Minimum-cost numerical prediction system for wind power in Uruguay, with an assessment of the diurnal and seasonal cycles of its quality
Keywords:NWP, Diurnal cycle, Seasonal cycle
This work presents the results of a numerical forecast system of minimum cost for the electric power generated by wind farms in Uruguay. By keeping at minimum levels both the computational costs and the complexity of the empirical corrections of the numerical results, we obtain a benchmark for the forecast skill of more complex forecast systems, that is easily available during their calibration stages and operative functioning. The work also aims to explore the diurnal and seasonal cycle of the forecasts quality. It is found that this simple forecast system produces very good results, albeit the dependencies of the forecast skill and errors respect to the season of the year and the time of the day are distinguishable. It is also found that it is necessary to take into account the diurnal and the seasonal cycles during the calibration of the empirical corrections. The good results of this simple technique might had been possible due to the relative smooth topography of Uruguay.
BHARGAVA; KALNAY, E.; CARTON, J. A. Estimation and correction of the gfs systematic errors. In: AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY MEETING, 97., 2017, Keystone. Anais eletrôni cos... Boston: American Meteorological Society, 2017. Availavable at: https://ams.confex.com/ams/97Annual/webprogram/Paper305798.html .
FREDIANI, M.; HACKER, J. P.; ANANGNOSTOU, E. N.; HOPSON, T. Evaluation of pbl parameterizations for modeling surface wind speed during storms in the northeast united states. weather and forecasting. Weather and Forecasting, v. 31, p. 1511-1528, 2016.
GARCíADIEZ, M.; FERNáNDEZ, J.; FITA, L.; YAGüE, C. Seasonal dependence of wrf model biases and sensitivity to pbl schemes over europe. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, v. 139, p. 501-514, 2013.
DE MELLO, S.; BOEZIO, G. C.; GUTIERREZ, A. Operational wind energy forecast with power assimilation. In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WIND ENERGY, 14., 2015. Porto Alegre, RS, 2015.
ORTELLI, S.; BOEZIO, G. C. Construction of empirical speed-power curves in wind farms installed in uruguay. application to real-time data quality control and estimation of possible generation in case of restriction. In: X WORKSHOP BRASILEIRO DE MICROMETEOROLOGIA, 10., 2017. Santa Maria, RS, 2017. Available at: https://www.fing.edu.uy/cluster/eolica/publi/ICWE14_02237.pdf .
SEIDEL, D. J.; CHI, O. A.; LI, K. Estimating climatological planetary boundary layer heights from radiosonde observations: Comparison of methods and uncertainty analysis. J. of Geophysical Research, v. 115, p. D16113, 2010.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.