Wind Energy Expertise for Planned Wind Farm Vientos del Secano in Argentina

1.
Supplement of Wind Energy Expertise for
Vientos del Secano

Province of Buenos Aires
(Argentina)
Date: November 21, 2012

Report No.: 09-1-2084a
Client:
Parques Elicos Pampeanos S.A.
Av. Alicia Moreau de Justo 1050 (Piso 4 Oficina 196 Dock 7)
AR - C1107AAP Puerto Madero (Buenos Aires)
Consultant:
CUBE Engineering GmbH
Breitscheidstrae 6
D-34119 Kassel
Tel.: 0561 / 288573-0
Fax: 0561 / 288573-19
Certificate of accreditation
09-1-2084a Wind Energy Expertise Vientos del Secano Page 2 of 143
Parques Elicos Pampeanos S.A., which is a company founded by ABO Wind with the special
purpose of promoting this project, appointed CUBE Engineering GmbH in September 2012 to
elaborate the following wind energy expertise for planned wind farm Vientos del Secano near
Mayor Buratovich, Province of Buenos Aires (Argentina). This independent report was compiled
based on a local wind measurement using the latest scientific and technological techniques as
well as the Technical guideline No. 6 of the German Frdergesellschaft Wind (FGW). CUBE En-
gineering GmbH is accredited to DIN EN ISO/IEC 17025:2005 for site assessments in the field of
wind energy as shown Appendix II by the accreditation certificate. The calculation procedures be-
ing applied in-house at CUBE Engineering GmbH according to the regulations mentioned above
are fixed and documented in the internal process description wind energy expertise.
The quality of the wind study depends on the quality of the data delivered by the client or third
parties. In processing the data CUBE Engineering GmbH tries to ensure their quality, but is not
responsible for hidden data manipulations or errors. The consultancy does not guarantee the
forecast wind conditions and energy yield calculations. Any compensation claims relating to re-
duced yields will not be accepted. This wind study is presented in a comprehensive report as
complete as possible. However, if special additional information is required (e.g. in terms of due
diligence) please contact CUBE Engineering GmbH directly.
Publication, duplication or other unauthorized use of this study by third parties (other than for pro-
specting purposes, or for authorities and financing institutes) is permissible only with the written
agreement of CUBE Engineering GmbH.
Kassel, November 21, 2012
___________________________ _________________________
Dipl.-Geogr. Friderike Pfeil (Author) Dipl.-Geogr. Stefan Manolescu (Examiner)
CUBE Engineering GmbH, Breitscheidstr. 6, D - 34119 Kassel, Fon: +49 (0)561 / 288573-0, Fax 19
Table of contents:
0. Summary .............................................................................................................................. 5
1. Objective............................................................................................................................... 8
2. Data base ............................................................................................................................. 9
2.1 Site visit ............................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Wind measurement Mayor Buratovich ................................................................................ 9
2.2.1 History and plausibility check of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich ................ 11
2.2.2 Results for the measuring period 2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18 ................................ 13
2.2.3 Long term wind conditions and adjustment ........................................................... 14
2.2.4 Results for the long term period 2002 - 2011 ........................................................ 17
2.3 Orography ......................................................................................................................... 19
2.4 Roughness classification ................................................................................................... 20
2.5 Obstacles .......................................................................................................................... 20
2.6 Power curve ...................................................................................................................... 21
3. Results................................................................................................................................ 23
3.1 Wind conditions ................................................................................................................. 23
3.2 Calculation of energy yield ................................................................................................ 25
3.2.1 Energy yield for single turbine ............................................................................... 25
3.2.2 Wind farm energy yield and array losses ............................................................... 25
4. Evaluation of the results ..................................................................................................... 29
4.1 General discussion ............................................................................................................29
4.2 Uncertainty considerations ................................................................................................ 30
5. Bibliography ........................................................................................................................ 35
Appendix I Calculation methods
Appendix II Site information and documentation of wind measurement
Appendix III Wind measurement results for WM Mayor Buratovich:
2008-04-25 until 2012-08-31 at 72.5 m, 50.0 m and 30.0m a.g.l.
Appendix IV Long term wind data for WM Mayor Buratovich 2002 - 2011 at 72.5 m a.g.l.
Appendix V WindPRO-results single turbine (WASP-INTERFACE single turbine)
Appendix VI WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant I: 21Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 (80 m)
Appendix VII WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant II: 27Vestas V90/1.8MW (80 m)
Appendix VIII WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant III: 20Nordex N90/2.5MW HS (80 m)
0. Summary
To evaluate the wind conditions at the site of planned wind farm Vientos del Secano in the Prov-
ince of Buenos Aires (Argentina) the WINDATLAS-method with WAsP has been applied. A local
wind statistics has been generated on the basis of about 52 months (2008-04-25 to 2012-08-31)
of wind data from a measurement taken in the direct vicinity of the proposed wind turbines. These
data have been adjusted to a 10 years long term period (2002 - 2011) using MERRA Reanalysis
data. The measurement installations and the terrain have been examined locally by Dipl.-Geogr.
Friderike Pfeil on 2009-09-22, when 360 photographs have been taken and terrain conditions
such as roughness, obstacles and orography have been described. Wind conditions and energy
yields for individual sites and heights have been calculated with this terrain description and wind
statistics as a data base. Calculations were performed by using the numerical software programs
WindPRO and WAsP (Windatlas Analysis and Application Program).
The average wind speed, the Weibull-parameters for the vertical wind profile as well as the ex-
pected annual energy production for several wind turbine generator (WTG) types as requested by
the client have been determined (considering the representative reference period 2002 - 2011).
Computations are valid for the chosen reference point (RP 'M. Buratovich') directly at the site of
the wind measurement. The main results are summarized below:
Wind conditions at site Vientos del Secano (RP 'M. Buratovich')
Average wind speed at 50 m above ground 7.6 m/s
Average wind speed at 80 m above ground 8.5 m/s
WTG type hub height Annual energy yield p50-value

Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 80 m 10,348
Vestas V90/1.8MW 80 m 8,978
Nordex N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 10,822
Table 1: Annual energy production [MWh/a] for single turbines at the site of wind farm Vientos del Secano
It is planned to install up to 27 wind turbines (depending on the layout) at site of wind farm
Vientos del Secano. Contrary to the energy calculation of a single WTG, individual wind condi-
tions at each turbine site and mutual array losses of these have to be considered to obtain the
energy yield of a wind farm. The array losses may be regarded as measure of the efficiency of
the wind farm. According to the clients requests three different wind farm variants have been
considered within the present report. The energy yield estimates for the wind farm Vientos del
Secano consisting of three different layouts with machines of WTG types mentioned above and
the park efficiency are given in Table 2 below. Details of production data for individual wind tur-
bines are given in the appendix.
Gross energy Energy

hub Park Energy yield
Variants yield yield
height efficiency p50-value
(free flow) p90-value
Var.I: 21 SWT 2.3MW-93 80 m 216,449 90.9% 196,615 170,858
Var.II: 27 V90/1.8MW 80 m 240,900 91.8% 221,058 191,658
Var.III: 20 N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 215,428 91.6% 197,206 171,372
Table 2: Annual wind farm energy production [MWh/a] at the site of Vientos del Secano
The estimated energy production figures are valid for a representative long term period 2002 -
2011. Column Gross energy yield free flow gives the WTG energy production without consider-
ing wind farm sheltering. Energy yield p50-value gives the most probable number for energy
production considering wake losses, but without any further technical losses. The values given
here are the most probable numbers as expressed by a p50 levels of occurrence and do not in-
clude any uncertainties and safety reductions. The given Energy production p90-value comprises
a safety reduction of 13.1 %, 13.3 % and 13.1 % (depending on variant to be considered), uncer-
tainties arise from the calculation method, digital terrain description, wind data, stability of the
long term value1 and the chosen power curves. The safety reductions result from site dependent
uncertainty considerations (see section 4.2) and are given exemplarily with respect to a 90 %
probability of occurrence (p90-value). For other risk levels alternative safety reductions may be
applied (section 4.2).
The present wind study was elaborated considering the requirements of the Technical Guidelines
No. 6 (TR6) of the German Frdergesellschaft Wind (FGW). The wind study mainly fulfills the re-
quirements of the TR6, only one point is deviating. It was not possible to perform the long term
1
The given uncertainties relate to an assumed future operation time of the wind farm of 15 years, which might be considered as a
typical refinancing period of a wind farm project. Energy yield and safety reduction figures for differing future operation periods and
risk levels may be found in section 4.2 regarding the uncertainty considerations.
reconstruction with two totally independent reference data sets since weather station data was of
poor quality with an implausible trend behavior and no other independent data sets were availa-
ble.
1. Objective
The objective of this wind study is to evaluate expected average wind conditions for the estimated
operation time of the planned wind turbines at a defined reference point at the site of wind farm
Vientos del Secano. The prognoses presented here are based on a wind measurement per-
formed directly at the planned wind farm area, long term wind data taken in the past and also
model calculations according to the WINDATLAS-method by using WindPRO (EMD) and WAsP
(Ris). Furthermore, estimates of the expected annual energy production of specific WTG types -
as designated by the customer - have been made on the basis of the derived wind conditions. In
this case the WTG types Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93, Vestas V90/1.8MW and Nordex N90/2.5MW
HS all with hub heights of 80 m have been considered.
Besides that, the expected annual energy production of up to 27 wind turbines (depending on the
considered variant) of the WTG types mentioned above according to three defined wind farm var-
iants had to be evaluated considering fixed installation sites and mutual array losses. Wind tur-
bines were placed according to the coordinates delivered by the client at September 25th, 2012.
No existing wind turbines had to be considered with respect to their wind sheltering properties.
Park effects caused by the mutual sheltering of the wind flow in a wind farm consisting of several
WTG have been quantified within the WindPRO software by using the PARK-model of N. O. Jen-
sen.
The proposed wind farm site Vientos del Secano is located in the southern part of the province
Buenos Aires in Argentina. The sites topography is characterized by almost flat terrain mainly
covered by grass land being intersected with few farms or groups of trees. The coordinates and
the height above sea level of the chosen reference point RP 'M. Buratovich' in the wind farm area
are given in the following Table 3. Appendix II contains a topographic map (scale 1:50.000) with
WTG sites of park variant III and measurement position being marked:
Vientos del Secano (RP 'M. Buratovich') Height a.s.l 15 m
Geographical Coordinates [WGS84] -6234'24,44" -3912'05,99"
UTM-WGS84 [m], Zone 20 (South) Westing: 536,830 Southing: 5,660,758
Table 3: Coordinates of reference point RP 'M. Buratovich'
2. Data base
2.1 Site visit

The area around site Vientos del Secano has been visited under good viewing conditions by
Dipl.-Geogr. Friderike Pfeil on 2009-09-22. The topographic characteristics governing the wind-
and energy conditions at the proposed WTG sites have been recorded and documented by pano-
rama pictures (see Appendix II). The site of the wind measurement and its installation has been
examined also.
2.2 Wind measurement Mayor Buratovich

