4.8 Article

Wind power analysis and site matching of wind turbine generators in Kingdom of Bahrain

Journal

APPLIED ENERGY
Volume 86, Issue 4, Pages 538-545

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.08.006

Keywords

Wind energy; Weibull parameters; Capacity factor; Wind data in Kingdom of Bahrain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, the hourly measured wind speed data for years 2003-2005 at 10 m, 30 m and 60 m height for Kingdom of Bahrain have been statically analyzed to determine the potential of wind power generation. Extrapolation of the 10 m data, using the Power Law, has been used to determine the wind data at heights of 30 m and 60 m. Weibull distribution parameters have been estimated and compared annually and on monthly bases using two methods; the graphical method and the another method, designated in this paper as approximated method, which depends on the standard deviation and average wind speed. The maximum power density for 10 m, 30 m and 60 m heights were found to be 164.33 W/m(2), 624.17 W/m(2) and 1171.18 W/m(2) in February, respectively while the minimum power density were 65.33 W/m(2), 244.33 W/m(2) and 454.53 W/m(2) in October, respectively. The average annual wind power density was found to be 114.54 W/m(2) for 10 m height, 433.29 W/m(2) for 30 m height and 816.70 W/m(2) for 60 m height. Weibull probability function, using Weibull parameters estimated from the approximated method, has shown to provide more accurate prediction of average wind speed and average power density than the graphical method. In addition, the site matching of wind turbine generators at 30 m and 60 m heights has been investigated by estimating the capacity factors of various commercially available wind turbines generators. The monthly and annual variation of capacity factors have been studied to ensure optimum selection of wind turbine generators. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available