PhotovoltaicandSolarForecasting:

StateoftheArt

ForecastPVpower

ReportIEAPVPST1401:2013

ActualPVpower

Photocreditscoverpage
Upperleftimage:EnvironmentCanada,DatacourtesyofNOAA(February27,2013)
Upperrightimage:DaveTurcotte,CanmetENERGY,NaturalResourcesCanada

INTERNATIONALENERGYAGENCY
PHOTOVOLTAICPOWERSYSTEMSPROGRAMME

PhotovoltaicandSolarForecasting:
StateoftheArt

IEAPVPSTask14,Subtask3.1
ReportIEAPVPST1401:2013
October2013

ISBN9783906042138

Authors:
SophiePelland,spelland@nrcan.gc.ca
JanRemund,jan.remund@meteotest.ch
JanKleissl,jkleissl@eng.ucsd.edu
TakashiOozeki,takashi.oozeki@aist.go.jp
KarelDeBrabandere,Karel.DeBrabandere@3e.eu

Contents
Contents...................................................................................................................................................1
Foreword..................................................................................................................................................2
Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................................3
Executivesummary..................................................................................................................................3
1. Introduction.....................................................................................................................................4
2. Photovoltaicforecastingandlinktosolarforecasting....................................................................6
3. Forecastingmethodsfordifferentforecasthorizons.....................................................................8
3.1
SolarandPVforecasting0to6hoursahead(Intradayforecasts)........................................8
3.1.1
TotalSkyImagery.........................................................................................................10
3.1.2
SatelliteCloudMotionVectorApproach.....................................................................11
3.1.3
StochasticLearningTechniques...................................................................................12
3.2
SolarandPVforecasting6hourstodaysahead..................................................................12
3.2.1
Numericalweatherpredictionmodels........................................................................13
3.2.2
ImprovingforecaststhroughpostprocessingofNWPmodels...................................14
4. Pointforecastsandareaforecasts................................................................................................18
4.1
Upscaling...............................................................................................................................18
4.2
Errorreductionforareaforecasts........................................................................................19
5. Forecastaccuracy..........................................................................................................................22
5.1
Accuracymetricsandconfidenceintervals..........................................................................22
5.2
Benchmarkingofforecasts...................................................................................................23
5.3
Factorsthatinfluenceforecastaccuracy..............................................................................24
6. Solarforecastsurveyresults..........................................................................................................28
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................................32
References..............................................................................................................................................33

Foreword
TheInternationalEnergyAgency(IEA),foundedinNovember1974,isanautonomousbodywithinthe
frameworkoftheOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment(OECD)thatcarriesout
acomprehensiveprogrammeofenergycooperationamongits23membercountries.TheEuropean
CommissionalsoparticipatesintheworkoftheAgency.
The IEA Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (IEAPVPS) is one of the collaborative R & D
agreements established within the IEA and, since 1993, its participants have been conducting a
varietyofjointprojectsintheapplicationsofphotovoltaicconversionofsolarenergyintoelectricity.
The mission of the IEA PVPS program is: To enhance the international collaborative efforts which
facilitatetheroleofphotovoltaicsolarenergyasacornerstoneinthetransitiontosustainableenergy
systemsby:
1. ensuringsustainablePVdeployment,
2. improvingPVperformanceandreliability,and
3. assistingindesigningnewmarketstructuresandregulationswhichwillbesuitableforthe
widespreadadoptionofunsubsidisedPV.
The overall program is headed by an Executive Committee composed of one representative from
each participating country, while the management of individual research projects (Tasks) is the
responsibilityofOperatingAgents.Bymid2012,fourteenTaskshadbeenestablishedwithinthePVPS
program.
TheoverallgoalofTask14:HighPenetrationofPVSystemsinElectricityGridsistopromotetheuse
of gridconnected PV as an important source in electric power systems at the higher penetration
levelsthatmayrequireadditionaleffortstointegratedispersedgenerators.Theaimoftheseefforts
is to reduce the technical barriers to achieving high penetration levels of distributed renewable
systems.
The current members of the IEA PVPS Task 14 are: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Switzerland, China,
Germany,Denmark,Spain,Israel,Italy,Japan,Portugal,SwedenandtheUnitedStatesofAmerica.
This report describes the state of the art of solar and photovoltaic forecasting models used to
facilitate the integration of photovoltaics into electric systems operation, and reduce associated
uncertainties. The report represents, as accurately as possible, the international consensus of the
Task14expertsonthesubject.FurtherinformationontheactivitiesandresultsoftheTaskcanbe
foundat:http://www.ieapvps.org.

Acknowledgements
The Belgian contribution to this work has been funded by the three Belgian regions: Brussels
Hoofdstedelijk Gewest/Rgion Bruxelles Capitale, Vlaams Gewest and Rgion Wallonne. Financial
supportforUCSanDiego'sresearchinsolarforecastingthatformedthebasisforthecontributionto
thisreportwasprovidedbytheCaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommissionCaliforniaSolarInitiative,The
CaliforniaEnergyCommissionPIER,Panasonic,andtheUSDepartmentofEnergyHighPVPenetration
Program.FinancialsupportforCanmetENERGY'scontributiontothisreportwasprovidedbyNatural
ResourcesCanadathroughtheProgramonEnergyResearchandDevelopment.Financialsupportfor
Meteotest's contribution to this report was provided by Swiss PVPS Pool. Financial support for
Japanese Committee of PVPS TASK 14 including AIST contribution to this report was provided by
NEDO.ThemanagementofPVPSTask14andthecoordinationofthereportsbyAustriaarefunded
byBMVITandFFG.

Executivesummary
Thefieldofsolarandphotovoltaic(PV)forecastingisrapidlyevolving.Thecurrentreportprovidesa
snapshotofthestateoftheartofthisdynamicresearcharea,focusingonsolarandPVforecastsfor
timehorizonsrangingfromafewminutesaheadtoseveraldaysahead.Diverseresourcesareusedto
generatesolarandPVforecasts,rangingfrommeasuredweatherandPVsystemdatatosatelliteand
skyimageryobservationsofclouds,tonumericalweatherprediction(NWP)modelswhichformthe
basis of modern weather forecasting. The usefulness of these resources varies depending on the
forecasthorizonconsidered:veryshorttermforecasts(0to6hoursahead)performbestwhenthey
make use of measured data, while numerical weather prediction models become essential for
forecasthorizonsbeyondapproximatelysixhours.Thebestapproachesmakeuseofbothdataand
NWPmodels.ExamplesofthisstrategyincludetheuseofNWPmodeloutputsinstochasticlearning
models, or the use of measured data for postprocessing NWP models to correct systematic
deviationsbetweenNWPmodeloutputsandmeasureddata.
BenchmarkingeffortshavebeenconductedtocomparetheaccuracyofvarioussolarandPVforecast
modelsagainstcommondatasets.Suchbenchmarkingiscriticaltoassessingforecastaccuracy,since
this accuracy depends on numerous factors, such as local climate, forecast horizon and whether
forecastsapplytoasinglepointorcoverawidegeographicarea.Inthelattercase,whichisoftenthe
maininterestofelectricsystemoperators,higheraccuraciescanbeachievedsincerandomerrorsat
distantlocationstendtobelargelyuncorrelatedandtopartiallycancelout.

1.

Introduction

Followingontheheelsofwindpower,photovoltaic(PV)electricitygenerationismakingrapidinroads
in electricity grids worldwide, with growth rates in installed capacity ranging from 34% to 82% for
OECDcountriesoverthepastdecadeandinstalledcapacityinthesecountriesreaching63.6GWat
theendof2011(IEAPVPS2012).InsomeEuropeancountries,PVproductionalreadyreaches30%of
overallpowerproductionduringclearsummerdaysonaregularbasis(EPIA2012).Therapidgrowth
ingridpenetrationofPVandothervariablerenewableshaspromptedresearchandrelatedinitiatives,
suchastheIEAPVPSTask14HighPenetrationofPVSystemsinElectricityGrids.
ThetwomainchallengestohighpenetrationratesofPVsystemsarevariabilityanduncertainty,i.e.
thefactthatPVoutputexhibitsvariabilityatalltimescales(fromsecondstoyears)andthefactthat
thisvariabilityitselfisdifficulttopredict.Thecurrentreportaddressesthesecondissue,uncertainty,
andthemethodusedtoaddressit:photovoltaicforecasting.
Thisreportis structured asfollows. Section2 discussesthe link betweenweatherforecasts andPV
forecasts.Section3presentsareviewofforecastingmethods,firstforforecastinghorizonsof0to6
hoursahead(Section3.1)andthenforlongerforecastinghorizons,from6hourstoafewdaysahead
(Section3.2).Section4specificallyexaminesupscaling,whichisusedtoforecasttheoutputofalarge
number of PV systems by making use of a representative subset of wellcharacterized systems.
Section 5 examines forecast accuracy how well forecasts perform, and what factors influence
forecastquality.Finally,Section6presentstheresultsofanIEAPVPSTask14surveyofsolarandPV
forecastmodelsworldwide,illustratingtheconceptsexploredintheprevioussectionswithconcrete
examples.

2.

Photovoltaicforecastinganditslinktosolar
forecasting

DifferentusesofPVforecastsrequiredifferenttypesofforecasts.ForecastsmayapplytoasinglePV
system,orrefertotheaggregationoflargenumbersofsystemsspreadoveranextendedgeographic
area.Forecastsmayfocusontheoutputpowerofsystemsoronitsrateofchange(alsoknownasthe
ramprate).Accordingly,differentforecastingmethodsareused.Forecastingmethodsalsodependon
thetoolsandinformationavailabletoforecasters,suchasdatafromweatherstationsandsatellites,
PVsystemdataandoutputsfromnumericalweatherprediction(NWP)models.
Forecasting methods can be broadly characterized as physical or statistical. The physical approach
usessolarandPVmodelstogeneratePVforecasts,whereasthestatisticalapproachreliesprimarily
onpastdatatotrainmodels,withlittleornorelianceonsolarandPVmodels.

WEATHER FORECAST
1. Global horizontal
irradiance (GHI)
2. Ambient temperature

PV SYSTEM DATA
1. System location and
orientation
2. Historical data or
manufacturer specifications

FORECASTS OF RADIATION IN
ARRAY PLANE (Gi) AND BACK-OFMODULE TEMPERATURE (Tm)

PV POWER FORECAST
Figure1:SketchofatypicalphysicalapproachforgeneratingPVpowerforecastsfromweather
forecastsandPVsystemdata.

