Exploring and Quantifying the Role of Resource 
Uncertainties in Wind Project Planning 
Achille Messac#, Souma Chowdhury*, Jie Zhang*, and Luciano Castillo** 
# Syracuse University, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering 
* Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering 
**Texas Tech University, Department of Mechanical Engineering 
1000 Islands Energy Research Forum 
Nov 11 – 13, 2011 
Alexandria Bay, NY
Wind Energy - Overview 
 Currently wind contributes 2.5% of the global electricity consumption. 
 The growth rate of wind energy has however not been consistent 
(WWEA report). 
 One of the primary factors affecting its growth is the variability of the 
resource itself. 
2 
www.prairieroots.org
Uncertainties in Wind Energy 
Physical uncertainties in wind energy may be broadly classified into: 
• Long Term Uncertainties: Introduced by (i) the long term variation of 
wind conditions, (ii) turbine design, and (iii) other environmental, 
operational and financial factors 
• Short Term Uncertainties: Introduced by boundary layer turbulence and 
other flow variations that occur in a small time scale (order of minutes) 
3 
Long Term 
Uncertainties 
Wind Conditions 
Wind Speed 
Wind Direction 
Air Density 
Environmental 
Factors 
Rain/Snow 
Storms 
Topography 
Terrain/Surface 
Roughness 
Vegetation 
Man-made 
Structures 
Turbine 
Performance 
Component 
Depreciation 
Component 
Replacement 
Operational 
Interruptions 
Turbine 
Component 
Breakdown 
Power Grid 
Repair 
Installation of 
Additional 
Turbines 
Economic 
Factors 
Changes in 
Utility Price 
($/kWh) 
Changes in 
O&M Cost 
Changes is Govt. 
Policies 
Changes in 
Interest Rates & 
Insurance Rates
Variability of Wind Conditions 
 The wind speed, the wind direction, and the air density at a given 
site vary significantly over the course of a year. 
 The annual distribution of wind conditions also varies from year to 
year, although the overall pattern remains somewhat similar. 
 The long term variation of wind conditions is generally 
represented using probability distribution models. 
 These probability distribution models can be developed using 
previous years’ recorded wind data at the site. 
Zhang et al, 2011 4
Uncertainties in Wind Conditions 
Uncertainty is introduced by: 
 the assumption that, “The expected distribution of wind in the succeeding 
years of operation of the wind farm is deterministically equivalent to the 
wind distribution estimated from preceding years’ data”. 
 Further uncertainties can also be introduced by the assumptions in the 
Measure-Correlate-Predict (MCP) method used for long term wind 
resource modeling. 
[MCP: It is a method implemented to predict the long term wind data/distribution at 
the site using short term (1-year) onsite data, and the co-occurring data at nearby 
meteorological stations (that also have long term data).] 
5
Presentation Outline 
• Research Objectives 
• Wind Distribution Modeling 
• Uncertainties in the Yearly Wind Distribution 
• Modeling the Wind Uncertainties 
• Quantifying and Illustrating the Resulting Uncertainties in 
the farm AEP and COE. 
• Concluding Remarks 
6 
AEP: Annual Energy Production; COE: Cost of Energy
Research Objectives 
 Model the yearly (and long term) joint distribution of wind 
speed, wind direction, and air density, using recorded site 
data. 
 Characterize the uncertainty in the yearly distribution of 
wind conditions. 
 Model the propagation of the wind distribution uncertainty 
into the predicted Annual Energy Production (AEP) and 
Cost of Energy (COE). 
7
Wind Distribution 
8
Existing Wind Distribution Models 
 Popular wind distribution models include variations of Weibull, 
Lognormal, Rayleigh, Beta, inverse-Gaussian and Gamma distributions. 
9 
 These models can be broadly classified into: 
 univariate and unimodal distributions of wind speed 
 bivariate and unimodal distributions of wind speed and wind 
direction 
 These wind distribution models make limiting assumptions regarding 
the correlativity and the modality of the distribution of wind conditions.
Multivariate and Multimodal Wind Distribution 
(MMWD) Model 
• MMWD can capture the joint variation of wind speed, wind direction, 
and air density. 
• MMWD allows representation of multimodally distributed data. 
• MMWD is developed using Kernel Density Estimation. 
• Case studies: 
10 
26NDSU, North Dakota Agricultural Weather Network, online, 2010. 
27NOAA, National Data Buoy Center, online, 2011.
Kernel Density Estimation 
11 
Univariate Kernel Density Estimation 
Multivariate Kernel Density Estimation 
Optimal Bandwidth Matrix Selection 
MISE: Minimum Integrated Squared Error
Wind Distribution Results 
12 
Onshore Offshore 
Wind data is observed to be multimodal
Comparison of Distribution Accuracies 
 To compare the distributions, we use coefficient of determination, (R2) that 
is a measure of the agreement between an estimated distribution and the 
recorded data. 
13 
 Higher the value of R2, better the distribution
Uncertainties in the Yearly Wind 
Distribution 
14
Year-to-Year Variations (Onshore Site) 
Zhang et al., 2011 15 
Estimated Wind 
Distribution 
(preceding years’ data) 
Predicted Long Term 
Variation of Wind 
(succeeding years) 
May not be the right 
way to account for 
Deterministic assumption 
wind variations
Wind Distribution in Annual Power Generation 
• Annual Energy Production of a farm is given by: 
Wind Probability Distribution 
• This integral equation can be numerically expressed as: 
16 
Kusiak and Zheng, 2010; Vega, 2008
Characterizing the Uncertainties 
In this paper, two different models have been proposed. 
 Parametric Wind Uncertainty (PWU) Model: We consider the 
parameters of the wind distribution model to be stochastic - e.g. the k and 
c parameters in the Weibull distribution. 
 Non-Parametric Wind Uncertainty (NPWU) Model : We consider the 
predicted yearly probability of a wind condition itself to be stochastic. 
17
Parametric Wind Uncertainty (PWU) Model 
 The uncertainty in the parameters of the wind distribution model is 
represented by their variance (in this paper). 
 For a mp-parameter wind distribution model, the corresponding 
uncertainties in the predicted yearly probabilities of the sample wind 
conditions can be expressed in terms of a covariance matrix Sp as 
 qk: kth parameter; Sq: Covariance of the distribution parameters; 
 pi: frequency of the ith sample wind condition; 
18
PWU Model (continued…) 
 The uncertainty propagating into the AEP is modeled as a function of the 
uncertainty in the wind distribution. 
 Subsequently, the uncertainty in the COE can be expressed as 
Lindberg, 1999 19 
where
NPWU Model: Formulation 
 The probability of a given wind condition was observed to vary in orders 
of magnitude from year to year. 
 To model this variability, a multivariate normal distribution of the 
logarithms of the predicted yearly wind probabilities is used. 
 The uncertainty in the predicted yearly wind probabilities is then given 
by 
 The uncertainty in the AEP and the COE can be determined as in PWU. 
20
Illustration of the Estimated Uncertainty 
Uncertainty in the univariate distribution of wind speed: Using NPWU 
model without cross-covariance terms 
 For a major portion of the wind distributions, there is approximately 10% 
uncertainty. 
21
Illustration of the Estimated Uncertainty 
Uncertainty in the bivariate distribution of wind speed and direction, using 
NPWU model without cross-covariance terms 
22 
Uncertainty in Yearly Wind Distribution Wind Distribution 
Ofnfsshhoorree
Uncertainty in the Farm Performance 
• We consider a wind farm comprising 25 GE 1.5MW xle turbines at the 
onshore site. 
• Uncertainty is evaluated for the optimized farm layout, adopted from a 
recent publication*. 
