IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v12y2021i5d10.1007_s13198-021-01165-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An overall performance index for wind farms: a case study in Norway Arctic region

Author

Listed:
  • Albara M. Mustafa

    (UiT The Arctic University of Norway)

  • Abbas Barabadi

    (UiT The Arctic University of Norway)

  • Tore Markeset

    (University of Stavanger)

  • Masoud Naseri

    (UiT The Arctic University of Norway)

Abstract

Wind farms (WFs) experience various challenges that affect their performance. Mostly, designers focus on the technical side of WFs performance, mainly increasing the power production of WFs, through improving their manufacturing and design quality, wind turbines capacity, their availability, reliability, maintainability, and supportability. On the other hand, WFs induce impacts on their surroundings, these impacts can be classified as environmental, social, and economic, and can be described as the sustainability performance of WFs. A comprehensive tool that combines both sides of performance, i.e. the technical and the sustainability performance, is useful to indicate the overall performance of WFs. An overall performance index (OPI) can help operators and stakeholders rate the performance of WFs, more comprehensively and locate the weaknesses in their performance. The performance model for WFs, proposed in this study, arranges a set of technical and sustainability performance indicators in a hierarchical structure. Due to lack of historical data in certain regions where WFs are located, such as the Arctic, expert judgement technique is used to determine the relative weight of each performance indicator. In addition, scoring criteria are predefined qualitatively for each performance indicator. The weighted sum method makes use of the relative weights and the predefined scoring criteria to calculate the OPI of a specific WF. The application of the tool is illustrated by a case study of a WF located in the Norwegian Arctic. Moreover, the Arctic WF is compared to another WF located outside the Arctic to illustrate the effects of Arctic operating conditions on the OPI.