BasicstepsofatypicalphysicalapproachareshowninFigure1.Workingupwardthroughthefigure,
the end product is a PV forecast as a function of relevant weather variables and PV system
characteristics.ThemainvariablesinfluencingPVoutputpoweraretheirradianceintheplaneofthe
PVarray,Gi,andthetemperatureatthebackofthePVmodules(orcells),Tm.Fornonconcentrating
PV, the relevant irradiance is global irradiance in the array plane, while for concentrating PV it is
direct normal irradiance. Other variables, such as the incidence angle of beam irradiance and the
spectral distribution of irradiance, are included in some PV models, but high accuracies have been
obtained with models that do not incorporate these effects. Depending on data availability, PV
models can either be fitted to historical data (see e.g. Pelland et al., 2011) or else based on
manufacturerspecifications(seee.g.Lorenzetal.,2011b).

Since neitherGinor Tmare outputbyweather forecasts,thesemustbeobtainedinstead fromsolar

and PV models that calculate these from PV system specifications and weather forecasts, such as
global horizontal irradiance (GHI) and ambient temperature forecasts. These solar and PV models
make up the intermediate step in Figure 1. Tm can be modelled from PV system specifications and
from GHI and ambient temperature and, optionally, wind speed (see e.g. Lorenz et al., 2011b).
Meanwhile,transpositionmodelstocalculateGivaryincomplexityandcanmakeuseofonlyGHI,or
ofarangeofinputssuchasalbedo,temperatureandrelativehumidity.Forthepurposeofforecasting
Gi,recentworkbyPellandetal.(2011)suggeststhatthechoiceofthetranspositionmodelhaslittle
impactonforecastaccuracy.
TheapproachshowninFigure1concernsasingle,wellcharacterizedPVsystem.WhenPVforecasts
mustbedevelopedforalargenumberofsystems,upscalingmethods(seeSection4.1)areusedto
generateforecastscoveringallsystemsfromforecastsforalimitednumberofrepresentativesystems.
The physical approach with upscaling has been applied for instance by Lorenz et al. (2011b) to
generate PV forecasts over two balancing areas in the German electricity grid. Root mean square
errors (RMSEs) for intraday and dayahead forecasts of 3.9% and 4.6%, respectively, have been
achievedwiththismethodtodateoveraoneyeartestperiodinGermany,whereerrorsarequoted
asapercentageofthenominalinstalledPVpowerandincludenighttimevalues(Lorenzetal.,2011a).
Meanwhile, purely statistical approaches do not use the solar and PV models that make up the
intermediatestepinFigure1.TheirstartingpointisatrainingdatasetthatcontainsPVpower,aswell
as various inputs or potential inputs, such as NWP outputs (GHI, Tm or other), ground station or
satellitedata,PVsystemdataandsoon.Thisdatasetisusedtotrainmodelssuchasautoregressive
orartificialintelligencemodelsthatoutputaforecastofPVpoweratagiventimebasedonpast
inputsavailableatthetimewhenthemodelisrun.
ThestatisticalapproachwasusedforinstancebyBacheretal.(2009)toforecasttheaverageoutput
power of 21 rooftop PV systems in Denmark. Past measurements of the average power and NWP
forecastsofGHIwereusedasinputstoanautoregressivemodelwithexogenousinput(ARX).
In two cases where (pure) statistical and physical approaches were compared (Huang et al., 2010;
Kudoetal.,2009),thestatisticalapproachslightlyoutperformedthephysical.Inpractice,however,
thesetwoapproachescanbeblendedandthedivisionbetweenthemisnotsharp.Forinstance,the
physical approach frequently makes use of model output statistics (MOS) methods that compare
forecasts to observations over a training period in order to correct forecasts, for example by
removingsystematicerrors.Meanwhile,thebeststatisticalapproachesmakeuseoftheknowledge
encapsulatedinFigure1toselectinputvariablesjudiciously,ortotransformthese.Forinstance,Cai
etal.(2010)calculatedclearskyirradiancesintheplaneofPVarraysandusedthisasaninputtoa
statisticalmodel.

3.

Forecastingmethodsfordifferentforecast
horizons

3.1 SolarandPVforecasting0to6hoursahead(Intraday
forecasts)
Intradayforecastsareanimportantcomponentoftheintegrationofvariablerenewableresources
intotheelectricgrid(Jones2011).Forexample,inCalifornia(thestatewithbyfarthelargestamount
of installed solar power in the US, the independent system operator CAISO uses the following
forecasts:

The day ahead (DA) forecast is submitted at 05:30 on the day before the operating day,
whichbeginsatmidnightonthedayofsubmissionandcovers(onanhourlybasis)eachofthe
24 hours of that operating day. Therefore, the day ahead forecast is provided 18.5 to 42.5
hourspriortotheforecastedoperatingday.Thevastmajorityofconventionalgenerationis
scheduledintheDAmarket.

Thehourahead(HA)forecastissubmitted105minutespriortoeachoperatinghour.Italso
providesanadvisoryforecastforthe7hoursaftertheoperatinghour.[NotethattheCAISO
HA forecast is really a 1.75 to 8.75 hour ahead forecast. We will use intraday here to
identify0to6houraheadforecastsincontrasttothedayaheaddiscussioninSection3.2.

CAISOalsoisconsideringtheimplementationofintrahourforecastson5minuteintervals;asimilar
intrahourforecastisalreadyimplementedbytheMidwestIndependentSystemOperator(ISO).The
US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
requiring public utility transmission providers to offer all customers the opportunity to schedule
transmission service every 15 minutes, and requiring providers with variable renewables on their
systemstousepowerproductionforecasting.Similardayaheadschedulesareapplicablethroughout
the different power exchange markets in Europe. In summary, intraday forecasts are currently of
smaller economic value than DA forecasts but with increasing solar penetration and the expected
accuracy improvement of intraday compared to DA forecasts substantial market opportunities will
likelymaterialize.
Forsolarforecasting,verydifferentmethodologiesarepreferred,dependingontheforecasthorizon
(Table1).Foramoreindepthdiscussionseeanupcomingbook(Kleissl,2013):

Stochastic learning techniques identify patterns in data both within one variable (e.g.
autoregression)and betweenvariablesorevenimages.The underlyingassumption isthat future
irradiationcanbepredictedbytrainingthealgorithmswithhistoricalpatterns.
o

The simplest stochastic learning technique is the persistence forecast which is based on
current or recent PV power plant or radiometer output and extrapolated to account for
changingsunangles.Persistenceforecastaccuracydecreasesstronglywithforecastduration
ascloudinesschangesfromthecurrentstate.

Totalskyimagerycanbeusedtoforecastfromrealtime(nowcast)upto1030minutesaheadby
applying image processing and cloud tracking techniques to sky photographs (Figure 3). The
publishedmethodsassumepersistenceintheopacity,direction,andvelocityofmovementofthe

clouds(Chowetal.2011).Irradianceispredictedforthecurrentcloudshadowandthenthecloud
shadowismovedforwardintimebasedoncloudvelocityanddirection.

Forsatelliteimagery,similarmethodsasintotalskyimageryareapplied.Cloudsreflectlightinto
the satellite leading to detection and the ability to calculate the amount of light transmitted
throughthecloud(transmissivity=1reflectivityabsorptivity).Thelowerspatialandtemporal
resolution probably causes satellite forecasts to be less accurate than sky imagery on intrahour
time scales, but extensive comparisons or combinations of the two approaches have not been
conducted.Satelliteimageryiscommonlyconsideredthebestforecastingtechniqueupto5hour
forecastrange(Perezetal.2010).
Table1Characteristicsofsolarforecastingtechniques.
Technique

Samplingrate

15min

Spatial
Spatial
resolution
extent
Onepoint
OnePoint
10to100
38km
meters
radius
1km
65S 65N

Persistence
WholeSkyImagery
(Figure3)
Geostationarysatellite
imagery
Numericalweather
prediction(NWP)

High
30sec

1hour

2 50km

Worldwide

MaximumSuitable
Forecasthorizon
Minutes
10sofminutes
5hours
10days

Application
Baseline
Ramps,
regulation
Loadfollowing
Unit
commitment
regionalpower
prediction

Dayahead forecasting using NWP and stochastic learning techniques is extensively described in
Section3.2.NWPmodelscanalsobeappliedintraday,buttheywillnotbeconsideredhere,sincethe
techniques describedinthis sectiontypically achievesuperior performancefor forecasthorizonsof
about0to56hoursahead,asshowninFigure2.

Figure2Rootmeansquareerror(RMSE)ofdifferentsolarforecastingtechniquesobtainedoverayear
atsevenSURFRADgroundmeasurementsites(fromPerezetal.2010).Theredlineshowsthesatellite
nowcastforreference,i.e.thesatelliteforecastforthetimewhenthesatelliteimagewastaken.Cloud
motionforecastsderivedfromsatellite(yellowandwhitelines)performbetterthannumericalweather
prediction(NDFD)upto5hoursahead.Numericalweatherpredictionhassimilaraccuraciesforforecast
horizonsrangingfrom1hourto3daysahead.FromPerezetal.(2010).

3.1.1 TotalSkyImagery
Solarforecastingbasedonwholeskyimageryanalysisconsistsoffourcomponents:(1)acquisitionof
askyimageinthevicinityoftheforecastsiteusingadevicesuchasaWholeSkyImager(WSI)(Shields
et al., 1998); (2) analysis of sky image data to identify clouds (ideally distinguish between thin and
thickclouds);(3)estimationofcloudmotionvectorsusingsuccessiveimages;(4)useofcloudlocation
and motion vector data for shortterm deterministic or probabilistic cloud cover, irradiance, and
power forecasting. A method to accomplish this is described in detail in Chow et al. (2011) and in
GhonimaandKleissl(2012)andanexampleispresentedinFigure3b.
Skyimageryhastheadvantageofverydetailedinformationabouttheextent,structureandmotionof
existingcloudsatthetimetheforecastismade.Thesedatacanbeusedtogenerateveryshortterm
(minutes ahead) predictions of future cloud patterns in the vicinity of the solar generation facility.
However, the approach at present does not account for cloud development and dissipation or
significantchangesincloudgeometry.Theextrapolationofthecloudpatternsisalsolimitedtothe
spatialscaledefinedbythefieldofviewoftheskyimager.Itispossibletoextendthespatialscaleby
using multiple imagers at different locations. Multiple cloud layers with different characteristic
motion vectorsmay also poseaproblemsincecloudsatupperlevelsmay bepartially obscuredby
clouds at lower levels. The actual lookahead time for which this method has significant skill will
depend,amongotherthings,uponthecloudvelocityandtheheightoftheclouds(theratioofthe
cloud velocity to the cloud height defines an angular velocity about the WSI which determines the
time duration of the cloud being in the fieldofview). For low and fast clouds the forecast horizon
may only be 3 minutes while for high and slow clouds it may be over 30 minutes, but generally
horizons between 5 to 20 minutes are typical. Even if cloud size and velocity could be determined
accurately,theforecastaccuracydependsontherateatwhichthecloudfieldisdepartingfromthe
evolutiondefinedbythecloudmotionvectors(i.e.development,dissipation,etc.).
AttheUniversityofCaliforniaSanDiego,skyimagers(USIs)haverecentlybeenspecificallydeveloped
for solar forecasting applications and feature high resolution, high dynamic range, high stability
imaging chips that enable cloud shadow mapping and solar forecasting at unprecedented spatial
detail(Figure3a).Suchcamerasarebetterabletoresolvecloudsnearthehorizon,whichwillextend
theforecastaccuracyespeciallyforlongerlookaheadtimes.

