PARK - Main Result Calculation: PARK calculation (5 x 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGATION) N.O. Jensen (RISØ/EMD)

Similar documents
WindPRO version Nov 2012 Project:

Site Assessment Report. Wind farm: Ascog Farm (GB)

Torrild - WindSIM Case study

WindPRO version Jan 2011 Printed/Page :55 / 1. SHADOW - Main Result

Wind Project Siting & Resource Assessment

windnavigator Site Analyst Report

Measured wake losses By Per Nielsen

Datum Projectnummer

HOUTEN WIND FARM WIND RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

8 SHADOW FLICKER 8.1 INTRODUCTION 8.2 RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

windpro WP A15-Lingewaard WTGs Shadow receptor-input

The Wind Resource: Prospecting for Good Sites

Advanced pre and post-processing in Windsim

NordFoU: External Influences on Spray Patterns (EPAS) Report 16: Wind exposure on the test road at Bygholm

Energy Output. Outline. Characterizing Wind Variability. Characterizing Wind Variability 3/7/2015. for Wind Power Management

Power curves - use of spinner anemometry. Troels Friis Pedersen DTU Wind Energy Professor

Increased Project Bankability : Thailand's First Ground-Based LiDAR Wind Measurement Campaign

7 th International Conference on Wind Turbine Noise Rotterdam 2 nd to 5 th May 2017

COLLECTOR WIND FARM SHADOW FLICKER ASSESSMENT

WIND DATA REPORT. Paxton, MA

Wind Farm Blockage: Searching for Suitable Validation Data

3D Nacelle Mounted Lidar in Complex Terrain

New IEC and Site Conditions in Reality

Why does T7 underperform? Individual turbine performance relative to preconstruction estimates.

Gorge Wind Characteristics in Mountainous Area in South-West China Based on Field Measurement

Outline. Wind Turbine Siting. Roughness. Wind Farm Design 4/7/2015

Bankable Wind Resource Assessment

Wind Resource Assessment Østerild National Test Centre for Large Wind Turbines

Shorter wind measurement campaigns Re-thinking with LiDAR

Wake effects at Horns Rev and their influence on energy production. Kraftværksvej 53 Frederiksborgvej 399. Ph.: Ph.

Predicting climate conditions for turbine performance

WindPRO version Jan 2011 Printed/Page :09 / 1. SHADOW - Main Result

Wave Energy Resources Assessment for the China Sea Based on AVISO Altimeter and ERA Reanalysis Data (ID:10412)

Site Description: LOCATION DETAILS Report Prepared By: Tower Site Report Date

Background Preliminary Review... 3

Wind farm performance

On the use of rotor equivalent wind speed to improve CFD wind resource mapping. Yavor V. Hristov, PhD Plant Performance and Modeling Vestas TSS

July Interim Report. National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE) Wind Resource Assessment & Offshore Unit Chennai, India.

Site Description: Tower Site

Investigation on Deep-Array Wake Losses Under Stable Atmospheric Conditions

Scoping analysis of the potential yield of the Hollandse Kust (noord) wind farm and the influence on the existing wind farms in the proximity

Computational Fluid Dynamics

Saint Mary s, Alaska Wind Resource Report (for Pitka s Point and Saint Mary s met towers)

Wind Farm Power Performance Test, in the scope of the IEC

Wind Data Verification Report Arriga 50m

Wind Resource Assessment for FALSE PASS, ALASKA Site # 2399 Date last modified: 7/20/2005 Prepared by: Mia Devine

WindProspector TM Lockheed Martin Corporation

Rotor Average wind speed for power curve performance. Ioannis Antoniou (LAC), Jochen Cleve (LAC), Apostolos Piperas (LAC)

Analyses of 03 OP-FTIR monitoring results

Draft Kivalina Wind Resource Report

Hollandse Kust (zuid) Wind resource assessment. 17 January 2017 Anthony Crockford

Chart Discussion: Fri-25-May-2018 Rainfall Last Week

Control Strategies for operation of pitch regulated turbines above cut-out wind speeds