All calculations in this wind study are based on the WINDATLAS method and are performed with
the WAsP program which is described in Appendix I. These calculations are based on a wind
measurement named WM Mayor Buratovich, which has been operated directly in the planned
wind farm Vientos del Secano since April 2008. The measurement was installed by ELETEC SA.
The documentation of the wind measurement was established by ABOWIND. The wind has been
measured at a lattice tower by using cup anemometers at the heights of at 72.5 m, 50.0 m and
30.0m a.g.l.. Table 4 shows the basic site information. A comprehensive documentation of the
measurement installation and operation mostly according to the standards of the Technische
Richtlinie No. 6 of the German Frdergesellschaft Wind e.V. (Appendix B) was provided and is
summarized in an overview table in Appendix II. The complete original documentation is available
at CUBE and may be asked for if required.
Coordinates UTM WGS84 (20) South X: 536,830 Y: 5,660,758
Height a.s.l. 15 m
Measurement period 04/2008 - 09/2012
evaluated period 2008-04-25 until 2012-09-18
Table 4: Site of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich
The measurement is still in operation; data was provided until 19th of September 2012 (about 52
measuring months). The period 2008-04-25 until 2012-09-18 has been used for evaluation of the
measurement period, while the long term reconstruction was performed by using data of the peri-
od 2008-04-25 until 2012-08-31 due to the lack of reference data for September 2012. The
measuring mast has been placed in almost open and flat terrain in the direct vicinity of the
planned wind turbines. A farm with some trees is located in the southwestern sector at a mini-
mum distance of approx. 460 m. But since winds in this sector do not occur very frequently, this
may be rated as unimportant. In general, the placement of the met mast may be rated very well
since it is located directly in the topographically simple area of the proposed wind farm. Meas-
urement view and panorama photos of the surroundings are given in Appendix II. The equipment
used for the wind measurement Mayor Buratovich, its installation and measurement history is
documented in Appendix II as well.
At WM Mayor Buratovich diverse sensor changes were performed and documented. All ane-
mometers were exchanged on the 24th of November, 2011 and the wind vane at 71.0 on the 17th
of July, 2012. Until November 2011 Thies First Class anemometers have been installed and were
replaced for Thies First Class Advanced anemometers. All anemometers have been calibrated by
Deutsche WindGuard before installation. The calibration reports and serial numbers of the sen-
sors have been provided by the customer (see Appendix II). All data were collected and delivered
by the client as raw data logger files. The programming of the data logger could be proven from
the delivered data log-files. The calibration parameters as given by the delivered calibration re-
ports and the wind vane offset were part of the data logger configuration. Thus, it was not neces-
sary to convert the delivered data.
CUBEs assessment and rating of the measurement completely follows the requirements im-
posed by the Technische Richtlinie No. 6 of the German Frdergesellschaft Wind e.V.. Further
quality demands have been taken from other international standards (IIEA 11, IEC 61400-12,
MEASNET). As these guidelines do not address directly the issue of assessing wind energy con-
ditions for specific sites, only relevant topics have been considered here. An overview of CUBEs
quality rating procedure for wind measurements is given in Appendix II. The following section
presents critical aspects and peculiarities of the measurement Mayor Buratovich only.
From the documentation and our own inspection the measurement almost follows the interna-
tional standards. The installed Thies First Class and Thies First Class Advanced anemometers
meet the first class recommendations. None of the sensor recordings were corrected for the wind
sheltering effect of the mast since the distance between the top anemometer and the lower sen-
sors was too big. Regarding the wind direction, the documented offset was checked considering
reanalysis reference data and data of meteo station Bahia Blanca, together with the mast influ-
ence on turbulence rose (considering boom orientation as well as north mark orientation), and
was rated realistic. We have used the data of lower wind vane at 50.0 m a.g.l., since this wind
vane shows a greater data availability. No damages or system failures have been reported by
ABOWIND. In summary the measurement mostly fulfils the international standards and the
measurement installation may be rated to be of good quality.
2.2.1 History and plausibility check of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich
The measurement at the site of the planned wind farm Vientos del Secano was started in April
2008 and the delivered data last until September 2012 (about 52 measuring months). The meas-
urement covers more than four full seasonal cycles and thus the prevails the full range of climatic
conditions at the site.
To check the quality of the data and to detect possible measuring errors (e.g. anemometer dam-
ages, icing conditions, power supply failures etc.) the data of the different anemometers were
compared against each other and also to reference data. These data were taken from reanalyses
data and observations at weather stations in the surroundings (see section 2.2.3). The data of
wind measurement Mayor Buratovich exhibit a few gaps which come along with logger failures
and a few further data points had to be excluded due to sensor icing. A summary of missing or er-
roneous data is given in the overview documentation in Appendix II. About 13 days of data are
missing. The overall data availability for the different measuring heights was 99%. The day by
day data availability for each measuring height is shown in Appendix III.
The 10min means of wind speed and direction of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich show a
quite similar temporal evolution at the different measuring heights confirming the plausibility of the
recorded sensor signals. The similarities of the time series have been checked by regression
plots. For the different measuring levels the correlations of the wind speed after eliminating erro-
neous data points amount 0.97 (72.5 m - 50.0 m) and 0.90 (72.5 m - 30.0m). These correlations
indicate a good correspondence between the observations and confirm the good quality of the
wind measurement and the sensor installations.
Moreover, the time series of wind speed and direction recorded at wind measurement Mayor
Buratovich have been compared with a meteo station at Bahia Blanca, Vortex data, the MERRA
Reanalyses and NCAR Reanalyses data. With regard to the total measuring period and 1-hourly
means the MERRA reanalysis data show a correlation of about 0.72, while Vortex data a correla-
tion of 0.74 with the measured data at 72.5 m. The observations at the meteorological station
yield to a correlation of about 0.54 on a 3-houly base and with NCAR data of 0.59 on a 6-hourly
base. The time series of wind direction and the shape of the wind roses are in a rather good cor-
respondence confirming the representativity of the reference data and the alignment of the wind
vane of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich. Thus, all data retained after the plausibility checks
must be rated to be suitable for further analysis as the self consistency and comparison to refer-
ence data show.
Except for the top anemometer, the measured wind speed values underlie slight impacts due to
mast induced wake shadowing. The top anemometer itself underlies the impact of a lightning rod
which is installed at the mast, however, in a sector with minor frequency. The resulting wind
speed reductions could not be compensated since no backup sensor was installed.
To verify the measured vertical profile, this one has been checked against simulation results. To
do that the measured wind data of each height have been converted into a wind statistics and ex-
trapolated to the other heights by applying the WINDATLAS-method with WAsP. The calculated
values have to be compared with the measured data. By such a cross comparison not only the
reliability of the measured vertical profile will be examined, but also the quality of the digital to-
pography data (section 2.3-2.5) and the applicability of the modeling approach.
Transferring the measured wind data of the measuring heights at 72.5 m, 50.0 m and 30.0m mu-
tually to the other heights as described leads to calculated wind profiles which are comparable
with the measurement. Deviations in wind speed remain below 2% except for the lowest measur-
ing height, where much larger errors occur. However, at this height the observations are ex-
pected to be distorted by impacts of the nearby terrain and obstacle conditions, which hardly can
be simulated accurately. Thus, this level had to be excluded from further analyses.
Additionally, the measured wind data of the remaining heights have been extrapolated to the pro-
posed hub height. These calculations give comparable results. The calculated energy yields de-
viate by about 3.5% confirming the derived terrain model and the reliability of the vertical ex-
trapolation. Since the measurement was performed at 72.5 m and the planned hub height is 80 m
only a small vertical extrapolation will be necessary. The evaluation of the corresponding uncer-
tainties is part of section 4.2..
2.2.2 Results for the measuring period 2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18
After verifying the measured data, the time series of the 10min-average values have been classi-
fied according to wind direction (12 sectors 30) and wind speed (bin width 1m/s). As a result
the measurement can be presented in form of a two-dimensional frequency of occurrence distri-
bution. For further mathematical processing this distribution is approximated by a two-parametric
distribution function, the so called Weibull distribution with scale parameter A and form factor k.
Parameter estimation is done energy-weighted, which means that the adaptation to the measured
values is best for high wind speeds. Main results for all measuring heights covering the full
measuring period are presented in Table 5. Further details (e.g. monthly averages) may be found
in Appendix III.
Wind conditions at WM Mayor Buratovich

