|
<br />premature to conclude that these sites are su-
<br />perior to the other sites until anemometer kite
<br />data can also be evaluated versus height. These
<br />kite data are currently being obtained at some
<br />sites.
<br />
<br />The available power at 50 meters for the 2-year
<br />period was above 400 W/m2 for all sites except
<br />PCP. The PROBE station at the latter site is
<br />installed in a location that normal expected
<br />channeling of the wind through the pass is not
<br />observed, because the location is too far away
<br />from the center of the channeling effect. It should
<br />be noted that the PCP site had 13,156 hours of
<br />windspeeds above 4 m/s at the 50-meter height,
<br />which ranks closely with PTH that had 13,523
<br />hours at 50 meters. PTH and WKR had average
<br />windspeeds of above 6.2 m/s at the 10-meter
<br />height.
<br />
<br />2. October 1, 1980toSeptember30, 1981, table
<br />2. - PTH was predicted to have had 14.579
<br />million kWh of WTS-4 energy during this 12-
<br />month period, which is an average of 1.214
<br />million kWh/mo. WKR had 8.947 million kWh, a
<br />monthly average of 0.7456 million kWh. ELL was
<br />the only other site that had an average greater
<br />than 0.5 million kWh/mo. This time period is the
<br />first half of the 2-year period in table 1.
<br />
<br />3. October 1,1981 toSeptember30, 1982, table
<br />3. - The six stations in tables 1 and 2 are
<br />compared with seven other sites during this
<br />period. PTH was predicted to have had 12.826
<br />million kWh of WTS-4 energy during this 12
<br />months, which is an average of 1.0688 million
<br />kWh/mo. LWT, WKR, WBB, MOB, CWP, and ELL
<br />all had monthly averages greater than 0.5 million
<br />kWh. PTH, LWT, WKR, WBB, and MOB had wind-
<br />speed averages equal to or greater than 6.0 m/s
<br />at the 1 Q-meter height. It should be mentioned
<br />that WBB's average windspeed of 6.2 m/s at the
<br />10-meter height is considerably better than
<br />anticipated, since it was originally estimated to
<br />be about 5.3 mis, using the very limited data that
<br />were available before the PROBE station was
<br />installed.
<br />
<br />Eight of the sites had available power at the 50-
<br />meter height above 400 W /m2.
<br />
<br />4. October 1, 1980 to April 30, 1981, table 4.
<br />-This comparison represents the eight coastal-
<br />mountain sites in California, and the Ellensburg,
<br />Washington site. WKR, PTH, and GTM all ex-
<br />ceeded 5.3 million kWh for the 7-month period,
<br />with a WKR average of 0.8084 million kWh/mo.
<br />PTH, WKR, BRP, ELL, GTM, and CWP all exceeded
<br />the 400 W/m2 threshold, but the data included
<br />
<br />only a 7-month period. GTM and WKR both
<br />exceeded windspeeds above 4 m/s at the 50-
<br />meter height during 70 percent of the time. GTM
<br />and WKR had average windspeeds of 8.5 and 6.3
<br />m/s at the 1 O-meter height.
<br />
<br />5. December 1, 1980 to October 31, 1981, table
<br />5. - PTH was predicted to have had 12.65 million
<br />kWh of WTS-4 energy during this 11-month
<br />period, or an average of 1.15 million kWh/mo.
<br />WKR had 8.519 million kWh or 0.7745 million
<br />kWh/mo average. ELL and WBB averaged above
<br />0.5 million kWh during the indicated period. PTH,
<br />WKR, and PCP had more than 65 percent of
<br />windspeeds averaging above 4 m/s at the 10-
<br />meter height. PTH, WKR, WBB, ELL, andAUS had
<br />more than 500 W /m2 available power at the 50-
<br />meter height; no other station in the comparison
<br />exceeded the 400-W/m2 threshold.
<br />
<br />1
<br />
<br />6. December 1, 1980 to April 30, 1981, table 6.
<br />- This 5-month comparison period had the
<br />greatest number of stations with 15 sites. Since
<br />the period is so short, the reader is cautioned that
<br />the comparisons may be misleading, in that this
<br />may be comparing the low wind season of one
<br />site with the high wind season of another. Even
<br />though it is a short period, it may be useful for
<br />some studies if other data is also available. It
<br />. tends to predict 4.324 million kWh for WKR, a
<br />monthly average of 0.8648 million kWh, and
<br />4.226 million kWh for GTM, an average of 0.8452
<br />million kWh/mo. The average windspeed at 10
<br />meters for GTM was 9.8 mis, while WKR had 6.6
<br />m/s; however, AUS, CWP and PTH had average
<br />windspeeds of above 5 m/s.
<br />
<br />7. April 1, 1981 to March 30, 1982, table 7. -
<br />This period allows a comparison of the various
<br />candidate sites with PROBE station data taken
<br />near the Medicine Bow, Wyoming site, where the
<br />Bureau's first wind turbine project is located.
<br />Because the data measured at the other sites
<br />were measured at low levels and then estimated
<br />for the higher levels, it is premature to conclude
<br />that some of these sites may be as good as the
<br />Medicine Bow site. However, it suggests that
<br />some of these sites should be considered for
<br />further study, in addition to the Medicine Bow
<br />site, which has already been determined to be an
<br />excellent site using actual anemometry tower
<br />data versus height over a relatively long period of
<br />time (November 1978 to present). If the 1/7
<br />power law estimate is proven to be accurate for
<br />the other sites as it has been verified for Medicine
<br />Bow, it appears that the PTH, WKR, and WBB
<br />sites may have as good or better winds than the
<br />Medicine Bow site. However, some are located
<br />on ridges which tend to have exponents less than
<br />
<br />..
<br />
<br />6
<br />
|