This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
As renewable energy sources continue to account for an increasing proportion of Belgium's energy production, decision making in renewable energy production increasingly relies on accurate numerical weather prediction forecasts. For general applications, forecast validation often focuses on direct comparisons to observations for the whole domains of interest, while in this study we assess model performance specifically related to renewable energy productions. We perform extended verification of relevant variables (wind speed, temperature, solar radiation, etc.) from multiple high-resolution deterministic and ensemble weather forecast models operated in Belgium for the period of May 2021 - June 2023. The forecasts are verified with observational datasets collected from on- and offshore weather stations, masts, lidars, and wind farm observations to comprehensively understand the capabilities of the models, making use of various deterministic and probabilistic skill scores. The results show that during lead times up to two days, although verification metrics differ among models, there are systematic errors in their forecasts for different observation sites. Such errors can often be eliminated by post-processing techniques. Therefore, we extend our verification dataset, with post-processed forecasts corrected by several methods including member-by-member and AI-based approaches. The results of this work will lead to an enhanced understanding of current forecasting skills of the operational models, help to evaluate the effectiveness of goal-oriented post-processing methods, and provide a reference for Belgian sustainable energy stakeholders.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meng et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: