in News Departments > FYI
print the content item

DNV KEMA, in collaboration with developers and consultants, has developed a new framework document for wind energy assessments.

Various entities in the Renewable UK Wind Resource Working Group have come together to propose that the wind energy industry adopt a common framework for discussing both energy losses and uncertainties around energy assessments. According to DNV KEMA, the new framework document will lead to more transparency and advancements in the quantification of project losses and uncertainties.

"The loss and uncertainty framework will aid the consultants when performing due diligence on energy assessments completed by other leading consultants," explains Ruben Menezes, project manager for the framework and consultant at DNV KEMA renewable energy services in London. “All participants agree to report on their energy assessments in accordance to this framework.”

Menezes says a typical wind resource and energy yield assessment derives gross generation from a site’s wind speed frequency distribution and a turbine’s power curve. Technical loss factors are then applied to derive expected net energy generation. Example loss factors include equipment availability, wake losses, icing losses and electrical line losses.

An uncertainty analysis is then conducted to determine the probability distribution of net energy production. Example uncertainty categories include those associated with wind speed measurement, wind shear extrapolation, modeling, and loss assumptions.

“However, without standard definitions for such loss factors and uncertainty categories, it is difficult to compare studies prepared by different consultants,” Menezes says. “Standardized definitions will not only facilitate direct comparison of energy estimates among different consulting studies; it will lead to more productive dialog and, ultimately, improved understanding of technical losses and uncertainties.”

According to Menezes, it is not uncommon for more than one energy assessment to be prepared for a proposed wind power facility.

“Often, the results of the assessments will have material differences, and these differences typically include different assumptions regarding technical losses used to derive net energy generation from gross energy generation,” he says. “However, when both the definition of a loss and the value of the loss differ, direct comparisons are difficult to make.

“Compounding this challenge is the use of different uncertainty categories and their definitions, making it difficult to interpret and compare the results of different reports at the various probability levels,” Menezes continues. “Developers, investors and the consultants that support them will be able to focus on actual differences between assessments if assessments use a common set of loss and uncertainty definitions.”

The framework document was developed in collaboration with the following participants: Arcus, Dulas, Natural Power, Oldbaum, Prevailing Wind Farm Analysis, Sgurr Energy, SKM, Vattenfall and Wind Prospect.


Trachte Inc._id1770
Latest Top Stories

Why States Should Adopt A Renewable Portfolio Standard

A new study analyzes the potential benefits of state renewable energy mandates, as well as recommends what such policies should include.


Sen. Reid Vows To Bring Wind PTC To A Vote By Year's End

Nevada's senior senator provides some encouragement to wind industry advocates during his annual Clean Energy Summit.


Steadily, Wind Turbine OEMs Resume R&D Investment

An increased commitment to research and development will likely lead to wind energy innovation - not to mention a likely increase in patent-protected technology.


Quebec Government Postpones Wind Power RFP; No New Date Scheduled

The request for proposals (RFP) is part of an overall 800 MW wind power tranche that will serve as a bridge to the next phase in the province's energy future.


Setting The Record Straight: How Many Birds Do Wind Turbines Really Kill?

Several peer-reviewed studies are more or less in agreement with avian mortality rates caused by wind turbines. However, one study, which is wildly off from the others, is most often cited in the media. Why?

Renewable NRG_id1934
Canwea_id1984
Future Energy_id2008
UnitedEquip_id1995