measuring period 2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18
Weibull-parameters
Height [m] Vmean [m/s] 2 Power density Wm-2
A [m/s] k
72.5 8.3 9.3 3.26 473
50.0 7.5 8.3 3.10 348
30.0 6.4 7.2 2.58 249
Table 5: Averages of wind measurement for the measuring period
Power density takes into account local air density values of 1.216-1.221 kg/m depending on
measuring height. It is based on the measured mean temperature of 14.9 C at 10 m and meas-
ured pressure of 1012 hPa at 4 m extrapolated to each measuring height.
Mean wind speed with respect to the approx. 52 months measuring period was estimated to
8.3 m/s at 72.5 m height. Highest wind speeds are found in the northern sectors (~9.6m/s). Main
wind directions during the measuring period were the north to northwestern sectors (43%). Since
2
The given averages for vmean are Weibull estimates
the wind speeds are largest in these sectors, the main wind energy fraction (51%) results from
these directions (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1: Frequency of occurrence and wind power distribution at 72.5 m height for the measuring period from
2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18
2.2.3 Long term wind conditions and adjustment
Wind conditions and consequently energy yield of wind turbines may vary considerably from one
year to another. Therefore it is required to assess the long term wind conditions at a site to get a
reasonable base for wind energy planning considerations. Since a project related wind measure-
ment is usually time-limited an adjustment with respect to long term climate data is required. This
is also true for the measurement at the planned wind farm site Vientos del Secano. Although it
covers about 52 months a correction considering the interannual variability is required. Such a
correction can be performed by taking suitable reference data into account, which are representa-
tive for the same wind climate and cover a long term period including the short term measure-
ment. For Vientos del Secano three data sets have been considered:
Meteo Station Bahia Blanca: Data of the meteorological station at Bahia Blanca (approx.
60 km northeast) covering a long term period (time series with 1-hourly values for period
1990 10/2005 and 3-hourly means for period 11/2005 08/2012 including several gaps)
of more than 22 years (January 1990 - July 2011). The data have been provided by
NOAA/NCDC (U.S. National Climate Data Centre). The station has not been seen during
the site visit.
MERRA Reanalyses Data: Large scale analyses of the wind at 50 m height covering 1998-
2012 (1-hourly values). These are based on global numerical weather analyses of the U.S.
National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) and are characterized by a high temporal
consistency contrary to the local measurements. This dataset describes the large scale
wind field at a horizontal resolution of approximately 50 km and can be transferred to local-
ized wind energy questions only if the smaller scale topographical and meteorological condi-
tions arent too complex. In such cases the Reanalyses Data have been applied by CUBE
many times with great success (France, Germany and Romania). Since the topographic
conditions within the investigation area arent complex the MERRA Reanalyses Data are
applicable also for site Mayor Buratovich.
NCAR Reanalysis Data: Large scale wind analyses covering the time period 1979/01-
2012/08 (6-hourly values). These data are based on global numerical weather analyses of
the U.S. National Centre for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and are contrary to local meas-
urements characterized by a high temporal consistency. This dataset describes the large
scale wind field (scales ~250 km) and can be transferred to localized wind energy questions
only if the smaller scale topographical and meteorological conditions arent too complex. In
such cases the Reanalysis Data have been applied by CUBE in many cases with great suc-
cess (Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Slovakia, Czech Republic, France and Germa-
ny). The monthly time series is given by the yellow line in figure 2.
Taking just one data source into account for the long term adjustment can be quite misleading.
Station data may suffer from station modifications which damage their temporal consistency. Re-
analysis data posses a much better temporal consistency, but may be not representative due to
their coarse spatial resolution. Therefore, it is very important to compare several data sets to ob-
tain a realistic solution. Fig. 2 gives the long term time series (running annual averages normal-
ized to 2002-2011) of the weather station presented before and the MERRA Reanalysis data, as
well as the NCAR Reanalysis data.
Fig. 2: Time series of reference indices
To be representative the chosen long term period must be necessarily as long as possible. How-
ever, the quality of the reference data always limits the length to a certain period where the data
are reliable. After data check, it was decided that the meteorological station data and NCAR Re-
analysis should not be used for energy yield calculations. NCAR data was not used for the analy-
sis since the correlation is at a lower level and the time averaging period is larger in comparison
to the MERRA data. The data of meteo station Bahia Blanca shows a timely inconsistency as well
as a low correlation with the wind measurement data. Thus, it was not possible to compare two
independent data sets to obtain a more realistic solution.
Therefore, the MERRA Reanalysis Data scaled for the height of 72.5 m was used for the correla-
tion and long term extent.
A Measure-Correlate-Predict (MCP) procedure has been used to adjust the Vientos del Secano
wind data to the chosen reference period 2002 - 2011. The long term reconstruction procedure is
described in Appendix I. For reconstruction we have used 1-hourly mean data, but with included
corrections for the variability lost due to this averaging. Unfortunately, it was not possible to per-
form the long term reconstruction with two independent data sets since weather station data is
not plausible. The MERRA data exhibit a moderate correlation with the wind measurement Mayor
Buratovich of 0.72 for 1-hourly means, confirming their representativity for the Vientos del Secano
region.
The final long term adjustment has been performed by adjusting the 72.5 m wind speeds of
measurement Mayor Buratovich. The resulting data reconstruction gives a moderate correlation
to measurement Mayor Buratovich of about 0.73 on one hourly basis. When comparing the re-
sulting differences in WTG energy yield for reconstruction-sets of the MERRA Reanalysis data
using different reference periods (2002-2011 in comparison to 1998-2011) the medium deviation
amounts about 1%. Since no second totally independent data set was available, the long term
adjustment is affected with higher uncertainties.
2.2.4 Results for the long term period 2002 - 2011
Main results for the long term adjusted wind speed at 72.5 m height are presented in Table 6. De-
tails may be found in Appendix IV.
Wind conditions at WM Mayor Buratovich
long term period 2002 - 2011
Weibull-parameters
Height [m] Vmean [m/s] 3 Power density Wm-2
A [m/s] k
72.5 8.3 9.3 3.07 480
Table 6: Averages of wind measurement for the long term period
Power density is based on a local air density of 1.214 kg/m at measuring height. It is based on
the long term adjusted mean temperature of 15.4 C at 10 m and measured pressure of 1012
hPa at 4 m extrapolated to measuring height. Temperature and pressure have been long term
corrected by using reanalysis data.
Mean wind speed with respect to the 10 years reference period was estimated to 8.3 m/s at 72.5
m height. Highest wind speeds are found in the northern sectors (~9.5 m/s). Main wind directions
during the long term period were the north to northwestern sectors (43%). Since the wind speeds
are largest in these sectors as well, the main wind energy fraction (53%) results from these direc-
tions (Fig. 3). Long term wind speed is about the same as compared to the measuring period
2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18. WTG energy yield is about 2% larger in the long term than in the
measuring period.
3
The given averages for vmean are Weibull estimates
Fig. 3: Frequency of occurrence and wind power distribution at 72.5 m height for the long term period 2002
- 2011
The results regarding energy production presented in section 3 are based on the long term re-
constructed wind data at 72.5 m height covering the representative long term period 2002 - 2011.
These datasets have been transformed into a wind statistics AR v72.5 WM M. Buratovich
20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h 2002-2011 representing the region around the planned
wind farm Vientos del Secano according to the WINDATLAS-method by considering local orog-
raphy, roughness and obstacles. It was shown in section 2.2.1 during the analyses of the short
term data that the measured vertical profile, i.e. the wind speeds at all measuring heights and the
modeling of the vertical profile are in reasonable agreement. Extrapolations to planned hub
height starting from the different measuring heights result in rather similar WTG production fig-
ures. Furthermore, the wind was measured at 72.5 m a.g.l. and the planned hub height is only
80 m, thus only very little vertical extrapolation is necessary. Therefore, it is sufficient to use the
most representative measuring height for vertical extrapolation and subsequent energy calcula-
tions in the long term.
2.3 Orography
Based on data of the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM3) and topographic maps on
scales of 1: 50,000 an area of approx. 2500 km2 (50 km x 50 km) around the site of Vientos del
Secano has been digitized as input data for the computational model WAsP. The resolution of the
digitized map was chosen rather exactly within the surrounding of the site (radius approx. 3 km)
while a coarser resolution was sufficient in the far field. For the direct area of the planned wind
farm an orographical model was provided by the customer. The orography of the closer surround-
ings of the site is presented in the following Fig. 4 with a stronger height excess (factor 10) view-
ing from direction southwest. The three-dimensional presentation should guide to illustrate the
flow conditions around the micro site.
Fig. 4: Relief around site Vientos del Secano (5 km radius)
The proposed wind farm site of Vientos del Secano is located in an almost flat area of about 10-
20 m a.s.l.. No relevant orographic features can be depicted even at a height excess factor 10.
Thus, no significant contribution of the orography to the energy yield conditions may be expected.
The wind turbines of planned Layout II (blue symbols) and the wind measurements (black sym-
bol) have been marked also in the orography plot. An enlarged figure of the relief is given in Ap-
pendix II.
2.4 Roughness classification

