2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.solener.2018.02.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bias correction of a novel European reanalysis data set for solar energy applications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
33
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 70 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
4
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Those rates are quite reasonable for hourly GHI [42]. Those rates of bias can be corrected or modified in some ways [14,18,56,57].…”
Section: All-sky Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Those rates are quite reasonable for hourly GHI [42]. Those rates of bias can be corrected or modified in some ways [14,18,56,57].…”
Section: All-sky Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Another possible source of negative bias during clear-sky situations would be too much water vapour in the atmosphere. There are earlier studies showing similar results elsewhere (Ahlgrimm and Forbes, 2012;Frank et al, 2018). Overcast situations occur more frequently than clear sky (23 % of the time), resulting in the overall positive bias in the solar radiation forecast.…”
Section: How Do Errors In Cloud Cover Impact the Solar Radiation Foresupporting
confidence: 69%
“…Schroedter-Homscheidt et al, 2017) and accuracy of the solar radiation data obtained from the reanalysis (e.g. Frank et al, 2018;Urraca et al, 2018) at different locations based on solar radiation measurements, satellite-derived radiation products and numerical model data. These studies focus on solar radiation forecast error, and do not investigate the possible source of the error.…”
Section: Forecasting Solar Radiation and Cloudsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Pfeifroth et al, [7] compared the trends and variability of surface solar radiation based on measurements and satellite data sources. Frank et al, [8] proposed new data sets, which outperform ERA-Interim and MERRA-2 thanks to the bias correction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%