WIND DATA REPORT. Mt. Lincoln Pelham, MA

Background noise maps

Meteorological Measurements OWEZ

Scoping analysis of the potential yield of the Hollandse Kust (zuid) wind farm sites and the influence on the existing wind farms in the proximity

Ris0-I-668(EN) PARK- User's Guide. A PC-program for calculation of wind turbine park performance. Peter Sanderhoff

RESOURCE DECREASE BY LARGE SCALE WIND FARMING

Meteorological Measurements OWEZ

Investigating Wind Flow properties in Complex Terrain using 3 Lidars and a Meteorological Mast. Dimitri Foussekis

MULTI-WTG PERFORMANCE OFFSHORE, USING A SINGLE SCANNING DOPPLER LIDAR

Global Flow Solutions Mark Zagar, Cheng Hu-Hu, Yavor Hristov, Søren Holm Mogensen, Line Gulstad Vestas Wind & Site Competence Centre, Technology R&D

Chart Discussion: Fri-15-Jun-2018 Rainfall Last Week

Session 2a: Wind power spatial planning techniques. IRENA Global Atlas Spatial planning techniques 2-day seminar

Design Criteria Data

Design Criteria Data

Session 2: Wind power spatial planning techniques

Design Criteria Data

On- and Offshore Assessment of the ZephIR Wind-LiDAR

WIND DATA REPORT. Swan s Island, ME

Buckland Wind Resource Report

Urban Environmental Climate Maps for Urban Planning Considering Urban Heat Island Mitigation in Hiroshima

Comparison of flow models

3D Turbulence at the Offshore Wind Farm Egmond aan Zee J.W. Wagenaar P.J. Eecen

Lake Michigan Wind Assessment Project Data Summary and Analysis: October 2012

Yellowknife Area Wind Potential

Kodiak, Alaska Site 1 Wind Resource Report for Kodiak Electric Association

Windcube FCR measurements

Validation of Measurements from a ZephIR Lidar

Wind resource assessment over a complex terrain covered by forest using CFD simulations of neutral atmospheric boundary layer with OpenFOAM

CORRELATION EFFECTS IN THE FIELD CLASSIFICATION OF GROUND BASED REMOTE WIND SENSORS

Executive Summary of Accuracy for WINDCUBE 200S

MEMO CC: Summary. ESMWT16419: _MEM_RVO_HKZ floating LiDAR uncertainty_v3.docx 1/8

Wind Turbine Noise Measurements How are Results influenced by different Methods of deriving Wind Speeds? Sylvia Broneske

Wind Resource Assessment for NOME (ANVIL MOUNTAIN), ALASKA Date last modified: 5/22/06 Compiled by: Cliff Dolchok

Wind statistics offshore based on satellite images

Stefan Emeis

Inuvik Wind Monitoring Update 2016

Matrix-analog measure-cerrelatepredict

IMPLICATIONS OF THE WEIBULL K FACTOR IN RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

WIND DATA REPORT. Bishop and Clerks

Yawing and performance of an offshore wind farm

Modelling and Assessment of Marine Renewable Energy Resources. Andrew Cornett Canadian Hydraulics Centre National Research Council Canada May 2008

Site Summary. Wind Resource Summary. Wind Resource Assessment For King Cove Date Last Modified: 8/6/2013 By: Rich Stromberg & Holly Ganser

Remote sensing standards: their current status and significance for offshore projects

WIND DATA REPORT. Mt. Tom

Strategic Advice about Floating LiDAR Campaigns. Borssele offshore wind farm

Modelling Wind for Wind Farm Layout Optimization Using Joint Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction

WIND DATA REPORT. Ragged Mt Maine

Transcription:

PRK - Main Result Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION) Wake Model N.O. Jensen (RISØ/EMD) Calculation Settings ir density calculation mode Result for WTG at hub altitude ir density relative to standard Hub altitude above sea level (asl) nnual mean temperature at hub alt. Pressure at WTGs Individual per WTG 1,226 kg/m³ to 1,226 kg/m³ 1,1 % to 1,1 % 172,5 m to 176, m 8,8 C to 8,8 C 991,9 hpa to 992, hpa Wake Model Parameters Terrain type Wake decay constant HH:15m Mixed farmland 59 Displacement heights from objects Wake calculation settings ngle [ ] Wind speed start end step start end step,5 6 1,,5,5 1, Wind statistics NL Windmeetmast Ressen (1 yr) (Regression MCP using MERR_basic_E6.1_N52. (5) (1)).wws WsP version WsP 11 Version 11.2.62 Scale 1:25. Site Data WTG Key results for height m above ground level Terrain Dutch Stereo-RD/NP 2 X (east) Y (north) Name of wind distribution Type 19.17 Wind energy Mean wind speed Equivalent roughness [kwh/m²] WsP (WsP 11 Version 11.2.62).77 7,7 1,7.8 WsP object Calculated nnual Energy for Wind Farm WTG combination Wind farm Specific results ) Result Result-11,6% GROSS (no loss) Park Capacity Mean WTG Full load Mean wind speed PRK Free WTGs efficiency factor result hours @hub height [h/y] [h/y] [h/y] [h/y] [Hours/year] 87.79,9 77.57,9 9.6,8 9,2 15.51,2.879 7,7 ) Based on Result-11,6% Calculated nnual Energy for each of 5 new WTGs with total 2 rated power WTG type Links Valid Manufact. Type-generator 1 2 5 VESTS VESTS VESTS VESTS VESTS V15-.2 V15-.2 V15-.2 V15-.2 V15-.2 (SW)-. (SW)-. (SW)-. (SW)-. (SW)-. Power curve Power, Rotor Hub Creator Name rated diameter height......2.2.2.2.2 nnual Energy Park Result Result-11,6% Efficiency [h] 18.18,8 17.71,7 17.227,9 17.298,7 17.82,9 [h] 15.929 15.57 15.229 15.292 15.76 95,8 92, 91,9 91,8 9,88 Free mean wind speed 7,65 7,65 7,66 7,67 7,69 WTG siting 1 2 5 Dutch Stereo-RD/NP 2 X (east) Y (north) Z Row data/description 192.19.79 1 WT1 192.7.778 WT2 19.17.8 7, WT 19.561.81 6,5 WT 19.975.858 7,7 WT5.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 1

PRK - Production nalysis Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION)WTG: ll new WTGs, ir density 1,226 kg/m³ Directional nalysis Sector Roughness based energy +Increase due to hills -Decrease due to array losses Resulting energy Specific energy Specific energy Increase due to hills Decrease due to array losses Utilization Operational Full Load Equivalent [h] [h] [h] [h] [kwh/m²] [kwh/kw] [Hours/year] [Hours/year] N 1 NNE 2 ENE E ESE 5 SSE 6S 7 SSW 8 WSW 9W 1 WNW 11 NNW Total 2.82,.56, 8.56,9 6.61,9.759,6.127, 8.52, 17.672, 19.665,9 1.92, 6.,8 2.81,5 9.95-28,6-25,5-25,6-1,2-15, -26,6-5,2-7, -8,2-1,9-19,9-21,8-5,2 59, 2.72, 8,2 778,9.76,2 1, 6.85,9 2.8,5.5,8 7.972,.156,.76,1.1, 8.99,1 17.62, 18.88,8 7.8, 5.97,5 2.792,7 87.79,9 99.87-1, -,7 -, -,2 -, -,6 -,6 -, -,2 -,1 -, -,8 -,7 6, 7,,2, 28,2,2 7,25 7,6 6,6, 22, 7, 2,9 27, 22,6 19,9 17, 29,9,9 2, 9 818 62 9 9 717 1.21 1.89 9 589 7 8.59 1 177 99 28 187 25 2 88 92 92 299 1.87.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 2

