C. Hallgren, J. Aird, S. Ivanell, H. Körnich, V. Vakkari, R. Barthelmie, S. Pryor, E. Sahlée
{"title":"Machine learning methods to improve spatial predictions of coastal wind speed profiles and low-level jets using single-level ERA5 data","authors":"C. Hallgren, J. Aird, S. Ivanell, H. Körnich, V. Vakkari, R. Barthelmie, S. Pryor, E. Sahlée","doi":"10.5194/wes-9-821-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Observations of the wind speed at heights relevant for wind power are sparse, especially offshore, but with emerging aid from advanced statistical methods, it may be possible to derive information regarding wind profiles using surface observations. In this study, two machine learning (ML) methods are developed for predictions of (1) coastal wind speed profiles and (2) low-level jets (LLJs) at three locations of high relevance to offshore wind energy deployment: the US Northeastern Atlantic Coastal Zone, the North Sea, and the Baltic Sea. The ML models are trained on multiple years of lidar profiles and utilize single-level ERA5 variables as input. The models output spatial predictions of coastal wind speed profiles and LLJ occurrence. A suite of nine ERA5 variables are considered for use in the study due to their physics-based relevance in coastal wind speed profile genesis and the possibility to observe these variables in real-time via measurements. The wind speed at 10 ma.s.l. and the surface sensible heat flux are shown to have the highest importance for both wind speed profile and LLJ predictions. Wind speed profile predictions output by the ML models exhibit similar root mean squared error (RMSE) with respect to observations as is found for ERA5 output. At typical hub heights, the ML models show lower RMSE than ERA5 indicating approximately 5 % RMSE reduction. LLJ identification scores are evaluated using the symmetric extremal dependence index (SEDI). LLJ predictions from the ML models outperform predictions from ERA5, demonstrating markedly higher SEDIs. However, optimization utilizing the SEDI results in a higher number of false alarms when compared to ERA5.\n","PeriodicalId":46540,"journal":{"name":"Wind Energy Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wind Energy Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/wes-9-821-2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract. Observations of the wind speed at heights relevant for wind power are sparse, especially offshore, but with emerging aid from advanced statistical methods, it may be possible to derive information regarding wind profiles using surface observations. In this study, two machine learning (ML) methods are developed for predictions of (1) coastal wind speed profiles and (2) low-level jets (LLJs) at three locations of high relevance to offshore wind energy deployment: the US Northeastern Atlantic Coastal Zone, the North Sea, and the Baltic Sea. The ML models are trained on multiple years of lidar profiles and utilize single-level ERA5 variables as input. The models output spatial predictions of coastal wind speed profiles and LLJ occurrence. A suite of nine ERA5 variables are considered for use in the study due to their physics-based relevance in coastal wind speed profile genesis and the possibility to observe these variables in real-time via measurements. The wind speed at 10 ma.s.l. and the surface sensible heat flux are shown to have the highest importance for both wind speed profile and LLJ predictions. Wind speed profile predictions output by the ML models exhibit similar root mean squared error (RMSE) with respect to observations as is found for ERA5 output. At typical hub heights, the ML models show lower RMSE than ERA5 indicating approximately 5 % RMSE reduction. LLJ identification scores are evaluated using the symmetric extremal dependence index (SEDI). LLJ predictions from the ML models outperform predictions from ERA5, demonstrating markedly higher SEDIs. However, optimization utilizing the SEDI results in a higher number of false alarms when compared to ERA5.