• The AEP of the optimized wind farm was reported to be 4.4% higher 
than that of a reference wind farm having a 5x5 array layout. 
• The relative uncertainties in the AEP and in the COE, estimated 
using the NPUW model without cross-covariance, are each 
approximately 4%. 
*Chowdhury et al. 2011 23
Concluding Remarks 
 This research developed a distribution model that represents the joint 
variation of wind speed, wind direction, and air density. 
 However, the predicted annual distribution of wind conditions themselves 
varied significantly from year to year. 
 A novel methodology to characterize these yearly wind distribution 
uncertainties was therefore developed. 
 Uncertainty propagation models were developed to quantify the resulting 
uncertainties in the farm AEP and COE. 
 The relative uncertainty in the predicted yearly wind distribution was found 
to be as high as 10% (approx.) for the sites considered. 
 The uncertainty in the AEP and COE of an optimized farm layout was 
found to be as high as 4% of their nominal values. 
24
Future Research 
• Future research would investigate the impact of the wind resource 
uncertainties on farm layout planning. 
• Future research should also investigate the interaction of “the 
uncertainties occurring due to year-to-year variations” with “the 
uncertainties introduced by the MCP method”. 
25
Questions 
and 
Comments 
26 
Thank you
UWFLO Cost Model 
• A response surface based cost model is developed using radial basis 
functions (RBFs). 
• The cost in $/per kW installed is expressed as a function of (i) the 
number of turbines (N) in the farm and (ii) the rated power (P) of those 
turbines. 
• Data is used from the DOE Wind and Hydropower Technologies 
program to develop the cost model. 
27
Prediction of 5-year wind distribution 
28
UWFLO Power Generation Model 
 Turbines locations are defined by a 
29 
Cartesian coordinate system 
 Turbine-j is in the influence of the wake 
of Turbine-i, if and only if 
 Effective velocity of wind 
approaching Turbine-j: 
 Power generated by Turbine-j: 
Avian Energy, UK 
 This approach allows us to consider turbines with differing rotor-diameters 
and hub-heights
Wake Model 
30 
 We implement Frandsen’s velocity deficit model 
Wake growth Wake velocity 
a – topography dependent wake-spreading constant 
 Wake merging: Modeled using wake-superposition principle 
developed by Katic et al.: 
Frandsen et al., 2006; Katic et al.,1986
The Solution 
 Economic and timeline constraints limit the feasibility of 
recording detailed onsite wind data over a longer time period. 
 Uncertainties in wind predictions thus remain unavoidable. 
 Therefore, if these uncertainties can at least be accurately 
quantified, a more credible farm resource assessment and a 
reliable farm performance projection/economic evaluation can 
be made. 
31
Motivation 
 One of the key factors restraining the development of wind energy is 
the ill-predictability of the actual power that will be generated. 
 The power generated by a wind farm is a variable quantity that is a 
function of a series of highly uncertain parameters. 
 A majority of these uncertainties are not well understood. 
 Careful modeling of these uncertainties, together with their 
propagation into the overall system, will allow for 
1. More credible wind resource assessment, and 
2. Development of wind farms that have a reliable performance. 
32
Year-to-Year Variations (Offshore Site) 
Zhang et al., 2011 33 
Estimated Wind 
Distribution 
(preceding years’ data) 
Predicted Long Term 
Variation of Wind 
(succeeding years) 
May not be the right 
way to account for 
Deterministic assumption 
wind variations
Jacobian of Popular Univariate Wind Distribution 
Models 
34
Non-Parametric Wind Uncertainty (PWU) Model : 
Concept 
 The variability in the predicted yearly probabilities pi is directly 
35 
Sample # Wind Speed (m/s) Wind Direction (deg) Air Density (kg/m3) 
1 6.50 180 1.245 
2 9.75 90 1.323 
3 3.25 270 1.168 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
4 4.88 135 1.284 
5 11.38 315 1.129 
5 
3 
1 
-1 
-3 
-5 
-7 
-9 
-11 
-13 
-15 
-17 
Sample number, i 
i 
,  
Estimated probability of wind distribution, log(p(U 
i 
)) 
Stochastic models of the wind distribution probabilities 
10-yr MMWD 
2000 MMWD 
2001 MMWD 
2002 MMWD 
2003 MMWD 
2004 MMWD 
2005 MMWD 
2006 MMWD 
2007 MMWD 
2008 MMWD 
2009 MMWD 
sample-1 DPSWC 
sample-2 DPSWC 
sample-3 DPSWC 
sample-4 DPSWC 
sample-5 DPSWC 
represented by a stochastic model. 
