Abstract. This research presents a comparative study on offshore wind energy site selection, focusing on technological, environmental, social, and regulatory barriers, while ensuring compatibility with other marine activities and habitats. The study applies Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) through the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and contrasts it with a probabilistic approach based on Monte Carlo simulations. Although AHP is widely used, its deterministic nature limits the representation of uncertainty in decision-making. To address this, Monte Carlo methods are applied independently, extending previous approaches by incorporating additional design criteria and enhancing robustness. Results demonstrate that integrating probabilistic uncertainty significantly improves the reliability of site selection, identifying optimal zones with higher confidence. Overall, the study highlights the advantages of Monte Carlo simulations over AHP in supporting sustainable and reliable offshore wind energy planning.
Received: 28 Sep 2025 – Discussion started: 30 Oct 2025
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
In the paper “Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Proposed Areas for Offshore Wind Implementation with Monte Carlo Method”, the authors present a comparison of different methods for assessing three potential offshore wind farm locations in Spain. The paper compares Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with two Monte Carlo (MC) simulation approaches for ranking three potential offshore wind farm locations in Spain. The topic is relevant, and the finding that different methods yield significantly different rankings is an interesting case study. However, several points need clarification and improvement:
The authors write: “Unlike most prior research that integrates AHP and Monte Carlo into a hybrid model, this work directly compares the outcomes of traditional AHP with two independent Monte Carlo simulation approaches”. Later they write: “Two Monte Carlo simulation approaches were implemented to refine the AHP results…”. These statements appear contradictory. Are the MC approaches independent of AHP or do they refine its results? Please clarify.
The paper suggests that the MC results are "better," but the basis for this claim is unclear. How do your tests or validations demonstrate superiority? For example: Does MC lead to higher expected revenue or profitability? Does it provide more stable results under uncertainty? Or should the interpretation of the results be something completely different? Please explain the practical implications for decision-makers.
Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is widely used for site competitiveness. Including an LCOE-based ranking of the three sites would make the paper more accessible to readers familiar with cost-driven approaches.
CAPEX and OPEX are critical in offshore wind investment decisions. Are these included under "Operational/Construction Conditions" (Table 3) or elsewhere? How are export cable distances in Table 2 translated into CAPEX? What cable technology assumptions are made? Please provide more details.
In Table 1, “Levantine-Balearic” shows higher mean wind speed and lower wake losses than “Canary Islands,” yet has a lower capacity factor and fewer full-load hours. Can you please explain why this is?
It would be great to see 1 or 2 scientific references showing the suitability of GWA and WAsP for assessing the offshore wind resources in Spain, including some validation if possible.
This study examines how to choose the best locations for offshore wind farms. Researchers compared a traditional ranking method with a probability-based approach using computer simulations. The probability method better handles uncertainties by testing thousands of scenarios. Results showed this approach identifies suitable locations with greater confidence. This improved decision-making could help planners build environmentally sustainable and economically viable wind farms.
This study examines how to choose the best locations for offshore wind farms. Researchers...
In the paper “Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Proposed Areas for Offshore Wind Implementation with Monte Carlo Method”, the authors present a comparison of different methods for assessing three potential offshore wind farm locations in Spain. The paper compares Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with two Monte Carlo (MC) simulation approaches for ranking three potential offshore wind farm locations in Spain. The topic is relevant, and the finding that different methods yield significantly different rankings is an interesting case study. However, several points need clarification and improvement: