From CSIRO Australia
New energy in search for future wind
Scientists are taking the first steps to improve estimates of long-term wind speed changes for the fast-growing wind energy sector. The research is intended to identify the risks for generators in a changing climate.
Some recent international studies have shown a decrease in wind speeds in several parts of the globe, including across Australia. However, more recent results by CSIRO show that Australia’s average wind speed is actually increasing.
Scientists at CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research have analysed wind speed observations to understand the causes of variations in near-surface wind and explore long-term wind speed trends over Australia.
“We have a good picture of wind energy availability across Australia from previous CSIRO wind mapping and, with the growth of wind farms, there is an emerging need to understand how climate change can affect the wind resource,” says Dr Alberto Troccoli, lead author of the paper published in the Journal of Climate.
“Wind power production is expected to increase greatly over the coming years and the associated electricity system will be subject to variations of several hundred megawatts – depending on wind availability.
“The ability to quantify with accuracy these long-term variations is essential to the sector from an economic point of view,” he said.
The conjunction of energy and meteorology is the subject of an international conference on the Gold Coast in November – http://www.icem2011.org/index.html
Dr Troccoli said that averaged across Australia wind speeds measured at a height of 10 metres had increased by 0.69% per annum compared to a decline of 0.36% per annum for wind speeds measured at 2m height, both over the 1989-2006 period.
Accurate estimates of long-term trends of wind speed provide a useful indicator for circulation changes in the atmosphere and are invaluable for the planning and financing of sectors such as wind energy.
“The potential for increasing the efficiency of energy operations by using quality weather and climate information is therefore apparent and one of the first steps is the standardisation of wind recording stations.
” Wind observations, like other meteorological variables, are sensitive to the conditions in which they are observed – for example, where the instrumentation sits relative to topographical features, vegetation and urban developments.”
The team found that the wind speed trends over Australia are sensitive to the height of the station, with winds measured at 10m displaying an opposite and positive trend to that reported by a previous study which analysed only winds measured at 2m.
Light winds measured at 10m, a height that represents better the free atmospheric flow, tend to increase more rapidly than the average, whereas strong winds increase less rapidly than the average winds. Light and strong wind measured at a height of 2m tend to vary in line with the average winds.
“Our work shows a number of challenges with the consistency of the observations during their period of operation and between sites across Australia.
“The quality of future wind observational datasets will depend on having consistency between sites, particularly with respect to measurement procedure, maintenance of instrumentation, and detailed records of the site history,” Dr Troccoli said.
He said the work has implications for a variety of sectors beyond wind energy including building construction, coastal erosion, and evaporation rates.
The research was partly funded by a grant from the Australian Climate Change Science Program supported by the Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dr Troccoli said that averaged across Australia wind speeds measured at a height of 10 metres had increased by 0.69% per annum compared to a decline of 0.36% per annum for wind speeds measured at 2m height
The good Dr has found a proxy for tree height in a locality.
Would this increased wind be related to higher La Nino winds? Or is Oz too far away to be affected?
Somebody give Dr Troccoli a banana, please! I don’t want him wasting any more of my hard earned tax dollars on this tripe.
I would be very interested as an engineer to know how sub 1% accuracies are possible with anemometer technologies available now let alone 18 years ago allowing for drift,temperature coefficient and inherent non-linearity. But I suppose measurement accuracy has never been allowed to get in the way of ” climate science”.
Baron
Just 1 thing with this analysis:
Tower height 69m
Blade length 40m
So this 10m analysis still falls 19m short of blade tip & 59m short of blade centre?
(Info from Wonthaggi Wind Farm ‘Green Power’ brochure)
Remember the CSIRO were involved with the introduction of the can toad. I’d take any study/paper published by them with pinch of salt.
“Dr Troccoli said that averaged across Australia wind speeds measured at a height of 10 metres had increased by 0.69% per annum compared to a decline of 0.36% per annum for wind speeds measured at 2m height, both over the 1989-2006 period.”