 Let us consider an example of the following five sample wind conditions 
DPSWC: Distribution of the yearly probability of the sample wind condition
NPWU Model: Alternative 
 The number of wind condition samples used (np) is significantly higher 
than the number of years for which wind data is available. 
 The estimation of the probability pp thus requires fitting a high 
dimensional data with a significantly small number of data points. 
 Alternatively, we can neglect the cross-covariance terms, thereby 
assuming the sample wind conditions to be independent random variables. 
 The uncertainty in the AEP is then given by: 
ith diagonal element of the cov matrix 
Lindberg, 1999 36
Comparing the Two Uncertainty Models 
37
Uncertainty in the WPD: Validation 
 The uncertainty in the annual WPD can also be readily evaluated by its 
standard deviation over the ten years. 
WPD 
Uncertainty in the predicted WPD 
38 
Reasonably accurate Underestimation Overestimation
Wind Distribution in Wind Power Density 
• WPD of a potential site is given by: 
Wind Probability Distribution 
• Using Monte Carlo integration, this integral equation can be numerically 
expressed as: 
39
Concluding Remarks 
 The parametric model provides a reasonably accurate estimation of the 
uncertainty in the WPD. 
 Further advancement of the non-parametric model is necessary in order to 
provide accurate uncertainty quantification. 
 Significant uncertainties were also observed in the AEP and the COE of a 
wind farm with an optimized layout. 
 Therefore, an exploration of the trade-offs between optimal and reliable 
wind farm design is crucial in wind project planning. 
 Future research should also investigate the interaction of “the uncertainties 
occurring due to year-to-year variations” with “the uncertainties 
introduced by the MCP method”. 
40

WFO_TIERF_2011_Messac

  • 1.
    Exploring and Quantifyingthe Role of Resource Uncertainties in Wind Project Planning Achille Messac#, Souma Chowdhury*, Jie Zhang*, and Luciano Castillo** # Syracuse University, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering * Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Nuclear Engineering **Texas Tech University, Department of Mechanical Engineering 1000 Islands Energy Research Forum Nov 11 – 13, 2011 Alexandria Bay, NY
  • 2.
    Wind Energy -Overview  Currently wind contributes 2.5% of the global electricity consumption.  The growth rate of wind energy has however not been consistent (WWEA report).  One of the primary factors affecting its growth is the variability of the resource itself. 2 www.prairieroots.org
  • 3.
    Uncertainties in WindEnergy Physical uncertainties in wind energy may be broadly classified into: • Long Term Uncertainties: Introduced by (i) the long term variation of wind conditions, (ii) turbine design, and (iii) other environmental, operational and financial factors • Short Term Uncertainties: Introduced by boundary layer turbulence and other flow variations that occur in a small time scale (order of minutes) 3 Long Term Uncertainties Wind Conditions Wind Speed Wind Direction Air Density Environmental Factors Rain/Snow Storms Topography Terrain/Surface Roughness Vegetation Man-made Structures Turbine Performance Component Depreciation Component Replacement Operational Interruptions Turbine Component Breakdown Power Grid Repair Installation of Additional Turbines Economic Factors Changes in Utility Price ($/kWh) Changes in O&M Cost Changes is Govt. Policies Changes in Interest Rates & Insurance Rates
  • 4.
