Denmark plans to expand offshore wind energy, and to do so, wants to create an artificial island in the North sea. This plan is based on a cost-benefit analysis, which is based on an estimate of how much electricity generation can be expected from wind turbines in that region. Such wind resource estimates use highly resolved wind fields, turbine characteristics as well as their spatial arrangement, but they typically neglect the atmospheric response to the turbines. Each turbine removes kinetic energy from the atmosphere to generate its electricity, so more turbines remove more energy from the atmosphere, leaving a greater impact behind. What this means is that such estimates typically turn out to be too high (see e.g., here), with a greater bias with greater installed capacity, as we have shown for German offshore scenarios, or in a new study just published. So when a colleague asked me about my opinion, I thought this is a good occasion to use our KEBA approach, which takes the atmospheric response into account, and redo the estimate.
Continue reading “The Danish energy island in the North sea: By how much could the atmospheric response to many wind turbines lower the expected yields? Using KEBA to derive a simple, physical answer.” →