PRK - Power Curve nalysis Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION)WTG: 1 - VESTS V15-.2 (SW) 15.!O!.2, Hub height: m Name: Source:.2 Document no.: 67-767 V7 Source/Date Created by 1-11-217 Created Edited Stop wind speed Power control CT curve type Generator type Specific power kw/m² 12-12-217 12-12-217 25, Pitch Standard pitch Variable,2 HP curve comparison - te: For standard air density and weibull k parameter = 2 Vmean HP value Pitch, variable speed (21) [h] VESTS V15-.2 (SW) 15.!O!.2 [h] Check value 5 6 7 8 9 1 8.2 12.26 15.76 18.78 21.12 22.991 8.757 12.7 16.76 19. 21.86 2.62 - - - - - - The table shows comparison between annual energy production calculated on basis of simplified "HP-curves" which assume that all WTGs performs quite similar - only specific power loading (kw/m^2) and single/dual speed or stall/pitch decides the calculated values. Productions are without wake losses. For further details, ask at the Danish Energy gency for project report J.nr. 51171/-16 or see manual chapter.5.2. The method is refined in EMD report "2 Detailed Case Studies comparing Project Design Calculations and actual Energy Productions for Wind Energy Projects worldwide", jan 2. Use the table to evaluate if the given power curve is reasonable - if the check value are lower than -5%, the power curve probably is too optimistic due to uncertainty in power curve measurement. Power curve Power, Efficiency and energy vs. wind speed Original data, ir density: 1,225 kg/m³ Wind speed Power Ce Wind speed Ct curve, 81,,28 1,,1, 285,,1 2,,1 5, 597,,,,1 6, 1.62,,5,,8 7, 1.79,,6 5,,82 2.55,,6 6,,8 9,.5, 7,,79 1.,7,72 11,.191,,29 9,,66 12,.2,22 1,59 1,.2,18 11,,5 1,.2,1 12,,6 15,.2,11 1, 16,.2 9 1,, 17,.2 8 15,,28 1.2 7 16,,2 19,.2 6 17,,2 2.2 5 1,16 21,.87 19,,1 22,.75, 2,12 2, 1.85, 1 21,,12 2, 1.2 1 22,,11 2,,11 2,,1 Data used in calculation, ir density: 1,226 kg/m³ method (adjusted IEC method, improved to match turbine control) <RECOMMENDED> Wind speed 1, 2,,, 5, 6, 7, 9, 1 11, 12, 1, 1, 15, 16, 17, 1 19, 2 21, 22, 2, 2, 25,.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk Power 81, 285, 597, 1.62, 1.79, 2.55,.5..191,.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.2.87.75, 1.85, 1.2 1.2 Ce,28,1,,5,6,6,,7,29,22,18,1,11 9 8 7 6 5 1 1 1 Interval,5-1,5 1,5-2,5 2,5-,5,5-,5,5-5,5 5,5-6,5 6,5-7,5 7,5-8,5 8,5-9,5 9,5-1,5 1,5-11,5 11,5-12,5 12,5-1,5 1,5-1,5 1,5-15,5 15,5-16,5 16,5-17,5 17,5-18,5 18,5-19,5 19,5-2,5 2,5-21,5 21,5-22,5 22,5-2,5 2,5-2,5 2,5-25,5 Energy cc.energy Relative [h] [h] 5,9 5,9, 226,2 281,1 1,6 55, 826,1,6 1.,7 1.86,8 1, 1.65,8.51,6 19,5 2.267,8 5.782, 2,1 2.61, 8.1,7 6,7 2.551, 1.96,8 6,9 2.122, 1.87,1 72,6 1.6,5 1.69,6 81,5 1.19,5 15.8,1 87,9 79,5 16.6,6 92, 51,8 17.166, 95, 5,1 17.511, 97,2 216,9 17.728, 98, 11,9 17.86,2 99,1 77,5 17.97,7 99,5,2 17.98,9 99,8 22,5 18.,5 99,9 1, 18.1,8 1,6 18.17, 1 1,1 18.18,5 1, 18.18,8 1 1-12-217 1:56 /

PRK - Terrain Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION)Site Data: - WsP object Obstacles: Obstacles used Roughness: Terrain data files used in calculation: C:\WindPro.1\Projects\\ROUGHNESSLINE.wpo Min X: 161.65, Max X: 22.1, Min Y: 2.877, Max Y: 66.578, Width: 62.777 m, Height: 6.71 m Orography: Terrain data files used in calculation: C:\WindPro.1\Projects\\_EMDGrid_.wpg Min X: 178.26, Max X: 28.6, Min Y: 19.75, Max Y: 9.92, Width:.2 m, Height:.27 m.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 /