    Variability of WindConditions  The wind speed, the wind direction, and the air density at a given site vary significantly over the course of a year.  The annual distribution of wind conditions also varies from year to year, although the overall pattern remains somewhat similar.  The long term variation of wind conditions is generally represented using probability distribution models.  These probability distribution models can be developed using previous years’ recorded wind data at the site. Zhang et al, 2011 4
  • 5.
    Uncertainties in WindConditions Uncertainty is introduced by:  the assumption that, “The expected distribution of wind in the succeeding years of operation of the wind farm is deterministically equivalent to the wind distribution estimated from preceding years’ data”.  Further uncertainties can also be introduced by the assumptions in the Measure-Correlate-Predict (MCP) method used for long term wind resource modeling. [MCP: It is a method implemented to predict the long term wind data/distribution at the site using short term (1-year) onsite data, and the co-occurring data at nearby meteorological stations (that also have long term data).] 5
  • 6.
    Presentation Outline •Research Objectives • Wind Distribution Modeling • Uncertainties in the Yearly Wind Distribution • Modeling the Wind Uncertainties • Quantifying and Illustrating the Resulting Uncertainties in the farm AEP and COE. • Concluding Remarks 6 AEP: Annual Energy Production; COE: Cost of Energy
  • 7.
    Research Objectives Model the yearly (and long term) joint distribution of wind speed, wind direction, and air density, using recorded site data.  Characterize the uncertainty in the yearly distribution of wind conditions.  Model the propagation of the wind distribution uncertainty into the predicted Annual Energy Production (AEP) and Cost of Energy (COE). 7
  • 8.
  • 9.
    Existing Wind DistributionModels  Popular wind distribution models include variations of Weibull, Lognormal, Rayleigh, Beta, inverse-Gaussian and Gamma distributions. 9  These models can be broadly classified into:  univariate and unimodal distributions of wind speed  bivariate and unimodal distributions of wind speed and wind direction  These wind distribution models make limiting assumptions regarding the correlativity and the modality of the distribution of wind conditions.
  • 10.
    Multivariate and MultimodalWind Distribution (MMWD) Model • MMWD can capture the joint variation of wind speed, wind direction, and air density. • MMWD allows representation of multimodally distributed data. • MMWD is developed using Kernel Density Estimation. • Case studies: 10 26NDSU, North Dakota Agricultural Weather Network, online, 2010. 27NOAA, National Data Buoy Center, online, 2011.
  • 11.
    Kernel Density Estimation 11 Univariate Kernel Density Estimation Multivariate Kernel Density Estimation Optimal Bandwidth Matrix Selection MISE: Minimum Integrated Squared Error
  • 12.
    Wind Distribution Results 12 Onshore Offshore Wind data is observed to be multimodal
  • 13.
    Comparison of DistributionAccuracies  To compare the distributions, we use coefficient of determination, (R2) that is a measure of the agreement between an estimated distribution and the recorded data. 13  Higher the value of R2, better the distribution
  • 14.
    Uncertainties in theYearly Wind Distribution 14
  • 15.
    Year-to-Year Variations (OnshoreSite) Zhang et al., 2011 15 Estimated Wind Distribution (preceding years’ data) Predicted Long Term Variation of Wind (succeeding years) May not be the right way to account for Deterministic assumption wind variations
  • 16.
    Wind Distribution inAnnual Power Generation • Annual Energy Production of a farm is given by: Wind Probability Distribution • This integral equation can be numerically expressed as: 16 Kusiak and Zheng, 2010; Vega, 2008
  • 17.
    Characterizing the Uncertainties In this paper, two different models have been proposed.  Parametric Wind Uncertainty (PWU) Model: We consider the parameters of the wind distribution model to be stochastic - e.g. the k and c parameters in the Weibull distribution.  Non-Parametric Wind Uncertainty (NPWU) Model : We consider the predicted yearly probability of a wind condition itself to be stochastic. 17
  • 18.