The description of the terrain roughness depends on conventions of roughness classes as de-
termined in the European Windatlas. Each class can be graded into tenths. The region around
Vientos del Secano wind farm has been visited locally and evaluated under good viewing condi-
tions in September, 2009, The terrain conditions have been described by classifying roughness
within 12 sectors of 30 each. A detailed subsequent classification of roughness parameters has
been performed on the base of aerial photographs and digitized topographical maps (1:50,000).
Up to five changes in roughness have been considered within a radius of about 20 km around the
site.
The region around site Vientos del Secano is characterized by open grassland land sparsely dis-
rupted by tree rows or groups, and single farms. Surface roughness is low in general. Forests are
very rare over the whole investigated area. Even at larger distances to the wind farm area the ag-
ricultural areas are only sparsely interspersed with small villages or farms. Directly around the
proposed wind farm area a few small farm estates appear. The village Mayor Buratovich is locat-
ed approx. 4.6 km south of the closest WTG position. Therefore, a positive impact of the land use
characteristics onto the energy yield conditions of the proposed wind farm may be expected.
2.5 Obstacles
Buildings, tree rows, hedges or woods with heights more than a quarter of the hub height of the
planned WTG or wind measurement, located within a radius of approx. 1,000 m, might be con-
sidered as significant flow obstacles. Flow obstacles in WAsP are parameterized by their height,
extension and porosity. The linear groves which border the individual acres, roads and farm es-
tates near the wind farm do match the conditions regarding the wind measurements at lower
height levels at the site of WM Mayor Buratovich. Tree rows and groves with heights up to 32 m
are located at a distance of approx. 460 m to the southwest. These obstacles are expected to
have little impact on the lower measurement heights at 30 m.
Regarding the planned WTG sites and hub height of 80 m a few objects within a radius of
1,000 m have to be considered as flow obstacle. These obstacles with heights up to 32 m can be
found towards the western, northern and southern sectors of the planned wind farm area. In order
to simulate the most realistic vertical wind profile at the sites of the planned WTG also the tree
rows and settlements have been considered with respect to their low impacts on the wind profile
for lower height above ground.
2.6 Power curve