Figure3b:30secondGHIrampforecastfromtheTotalSkyImager
Figure3a:Ratioofredandblue
(green)againstmeasurementsbya1secGHIstationattheUCSan
channelintensity(redblueratioor
RBR)onapartlycloudydayfromthe Diegocampus(black).Timingofcloudyclearandclearcloudyramps
newlydevelopedUCSanDiegosolar onthisdaywithcumuluscloudsareaccuratelypredictedwiththesky
forecastingskyimager.Areasofhigh
imager.
RBRareclassifiedascloudy.

10

3.1.2 SatelliteCloudMotionVectorApproach
The satellitecloud motion vector approach is conceptually similar to the sky image method; cloud
patternsaredetectedthroughtheuseofvisibleand/orinfraredimagesfromsatellitebasedsensors
flying overhead. The advantage compared to the WSI is that a much larger spatial scale of cloud
patterns can be detected and that high quality satellite imagery is continuously available for the
entireworld.Thecloudindex(assumedtobeproportionaltocloudopticaldepth)canbecalculated
accurately from the reflectance measured by the satellite. This cloud index method is a mature
approachthathasbeenusedextensivelyinsolarresourcemapping(e.g.Cebecaueretal.2010,Perez
etal.2002).
Cloudmotionvectorscanbedeterminedfromsubsequentsatelliteimages.Assumingcloudfeatures
donotchangebetweentwoimages,Leeseetal.(1971)cloudspeediscomputedbyfindingthesame
featuresinasuccessiveimage.HamillandNehrkorn(1993)appliedthesamemethodandshowedthe
forecastwithabackwardtrajectorytechniqueoutperformedthepersistenceforecast.Hammeretal.
(1999)developedastatisticalmethodbasedonconditionalprobabilitiestopredictcloudcoverand
solar radiation up to 2 hours ahead. Lorenz et al. (2004) used a similar method that minimizes the
meansquarepixeldifferencesandforecastssolarradiationupto6hoursahead.
Satellitederivedmotionvectorshavebeenusedalsotoimprovetheresultsfromnumericalmodels.
Velden et al (1998) showed that the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites (GOES)
multispectral wind information had a significant positive impact on the numerical model derived
forecastsfortropicalcyclonetracks.BedkaandMecikalski(2005)improvedtheVeldenetal.(1998)
algorithm to derive motion vectors including both synopticscale and mesoscale flows; such
mesoscaleflowsareimportantinapplicationsthatmonitortherapidevolutionof(convective)clouds
innearrealtime.Mecikalskietal.(2009)pointedoutthatproblematicscenetypesforbothsynoptic
andmesoscaleprocessingmethodsaredeepconvection,thincirrus,andmultilayeredclouds.Bosch
etal.(2013)demonstratedthatcloudmotionvectorscanbeestimatedfromgroundbasedirradiance
measurements.
Conversely, for longer lookahead times, wind fields from NWP can be used to improve upon the
steady cloud advection vectors from two recent images (Miller et al. 2011), but the benefit of the
approach has yet to be demonstrated. Classical satellite methods only use the visible spectrum
channels(i.e.theyonlyworkindaytime),whichmakesmorningforecastslessaccurateduetoalack
oftimehistory.Toobtainaccuratemorningforecasts,itisimportanttointegrateinfraredchannels
(whichworkdayandnight)intothesatellitecloudmotionforecasts(Perezetal.2010b).
The spatial resolution of geostationary satellite images is 1 km (GOES) or larger (Meteosat outside
highresolutionarea)whichismuchlessthangroundbasedskyimages.Hence,withtheexceptionof
largeconvectiveclouds,mostcloudscannotbedetectedandlocateddirectly;onecanonlyconclude
thatcloudshavetobelocatedsomewherewithinthepixel.Inaddition,thetimefrequency,download
timeandprocessingoftheimagesisslowerthanthatoftheskyimager,whichmeanstheforecast
cannot be updated as frequently. The lack of high spatial and temporal resolution in the satellite
image data reduces the performance of the satellitebased approach relative to the sky imager
methodforveryshortlookaheadtimes.However,themuchlargerareaofcoveragemeansthatthe
motionofthecloudfieldcanbeprojectedforwardoverlongertimeperiods.
Satellite forecasts have been shown to outperform Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) models
(Perezet al.,2010)for shortterm forecasts.Perez etal. (2010) conclude that forforecasts up to 5
hoursaheadsatellitederivedcloudmotionbasedforecastingleadstoasignificantimprovementover
National Digital Forecast Database (NDFD) forecasts. For 1 h forecasts the results from persistence

11

andsatellitederivedcloudmotionarefoundtobeonpar,probablyduetosatellitesnavigationand
parallaxuncertainties,whichtendtomitigateforlongertimes.

3.1.3 StochasticLearningTechniques
For very shortterm (intrahour, and up to 2 or 3 hours ahead depending on the time averaging
interval)forecasts,stochasticlearningtechniqueswithoutexogenousinput(i.e.onlythepowerplant
output is used) can be highly competitive in accuracy and relatively easy to setup, especially when
advanced forecasting engines are used (see, e.g., Pedro and Coimbra, 2012). However, inclusion of
relevant exogenous data from sky imagery, satellite, and NWP (in order of increasing forecast
horizon), as well as data from other meteorological databases (NWS, NDFD, etc.) can significantly
increase accuracy and forecasting skill, as described in Section 2. For a review of earlier stochastic
learningandthegeneraluseofartificialintelligencemethodsinsolarforecasting,seeMellit(2008).
More recently, new forecasting algorithms that go beyond the use of simple pattern recognition
algorithmshavegainedattention.Thesemorecomprehensivestochasticlearningtechniquesattempt
to remove the opinion of the modeller in the optimization of the topology, initial weights and
coefficients of the neural networks through a Master Optimization Process (MOP) that is usually
evolutionary in nature. The MOP evolves the topology of the various artificial neural networks
(ANNs)(numberofneurons,layers,initialweights,sizeofthetrainingset,etc.)byscanningthewhole
solution space of the training set with an evolutionary optimization scheme such as a Genetic
Algorithm(GA).Thismultiobjective,multilayeroptimizationdeterminesthebesttopologiesandthe
best sections of the training set for each microclimate under study, and may or may not include
dynamicinputselectionforexogenousvariablesthroughGammatests(MarquezandCoimbra,2011).
Because of their robust and versatile nature, these hybrid schemes outperform persistence,
conventionalregression(ARMA,ARIMA,fARIMA,etc.)andpatternrecognitionmethods(kNN,ANN,
etc.), producing higherfidelity forecasts with or without exogenous variables at various horizons
(PedroandCoimbra,2012;andMarquezetal.,2012).

3.2 SolarandPVforecasting6hourstodaysahead
One of the key uses of solar and PV forecasting is dayahead forecasting of the hourly output
powerthatwillbegeneratedbyPVsystemswithinanareamanagedbyanelectricitysystemoperator
orutility.Thesedayaheadforecastsaretypicallyrequiredbyaboutnoonforeachhourofthenext
day,whichimpliesthatdayaheadforecastsmustinfactextendatleast36hoursaheadtoafewdays
ahead,dependingonthetimingofelectricitymarketsandofweatherforecasts.

12

Figure4EvolutionoftheautocorrelationoftheclearskyindexoverseveraldaysforBergen,Norway.The
correlationcoefficientofaNWPmodelforecastforthefirstforecastdaywasfoundtobe0.54.Reproduced
from(Beyeretal.,2009).

While key inputs for forecasts in the range of 0 to 6 hours ahead are past observations (see 3.1),
weatherforecastsfromnumericalweatherprediction(NWP)modelsarethekeyinputsfordayahead
forecasting.ThisisillustratedinFigure4,whichshowsthattheautocorrelationoftheclearskyindex
dropsrapidlyoverthecourseofafewhours,limitingtheeffectivenessofmethodsbasedpurelyon
past data and not incorporating dynamics. Methods that include NWP model outputs therefore
outperform methods based purely on past data after about 2 to 3 hours ahead for the simplest
persistence model to about 3 to 5 hours ahead for cloud motion vector approaches (Perez et al.,
2010).

3.2.1 Numericalweatherpredictionmodels
Numericalweatherpredictionmodelsarebasedondynamicalequationsthatpredicttheevolutionof
theatmosphereuptoseveraldaysaheadfrominitialconditions.TheNWPmodelsthatunderlieall
othersareglobalmodelscoveringthewholeEarth.Themodelequationsandinputsarediscretized
on a threedimensional grid extendingvertically from the surface of the Earth. Since global models
are computationally and otherwise intensive, there are only 14 of these currently in operation
worldwide(TraunmllerandSteinmaurer,2010).
Modelrunsaretypicallyinitiatedtwotofourtimesperday,forexampleat0,6,12and18UTC.Their
initialconditionsarederivedfromsatellite,radar,radiosondeandgroundstationmeasurementsthat
are processed and interpolated to the 3D grid. In order to limit computational requirements, the
resolutionofglobalNWPmodelsisrelativelycoarse,withgridspacingsoftheorderof40kmto90
km (Traunmller and Steinmaurer, 2010). Mesoscale or limited area models are NWP models that
coveralimitedgeographicalareawithhigherresolution,andthatattempttoaccountforlocalterrain
and weatherphenomena inmoredetailthanglobalmodels.Initial conditionsforthesemodels are
extractedfromtheglobalmodels.
The best dayahead solar and PV forecasts combine NWP forecasts with postprocessing of these
forecastsinordertoimprovethemortogenerateforecaststhatarenotincludedinthedirectmodel
outputsoftheNWP,suchasPVforecastsordirectnormalirradianceforecasts.

