Abstract
Weather forecasts from numerical weather prediction models play a central role in solar energy forecasting, where a cascade of physics-based models is used in a model chain approach to convert forecasts of solar irradiance to solar power production. Ensemble simulations from such weather models aim to quantify uncertainty in the future development of the weather, and can be used to propagate this uncertainty through the model chain to generate probabilistic solar energy predictions. However, ensemble prediction systems are known to exhibit systematic errors, and thus require post-processing to obtain accurate and reliable probabilistic forecasts. The overarching aim of our study is to systematically evaluate different strategies to apply post-processing in model chain approaches with a specific focus on solar energy: not applying any post-processing at all; post-processing only the irradiance predictions before the conversion; post-processing only the solar power predictions obtained from the model chain; or applying post-processing in both steps. In a case study based on a benchmark dataset for the Jacumba solar plant in the U.S., we develop statistical and machine learning methods for post-processing ensemble predictions of global horizontal irradiance (GHI) and solar power generation. Further, we propose a neural-network-based model for direct solar power forecasting that bypasses the model chain. Our results indicate that postprocessing substantially improves the solar power generation forecasts, in particular when post-processing is applied to the power predictions. The machine learning methods for post-processing slightly outperform the statistical methods, and the direct forecasting approach performs comparably to the post-processing strategies.
摘要
数值天气预报模型的天气预测结果在太阳能预测中起着核心作用, 进一步基于物理模型链方法将太阳辐照度预测值转为光功率预测值. 天气模型的集合预报主要用于量化未来天气预报的不确定性, 并可以将不确定性通过模型链传播, 生成概率性的太阳能预测. 然而, 集合预报系统通常会产生系统性误差, 因此需要通过后处理以获得准确可靠的概率预测. 本研究目标是针对太阳能预测, 系统评估不同后处理方法效果, 包括不进行任何后处理; 仅在辐照度预测进行后处理; 仅对通过模型链后的光功率预测进行后处理; 或对辐照度预测和光功率预测值均进行后处理. 基于美国Jacumba太阳能电站的基准数据集, 本文发展了针对总辐照度和光功率的集合预测的统计和机器学习方法. 此外, 我们提出了一种基于神经网络的光功率预测模型, 替代模型链. 结果表明, 后处理方法显著提高了太阳能预测的准确性, 尤其是在对光功率预测值进行后处理. 基于机器学习的后处理方法略微优于统计方法, 直接预测方法与最佳后处理策略的表现相当.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Appino, R. R., J. Á. González Ordiano, R. Mikut, R. Faulwasser, and V. Hagenmeyer, 2018: On the use of probabilistic forecasts in scheduling of renewable energy sources coupled to storages. Applied Energy, 210, 1207–1218, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.133.
Bakker, K., K. Whan, W. Knap, and M. Schmeits, 2019: Comparison of statistical post-processing methods for probabilistic NWP forecasts of solar radiation. Solar Energy, 191, 138–150, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.08.044.
Baran, Á., and S. Baran, 2024: A two-step machine-learning approach to statistical post-processing of weather forecasts for power generation. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 150, 1029–1047, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.4635.
Baran, S., and S. Lerch, 2015: Log-normal distribution based ensemble model output statistics models for probabilistic wind-speed forecasting. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 141, 2289–2299, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2521.
Baran, S., and S. Lerch, 2016: Mixture EMOS model for calibrating ensemble forecasts of wind speed. Environmetrics, 27, 116–130, https://doi.org/10.1002/env.2380.
Bi, K. F., L. X. Xie, H. H. Zhang, X. Chen, X. T. Gu, and Q. Tian, 2023: Accurate medium-range global weather forecasting with 3D neural networks. Nature, 619, 533–538, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06185-3.
Bremnes, J. B., 2020: Ensemble postprocessing using quantile function regression based on neural networks and bernstein polynomials. Mon. Wea. Rev., 148, 403–414, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-19-0227.1.
Bülte, C., N. Horat, J. Quinting, and S. Lerch, 2024: Uncertainty quantification for data-driven weather models. Available from https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.13458.
Chapman, W. E., L. Delle Monache, S. Alessandrini, A. C. Subramanian, F. M. Ralph, S.-P. Xie, S. Lerch, and N. Hayatbini, 2022: Probabilistic predictions from deterministic atmospheric river forecasts with deep learning. Mon. Wea. Rev., 150, 215–234, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-21-0106.1.
Czado, C., T. Gneiting, and L. Held, 2009: Predictive model assessment for count data. Biometrics, 65, 1254–1261, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2009.01191.x.
Demaeyer, J., and Coauthors, 2023: The EUPPBench postprocessing benchmark dataset v1.0. Earth System Science Data, 15, 2635–2653, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2635-2023.
Diebold, F. X., and R. S. Mariano, 1995: Comparing predictive accuracy. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 13, 253–263, https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.1995.10524599.
Erbs, D. G., S. A. Klein, and J. A. Duffie, 1982: Estimation of the diffuse radiation fraction for hourly, daily and monthly-average global radiation. Solar Energy, 28, 293–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(82)90302-4.
Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems, 2024: Recent facts about photovoltaics in Germany. Technical report. Available from https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/recent-facts-about-pv-in-germany.html.
Gneiting, T., and A. E. Raftery, 2007: Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102, 359–378, https://doi.org/10.1198/016214506000001437.
Gneiting, T., and M. Katzfuss, 2014: Probabilistic forecasting. Annual Review of Statistics and its Application, 1, 125–151, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-statistics-062713-085831.
Gneiting, T., A. E. Raftery, A. H. Westveld, and T. Goldman, 2005: Calibrated probabilistic forecasting using ensemble model output statistics and minimum CRPS estimation. Mon. Wea. Rev., 133, 1098–1118, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR2904.1.
Gneiting, T., F. Balabdaoui, and A. E. Raftery, 2007: Probabilistic forecasts, calibration and sharpness. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 69, 243–268, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9868.2007.00587.x.
Gneiting, T., S. Lerch, and B. Schulz, 2023a: Probabilistic solar forecasting: Benchmarks, post-processing, verification. Solar Energy, 252, 72–80, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2022.12.054.
Gneiting, T., and Coauthors, 2023b: Model diagnostics and forecast evaluation for quantiles. Annual Review of Statistics and its Application, 10, 597–621, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-statistics-032921-020240.
Gottwalt, S., J. Gärttner, H. Schmeck, and C. Weinhardt, 2017: Modeling and valuation of residential demand flexibility for renewable energy integration. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 8, 2565–2574, https://doi.org/10.1109/tsg.2016.2529424.
Haupt, S. E., and Coauthors, 2019: The use of probabilistic forecasts: Applying them in theory and practice. IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, 17, 46–57, https://doi.org/10.1109/MPE.2019.2932639.
Haupt, S. E., W. Chapman, S. V. Adams, C. Kirkwood, J. S. Hosking, N. H. Robinson, S. Lerch, and A. C. Subramanian, 2021: Towards implementing artificial intelligence post-processing in weather and climate: Proposed actions from the Oxford 2019 workshop. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 379, 20200091 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2020.0091.
Horat, N., and S. Lerch, 2024: Deep learning for postprocessing global probabilistic forecasts on subseasonal time scales. Mon. Wea. Rev., 152, 667–687, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-23-0150.1.
Jordan, A., F. Krüger, and S. Lerch, 2019: Evaluating probabilistic forecasts with scoringRules. Journal of Statistical Software, 90, 1–37, https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v090.i12.
King, D. L., W. E. Boyson, and J. A. Kratochvil, 2004: Photovoltaic array performance model. AC04-94AL85000.
Kingma, D. P., and J. Ba, 2015: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. Proc. 3rd International Conf. on Learning Representations, San Diego, USA.
Lam, R., and Coauthors, 2023: Learning skillful medium-range global weather forecasting. Science, 382, 1416–1421, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adi2336.
Lang, S., and Coauthors, 2024: AIFS – ECMWF’s data-driven forecasting system. Available from https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.01465.
Lauret, P., M. David, and P. Pinson, 2019: Verification of solar irradiance probabilistic forecasts. Solar Energy, 194, 254–271, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.10.041.
Lawrence Berkeley National Lab., 2021: Solar-to-grid public data file for utility-scale (UPV) and distributed photovoltaics (DPV) generation, capacity credit, and value for 2012–2020. Available from https://doi.org/10.25984/1825661.
