. A., Monache, L. D., 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, b
Archer, C. L., Wu, S., Vasel-Be-Hagh, A., Brodie, J. F., Delgado, R., St. Pé, A., Oncley, S., and Semmer, S.: The VERTEX Field Campaign: Observations of near-Ground Effects of Wind Turbine Wakes, J. Turbulence, 20, 64–92, https://doi.org/10.1080/14685248.2019.1572161, 2019. a
Archer, C. L., Wu, S., Ma, Y., and Jiménez, P. A.: Two Corrections for Turbulent Kinetic Energy Generated by Wind Farms in the WRF Model, Mon. Weather Rev., 148, 4823–4835, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-20-0097.1, 2020. a, b, c, d, e
Beiter, P., Musial, W., Duffy, P., Cooperman, A., Shields, M., Heimiller, D., and Optis, M.: The Cost of Floating Offshore Wind Energy in California Between 2019 and 2032, Tech. Rep. NREL/TP-5000-77384, NREL – National Renewable Energy Lab., Golden, CO, USA, https://doi.org/10.2172/1710181, 2020. a
Bodini, N., Hu, W., Optis, M., Cervone, G., and Alessandrini, S.: Assessing Boundary Condition and Parametric Uncertainty in Numerical-Weather-Prediction-Modeled, Long-Term Offshore Wind Speed through Machine Learning and Analog Ensemble, Wind Energ. Sci., 6, 1363–1377, https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-6-1363-2021, 2021a. a
Download
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.
Altmetrics
Final-revised paper
Preprint