13

3.2.2 ImprovingforecaststhroughpostprocessingofNWPmodels
Forecastimprovementsareoftenperformedbycomparingtomeasureddataduringatrainingperiod
which is used to develop corrected forecasts. This type of approach is often referred to as Model
OutputStatistics,orMOS.
AnumberofdifferentMOSapproacheshavebeenproposedtodate.Thefollowingsummarizessome
ofthekeypostprocessingapproachesthathavebeenintroducedsofarinthisrapidlyevolvingfield,
andwhichcanbeusedeithersinglyorincombination.
Spatiotemporalinterpolationandsmoothing
Since NWP forecasts are generated at discrete grid points, their use at a specific point in space
necessitatessomeformofinterpolation.Thesimplestmethodistousethenearestneighbourpoint
onthegridthatisclosesttothelocationofinterest.Otherapproachesinvolveinterpolatingforecasts
fromgridpointssurroundingthepointofinterest.AccordingtoLorenzetal.(2009a),thebestresults
areachievedbysimplytakinganaverageofforecastsatgridpointswithinanareasurroundingthe
point of interest, effectively smoothing the associated forecasts. Lorenz et al. (2009a), and later
Mathiesenetal.(2011)obtainedbestresultsbyaveragingoverareasofabout100kmby100kmfor
forecasts based on the ECMWF and GFS global models, while Pelland et al. (2011) found optimal
resultsbyaveragingoutputsoftheGEMmodeloverlargerareasof300kmby300kmormore,as
showninFigure5.ForthemesoscaleforecastmodelWRFwith10kmresolutionMllerandRemund
(2010)foundanoptimalsmoothingof10x10pixelsforSwitzerland.
160
150
Bondville
Fort Peck
Sioux Falls
Penn State
Boulder
Goodwin Creek
Desert Rock
Egbert
Bratt's Lake
Varennes

140

RMSE (W/m2)

130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
1

7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52

Size of square grid (N by N grid points)

Figure5Reductioninrootmeansquareerrorthroughaveragingofsolarforecastsoversquaregrids
consistingofNbyNgridpoints.

Inadditiontospatialinterpolation,temporalinterpolationmustbeusedwhenavailableNWPmodel
outputshavealowertemporalresolutionthandesired.Forinstance,Lorenzetal.(2011b)usedlinear
interpolationoftheclearskyindextointerpolate3hourlyGHIforecastsfromECMWFtoanhourly
timestep.
ModelOutputStatisticstoimproveforecastsfromasingleNWPmodel
Oncepointforecastshavebeengenerated,thesecanbeimprovedbycomparingtomeasureddata
duringatrainingperiodoverwhichimprovedmodelsaredevelopedandfitted.ThisMOSapproach

14

works best when forecast corrections are updated in time (recursive) and trained separately over
differentconditionsorregimes,sinceforecasterrorsoftendependonthetimeofthedayandofthe
year,onskyconditions,etc.(seeSection5.3).Moreover,NWP modelsarefrequentlymodifiedand
updated,whichnecessitatesforecastcorrectionstoadaptaccordingly.

Figure6Solarforecastbiasasafunctionofthecosineofthesolarzenithangleandofthe(forecasted)clear
skyindex.Reproducedfrom(Beyeretal.,2009).

OnesimplebutpowerfultypeofMOSisthecorrectionofsystematicforecasterrors,orbiasremoval.
ThiswasappliedforinstancebyLorenzetal.(2011b)tosolarforecastinginGermany:GHIforecast
biaswascomputedasafunctionofskycondition(forecastedclearskyindex)andofthepositionof
the sun (cosine of the solar zenith angle), with the bias computed over a moving 30day training
window using measurements at several ground stations in Germany. As shown in Figure 6, the
underlying ECMWF forecasts were found to have the strongest bias for intermediate values of the
clear sky index, corresponding to variable cloud conditions. A similar procedure was applied by
Mathiesenetal.(2011)fortheUSanddifferentbiasstructureswerefoundfordifferentNWPmodels.
BiasremovalwasalsodevelopedbyPellandetal.(2011)forGHIforecastsinNorthAmerica,usinga
Kalman filter linear in GHI and a 30 to 60 day moving training window. Both approaches have the
most impact when applied to area forecasts, where bias makes up a larger proportion of the root
mean square error, since nonsystematic errors from individual points tend to cancel out to some
extent(seesection4.2).

OtherMOSapproachesforecastGHIfromvariousNWPoutputsandpastobservations.Forinstance,
Perez et al. (2007) forecasted GHI using cloud cover forecasts from the US NDFD, which does not
outputGHIforecasts.TheyreachedforecastaccuraciescomparabletoMOScorrectedGHIforecasts
from other mesoscale NWP models that forecast GHI directly. Meanwhile, Marquez and Coimbra
(2011) found improvements over Perezs approach to GHI forecasting by using four or more NDFD
forecast variables to generate GHI (and DNI) forecasts rather than just one variable. They used a
Gamma Test to select the most relevant NDFD forecast outputs and trained their models using
genetic algorithm search and artificial neural networks (ANNs). Huang et al. (2010) also found
performanceimprovementsbyincludingmorethanoneNWPforecastoutputintotheirANNbased
PVforecasts.

15

Various other MOSbased approaches have been developed to forecast GHI or PV power one to
severaldaysahead,includingautoregressivemethods(Bacheretal.,2009;Caietal.,2010),aswellas
various artificial intelligence methods including artificial neural networks (Cao and Lin, 2008;
Chaouachi et al., 2010; Mellitet al., 2010; Huang et al., 2010; Yona et al., 2008), grey models with
ANN(Wangetal.,2011)andsupportvectormachines(Shietal.,2011).Inputsthathavebeenusedby
theseauthorsinclude:

NWP and other forecasts: GHI, cloud cover, temperature, probability of precipitation, relative
humidity,windspeedanddirection

Ground station weather measurements (GHI, relative humidity, temperature, vapour pressure,
sunshineduration)

SatellitebasedGHIandcloudcoverindices

PVpowermeasurements

Variablesrelatedtosolargeometryandtime(zenithangle,clearskyirradiance)

For modelsthat require stationary time series, the clearness index or the clear sky index are often
used,oraPVequivalentofthese.
CombiningvariousNWPmodels
OnewaytoimprovesolarandPVforecastingistocombineforecastsfromdifferentNWPmodelsor
from different members in an ensemble forecast, where initial conditions or physical
parameterizationsarevariedwithinasingleNWPmodeltoyieldprobabilisticforecasts.Thisapproach
isbeingactivelypursuedinthecaseofwindforecasting,wheresignificantimprovementsinforecast
accuracyhavebeenachievedbycombiningmodelswithweightsthatdependonprevailingweather
conditions(Ernstetal.,2009).Inthesolarcase,slightimprovementsinforecastaccuracyhavebeen
achievedsimplybyaveragingtheforecastsfromtwoorthreeNWPmodels(Perez,2011).Similarly,
Chaouachietal.(2010)foundthatanaverageofthreedifferentneuralnetworkforecastsbasedon
pastobservationsoutperformedtheindividualANNforecasts.

16

17

4.

Pointforecastsandareaforecasts

4.1 Upscaling
Therepresentationofthetotalpoweroutputofallpowersystemsinstalledinagivenareausingdata
from a subset representative of those systems is usually known as upscaling. Upscaling techniques
havebeenextensivelyusedinforecastsofwindenergypoweroutput,wheregeneratingforecastsfor
eachwindturbineinagivenarea,besidesrequiringtheavailabilityofdetaileddata,canbeatime
consumingtask.
Similarchallengesalsoariseinregionalforecastsofphotovoltaicpower,wherespecificinformation
for every photovoltaic system installed can be difficult to obtain, for example, in areas with large
deploymentsofresidentialsystems.Inthiscase,upscalingtechniquescanalsobeappliedastheycan
simplify the calculations and decrease the need for extended and detailed characteristics of all
photovoltaic systems installed in a given area. In spite of this fact, technical literature regarding
regionalforecastsofphotovoltaicpowerwithupscalingtechniquesisnotnearlyasnumerousasitis
inthecaseofwindenergy.
Inordertorepresentacompletesetofphotovoltaicsystemsusingonlyasubsetofthosesystems,
two steps need to be followed. First, the subset must be chosen in such a way that its behaviour,
regardingpoweroutputisrepresentativeofthebehaviorofthecompletesetofphotovoltaicsystems.
ThischaracteristiccanbeachievedbyselectingasthesubsetadistributionofPV systems withthe
desiredbehavior,orbycalculatingthenecessarynumberofrandomlyselectedsystemsthattogether
willmakethesubsetpresentcharacteristicssimilartothoseofthecompletesetofsystems.Thelatter
approachwasinvestigatedbyLorenzetal.(2008),whofoundthatasubsetof150randomlyselected
systems presented a measure of error (a normalized version of the RMSE) similar to that of a
completesetof500systemsinstalledinGermany.Thesecondstepinupscalingistoscaletheoutput
power of the subset to obtain the output power of the complete set. This step can include post
processingbasedoncomparingthepoweroutputoftheselectedsubsetwiththemeasuredpowerof
thecompleteset.Inordertodothat,Lorenzetal.(2008)normalizedthepoweroutputvaluesofthe
subset and of the complete set by their respective total nominal power, allowing for a direct
comparisonbetweenthevaluesofthesubsetandthevaluesofthecompleteset.
Asindicatedabove,anumberofdifferentapproachescanbeusedinthefirstandsecondsteps.For
example, in the first step, different errors or correlation parameters could be used to find the
necessary number of randomly selected systems to include in the subset in order to properly
represent the complete set. Also, the subset could be assembled not with a number of randomly
selected systems but with a distribution of systems selected so that their characteristics, such as
location or specifications, are representative of the complete set of installed photovoltaic systems.
ThiswastheapproachtakeninLorenzetal.(2011),whereinordertodotheupscaling,theymatched
thespatialdistributionoftherepresentativesubsettothatoftherealdatasetbyassigningtoeach
PVsystemascalingfactorbasedonitsgeographiclocationonagridwitharesolutionof1x1.For
eachgridpointtheyderivedascalingfactordefinedastheratiobetweenoverallinstalledpowerand
installedpowerofthesubsetforthisgridpoint;eachPVsystemwasthenassignedthescalingfactor
correspondingtothenearestgridpoint.