Not only are thermometers subject to UHI, the anemometers have positional errors too as buildings are erected.
“The research was partly funded by a grant from the Australian Climate Change Science Program supported by the Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.”
Like any good consultant, the good doctor provides the appropriate analysis that the organisations providing the money are seeking. Waste of good bits and bytes!
First sentence is repeated.
The drums sound louder tonight.
Thrrmm… thrrmm.
Do you think they’re coming closer?
Thrrmm…thrrmm.
(Extract from “Voodoo Science” by S.Keptick.)
I thought climate change was measured over 30 years?
Not 17 years like in this study. (1989-2006)?
And why on earth leave out the 4 last years up to 2011?
Because that is not going to produce the result the buyers of this study is kloning for?
Are the results ENSO and PDO adjusted?
If not they are measuring changes in jetstreams due to changes in the larger circulation systems on Earth.
In Norway the last 4-5 winters have become colder, drier and less wind, due to more High’s.
And the summers have become colder, wetter and windier, due to more low’s.
“The research was partly funded by a grant from the Australian Climate Change Science Program supported by the Australian Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.”
…………… Kinda says it all. Crony corporatism. Global Socialism. Corrupt politics cavorting as science, all done using our money. The Labor Party’s political skillbase, after all, is only a morally bankrupt ex Union elite with a credit card drawing endlessly on Union members money….. They simply swap it for a credit card endlessly drawing on the Australian taxpayer instead.
They may buy prostitutes on the weekends, but they screw Australia every day.
It has long been known that temperature is sensitive to equipment and to height above ground.
http://www.geoffstuff.com/Jane%20Warne%20thermometry.pdf
“However it needs to be born in mind that an aspirated screen measures an integrated vertical column of air while a non aspirated screen measure a horizontal slice of the air. In the situation where a strong vertical gradient of temperature exists this can result in large discrepancies. These conditions could not be tested in this study. Also the difference of an aspirated screen to
the small Stevenson screen will be greatest at low wind speed.”
To the extent that wind velocity/vector shows variations, so would one expect temperature to do likewise, just because the wind properties are changing over time.
Where do these academic ne’er-do-wells come from? Big High moving in over UK so the much warmer weather [Indian Summer] promised for later this week will have little contribution from wind farms to supply air con electricity. Then later on this year when it will be bitterly cold the wind farms will not help heat our homes as they will be static once again! As for wind maps………Doh!
“Whom the gods would destroy they first make insane”. Wind farms are a monument on the road to civilizational collapse.
The notion of ‘average wind speed’ across an entire continent is meaningless, whatever height you choose.
My taxes at work, again. Sigh.
Ah, don’t worry, they’ll make a model to account for it, and project wind speed to ten decimal places…all at an altitude below that of a wind turbine. Then they can add in the parabolic boundary-layer velocity fudge factor to show that indeed, once all the wind farms are built, CO2 will decrease, and wind speeds will eventually pick up in areas of presently-becalmed bird-dicers. Or, at least, that’s as plausible an outcome as what is being presented here.
The notion of ‘average wind speed’ across an entire continent is meaningless, whatever height you choose.
Of course it is, Johanna is absolutely right. This is all particularly silly!
Brett_McS (@Brett_McS) says: (September 26, 2011 at 10:58 pm) “Wind farms are a monument on the road to civilizational collapse.”
Hope it don’t hit collapse, Brett… but a very nice, albeit sobering, line.
“Wind power production is expected to increase greatly over the coming years…”
Boy, I hope not.