PRK - Wind Data nalysis Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION)Wind data: - WsP object; Hub height: Site coordinates Weibull Data Dutch Stereo-RD/NP 2 Current site Reference: Roughness class 1 East: 19.17 rth:.8 Sector Wind kfrequency kfrequency WT parameter speed parameter parameter parameter Wind statistics N 6,6 (1)).wws 5,88 2,18,7 7,2 2,282,6 NL Windmeetmast Ressen (1 yr) (Regression MCP using MERR_basic_E6.1_N52. (5) 1 NNE 2 ENE E ESE 5 SSE 6S 7 SSW 8 WSW 9W 1 WNW 11 NNW ll.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 7,1 9 7,99 7,6 8,1 8,81 9,85 9,8 9,1 6,8 8,65 6, 7,18 7,1 6,8 7,19 7,81 8,7 8,72 9 7,11 6, 7,66 2,75 2,561 2,98 5 2,627 2,55 2,51 2,291 2,7 2,26 2,17 2,291 5,1 9,7 7,6,7,7 8,5 15,6 17,6 1,7 7,, 1 7,5 8,1 8,7 7,8 8,8 9,22 1 1,6 9,71 8,7 7,71 9,17 1-12-217 1:56 / 5 2,71 2,55 86 7 2,629 2,56 2,55 2,297 2,9 2,9 2,167 2,6 5, 9,5 7,7,7,6 8,2 15, 17,8 1,9 7,1,5 1

PRK - Park power curve Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT Power Wind Free Park N NNE ENE E speed WTGs WTGs,5 1,5 2,5,5 85 862 68,5 2.25 1.96 2.25 2.25 1.972 1.25 5,5.18.658.18.18.69 2.159 6,5 6.928 6.98 6.928 6.928 6.17.51 7,5 1.65 9.5 1.65 1.65 9.55 5.58 8,5 15.8 1.1 15.8 15.8 1.76 8.25 9,5 18.7 17.15 18.7 18.7 17.622 11.7 1,5 2.57 19.21 2.572 2.572 2.1 1.57 11,5 2.978 2.2 2.978 2.978 2.82 17.15 12,5 21. 2.62 21. 21. 2.986 19.6 1,5 21. 2.876 21. 21. 21. 2.22 1,5 21. 2.981 21. 21. 21. 2.898 15,5 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.998 16,5 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 17,5 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 18,5 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 19,5 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2,5 2.175 2.21 2.175 2.175 2. 2.77 21,5 19.8 19.19 19.8 19.8 19.11 19.765 22,5 1.875 1.779 1.875 1.875 1.791 17.8 2,5 7.72 8.528 7.72 7.72 8.8 11.651 2,5 6.15 6.628 6.15 6.15 6. 7.556 25,5 26,5 27,5 28,5 29,5 CORR + MITIGTION) ESE SSE S SSW WSW W WNW NNW 91 2.196.1 6.9 1.598 1.967 18.715 2.566 2.977 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.18 19.9 1.9 7.728 6.15 2.25.18 6.928 1.65 15.8 18.7 2.572 2.978 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.175 19.8 1.875 7.72 6.15 2.25.18 6.928 1.65 15.8 18.7 2.572 2.978 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.175 19.8 1.875 7.72 6.15 2.25.18 6.928 1.65 15.8 18.7 2.572 2.978 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.175 19.8 1.875 7.72 6.15 862 1.97.69 6.17 9.55 1.75 17.62 2. 2.8 2.986 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2. 19.11 1.79 8.6 6.2 68 1.25 2.16.51 5.58 8.255 11.7 1.572 17.152 19.61 2.22 2.898 2.998 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.77 19.765 17.6 11.652 7.557 91 2.196.1 6.9 1.598 1.967 18.715 2.566 2.977 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.18 19.9 1.9 7.728 6.15 2.25.18 6.928 1.65 15.8 18.7 2.572 2.978 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 21. 2.175 19.8 1.875 7.72 6.15 Description: The park power curve is similar to a WTG power curve, meaning that when a given wind speed appears in front of the park with same speed in the entire wind farm area (before influence from the park), the output from the park can be found in the park power curve. nother way to say this: The park power curve includes array losses, but do NOT include terrain given variations in the wind speed over the park area. Measuring a park power curve is not as simple as measuring a WTG power curve due to the fact that the park power curve depends on the wind direction and that the same wind speed normally will not appear for the entire park area at the same time (only in very flat non-complex terrain). The idea with this version of the park power curve is not to use it for validation based on measurements. This would require at least 2 measurement masts at two sides of the park, unless only a few direction sectors should be tested, ND non complex terrain (normally only useable off shore). nother park power curve version for complex terrain is available in. The park power curve can be used for: 1. Forecast systems, based on more rough (approximated) wind data, the park power curve would be an efficient way to make the connection from wind speed (and direction) to power. 2. Construction of duration curves, telling how often a given power output will appear, the park power curve can be used together with the average wind distribution for the Wind farm area in hub height. The average wind distribution can eventually be obtained based on the Weibull parameters for each WTG position. These are found at print menu: >Result to file< in the >Park result< which can be saved to file or copied to clipboard and pasted in Excel.. Calculation of wind energy index based on the PRK production (see below).. Estimation of the expected PRK production for an existing wind farm based on wind measurements at minimum 2 measurement masts at two sides of wind farm. The masts must be used for obtaining the free wind speed. The free wind speed is used in the simulation of expected energy production with the PRK power curve. This procedure will only work suitable in non complex terrains. For complex terrain another park power curve calculation is available in (PPV-model). te: From the >Result to file< the >Wind Speeds Inside Wind farm< is also available. These can (e.g. via Excel) be used for extracting the wake induced reductions in measured wind speed..1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 6