    Parametric Wind Uncertainty(PWU) Model  The uncertainty in the parameters of the wind distribution model is represented by their variance (in this paper).  For a mp-parameter wind distribution model, the corresponding uncertainties in the predicted yearly probabilities of the sample wind conditions can be expressed in terms of a covariance matrix Sp as  qk: kth parameter; Sq: Covariance of the distribution parameters;  pi: frequency of the ith sample wind condition; 18
  • 19.
    PWU Model (continued…)  The uncertainty propagating into the AEP is modeled as a function of the uncertainty in the wind distribution.  Subsequently, the uncertainty in the COE can be expressed as Lindberg, 1999 19 where
  • 20.
    NPWU Model: Formulation  The probability of a given wind condition was observed to vary in orders of magnitude from year to year.  To model this variability, a multivariate normal distribution of the logarithms of the predicted yearly wind probabilities is used.  The uncertainty in the predicted yearly wind probabilities is then given by  The uncertainty in the AEP and the COE can be determined as in PWU. 20
  • 21.
    Illustration of theEstimated Uncertainty Uncertainty in the univariate distribution of wind speed: Using NPWU model without cross-covariance terms  For a major portion of the wind distributions, there is approximately 10% uncertainty. 21
  • 22.
    Illustration of theEstimated Uncertainty Uncertainty in the bivariate distribution of wind speed and direction, using NPWU model without cross-covariance terms 22 Uncertainty in Yearly Wind Distribution Wind Distribution Ofnfsshhoorree
  • 23.
    Uncertainty in theFarm Performance • We consider a wind farm comprising 25 GE 1.5MW xle turbines at the onshore site. • Uncertainty is evaluated for the optimized farm layout, adopted from a recent publication*. • The AEP of the optimized wind farm was reported to be 4.4% higher than that of a reference wind farm having a 5x5 array layout. • The relative uncertainties in the AEP and in the COE, estimated using the NPUW model without cross-covariance, are each approximately 4%. *Chowdhury et al. 2011 23
  • 24.
    Concluding Remarks This research developed a distribution model that represents the joint variation of wind speed, wind direction, and air density.  However, the predicted annual distribution of wind conditions themselves varied significantly from year to year.  A novel methodology to characterize these yearly wind distribution uncertainties was therefore developed.  Uncertainty propagation models were developed to quantify the resulting uncertainties in the farm AEP and COE.  The relative uncertainty in the predicted yearly wind distribution was found to be as high as 10% (approx.) for the sites considered.  The uncertainty in the AEP and COE of an optimized farm layout was found to be as high as 4% of their nominal values. 24
  • 25.
    Future Research •Future research would investigate the impact of the wind resource uncertainties on farm layout planning. • Future research should also investigate the interaction of “the uncertainties occurring due to year-to-year variations” with “the uncertainties introduced by the MCP method”. 25
  • 26.
  • 27.
    UWFLO Cost Model • A response surface based cost model is developed using radial basis functions (RBFs). • The cost in $/per kW installed is expressed as a function of (i) the number of turbines (N) in the farm and (ii) the rated power (P) of those turbines. • Data is used from the DOE Wind and Hydropower Technologies program to develop the cost model. 27
  • 28.
    Prediction of 5-yearwind distribution 28
  • 29.
    UWFLO Power GenerationModel  Turbines locations are defined by a 29 Cartesian coordinate system  Turbine-j is in the influence of the wake of Turbine-i, if and only if  Effective velocity of wind approaching Turbine-j:  Power generated by Turbine-j: Avian Energy, UK  This approach allows us to consider turbines with differing rotor-diameters and hub-heights
  • 30.