To calculate the expected annual energy yield the technical properties of the wind turbine genera-
tors Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93, Vestas V90/1.8MW and Nordex N90/2.5MW HS have been con-
sidered. The most important technical details of the chosen WTG types are given in the overview
in Table 7:
Siemens Vestas Nordex

WTG-type
SWT 2.3MW-93 V90/1.8MW N90/2.5MW HS
Rated power 2.300 kW 2500 kW 2.500 KW
Rotor diameter 93 m 90 m 90 m
Hub height 80 m 80 m 80 m
Manufacturer Mode 0
Power curve Manufacturer 01/08 Manufacturer 12/2010
(poweropt. Rho=1.225
calculated calculated calculated
Generator concept Synchronous Asynchronous Asynchronous
Control system pitch pitch pitch
ct values WindPRO Standard WindPRO Standard WindPROStandard
Table 7: Technical data of WTG
The power curves, either measured by independent institutes or calculated by the manufacturers,
the thrust coefficients and some other technical details of the considered WTG types are shown
in Appendix II. The WTG overview printouts will give unique statements concerning document
source, air density, anemometer type and possible peculiarities (e.g. noise limitations). However,
for all three turbine types independent measurements of the power curves are available also,
which confirm the theoretical power curves and contribute to a reduction of power curve uncer-
tainties. The Technical Guideline No. 6 gives preference to measured power curves. If no meas-
urement exists enhanced uncertainties have to be adopted for the power curve.
Please note that especially theoretically calculated but also measured power curves will cause
uncertainties which have to be considered in economic evaluations also. It should be mentioned
that the determination of power curves (both calculated and measured) is based on particular alt-
hough exactly specified conditions. We proceed from the assumption that the applied power
curves are valid for the examined site also.
In general, power curves are given for a standard air density of 1,225 kg/m3. Within the software
WindPRO these powers curves are converted to the sites correct air density considering meas-
ured air temperature and pressure.
3. Results
By using the wind statistics AR v72.5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h
2002-2011 derived in section 2.2.4 and parameters for orography, roughness as well as obsta-
cles as mentioned before, the vertical profile of Weibull parameters A and k and the mean wind
speed have been calculated for a reference point RP 'M. Buratovich' directly at the location of the
wind measurement. Further on, the power density per swept area (rotor diameter) has been esti-
mated.
Moreover, the calculations are considering a local air density at the site of 1.213 kg/m. It is
based on the average hub height of the planned WTG above sea level (95 m) and a long term
mean temperature of 15.1 C and pressure of 1004 hPa, which has been derived from the meas-
urement Mayor Buratovich and reanalysis data.
3.1 Wind conditions

Site and height above ground V mean Weibull-Parameters Power density
[m] [m/s] A k [W/m2]
50 7.6 8.5 2.82 385
60 8.0 8.9 2.88 439
70 8.3 9.3 2.93 488
80 8.5 9.6 2.97 533
90 8.8 9.8 3.01 575
RP 'M. Buratovich' 100 9.0 10.1 3.04 613
110 9.3 10.4 3.03 672
120 9.5 10.7 3.01 730
130 9.8 10.9 3.01 784
140 10.0 11.2 2.99 838
150 10.2 11.4 2.99 889
Table 8: Calculated wind profile at the micro site of RP 'M. Buratovich'
All values shown in Table 8 refer to the long term period 2002 - 2011. Further information regard-
ing the wind conditions e.g. frequency distributions and Weibull parameters are given in Appen-
dix V (WindPRO results WAsP-INTERFACE).
3.2 Calculation of energy yield

3.2.1 Energy yield for single turbine
In order to determine the energy yield for a special WTG type according to the calculated wind
resources, the Weibull distribution of the wind estimate has to be multiplied and integrated with
the power curve of the WTG considering the whole spectrum of wind speeds. Table 9 gives the
corresponding numbers for the WTG types under consideration:
WTG type hub height Energy yield p50-value

Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 80 m 10,348
Vestas V90/1.8MW 80 m 8,978
Nordex N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 10,822
Table 9: Annual energy production [MWh/a] for single turbines at the site of RP WM M. Buratovich
The given energy yield (p50-value) refers to the long term period 2002 - 2011 and does not in-
clude any losses (e.g. WTG availability. grid losses and self consumption). The uncertainties will
be considered in the energy yield figures presented in section 3.2.2 for the whole wind farm. De-
tails including wind direction depending results for the energy yield (PRODUCTION ANALYSIS)
are given in the Appendix V.
3.2.2 Wind farm energy yield and array losses
To calculate the energy production of a whole wind farm the individual wind profiles at each WTG
site and the mutual wake effects have to be considered. Array losses may be seen as an indica-
tor for mutual wake effects of the different WTGs according to their technical dimensions as well
as the layout of the wind farm. Wake effects are modeled by WindPRO for each WTG by using
the wake model of N. O. Jensen (1986).
Energy yield calculations for the up to 27 WTGs (depending on the variant) being planned at wind
farm site Vientos del Secano including wake effects deviate by following items from the consider-
ations for a single machine: Terrain roughness was given at three different reference points being
representative for groups of turbines (their allocation can be found in appendix VI to VIII). The in-
fluences of orography and obstacles as well as mutual wake effects (PARK efficiency) have been
determined for each single WTG individually. The air density is calculated also for each WTG lo-
cation separately considering the ground level and hub height. The turbines were placed accord-
ing to the coordinates provided by the customer on September 25th, 2012, (see Appendix VI-VIII).
The up to 27 planned WTG have been considered in the following variants with positions accord-
ing to the delivered coordinates:
Variant I: 21Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 with 80 m hub height

Variant II: 27Vestas V90/1.8MW with 80 m hub height
Variant III: 20Nordex N90/2.5MW HS with 80 m hub height
All energy calculations are based on the power curves and ct-values as mentioned in chapter 2.6.
The main results for Variant I at site Vientos del Secano are shown in Table 10. Details for indi-
vidual turbines and direction dependent results are given in the appendix VI:
21 SWT 2.3MW-
wind speed Park Energy yield Energy yield
93
[m/s] efficiency p50-value p90-value (-13.1 %)
80m hub height
WTG all 8.5 90.9% 196,615 170,858
WTG max. (21) 8.6 98.2% 10,209 8,872
WTG min. (10) 8.5 87.1% 8,986 7,808
WTG mean 8.5 90.9% 9,363 8,136
Table 10: Annual wind farm energy production [MWh/a] for Variant I
The main results for Variant II at site Vientos del Secano are shown in Table 11. Details for indi-
vidual turbines and direction dependent results are given in the appendix VII:
27 V90/1.8MW wind speed Park Energy yield Energy yield

80 m hub height [m/s] efficiency p50-value p90-value (-13.3 %)
WTG all 8.5 91.8% 221,058 191,658
WTG max. (25) 8.6 98.2% 8,815 7,642
WTG min. (10) 8.4 88.2% 7,863 6,817
WTG mean 8.5 91.8% 8,187 7,098
Table 11: Annual wind farm energy production [MWh/a] for Variant II
The main results for Variant III at site Vientos del Secano are shown in Table 12. Details for indi-
vidual turbines and direction dependent results are given in the appendix VIII:
20 N90/2.5MW
wind speed Park Energy yield Energy yield
HS
[m/s] efficiency p50-value p90-value (-13.1 %)
80 m hub height
WTG all 8.5 91.6% 197,206 171,372
WTG max. (20) 8.6 98.4% 10,703 9,300
WTG min. (5) 8.5 88.8% 9,496 8,252
WTG mean 8.5 91.6% 9,860 8,569
Table 12: Annual wind farm energy production [MWh/a] for Variant III
The estimated energy production figures are valid for a representative long term period 2002 -
2011. Column Energy yield p50 values gives the most probable number for energy production
considering wake losses, but without any further technical losses (e.g. electrical network losses,
WTG failures etc.). The values given to here are the most probable numbers as expressed by a
p50 levels of occurrence and do not include any uncertainties and safety reductions. The given
Energy production p90-value comprises a safety reduction of 13.1 %, 13.3 % and 13.1 % de-
pending on the variant to consider. The uncertainties arise from the calculation method, digital
terrain description, wind data, stability of the long term value4 and the chosen power curves. The
safety reductions result from site dependent uncertainty considerations (see section 4.2) and are
given exemplary with respect to a 90 % probability of occurrence (p90-value). For other risk levels
alternative safety reductions may be applied (section 4.2).
It has to be mentioned, that the specific topography conditions (roughness, orography, obstacles
and forest) at each individual WTG position will modify the wind profile differently (see column
wind speed5 in Table 10-12). Thus, energy yield figures of each WTG are not only modified by
wake losses, but also by the specific terrain conditions.
4
The given uncertainties relate to an assumed future operation time of the wind farm of 15 years, which might be considered as a
typical refinancing period of a wind farm project. Energy yield and safety reduction figures for differing future operation periods and
risk levels may be found in section 4.2 regarding the uncertainty considerations.
5
The values give free flow wind speed without any wake reduction
4. Evaluation of the results
4.1 General discussion

For the planned wind turbine site Vientos del Secano in Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina, cal-
culations revealed excellent conditions for wind energy utilization. Hub height free flow average
wind speed ranges between 8.4 m/s to 8.6 m/s within the wind farm area. Accordingly, wind en-
ergy utilization at planned wind farm site Vientos del Secano will result in 3.700-4.900 equivalent
full load hours6 or capacity factors ranging from 43 to 56 (depending on the WTG type). It is main-
ly the open landscape aligned with low surface roughness which causes the excellent wind condi-
tions at the site. Orographic and obstacle effects do not lead to any significant modifications of
energy yield conditions.
Since measurements are always afflicted with errors and because physical models represent only
a simplified image of reality, calculations relying on such sources are necessarily linked to uncer-
tainties. Typical sources for uncertainties in calculating the energy yield of wind turbine genera-
tors come from the natural variations of the wind, the underlying database (wind data, topography
model, WTG data) and the calculation method. Thus, it is recommended for economic reasoning
to apply a safety reduction (p90-value) of 13.1 %, 13.3 % and 13.1 % depending on the consid-
ered variant (see section 4.2). Systematic losses like self consumption, grid losses and reduced
availability are not part of the uncertainty considerations.
The present wind study was elaborated considering the requirements of the Technical Guidelines
No. 6 (TR6) of the German Frdergesellschaft Wind (FGW). The wind study mainly fulfills the re-
quirements of the TR6, only one point is deviating. It was not possible to perform the long term
reconstruction with two totally independent reference data sets since weather station data was of
poor quality with on implausible trend behavior and no other independent data sets were availa-
ble. Additional uncertainties arising from this fact have been considered accordingly in the uncer-
tainty estimation.
6
Net energy yield p50-value
4.2 Uncertainty considerations