18

4.2 Errorreductionforareaforecasts
Areaforecastsofpoweroutputofphotovoltaicsystemsareimportantforsystemoperatorsincharge
ofkeepingthebalancebetweendemandandsupplyofpowerinelectricitygrids.Areaforecastscan
be done using data from all systems installed in a given area or using an upscaling technique as
described inthe previoussection. Theerrors of area forecasts are typically significantly lower than
thecorrespondingerrorsofforecastsofsinglesystems.ThiserrorreductionwasexploredbyLorenz
et al. (2009), who found that the correlation coefficient between the solar forecast errors at two
locationscouldbemodelledwithanexponentialfunctionofthedistancebetweenthetwostations,
witherrorsdecreasingrapidlywithincreasingstationdistanceatfirst,andmoreslowlyfordistances
of about 200 km or more. This effect was modelled indetail by Focken et al. (2002) inthe case of
wind:Theyshowedthatboththesizeofthegeographicareaandthenumberofstationsorsystems
consideredcontributedtoerrorreduction,withthereductionfromanincreasednumberofstations
saturatingbeyondacertainthresholdforagivengeographicarea.
Itisdifficulttoquantifytheerrorreductionthatcanbeachievedinareaforecastsofpoweroutput,as
theparametersoftheexponentialfunctionsmentionedabovedependonclimatediversitywithinthe
region, PV system distribution, capacities, etc. Nevertheless, there are case studies available in the
technical literature. For example, Lorenz et al. (2009) show that solar and PV forecast accuracy
improves significantly as the size of the geographic area under consideration increases, with a
reduction in root mean square error (RMSE) of about 64% for a forecast over an area the size of
Germanyascomparedtoapointforecast.Similarly,Pellandetal.(2011)foundthattheRMSEforthe
forecastoftheaverageirradianceof10groundstationsacrossCanadaandtheU.S.wasabout67%
lowerthantheRMSEsoftheirradianceatindividualgroundstations.
InaJapanesecasestudy,Suzukietal.(2010)proposeaforecastsystembasedonirradianceforecasts
up to 1 day ahead from the JMAMSM (Japanese Meteorological Agency MesoScale Model). This
modelprovidesforecastsfor0to33hoursaheadwithaspatialresolutionof5kmx5kminJapan.
HourlyforecastsofirradianceareobtainedwithJustinTimemodeling,whichisoneoftheblackbox
models described in Section 3. The case study used data from 6 meteorological stations and 11
installedphotovoltaicsystems,from4/2003to4/2007.Theauthorsfoundthatforasetofsystemsin
an area of 100 km x 60 km in the Kanto region in Japan, the mean absolute error (MAE) for the
regional forecasts was 22% lower than the average MAE for the point forecasts. The authors also
evaluateanerrorreductionfactorinSuzukietal.(2011)usingthefullJapanesearea,witharelative
error_ratiodefinedastheratioofMAEtotheMAEofapointforecast(relativeerrorratioof1fora
pointforecast).Theerrorreductionwasaround70%(relativeerrorratioof0.3)asshownFigure7in
the Japanese case. Figure 8 shows the Kanto region case study using data from 64 PV systems, to
reflectthefactthatJapaneseutilitycompaniescontrolthefrequencyineachregionandwillrequire
regionalforecasts.Theaverage_distanceinFigure8isdefinedasthemeanvalueofdistanceamong
evaluatedpoints.Inthiscase,theerrorreductionfactorreachedmaximumvaluesofaround0.4(60%
reductioninerror)whenlargenumbersofpointsspreadacrosstheKantoregionwereconsidered.

19

1
plots

averageofeachpoint
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

41

36

31

26
21
16
Numberofpoints

11

Figure7CorrelationbetweenaveragedistanceandrelativeerrorratioinJapan

4points
32points

1.2

8points
63points

1.0

Relativeerrorratio

2points
16points

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1000

800

600
400
Averagedistance[km]

200

Figure8Correlationbetweenaveragedistanceandrelativeerrorratio
inKantoregionusing64PVsystemsdata

20

Relativeerrorratio

0.9

21

5.

Forecastaccuracy

5.1 Accuracymetricsandconfidenceintervals
Various metrics have been proposed and used to quantify the accuracy of solar and PV forecasts.
Which metrics are most appropriate depends on the user: system operators need metrics that
accurately reflect the costs of forecast errors, while researchers require indicators of the relative
performanceofdifferentforecastmodels,andofasinglemodelunderdifferentconditions(e.g.clear
vs.cloudyskiesseesection5.3).
Appropriatelyselectingandspecifyingthevalidationdatasetoverwhichforecastswillbeevaluatedis
crucial.First,thetestdatasetshouldexcludealldatathatwasusedtotrainmodelsandtodevelop
postprocessing methods, so that evaluation is performed on independent data (outofsample
tests). Also, data should be screened with appropriate quality check procedures, such as those
outlined by HoyerKlick (2008), to ensure that forecast evaluation reflects forecast accuracy rather
than issues with the observations used to test the forecasts. Finally, the test dataset should be
appropriatelyselectedandspecifiedalongsideevaluationresults.Datasetselectionshouldreflectthe
intendeduseoftheforecastsorevaluation:forinstance,systemoperatorsandutilitiesareinterested
in forecast accuracy over all hours of the day, whereas researchers may wish to exclude the trivial
case of forecasting night time irradiance or PV output, or to examine accuracy as a function of
variablesthataffectit(see5.3).
Whatever the intended use of forecasts, standardizing performance measures or metrics helps
facilitateforecastevaluationsandbenchmarking.Beyeretal.(2009)haveattemptedtostandardize
solar forecast benchmarking and accuracy metrics, while Madsen et al. (2005) have proposed
standardized measures of wind forecast accuracy. Common metrics proposed by these authors
includemeanbiaserror(MBE,orbias),meansquareerror(MSE)androotmeansquareerror(RMSE),
meanabsoluteerror(MAE)andstandarddeviation(SDEor).Thesearedefinedasfollows:

RMSE = ( MSE )

1 N
= ei2
N i =1

2
1 N
SDE = =
ei ei

N 1 i =1

N
1
MAE = ei
N i =1
1 N
MBE = ei
N i =1
ei = yi , forecast yi ,observed

(1)
1

(2)

(3)
(4)
(5)

whereyi,forecastandyi,observedaretheithforecastandobservation,respectively, andei istheith error,

withi=1,,Nrunningthroughallforecastobservationpairsinthetestdataset.
ThebiasorMBEistheaverageforecasterror,andencapsulatesthesystematictendencyofaforecast
modeltounderoroverforecast.Asdiscussedin3.2.2.2,modeloutputstatisticsapproachescanbe
used to significantly reduce the bias when past observations are available. MAE gives the average
magnitudeofforecasterrors,whileRMSE(andMSE)givemoreweighttothelargesterrors.Madsen

22

et al. (2005) argue that large errors are disproportionately costly, so that RMSE better reflects the
costsofforecasterrorstosystemoperatorsthantheMAE.
MSE,SDEandbiasarerelatedasfollows:

RMSE 2 = MSE = MBE 2 + SDE 2

(6)

Inotherwords,thestandarddeviationcapturesthepartoftheRMSEthatisnotduetosystematic
error, and provides an indication of the RMSE that can be achieved once the bias is essentially
eliminated.
Allthesemetricscanbestatedasabsolutes,orelsenormalizedbydividingbyareferencevalueto
facilitatecomparisons.Forinstance,windandPVforecastsarecommonlynormalizedbydividingby
the rated capacity of the PV or wind systems, since this is a straightforward and easily accessible
reference value. Meanwhile, solar forecasts are often normalized by dividing by the average
irradiance over the test dataset. In Hoff et al. (2012), the different definitions for the reporting of
normalizedaccuracymetricsaresummarized,evaluatedandcompared.
Forecast evaluation and accuracy metrics provide one way of generating confidence intervals (also
knownaspredictionintervals)forforecasts.Addingconfidenceintervalstoforecastsbuildsintothe
forecast an indicator of its expected accuracy: single, deterministic forecast values are replaced by
distributionsorrangesofvaluesthatcanbeexpected.Suchconfidenceintervalsforsolarforecasts
havebeendevelopedbyLorenzetal.(2009a)andbyMarquezandCoimbra(2011):theyassumeda
normaldistributioninforecasterrorsforsimplicity,andgaveconfidenceintervalsasmultiplesofthe
standard deviation associated with a given confidence level (e.g. 2 for 95.4% confidence, 3 for
99.7% confidence). They calculated , and therefore confidence intervals, as a function of sky
conditions and solar position (or time of day), since these parameters strongly influence forecast
accuracy(see5.3).Bacheretal.(2009)proposedconfidenceintervalsforPVforecastsusingquantile
regression. Similarly to Lorenz et al. (2009a) and Marquez and Coimbra (2011), they specified
confidence intervals as a function of forecast horizon and normalized solar power, their PV
equivalent of sky condition. Mathiesen, Brown and Kleissl (2012) calculated quantile regimebased
confidenceintervalsforcoastalCaliforniabasedongeostropicwindspeedanddirectiontoinferthe
likelihood of marine layer clouds. In principle, confidence intervals could also be obtained via
ensembleforecasts,whicharecommonlyusedforexampletoforecastprobabilitiesofprecipitation.
However,thisapproachhasnotyetbeenexploredforsolarforecasting.