Australians in general from my expertience…. need to go back to secondary school and learn some maths, logic, science, reading and writing etc…. LOL Would not trust CSIRO as far as you could through their 2000 ton building haha
all the eggs may be moving into a single basket:
27 Sept: WSJ: Goldman Sachs to buy majority stake in ReNew Wind Power
Goldman Sachs has invested more than $2 billion through private equity and its own funds in India since 2006, the statement added. The recipients included vehicle maker Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd and TVS Logistics…
http://www.livemint.com/2011/09/26235718/Goldman-Sachs-to-buy-majority.html?h=B
15 Sept: UK Independent: SSE ditches nuclear power for gas, wind and biomass
Dealing a blow to government plans to ramp up nuclear generation, SSE has pulled out of a joint venture with France’s GDF Suez and Spain’s Iberdrola that would have involved it in atomic energy for the first time.
SSE has sold its 25 per cent stake to its partners in the NuGeneration consortium, which will develop two or three 1.6GW reactors at Sellafield…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/sse-ditches-nuclear-power-for-gas-wind-and-biomass-2360140.html
24 Sept: AFP: Japan plans floating wind farm near nuclear plant
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hpN6NBbtjIRf-vxyP8dlcOpa_2tg?docId=CNG.bd52ba8ffae71e0859d1fbbcebf08d3e.2b1
23 Sept: Houston Business Journal: Wind power companies lack strategies in place for disposal of aging turbines
The old parts will need to be disposed of, but few companies have created end-of-life strategies for aging wind turbines, which could lead to logistical problems down the road, said Richard Williams, president of Houston-based Shell WindEnergy Inc…
http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/print-edition/2011/09/23/wind-power-companies-lack-strategies.html
Am I being stupid.
Firstly why would the average wind speed at 10 m increase by 0.69% and decrease by 0.3 % at 2m height?
Secondly given the instrumentation used and their accuracy do the increases in fact show there has been no increase?
Wind turbine energy production has a very non-linear response to wind speed. As mentioned, wind vary with height. The sustained wind speed at the height of the proposed wind tubine is the issue, as Steve 9:27 pm pointed out.
But wait! There’s more!
Big turbines take up about 80 acres each (despite the lies the state may try to tell you). Consequently, the amount of area with these sustained wind speeds must be known, otherwise, there may not be enough wind available for all of the turbines you might want to construct. If you want to put a dent in the energy needs of a large population, you’ll need to build many thousands, not dozens or hundreds.
In California, 100 m wind speed maps make clear there is not enough land area with the needed sustained winds to construct the numbers of wind turbines you need. The capacity factor is about 30% being VERY generous, so you have to construct about 3x the turbine nameplate capacity, and probably store what you make to use when you need it. The turbines California would need will have to be constructed off shore. To supply only 10% of our power needs, 20,000 1.5 MW turbines will require 2500 square miles of area. The levelized cost of marine wind is much higher than the already expensive land-based wind power, because everything has to be corrosion resistant.
The entire concept is fatally flawed. They can’t be built. They can’t be operated and maintained. We can’t afford the power they produce.
Green power is energy poverty.
The actual abstract says:
So the press release is a bit hyped, isn’t it?
It also states:
and it founds only a qualitative link:
-0.10 ±0.03% Amazing accuracy, but meaningless, considering that the best quality wind monitor we have at present has an accuracy of 1%, much less in 1948!
The synchrocrat cup anemometer used by CSIRO has an uncernainty of ±1.5 m/s (http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/IMOP/WebPortal-AWS/Tests/ITR633.pdf)
3 months == “minimal gap” ……
You cannot get a ±0.03% from reanalysis
May be Pielke jr should send his paper to the JoC, will be published at Trenberth speed records
Neil Gibson says:
September 26, 2011 at 9:21 pm
I would be very interested as an engineer to know how sub 1% accuracies are possible with anemometer technologies available
———
It’s due to a bit of advanced mathematics called averaging. The precision of one anenometer is say 10%. The precision of 100 anemometers is 1/sqrt(100) * 10% = 1%. Now extend that principle to trends.
Also since we are talking trends, accuracy is not relevant, precision and reproducability is.
So please move the goal posts and requibble.
Sigh!!! I just don’t know what they teach the younger generation of engineers these days.