Search

Is the post-processing of global horizontal irradiance (GHI) forecasts necessary for issuing good photovoltaic (PV) power forecasts? Whenever this question is raised, the instinctive supposition always seems to be "yes," because GHI is the most important weather parameter governing the amount of PV power generated, and surely, the better the GHI forecasts are, the better the PV power forecasts should result. To attend to this question more scientifically and more formally, two classic deterministic-to-deterministic post-processing methods, namely, the model output statistics and kernel conditional density estimation, are applied at various stages of PV power forecasting, resulting in four distinct workflows. These different workflows are trained and tested on three PV plants in Hungary, using data from a four-year (2017–2020) period. Both ground-based GHI and satellite-retrieved GHI are used as the "truth" with which numerical weather prediction (NWP) GHI forecasts are post-processed. A very thorough deterministic forecast verification exercise is conducted following the best practices. It is found that contrary to the common supposition, post-processing GHI only leads to marginal, if that can be quantified at all, benefits, so long as the PV power forecasts are to be post-processed. This ought to be deemed as a very important finding, as it puts into question the "GHI forecasting + post-processing + irradiance-to-power conversion" workflow that has dominated solar forecasting for decades. • Post-processing is best performed on PV power instead of GHI • Model chains change the bias and variance of the input forecasts • Post-processing methods developed for GHI are transferable to PV power [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inspecting the literature, much effort has been placed on the verification of irradiance forecasts from numerical weather prediction (NWP) models, as such forecasts are thought to have profound implications on the photovoltaic (PV) power forecasts, which in turn affects grid operators' confidence in integrating such power into the electricity grid. However, perhaps due to the proprietary nature of PV plants and lack of access to state-of-the-art NWP model output, only few have had the chance to conduct head-to-head comparisons of global mesoscale and regional downscaled NWP models, in terms of how their irradiance forecast inaccuracies propagate to PV power forecasts. In this regard, this work presents such a study, in which irradiance and PV power forecasts from the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts' High-Resolution (HRES) and Météo-France's Application of Research to Operations at Mesoscale (AROME) models are thoroughly verified against the ground-based measurements from 32 research-grade radiometry stations and 94 actual PV plants in Hungary. A wide range of techniques and case studies concerning verification is herein considered, including variance ratio analysis, Murphy–Winkler decomposition, point-versus-areal verification, and seasonal verification. Despite that the results are too numerous to be summarized in a few sentences, the overarching observation from the verification exercise is that the performance of irradiance forecasts can only be used to infer that of PV power forecasts to a certain extent, which contrasts the conventional wisdom. • Global ECMWF outperforms regional AROME for global horizontal irradiance forecasting. • The advantage of ECMWF is reduced if photovoltaic power forecasting is concerned. • Both numerical weather prediction models have the same accuracy for regional forecasting. • Photovoltaic power forecast errors are the highest in winter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]