PRK - WTG distances Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION) WTG distances Z 1 1 2 7, 6,5 5 7,7 Min 6,5 Max 1 Nearest WTG Z 2 7, 6,5 7, 6,5 6,5 Horizontal distance 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Distance in rotor diameters OpenStreetMap contributors - www.openstreetmap.org/copyright Scale 1:25. WTG.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 7

PRK - Wind statistics info Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION) Main data for wind statistic File Name Country Source Mast coordinates Created Edited Sectors WsP version Displacement height C:\WindPro.1\Projects\\NL Windmeetmast Ressen (1 yr) (Regression MCP using MERR_basic_E6.1_N52. (5) (1)).wws Windmeetmast Ressen (1 yr) (Regression MCP using MERR_basic_E6.1_N52. (5) (1)) Netherlands Dutch Stereo-RD/NP 2 East: 186.16 rth:.97 12-12-217 12-12-217 12 WsP 11 Version 11.2.62 ne Comments From MCP dditional info for wind statistic Based on measurement height Base elevation for measurement mast 7 m 8,9 m Long term correction information Method Source data Distance to source data Long term period from Long term period to Concurrent period from Concurrent period to Concurrent data records Concurrent record interval Concurrent data recovery Regression MCP MERR_basic_E6.1_N52. (5) (1) 16, km 1-1-198 1-8-21 1--21 1--21 8569 6 minutes 98,9 % Number of years with long term data Number of months with concurrent data,6 years 11,7 Months Correlation test based on Concurrent monthly windindices Power curve used for index Data availability demand for inclusion of month Number of months r^2 - wind index r - wind index s - wind index Simple power curve truncated at: 1, m/s 6 % 11,9896,998,26 te To get the most correct calculation results, wind statistics shall be calculated with the SME model and model parameters, as currently chosen in calculation. For WsP versions before 1., the model is unchanged, but thereafter more model changes affecting the wind statistic is seen. Likewise WsP CFD should always use WsP CFD calculated wind statistics..1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 8

PRK - Map Calculation: PRK calculation (5 x V15 @ 166m, + LT CORR + MITIGTION) 25 5 75 1 m Map: BG kaart groot, Print scale 1:12.5, Map center Dutch Stereo-RD/NP 2 East: 19.17 rth:.8 WTG.1.617 by EMD International /S, Tel. +5 96 5, www.emd.dk, windpro@emd.dk 1-12-217 1:56 / 9