Adding wind power to a wind‐rich grid: Evaluating secondary suitability metrics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As the quantity of renewable electricity generation from wind farms increases in a region, the costs associated with integrating it into the broader electricity system also grow. This is primarily due to the need for dispatchable generators that vary power output to compensate for wind farm power variations. Such “balancing services” are an economic cost to the system that is typically not passed on to wind farms. We propose including the use of technical merits other than capacity factor and cost of energy for evaluating new wind farm sites and present a new graphical geospatial method, with the intention of identifying sites that minimize the need for additional electricity balancing service and transmission congestion. Specifically, locations with low correlation to existing wind farms, locations with high correlation to load, locations with high characteristic power time‐shift from existing wind farms, and locations that relieve or do not negatively impact electricity transmission congestion are identified. A geospatial Venn diagram‐based method of visualization is presented. These methods will equip regional planners with new tools to encourage wind farm development in areas that benefit the electricity grid beyond the lowest bid price.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".