5.2 Benchmarkingofforecasts
Sinceforecastaccuracydependsstronglyonthelocationandtimeperiodusedforevaluationandon
other factors, it is difficult to evaluate the quality of a forecast from accuracy metrics alone. More
insightcanbegainedbycomparingtheaccuraciesofdifferentforecastsagainstacommonsetoftest
data.
For instance, some simple forecast methods can serve as benchmarks against which to evaluate
forecasts. One very simple, commonly used reference is the persistence forecast, which basically
assumes that things stay the same, which in the solar case implies projecting past values of the
clear sky or clearness index into the future (see e.g. Beyer et al., 2009). Other common reference
forecasts includethosebasedonclimatenormalsand simple autoregressive methods(Beyeretal.,

23

2009). Whatever the choice of reference model, forecasts can be compared simply by comparing
theiraccuracymetrics,orelsebycalculatingtheskillscoreforagivenmetric,whichisdefinedas:

skill score =

Metricreference Metric forecast

(7)

Metricreference Metric perfect forecast

In other words, the skill score of a forecast compares the improvement in the chosen metric with
respect to the reference model (numerator) to this same improvement in the case of a perfect
forecastwithnoerrors(denominator).Toillustrate,Bacheretal.(2009)reportedanimprovementin
RMSEby36%withrespecttopersistence,whichcorrespondstoanRMSEskillscorewithrespectto
persistenceof0.36.
Benchmarkingcanalsobeusedtoidentifyconditionsunderwhichforecastsperformrelativelywell,
orpoorly.Forinstance,asmentionedpreviously,NWPmodelforecastsunderperformpersistencefor
veryshortforecasthorizonsofuptoabout2or3hours,indicatingthatNWPforecastshavelittleskill
over these horizons. Similarly, Lorenz et al. (2011a) have used comparisons to persistence to flag
problems with PV forecasts in Germany during the winter, and to develop improved algorithms to
dealwithsnow.
Finally,comparisonscanalsobeappliedtovariousforecastmodelstosetbenchmarksforaccuracies
that can be expected by the best current models in a given region, and to spur innovation and
forecast improvement. Such benchmarking exercises have been performed for instance in the US
(Perez,2011), inCanadaand infourEuropean countries (Lorenzetal.,2009b).The bestresultsfor
dayaheadforecastinghavesofarbeenobtainedfrompostprocessingofglobalNWPmodels,which
have outperformed forecasts based on mesoscale NWP models. The performance of global NWP
models also seems less dependent on the region of evaluation (Lorenz et al., 2009b). This is also
suggestedbyMathiesenandKleissl(2011),whonotedbiaspatternsfortheECMWFmodelintheUS
similartothosereportedforGermany.Thebenchmarkingexercisesalsohighlightthatsolarforecast
accuracydependsontheregionofevaluation:forinstance,RMSEsrangedfromabout20%to35%in
Spain,reaching40%to60%inCentralEurope(Lorenzetal.,2009b).

5.3 Factorsthatinfluenceforecastaccuracy
Introduction
ThesolarandhencethePVproductionforecastingaccuracyaremainlyinfluencedbythevariabilityof
the meteorological and climatological conditions. To a minor extent, accuracy is affected by
uncertaintiesrelatedtothedifferentmodellingstepsthatareneededtomakeenergyforecastsout
of irradiation forecasts. The maximum achievable accuracy is determined mainly by the following
factors:

Localclimateandweatherconditions

Singlesiteorregionalforecast

Forecasthorizon

Accuracymetricused

Localclimateandweatherconditions
As stated in (Beyer et al., 2009) and (Lorenz et al., 2009), the accuracy of solar and PV forecasts
dependsmostlyonclimatetypeandweatherconditions.Itwasshownin(Beyeretal.,2009)aspart

24

of a study performed with 26 ground measurement stations in Spain during one year (2005) that
forecastaccuracyishighlyinfluencedbyregionalclimate.Inthatstudy,forecastaccuracymeasures
(bothRMSEandbias)wereshowntobemuchpoorerforinstallationsinthenorthernregionofSpain
ascomparedtothecentralandsouthernregionsofSpain.Also (Lorenzetal.,2009)foundthatfor
central European stations, the relative Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) ranges from 40% to 60%
compared with values of 20% to 35% for Spanish stations. Another study focusing on Switzerland
(Mller and Remund, 2010) concluded that the forecast error (RMSE) was lower in places with
sunnierweatherconditions.
Among the factors that can explain this regional dependence are the dependence on weather
situation(cloudsthatarecommonlyrepresentedbytheclearskyindexkT*),thesunelevationangle
andthelocalterrainconditions.AsshowninFigure9,thereisadirectrelationshipbetweenthesky
conditionsandtheaccuracyoftheforecasts(Beyeretal.,2009):Clearskiesarerelativelyeasierto
forecast (lower percent RMSE) than partly cloudy and overcast weather conditions. Figure 9 also
showsthattheforecastaccuracydecreasesasthesolarelevationangledecreases.Thesolarelevation
angledistributionnotonlycausesaregionaldependencyoftheforecastaccuracy,butalsoaseasonal
dependencyasfoundin(Beyeretal.,2009)and(Lorenzetal.,2009)aswellasdailyone(Mllerand
Remund,2010),compromisingtheforecastingasthesolarelevationdecreases.
Finally, concerning the local terrain conditions, it has been shown in (Pelland et al., 2011) that
forecasting accuracy of a single site is highly affected due to microclimatic effects, especially in
mountainousregions.

Figure9RMSEasafunctionofthecosineofthesolarzenithangleandthepredictedclearskyindex(Beyeret
al.,2009).Thesolarelevationangleincreasesfromlefttoright.

Singlesiteorregionalforecast
Besides singlesite forecasting, forecasting of the aggregated regional PV production is often
demanded.Asinthecaseofwindforecasting,Lorenzetal.(2009)showthatsolarandPVforecast
accuracyimprovessignificantlyasthesizeofthegeographicareaunderconsiderationincreases,with
areductioninrootmeansquareerror(RMSE)ofabout64%for aforecastoveran areathesizeof
Germany as comparedtoapointforecast.Thisisdueprimarilytodecreasingcorrelationsbetween
forecast errors from two locations as their separation increases, leading to (partial) cancellations
betweentheerrorsatindividualsites.ThiseffectwasmodelledindetailbyFockenetal.(2002)inthe

25

caseofwind:Theyshowedthatboththesizeofthegeographicareaandthenumberofstationsor
systemsconsideredcontributedtoerrorreduction,withthereductionfromanincreasednumberof
stationssaturatingbeyondacertainthresholdforagivengeographicarea.
Forecasthorizon
Asdiscussedinsection3,themostadequateforecastingtechniquedependsontheforecasthorizon
required: Numerical Weather Prediction models (NWP) perform best for horizons of 1 or 2 days
ahead, whereas statistical models based on local ground measurements, possibly combined with
satelliteorskyimagerdataofcloudmovements,aremoreadequateforshorthorizonsoflessthan6
hours((Hammeretal.,1999)and(Lorenzetal.,2009)).Accuraciestypicallydecreasewithincreasing
forecasthorizon,withasteeperdecreaseformethodssuchaspersistenceforecastingbasedsolelyon
pastdata.
Accuracymeasures
AsdiscussedinSections5.1and5.2,differentusersareinterestedindifferentmeasuresofforecast
accuracyandthestrategiesusedtooptimizeforecastaccuracywillvarydependingonwhichaccuracy
measuresareselectedforoptimization.Whenstatingforecastaccuracy,itisimportanttospecifynot
only which metric is used (RMSE, MAE or other), but also to clarify whether this value has been
calculated over complete 24 hour periods or only taking into account daylight hours. When
normalizing the accuracy value, especially for PV forecasts, it should be specified whether it is
normalizedbythemeanproducedpowerduringtheconsideredperiodortheratedpowerofthePV
system(s).

26

27

6.

Solarforecastsurveyresults

Important criteriafor theevaluationofforecast systems were determined andbroughttogetherin

thequestionnaire"UseofsolarandPVforecastsforenhancedPVintegration".Itwasdistributedin
August2011toabout30expertsinordertocollectdifferentcasestudies.
Thequestionnaireincludedatotalof34questionsgroupedin7blocks:
1. modelnames
2. temporalrange
3. postprocessingschemes(e.g.MOS)
4. additionalparameters(e.g.globalradiationoninclinedplanes,PVproduction)
5. spatialinformationandaggregation
6. forecastevaluation
7. uncertaintyandreferences
It was aiming at shortest (0 6 h) as well as short time (6 72 h) and at statistical as well as
deterministicforecasts.
Uptonow15organizationshavefilledinthequestionnaire.Theorganizationsarefromtheprivate
andpublicsectors(universitiesandmeteorologicaloffices)andarebasedinNorthAmerica,Europe
andJapan.Table2givesanoverviewofthe15answers.
Table2Overviewofsurveyresults.
Organi
sation
form
Science
Science
Met.office

Source

Type

Global
model

DLR(DE)
CanmetENERGY(CAN)
JWA(JP)

ECMWF
GEM

Met.office
University
Private
University
University
University
University
University

MeteoSwiss(CHE)
Univ.Oldenburg/
Meteocontrol(DE)
Univ.Jaen(ES)
DTUIMM(DK)
AIST/Waseda(JP)
Univ.GIFU(JP)
UCSD(USA)

NWP
NWP/P
Cloud
motion*
NWP
NWP/P

Mesoscale Reso
model
lution
[km]

25

15

ECMWF
ECMWF

Cosmo***

2/7
25

NWP
NWP
NWP/P
NWP
Cloud
motion**
NWP/P
NWP/P

ECM/GFS
ECMWF
JMAGSM
JMAGSM

WRF
Hirlam
NHM
MM5

5
2
<0.1

Private
Private

Area

Point
Point
Point
Point
Point/
Regional
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point

3E(BE)
ECMWF

Point
BlueskyWetteranalyse
GFS
Cosmo

Point
(A)
Private
Irsolav(ES)
NWP/P
GFS

Point
Private
Meteotest(CH)
NWP
GFS
WRF
10
Point
Private
WeatherAnalytics(USA) NWP/P
GFS

1
Point
NWP=numericalweatherpredictionmodel,P=postprocessing,*=satelliteimages,**=Skyimager
***Cosmo2kmfor024h,Cosmo7kmfor072hforecasts.