Le Gal La Salle, J., J. Badosa, M. David, P. Pinson, and P. Lauret, 2020: Added-value of ensemble prediction system on the quality of solar irradiance probabilistic forecasts. Renewable Energy, 162, 1321–1339, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.07.042.
Lerch, S., and T. L. Thorarinsdottir, 2013: Comparison of non-homogeneous regression models for probabilistic wind speed forecasting. Tellus A: Dynamic Meteorology and Oceanography, 65, 21206, https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v65i0.21206.
Lerch, S., and S. Baran, 2017: Similarity-based semilocal estimation of post-processing models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C: Applied Statistics, 66, 29–51, https://doi.org/10.1111/rssc.12153.
Matheson, J. E., and R. L. Winkler, 1976: Scoring rules for continuous probability distributions. Management Science, 22, 1087–1096, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.22.10.1087.
Mayer, M. J., and G. Gróf, 2021: Extensive comparison of physical models for photovoltaic power forecasting. Applied Energy, 283, 116239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116239.
Mayer, M. J., and D. Yang, 2022: Probabilistic photovoltaic power forecasting using a calibrated ensemble of model chains. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, 112821, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112821.
Mayer, M. J., and D. Yang, 2023: Pairing ensemble numerical weather prediction with ensemble physical model chain for probabilistic photovoltaic power forecasting. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 175, 113171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113171.
Messner, J. W., G. J. Mayr, A. Zeileis, and D. S. Wilks, 2014: Heteroscedastic extended logistic regression for postprocessing of ensemble guidance. Mon. Wea. Rev., 142, 448–456, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-13-00271.1.
Mikolov, T., K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean, 2013: Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. Proc. 1st International Conf. on Learning Representations, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA.
Phipps, K., S. Lerch, M. Andersson, R. Mikut, V. Hagenmeyer, and N. Ludwig, 2022: Evaluating ensemble post-processing for wind power forecasts. Wind Energy, 25, 1379–1405, https://doi.org/10.1002/we.2736.
Rasp, S., and S. Lerch, 2018: Neural networks for postprocessing ensemble weather forecasts. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 3885–3900, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-18-0187.1.
Reda, I., and A. Andreas, 2004: Solar position algorithm for solar radiation applications. Solar Energy, 76, 577–589, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2003.12.003.
Reindl, D. T., W. A. Beckman, and J. A. Duffie, 1990: Evaluation of hourly tilted surface radiation models. Solar Energy, 45, 9–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-092X(90)90061-G.
Roberts, J. J., A. A. Mendiburu Zevallos, and A. M. Cassula, 2017: Assessment of photovoltaic performance models for system simulation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 1104–1123, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.10.022.
Scheuerer, M., 2014: Probabilistic quantitative precipitation forecasting using ensemble model output statistics. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 140, 1086–1096, https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.2183.
Scheuerer, M., M. B. Switanek, R. P. Worsnop, and T. M. Hamill, 2020: Using artificial neural networks for generating probabilistic subseasonal precipitation forecasts over California. Mon. Wea. Rev., 148, 3489–3506, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-20-0096.1.
Schulz, B., and S. Lerch, 2022: Machine learning methods for postprocessing ensemble forecasts of wind gusts: A systematic comparison. Mon. Wea. Rev., 150, 235–257, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-21-0150.1.
Schulz, B., M. El Ayari, S. Lerch, and S. Baran, 2021: Post-processing numerical weather prediction ensembles for probabilistic solar irradiance forecasting. Solar Energy, 220, 1016–1031, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2021.03.023.
Sengupta, M., Y. Xie, A. Lopez, A. Habte, G. Maclaurin, and J. Shelby, 2018: The national solar radiation data base (NSRDB). Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 89, 51–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.003.
Song, M., and Coauthors, 2024: Non-crossing quantile regression neural network as a calibration tool for ensemble weather forecasts. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 41, 1417–1437, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-023-3184-5.
Taillardat, M., O. Mestre, M. Zamo, and P. Naveau, 2016: Calibrated ensemble forecasts using quantile regression forests and ensemble model output statistics. Mon. Wea. Rev., 144, 2375–2393, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-15-0260.1.