    Wake Model 30  We implement Frandsen’s velocity deficit model Wake growth Wake velocity a – topography dependent wake-spreading constant  Wake merging: Modeled using wake-superposition principle developed by Katic et al.: Frandsen et al., 2006; Katic et al.,1986
  • 31.
    The Solution Economic and timeline constraints limit the feasibility of recording detailed onsite wind data over a longer time period.  Uncertainties in wind predictions thus remain unavoidable.  Therefore, if these uncertainties can at least be accurately quantified, a more credible farm resource assessment and a reliable farm performance projection/economic evaluation can be made. 31
  • 32.
    Motivation  Oneof the key factors restraining the development of wind energy is the ill-predictability of the actual power that will be generated.  The power generated by a wind farm is a variable quantity that is a function of a series of highly uncertain parameters.  A majority of these uncertainties are not well understood.  Careful modeling of these uncertainties, together with their propagation into the overall system, will allow for 1. More credible wind resource assessment, and 2. Development of wind farms that have a reliable performance. 32
  • 33.
    Year-to-Year Variations (OffshoreSite) Zhang et al., 2011 33 Estimated Wind Distribution (preceding years’ data) Predicted Long Term Variation of Wind (succeeding years) May not be the right way to account for Deterministic assumption wind variations
  • 34.
    Jacobian of PopularUnivariate Wind Distribution Models 34
  • 35.
    Non-Parametric Wind Uncertainty(PWU) Model : Concept  The variability in the predicted yearly probabilities pi is directly 35 Sample # Wind Speed (m/s) Wind Direction (deg) Air Density (kg/m3) 1 6.50 180 1.245 2 9.75 90 1.323 3 3.25 270 1.168 1 2 3 4 5 6 4 4.88 135 1.284 5 11.38 315 1.129 5 3 1 -1 -3 -5 -7 -9 -11 -13 -15 -17 Sample number, i i ,  Estimated probability of wind distribution, log(p(U i )) Stochastic models of the wind distribution probabilities 10-yr MMWD 2000 MMWD 2001 MMWD 2002 MMWD 2003 MMWD 2004 MMWD 2005 MMWD 2006 MMWD 2007 MMWD 2008 MMWD 2009 MMWD sample-1 DPSWC sample-2 DPSWC sample-3 DPSWC sample-4 DPSWC sample-5 DPSWC represented by a stochastic model.  Let us consider an example of the following five sample wind conditions DPSWC: Distribution of the yearly probability of the sample wind condition
  • 36.
    NPWU Model: Alternative  The number of wind condition samples used (np) is significantly higher than the number of years for which wind data is available.  The estimation of the probability pp thus requires fitting a high dimensional data with a significantly small number of data points.  Alternatively, we can neglect the cross-covariance terms, thereby assuming the sample wind conditions to be independent random variables.  The uncertainty in the AEP is then given by: ith diagonal element of the cov matrix Lindberg, 1999 36
  • 37.
    Comparing the TwoUncertainty Models 37
  • 38.
    Uncertainty in theWPD: Validation  The uncertainty in the annual WPD can also be readily evaluated by its standard deviation over the ten years. WPD Uncertainty in the predicted WPD 38 Reasonably accurate Underestimation Overestimation
  • 39.
    Wind Distribution inWind Power Density • WPD of a potential site is given by: Wind Probability Distribution • Using Monte Carlo integration, this integral equation can be numerically expressed as: 39
  • 40.
    Concluding Remarks The parametric model provides a reasonably accurate estimation of the uncertainty in the WPD.  Further advancement of the non-parametric model is necessary in order to provide accurate uncertainty quantification.  Significant uncertainties were also observed in the AEP and the COE of a wind farm with an optimized layout.  Therefore, an exploration of the trade-offs between optimal and reliable wind farm design is crucial in wind project planning.  Future research should also investigate the interaction of “the uncertainties occurring due to year-to-year variations” with “the uncertainties introduced by the MCP method”. 40