Suggested Citation

  • Albara M. Mustafa & Abbas Barabadi & Tore Markeset & Masoud Naseri, 2021. "An overall performance index for wind farms: a case study in Norway Arctic region," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 12(5), pages 938-950, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:12:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-021-01165-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-021-01165-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-021-01165-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-021-01165-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sima Rastayesh & Lijia Long & John Dalsgaard Sørensen & Sebastian Thöns, 2019. "Risk Assessment and Value of Action Analysis for Icing Conditions of Wind Turbines Close to Highways," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Masoud Naseri & Javad Barabady, 2016. "On RAM performance of production facilities operating under the Barents Sea harsh environmental conditions," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 7(3), pages 273-298, September.
    3. John Quigley & Abigail Colson & Willy Aspinall & Roger M. Cooke, 2018. "Elicitation in the Classical Model," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Luis C. Dias & Alec Morton & John Quigley (ed.), Elicitation, chapter 0, pages 15-36, Springer.
    4. Welch, Jonathan B. & Venkateswaran, Anand, 2009. "The dual sustainability of wind energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1121-1126, June.
    5. Kucukali, Serhat, 2016. "Risk scorecard concept in wind energy projects: An integrated approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 975-987.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Contextualizing avian mortality: A preliminary appraisal of bird and bat fatalities from wind, fossil-fuel, and nuclear electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2241-2248, June.
    7. Koo, Choongwan & Hong, Taehoon & Oh, Jeongyoon & Choi, Jun-Ki, 2018. "Improving the prediction performance of the finite element model for estimating the technical performance of the distributed generation of solar power system in a building façade," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(C), pages 41-53.
    8. Samet Ozturk & Vasilis Fthenakis, 2020. "Predicting Frequency, Time-To-Repair and Costs of Wind Turbine Failures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Diaz-Balteiro, L & González-Pachón, J. & Romero, C., 2017. "Measuring systems sustainability with multi-criteria methods: A critical review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 607-616.
    10. Williamson, S.J. & Stark, B.H. & Booker, J.D., 2014. "Low head pico hydro turbine selection using a multi-criteria analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 43-50.
    11. Abigail R Colson & Roger M Cooke, 2018. "Expert Elicitation: Using the Classical Model to Validate Experts’ Judgments," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ashish Kumar & Muskaan Arora & Monika Saini, 2023. "Influence of mathematics on the academic performance of mechanical engineering students: a PLS-SEM approach," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(1), pages 367-376, February.
    2. Albara M. Mustafa & Abbas Barabadi, 2022. "Criteria-Based Fuzzy Logic Risk Analysis of Wind Farms Operation in Cold Climate Regions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Albara M. Mustafa & Abbas Barabadi, 2022. "Criteria-Based Fuzzy Logic Risk Analysis of Wind Farms Operation in Cold Climate Regions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Schoch-Spana, Monica & Ravi, Sanjana J. & Martin, Elena K., 2022. "Modeling epidemic recovery: An expert elicitation on issues and approaches," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    3. Jeremy Rohmer & Eric Chojnacki, 2021. "Forecast of environment systems using expert judgements: performance comparison between the possibilistic and the classical model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 131-146, March.
    4. Elena Verdolini & Laura Díaz Anadón & Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2018. "Future Prospects for Energy Technologies: Insights from Expert Elicitations," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 133-153.
    5. Misuri, Alessio & Landucci, Gabriele & Cozzani, Valerio, 2020. "Assessment of safety barrier performance in Natech scenarios," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    6. Milford, James & Henrion, Max & Hunter, Chad & Newes, Emily & Hughes, Caroline & Baldwin, Samuel F., 2022. "Energy sector portfolio analysis with uncertainty," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(PA).
    7. Peter Harrison Howard & Derek Sylvan, 2020. "Wisdom of the experts: Using survey responses to address positive and normative uncertainties in climate-economic models," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 213-232, September.
    8. Hathout, Michel & Vuillet, Marc & Carvajal, Claudio & Peyras, Laurent & Diab, Youssef, 2019. "Expert judgments calibration and combination for assessment of river levee failure probability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 377-392.
    9. Katarina Buganova & Maria Luskova & Jozef Kubas & Michal Brutovsky & Jaroslav Slepecky, 2021. "Sustainability of Business through Project Risk Identification with Use of Expert Estimates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, June.
    10. Wongnak, Phrutsamon & Bord, Séverine & Donnet, Sophie & Hoch, Thierry & Beugnet, Frederic & Chalvet-Monfray, Karine, 2022. "A hierarchical Bayesian approach for incorporating expert opinions into parametric survival models: A case study of female Ixodes ricinus ticks exposed to various temperature and relative humidity con," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).
    11. Carless, Travis S. & Redus, Kenneth & Dryden, Rachel, 2021. "Estimating nuclear proliferation and security risks in emerging markets using Bayesian Belief Networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    12. Cooke, Roger M. & Marti, Deniz & Mazzuchi, Thomas, 2021. "Expert forecasting with and without uncertainty quantification and weighting: What do the data say?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 378-387.
    13. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Fernando Pérez-Rodríguez & José María Martín-Martín & João C. Azevedo, 2019. "Planning for Democracy in Protected Rural Areas: Application of a Voting Method in a Spanish-Portuguese Reserve," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Claire Copeland & Britta Turner & Gareth Powells & Kevin Wilson, 2022. "In Search of Complementarity: Insights from an Exercise in Quantifying Qualitative Energy Futures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-21, July.
    15. Jiaxin Yu & Jun Wang, 2020. "Optimization Design of a Rain-Power Utilization System Based on a Siphon and Its Application in a High-Rise Building," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Anilkumar, T.T. & Simon, Sishaj P. & Padhy, Narayana Prasad, 2017. "Residential electricity cost minimization model through open well-pico turbine pumped storage system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 23-35.
    17. Ludovic Cassan & Guilhem Dellinger & Pascal Maussion & Nicolas Dellinger, 2021. "Hydrostatic Pressure Wheel for Regulation of Open Channel Networks and for the Energy Supply of Isolated Sites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-18, August.
    18. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & Amelia Pérez Zabaleta & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "Dealing with Water Conflicts: A Comprehensive Review of MCDM Approaches to Manage Freshwater Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-32, April.
    19. repec:eco:journ2:2017-04-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Ewa Roszkowska & Bartłomiej Jefmański, 2021. "Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy Synthetic Measure (I-VIFSM) Based on Hellwig’s Approach in the Analysis of Survey Data," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, January.
    21. Nishi, Yasuyuki & Mori, Nozomi & Yamada, Naoki & Inagaki, Terumi, 2022. "Study on the design method for axial flow runner that combines design of experiments, response surface method, and optimization method to one-dimensional design method," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 96-110.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:12:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s13198-021-01165-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.