Theocharides, S., G. Makrides, A. Livera, M. Theristis, P. Kaimakis, and G. E. Georghiou, 2020: Day-ahead photovoltaic power production forecasting methodology based on machine learning and statistical post-processing. Applied Energy, 268, 115023, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115023.
Thorarinsdottir, T. L., and T. Gneiting, 2010: Probabilistic forecasts of wind speed: Ensemble model output statistics by using heteroscedastic censored regression. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 173, 371–388, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2009.00616.x.
van der Meer, D. W., J. Widén, and J. Munkhammar, 2018: Review on probabilistic forecasting of photovoltaic power production and electricity consumption. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 1484–1512, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.212.
Vannitsem, S., and Coauthors, 2021: Statistical postprocessing for weather forecasts: Review, challenges, and avenues in a big data world. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 102, E681–E699, https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0308.1.
Veldkamp, S., K. Whan, S. Dirksen, and M. Schmeits, 2021: Statistical postprocessing of wind speed forecasts using convolutional neural networks. Mon. Wea. Rev., 149, 1141–1152, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-20-0219.1.
Wang, W., D. Yang, T. Hong, and J. Kleissl, 2022: An archived dataset from the ECMWF ensemble prediction system for probabilistic solar power forecasting. Solar Energy, 248, 64–75, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2022.10.062.
Yagli, G. M., D. Yang, and D. Srinivasan, 2020: Ensemble solar forecasting using data-driven models with probabilistic post-processing through GAMLSS. Solar Energy, 208, 612–622, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.07.040.
Yang, D., 2019: A guideline to solar forecasting research practice: Reproducible, operational, probabilistic or physically-based, ensemble, and skill (ROPES). Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 11, 022701, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5087462.
Yang, D., 2020: Ensemble model output statistics as a probabilistic site-adaptation tool for solar irradiance: A revisit. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 12, 036101, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0010003.
Yang, D., and C. A. Gueymard, 2020: Ensemble model output statistics for the separation of direct and diffuse components from 1-min global irradiance. Solar Energy, 208, 591–603, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.05.082.
Yang, D., and D. van der Meer, 2021: Post-processing in solar forecasting: Ten overarching thinking tools. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 140, 110735, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110735.
Yang, D., E. Wu, and J. Kleissl, 2019: Operational solar forecasting for the real-time market. International Journal of Forecasting, 35, 1499–1519, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2019.03.009.
Yang, D., X. Xia, and M. J. Mayer, 2024: A tutorial review of the solar power curve: Regressions, model chains, and their hybridization and probabilistic extensions. Adv. Atmos. Sci., 41, 1023–1067, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-024-3229-4.
Zhong, X., L. Chen, X. Fan, W. Qian, J. Liu, and H. Li, 2024: FuXi-2.0: Advancing Machine Learning Weather Forecasting Model for Practical Applications. Available from https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.07188.
Acknowledgements
The research leading to these results was carried out within the Young Investigator Group “Artificial Intelligence for Probabilistic Weather Forecasting” funded by the Vector Stiftung. In addition, this project received funding from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the Baden-Württemberg Ministry of Science as part of the Excellence Strategy of the German Federal and State Governments. We thank Peter Knippertz, Wenting Wang and Dazhi Yang for helpful comments and discussions. We further thank the two anonymous reviewers, whose constructive comments helped to improve an earlier version of this paper.
Funding
Funding note Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Article Highlights
• Post-processing substantially improves solar power forecasts, particularly, when the post-processing is applied to the power predictions.
• Whether or not the GHI forecasts are post-processed before using them as input to the model chain plays an almost negligible role.
• Post-processing methods for GHI and photovoltaic power should make use of the hour of the day, either as a predictor or by utilizing separate models.
• A neural-network-based, direct forecasting model that bypasses the model chain performs comparably to the best postprocessing strategy.
This paper is a contribution to the special topic on Solar Energy Meteorology.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Horat, N., Klerings, S. & Lerch, S. Improving Model Chain Approaches for Probabilistic Solar Energy Forecasting through Post-processing and Machine Learning. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 42, 297–312 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-024-4219-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00376-024-4219-2
