skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: An independent analysis of bias sources and variability in wind plant pre‐construction energy yield estimation methods

Journal Article · · Wind Energy
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2768· OSTI ID:1876490
 [1];  [2]; ORCiD logo [1]; ORCiD logo [1];  [1];  [3];  [1];  [1]
  1. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden Colorado USA
  2. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden Colorado USA, Veer Analytics Courtenay British Columbia Canada
  3. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Golden Colorado USA, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland Washington USA

Abstract The wind resource assessment community has long had the goal of reducing the bias between wind plant pre‐construction energy yield assessment (EYA) and the observed annual energy production (AEP). This comparison is typically made between the 50% probability of exceedance (P50) value of the EYA and the long‐term corrected operational AEP (hereafter OA AEP) and is known as the P50 bias. The industry has critically lacked an independent analysis of bias investigated across multiple consultants to identify the greatest sources of uncertainty and variance in the EYA process and the best opportunities for uncertainty reduction. The present study addresses this gap by benchmarking consultant methodologies against each other and against operational data at a scale not seen before in industry collaborations. We consider data from 10 wind plants in North America and evaluate discrepancies between eight consultancies in the steps taken from estimates of gross to net energy. Consultants tend to overestimate the gross energy produced at the turbines and then compensate by further overestimating downstream losses, leading to a mean P50 bias near zero, still with significant variability among the individual wind plants. Within our data sample, we find that consultant estimates of all loss categories, except environmental losses, tend to reduce the project‐to‐project variability of the P50 bias. The disagreement between consultants, however, remains flat throughout the addition of losses. Finally, we find that differences in consultants' estimates of project performance can lead to differences up to $10/MWh in the levelized cost of energy for a wind plant.

Research Organization:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States); Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Renewable Power Office. Wind Energy Technologies Office
Grant/Contract Number:
AC36-08GO28308; AC05-76RL01830
OSTI ID:
1876490
Alternate ID(s):
OSTI ID: 1876491; OSTI ID: 1882924
Report Number(s):
NREL/JA-5000-81032
Journal Information:
Wind Energy, Journal Name: Wind Energy Vol. 25 Journal Issue: 10; ISSN 1095-4244
Publisher:
Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)Copyright Statement
Country of Publication:
United Kingdom
Language:
English

References (9)

The Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2) journal July 2017
Lowering post‐construction yield assessment uncertainty through better wind plant power curves journal May 2021
Understanding Biases in Pre-Construction Estimates journal June 2018
Uncertainty Quantification in Wind Plant Energy Estimation conference January 2019
The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system journal April 2011
The NCEP Climate Forecast System Version 2 journal March 2014
Year-to-year correlation, record length, and overconfidence in wind resource assessment journal January 2016
OpenOA: An Open-Source Codebase For Operational Analysis of Wind Farms journal February 2021
Assessing variability of wind speed: comparison and validation of 27 methodologies journal January 2018