28

Maximum
time
horizon[d]
2
2
0.25
1/3
3
3
2
1.5
2
<0.1
6
3
3
2.5
6

The results of the questionnaire show only a part of the models used worldwide. Especially in
Germany, many commercial models are run as regional power prediction is needed for the grid
integrationofPVduetothehigherpenetrationlevel.Asaruleofthumb,regionalPVforecastsappear
tobeneededwhenyearlyenergyproductionofPVreachesalevelof12%ofyearlyenergydemand.
Mostofthemodelsdescribeddealwiththetimeframeof672hoursaheadandincludenumerical
weatherpredictionmodels(NWP).Nopurelystatisticalmodelisincluded.
NWP
models
ECMWF
(www.ecmwf.org)
and
GFS
The
underlying
global
(http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/GFS/)arethosethatareusedmostoften(almost50%each).Itcan
benotedthatGFSismostlyusedbyprivatecompanies,asECMWFistooexpensivetouseforsmall
privatecompanies(althoughtheaccuracyoftheradiationparametersofECMWFishigheraswillbe
shownlater).MostgroupsusingNWPareusingeitheralimitedareaforecastmodeland/orstatistical
postprocessing.
InTable3theinternetlinksforthemesoscalemodelsandthesolarradiationmodelsusedarelisted.
Table3Internetlinksofthemesoscaleandsolarradiationmodels
Type

Name

Link

Mesoscale
/solar
Mesoscale
Mesoscale
Mesoscale
Mesoscale
Solar

Cosmo

http://www.cosmomodel.org

Hirlam
MM5
NHM
WRF
Univ.
Oldenburg/
Meteocontrol
(DE)
UCSD(USA)
Univ.Jaen(ES)
Univ.GIFU(JP)
3E(BE)
Bluesky
Wetteranalyse
(A)
Irsolav(ES)
Meteotest(CH)
Weather
Analytics(USA)

http://hirlam.org
http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/mm5/
http://www.mrijma.go.jp/Project/mrinpd/INDEXE.htm
http://www.wrfmodel.org
http://www.meteocontrol.de/energyweather
services/prognosedienstleistungen/solarstromprognose/

Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar
Solar

Solar
Solar
Solar

http://solar.ucsd.edu
http://matras.ujaen.es
http://net.cive.gifuu.ac.jp
http://www.3E.eu
http://www.blueskywetter.com

www.irsolav.com
http://www.meteotest.ch/en/footernavi/energy_economy/energy_forecasts/
http://www.weatheranalytics.com

Postprocessingisdoneeitherbysimpledebiasingandsmoothingofseveralsurroundingpixels,by
Kalmanfiltersorbymorecomplexneuralnetworks(mostlybygroupsinSpainandJapan).Standard
modeloutputstatistics(MOS)likemultiplelinearregressionsarenotusedintheincludedexamples.
About50%ofthemodelsalsoincludeadditionalparameterslikePVproduction,andnotonlyglobal
radiationonahorizontalplane.
Two modelsare madefor veryshorttermforecasting.Onemodel madeby Universityof California
San Diego (UCSD) is based on a sky imager and delivers data up to 20 minutes ahead (see Section
3.2.1).TheothermodelcomingfromtheJapanWeatherAssociation(JWA)isbasedoncloudmotion
vectorsanddeliversresultsupto6hoursahead.Thistypeofmodelisalsorunforexamplebythe

29

State University of New York and the University of Oldenburg (Lorenz et al., 2004), but those
organisationsdidnotfillinthequestionnaireforthistypeofmodel.
14of15modelswereusedforpointforecastsandonlyonealsoforaregionalforecast.Theregional
forecastismadewithhelpofaregionalisationorupscalingmodelbasedononlinePVmeasurements
(Lorenzetal.,2011).
Informationaboutaccuracywasgivenfor13ofthe15models.Asexpected,theresultsaredifficultto
compare,asthevalidationsweremadeatdifferentlocationswithdifferenttimesteps.Nevertheless,
we try to show an overview in Table 4 in order to give an indication of the scale of uncertainties.
Whenever possible, we compare the root mean square error (RMSE, see 5.1) in relation to
persistencebygivingaratio(in%)offorecastRMSEtopersistenceRMSE.Toenhancethequalityof
the comparison we have entered also the results of the benchmarking within the IEA SHC Task 36
(Lorenzetal.,2009)aswellasthepublicationofPellandetal.(2011).
Table4Uncertaintyinformationforthegivenmodels.
(Ifnotmarked,theuncertaintiesaretakenfromthequestionnaire).
Source

Location

DLR(DE)

SouthernSpain

CanmetENERGY(CAN)

Canada,USA

JWA(JP)
MeteoSwiss(CH)
Univ.Oldenburg/
Meteocontrol(DE)

3E(BE)

Japan
Switzerland
Switzerland
SouthernSpain
Canada,Spain
SouthernSpain
Denmark
Japan
Gifu
SanDiego,
4days
Benelux

1h,day1

1h,day1
1h
30sec.
5min.
1h,day1

2
65%
61%2
57%2
2
72%
2
68%

50%
75%

BlueskyWetteranalyse(A)
Irsolav(ES)
Meteotest(CH)
WeatherAnalytics(USA)

Switzerland
Spain
Switzerland

1h,day1
1h,day1
1h,day1

65%

23
72%

Univ.Jaen(ES)
DTUIMM(DK)
AIST/Waseda(JP)
Univ.GIFU(JP)
UCSD(USA)

Timestep
and
forecast
time
1h,day1
1h,day1
2
30Min,1h.

1h,day1

Uncertainty
%ofpersistence
(=100%skillscore)

Uncertainty
RMSE(relativeor
absolute)

DNI:
5064%RMSE

57%

140W/m

42%RMSE
21%RMSE

2
100W/m
64%RMSE

GHI:100W/m,44%
Power:47%

1835%RMSE
41%50%RMSE

Foraforecasttimehorizonof2448htheRMSEisintherangeof5772%ofpersistenceRMSE.
Theresultsaredependentonthesite.Thecloudiertheregion,thehighertheuncertainty.Thebest
resultsfordayaheadforecastsareachievedwiththeGEMandECMWFmodelsincombinationwith
postprocessing,whilethehighestvaluesofuncertaintyarereachedbyGFSbasedWRF.Theuseof
mesoscalemodelsdoesnotseem to enhancethe quality.Postprocessing(mainlyspatial averaging
1

Pellandetal.,2011
Lorenzetal.,2009
3
MllerandRemund,2010
2

30

andbiascorrections)canlowertheuncertainties(relatively)by1525%(Pellandetal.,2011,Mller
andRemund,2010).
Thespatialresolutionisintherangeof225km.Theinfluenceofresolutiononthequalityofthe
results is not apparent (as it is for other meteorological parameters). This is also supported by the
experiencethatspatialsmoothingofmodeloutputleadstoloweruncertainty(seeSection3.2.2).The
reason for this is the fact that the exact positions of clouds cannot be calculated for more than 6
hoursaheadduetochaoticbehaviourofthesystem.

31

Conclusion
Solar and photovoltaic forecasting is a dynamic research and development area, with new models
andfindingsemergingrapidly.Theoverviewofthecurrentstateoftheartinthisfieldpresentedin
this report is therefore bound to gradually become outdated and the authors welcome this! In
particular,solarandphotovoltaicforecastshaveonlyrecentlybeenintroducedintoelectricitysystem
operation,forinstanceinGermanyandSpain.Dialoguebetweensystemoperatorsandtheresearch
communitywillhelpensurethatappropriateaccuracymetricsaretargetedandbecomethefocusof
forecastimprovementefforts.Probabilisticorensembleforecastingforinstancecouldformthebasis
ofprobabilisticunitcommitmentorothernovelapproachestosystemoperationadaptedtoastrong
presence of variable renewables on the grid. Forecasting rapid solar ramp rates is also garnering
attentionamongelectricitysystemoperatorsandhasnotyetreceivedsignificantattentionfromthe
researchcommunity.Likewise,theadventofthesmartgridwithpredictivecontrolofbuildingsand
electricity loads will place its own requirements on solar and PV forecasting and help spur new
developments.

32

References
Bacher P, Madsen H, Nielsen HA. Online shortterm solar power forecasting, Solar Energy,
2009;83(10):177283.
Bedka, KM,J.R.Mecikalski,2005:ApplicationofSatelliteDerivedAtmosphericMotionVectorsfor
EstimatingMesoscaleFlows.J.Appl.Meteor.,44,17611772
BeyerHG,PoloMartinezJ,SuriM,TorresJL,LorenzE,MllerSC,HoyerKlickCandIneichenP.D
1.1.3ReportonBenchmarkingofRadiationProducts.Reportundercontractno.038665ofMESoR,
2009.Availablefordownloadathttp://www.mesor.net/deliverables.html,(January12,2012).
BoschJL,YZheng,JKleissl.Derivingcloudvelocityfromanarrayofsolarradiationmeasurements,
SolarEnergy2013;87,pp.196203,10.1016/j.solener.2012.10.020.
CaiT, Duan S, ChenC.In:Forecastingpoweroutputforgridconnectedphotovoltaicpowersystem
without using solar radiation measurement. 2nd international symposium on power electronics for
distributedgenerationsystems,PEDG2010;;2010.p.7737.
Cameron CP. Comparison of PV System PerformanceModel Predictions with Measured PV System
Performance.33rdIEEEPVSCSanDiego,2008.
Cao J, Lin X. Study of hourly and daily solar irradiation forecast using diagonal recurrent wavelet
neuralnetworks.EnergyConversionandManagement.2008;49(6):1396406.
Cebecauer T, ri M and Gueymard CA. Uncertainty sources in satellitederived direct normal
irradiance: how can prediction accuracy be improved globally?. Proceedings of the SolarPACES
Conference,Granada,Spain,2023Sept2011.
Cebecauer T, ri M, Perez R.HighperformanceMSG satellitemodelforoperationalsolarenergy
applications,ASESNationalSolarConference,Phoenix,USA2010
Chaouachi A, Kamel RM, Nagasaka K. Neural network ensemblebased solar power generation
shorttermforecasting.JournalofAdvancedComputationalIntelligenceandIntelligentInformatics.
2010;14(1):6975.
ChowCW,UrquhartB,KleisslJ,LaveM,DominguezA,ShieldsJ,WashomB.Intrahourforecasting
with a total sky imager at the UC San Diego solar energy testbed, Solar Energy 2011;
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2011.08.025.
DrewsA,deKeizerAC,BeyerHG,LorenzE,BetckeJ,vanSarkWGJHM,HeydenreichW,WiemkenE,
Stettler S, Toggweiler P, Bofinger S, Schneider M, Heilscher G, HeinemannD. Monitoring and
remotefailuredetectionofgridconnectedPVsystemsbasedonsatelliteobservations.SolarEnergy
2007;81(4),pp.548564,doi:10.1016/j.solener.2006.06.019.
EPIA Connecting the Sun: Solar photovoltaics on the road to largescale grid integration,Report,
September2012.Availablefordownloadathttp://www.connectingthesun.eu.
ErnstB,ReyerF,VanzettaJ.In:Windpowerandphotovoltaicpredictiontoolsforbalancingandgrid
operation.2009CIGRE/IEEEPESjointsymposiumintegrationofwidescalerenewableresourcesinto
thepowerdeliverysystem,CIGRE/PES2009;;2009.
EspinarB,RamirezL,PoloJ,ZaralejoLF,WaldL.Analysisoftheinfluencesofuncertaintiesininput
variables on the outcomes of the Heliosat2 method. Solar Energy, 83,1731741, 2009.
doi:10.1016/j.solener.2009.06.010

33

Focken U, Lange M, Mnnich K, Waldl HP, Beyer HG and Luig A. Shortterm prediction of the
aggregatedpoweroutputofwindfarmsastatisticalanalysisofthereductionofthepredictionerror
byspatialsmoothingeffects.J.WindEng.Ind.Aerodyn.2002;90,pp.231246.
Ghonima M, J Kleissl. A Method for Cloud Classification Based on Ground Based Sky Imagery,
AtmosphericMeasurementTechnology2012;5,pp.28812892.
HamillTM,NehrkornT.AShortTermCloudForecastSchemeUsingCrossCorrelations,Weatherand
Forecasting,8(4):401411
Hammer A, Heinemann D, Lorenz E and Lckehe B. Shortterm forecasting of solar radiation: A
statisticalapproachusingsatellitedata.SolarEnergy67.1999
Hoff TE, Perez R, Kleissl J, Renne D, Stein J. Reporting of irradiance modeling relative prediction
errors,Prog.Photovolt:Res.Appl2012.doi:10.1002/pip.2225.
HoyerKlickC,BeyerHG,DumortierD,SchroedterHomscheidtM,WaldL,MartinoliM,SchilingsC,
GschwindB,MenardL,GaboardiE,RamirezSantigosaL,PoloJ,CebecauerT,HuldT,SuriM,deBlas
M, Lorenz E, Pfatischer R, Remund J, Ineichen P, Tsvetkov A, Hofierka J. Management and
ExploitationofSolarResourceKnowledge.ProceedingsofEurosun2008;Lisbon,Portugal.
HuangY,LuJ,LiuC,XuX,WangW,ZhouX.In:Comparativestudyofpowerforecastingmethodsfor
PV stations. 2010 international conference on power system technology: Technological innovations
makingpowergridsmarter,POWERCON2010;;2010.
IEAPVPSTask1.TrendsinphotovoltaicapplicationsSurveyreportofselectedIEAcountries
between1992and2011.ReportIEAPVPST121:2011.Availableonlineat:http://www.iea
pvps.org/index.php?id=92(November8,2012).
Jones LE, Strategies and Decision Support Systems for Integrating Variable Energy Resources in
Control Centers for Reliable Grid Operations Global Best Practices, Examples of Excellence and
LessonsLearned,Reportundercontractno.DEEE0001375ofU.S.Government,December2011.
King DL. Photovoltaic Module and Array Performance Characterization Methods for all System
OperatingConditions.SandiaNationalLaboratoriesAlbuquerque,1996
KleisslJ(editor),SolarResourceAssessmentandForecasting,Elsevier,March2013(estimated)
Kudo M, Takeuchi A, Nozaki Y, Endo H, Jiro S. Forecasting electric power generation in a
photovoltaicpowersystemforanenergynetwork.ElectrEngJpn.2009;167(4):1623.
Leese JA, Novak CS, Clark BB. An automated technique for obtaining cloud motion from
geosynchronoussatellitedatausingcrosscorrelation.J.Appl.Meteor.1971,16,118132.
LorenzE,HurkaJ,HeinemannD,BeyerHG.Irradianceforecastingforthepowerpredictionofgrid
connectedphotovoltaicsystems.IEEEJournalofSelectedTopicsinAppliedEarthObservationsand
RemoteSensing2009;2(1),pp.210,doi:10.1109/JSTARS.2009.2020300.
Lorenz E, Hur J, Karampela G, Hei D, Beyer HG and Schneider M. QualifiedForecastof Ensemble
Power Production by Spatially Dispersed GridConnected PV Systems, in Proceedings of the 23rd
EuropeanPhotovoltaicSolarEnergyConferenceandExhibition,Valenci,2008,pp.32853291.
LorenzE,RemundJ,MllerSC,TraunmllerW,SteinmaurerG,PozoD,RuizAriasJA,LaraFanegoV,
Ramirez L, Romeo MG, Kurz C, Pomares LM, Guerrero CG, 2009b. Benchmarking of Different
Approaches to Forecast Solar Irradiance. Proceedings of the 24th European Photovoltaic Solar

34

Energy Conference 2009; Hamburg, Germany: pp. 4199 4208, doi:10.4229/24thEUPVSEC2009

5BV.2.50.
LorenzE,ScheidstegerT,HurkaJ,HeinemannD,KurzC.RegionalPVpowerpredictionforimproved
gridintegration.ProgPhotovoltaicsResAppl.2011;19(7):75771.
Lorenz E, Hammer A, Heinemann D. Short term forecasting of solar radiation based on satellite
data,EUROSUN2004(ISESEuropeSolarCongress),Freiburg,Germany,20.06.23.06.2004
LorenzE,HeinemannD,KurzC.Localandregionalphotovoltaicpowerpredictionforlargescalegrid
integration:Assessmentofanewalgorithmforsnowdetection.ProgPhotovoltaicsResAppl.2011a
(inpress).
LorenzE,HeinemannD,WickramarathneH,BeyerHGandBofinger,S.ForecastofEnsemblePower
ProductionbyGridConnectedPvSystems,inProceedingsofthe20thEuropeanPVConference,Milan,
Italy,2007,p.3.97.9.
Madsen H, Pinson P, Kariniotakis G, Nielsen HA, Nielsen TS. Standardizing the performance
evaluationofshorttermwindpowerpredictionmodels.WindEng.2005;29(6):47589.
Marquez R, Coimbra CFM. Forecasting of Global and Direct Solar Irradiance Using Stochastic
LearningMethods,GroundExperimentsandtheNWSDatabase,SolarEnergy.2011(85),pp.746756
Marquez R, GueorguievVGGandCoimbraCFM.ForecastingofGlobalHorizontalIrradianceUsing
SkyCoverIndices,ASMEJournalofSolarEnergyEngineering2012(inpress).
MathiesenP,BrownJandKleisslJ.RegimeBasedCaliforniaNWPProbabilisticIrradianceForecasts,
IEEETransactionsonSustainableEnergy2012;99,10.1109/TSTE.2012.2200704.
MathiesenP,KleisslJ.Evaluationofnumericalweatherpredictionforintradaysolarforecastingin
thecontinentalunitedstates.SolarEnergy.2011;85(5):96777.
Mellit A. Artificial Intelligence technique for modelling and forecasting of solar radiation data: a
review.InternationalJournalofArtificialIntelligenceandSoftComputing2008.1,5276.
Miller, SD, CL Combs, N Sengupta, D Chand, AK Heidinger, 2011. Toward evaluating shortterm
predictions of solar irradiance at the surface: persistence, satellitebased trajectory and numerical
weatherpredictionmodels.AmericanSolarEnergySocietyConference2011.
MllerSC and Remund J. Advances in radiation forecast based on regional weather models MM5
and WRF. 25th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference. Valencia, Spain, 610 September,
2010.
Parker DF. Estimating uncertainty in the projected annual energy yield of a photovoltaic system.
JPV2011070052R.2011
Pedro HTC, Coimbra CFM. Assessment of Forecasting Techniques for Solar Power Output with No
ExogenousVariables,SolarEnergy2012(inpress)
Pelland S, Galanis G, Kallos G. Solar and photovoltaic forecasting through postprocessing of the
GlobalEnvironmentalMultiscalenumericalweatherpredictionmodel.ProgPhotovoltResAppl2011
(inpress).
Perez R, Kivalov S, Zelenka A, Schlemmer J and Hemker K Jr. Improving The Performance of
SatellitetoIrradianceModelsusingtheSatellitesInfraredSensors.Proc.,ASESAnnualConference,
Phoenix,Arizona,2010b

35

PerezR,KivalovS,SchlemmerJ,HemkerKJr.,RenneD,HoffTE,Validationofshortandmedium
termoperationalsolarradiationforecastsintheUS,SolarEnergy,inpress,2010a.
Perez R, Beauharnois M, Hemker K, Kivalov S, Lorenz E, Pelland S, Schlemmer J, Van Knowe G.
EvaluationofNumericalWeatherPredictionsolarirradianceforecastsintheUS.Proceedingsofthe
2011ASESAnnualConference;Raleigh,NorthCarolina,May1721,2011.
PerezR,MooreK,WilcoxS,RennD,ZelenkaA.Forecastingsolarradiationpreliminaryevaluation
ofanapproachbaseduponthenationalforecastdatabase.SolarEnergy.2007;81(6):80912.
RansomeS.RecentStudiesofPVPerformanceModels.SRCLLondon,2010
ReiseC.ErtragsgutachtenFrSolarstromanlagen:RechenmodelleundUnsicherheiten.Fraunhofer
InstitutefrSolareEnergiesytemeISEFreigburg,Germany
ShiJ,LeeW,LiuY,YangY,WangP.In:Forecastingpoweroutputofphotovoltaicsystembasedon
weather classification and support vector machine. Conference record IAS annual meeting (IEEE
industryapplicationssociety);2011.
Shields J, Karr M, Tooman T, Sowle D, Moore S. The whole sky imagera year of progress.
PresentedattheEighthAtmosphericRadiationMeasurement(ARM)ScienceTeamMeeting,Tucson,
Arizona,March2327,1998.
Suzuki,Takanobu;Wakao,Shinji;andOozeki,Takashi;NextDayInsolationForecastOverWideArea
by Using JustinTime Modeling, Proceedings of the 5th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy
Conversion,2010
Suzuki, Takanobu; Goto, Yusuke; Terazono, Takahiro; Wakao, Shinji; Oozeki, Takashi; Forecast
MethodofSolarIrradiancewithJustInTimeModeling,IEEJTransactionsonPowerandEnergy.Vol.
131,No.11,pp.912919(2011)(inJapanese)
Traunmller W, Steinmaurer G.Solarirradianceforecasting,benchmarkingofdifferenttechniques
andapplicationsofenergymeteorology.ProceedingsoftheEuroSun2010conference.September28
October1,2010,Graz,Austria.
Velden CS, Olander TL and Wanzong S. The impact of multispectral GOES8 wind information on
Atlantic tropical cyclone track forecasts in 1995. Part I: Dataset methodology, description, and case
analysis.Mon.Wea.Rev.1998,126,12021218.
WangS,ZhangN,ZhaoY,ZhanJ.In:Photovoltaicsystempowerforecastingbasedoncombinedgrey
modelandBPneuralnetwork.2011internationalconferenceonelectricalandcontrolengineering,
ICECE2011proceedings;2011.p.46236.
YonaA,SenjyuT,SaberAY,FunabashiT,SekineH,KimC.In:Applicationofneuralnetworkto24
hourahead generating power forecasting for PV system. IEEE power and energy society 2008
generalmeeting:Conversionanddeliveryofelectricalenergyinthe21stcentury,PES;2008.

36

37