The energy yield calculations of this study are based on physical models (like WAsP), which are
based on meteorological, topographical and technical input data. The used methods as well as
the quality of input data are afflicted with uncertainties, which have to be identified and quantified.
The following Table 13 shows the different aspects and the adopted values for this study accord-
ing to energy yield. The given uncertainties may be understood as standard errors and are con-
sidered to be statistically independent. Thus, the total standard error is given by the square root
of the sum of the squares of the individual uncertainties.
Uncertainty components Variant I Variant II Variant III

21Siemens 27Vestas 20Nordex
for WTG energy yield
SWT 2.3MW-93 V90/1.8MW N90/2.5MW HS
80 m 80 m 80 m
Selection of measuring site 0,3%
Measuring period 0,0%
Wind data base
Installation of sensors 2,2%

Calibration and accuracy of
2,0%
sensors
Data availability 0,0%
Long term adjustment 8,0%
Stability of long term average 1,3%
Wind field modeling 1,8% 1,8% 1,8%
Modeling of wake losses 1,3% 2,3% 1,3%
Power curves 5,0% 5,0% 5,0%
Standard uncertainty (rms) 10.2 % 10.4 % 10.2 %
Safety reduction (p90-value) 13.1 % 13.3 % 13.1 %
Table 13: Assessment of uncertainties at WTG site Vientos del Secano for an assumed future operation time
of 15 years
According to Technical Guidelines No. 6 of the German Frdergesellschaft Windenergie the re-
sulting calculation uncertainties have to be derived from individual uncertainty components for the
wind data, the applied modeling of the wind field, calculation of wake losses and the power
curves of the proposed WTG. Table 13 shows the adopted uncertainty components with respect
to energy yield and the resulting total rms error. The values for the uncertainty components must
be viewed as estimates which rely on experiences and not on an exact mathematical quantifica-
tion based on hard facts. The section wind data base covers the representativity of the measur-
ing site for the proposed wind farm area, the length of the measuring period, the installation, cali-
bration and accuracy of the sensors, data availability, long term adjustment (consistency of refer-
ence data, uncertainty of algorithm) and the stability of the long term average, which results from
projecting the chosen reference period in the past onto the future WTG operation time. Since the
wind conditions underlie considerable variations from year to year this uncertainty component
depends on the future WTG operation period. Therefore, increasing this period will reduce that
uncertainty. A typical operation time of 15 years has been assumed in Table 13. The stability of
the long term value has been analyzed by means of observed wind variations and Monte Carlo
simulations (Grtzner, A. 2008). Uncertainties and safety reductions originating from other opera-
tion periods will be shown further below. The wind field modeling uncertainty component in-
cludes both the impact of topographic input data and the numerical model used for the transfer of
measured wind data to WTG positions . Section modeling of wake losses is related to the relia-
bility of the wake model and the WTG thrust data. The uncertainty power curves covers the un-
certainty in determining the power curve and its application to the actual site.
Wind data base: The measurement can be viewed to be of good quality from its documentation
and the provided data which does not show obvious problems with the data quality. Due to the
fact that this study is a supplement to a study conducted in 2009 the site visit was performed
about 3 years ago. Actual pictures of the met mast could not be provided, thus it was not possible
to check the quality of the wind measurement recently. CUBE assumed very low or no uncertain-
ties concerning the measuring site and period and the data availability. The measurement is lo-
cated in open terrain of low complexity within the proposed wind farm and with only very few ob-
stacles in the vicinity. The measurement covers more than four years of data with an excellent
data availability of 99%. For the assembly of the measuring system and the sensor techniques
we assumed low uncertainties. High quality sensors were calibrated according to the MEASNET
regulations. Nevertheless, the first installed Thies First class anemometers were measuring for
approx. 3.5 years and have not been recalibrated meanwhile. The installation of the instruments
is mainly in accordance with the applicable regulations. The top anemometer is somewhat im-
paired by the lightning protection system but its impact must be regarded to be very small since it
is aligned in minor wind direction. Anemometers at 50.0 m and 30.0 m a.g.l. are aligned into pre-
vailing wind direction which leads to conservative values in measured wind speed. Since these
sensors were not used for the long term reconstruction this factor is of minor influence as well.
Nevertheless, it is not required to raise the uncertainties for anemometer installation. The compa-
rably high uncertainty of 8% related to expanding 52 months of measurement to the long term pe-
riod 2002 - 2011 is motivated by the fact that a reconstruction with two independent reference da-
ta sets was not possible. No independent data set with an appropriate quality was available. Ta-
ble 13 gives the uncertainty for the stability of the long term value with respect to an expected
WTG operation time of 15 years. Other periods ranging from 1 to 20 years will be addressed in
the tables below.
Modeling: The orographic situation at wind farm Vientos del Secano is of low complexity. Thus, it
is possible to apply the WAsP-model with a high level of confidence. It was possible to reproduce
the measured vertical profile by the calculations with a good level of accuracy which confirms the
applicability of the WAsP model at site Vientos del Secano. Furthermore, the wind measurement
was located within the proposed wind farm area and was conducted at 90 % of the planned hub
height which results in a very small vertical extrapolation. We assume low uncertainties of 1.8 %
for the wind field modeling since the horizontal transfer of the derived wind statistics starting from
the particular base location to some individual WTG sites is below 2.000 m in a simple landscape
with very few structural elements.
The uncertainty for the wake losses is motivated by the number of planned WTG sites as well as
their alignment regarding the prevailing wind direction. Thus, we adopted a low uncertainty of
1.3 % for wind farm layout I and II, while layout III has a slightly enhanced uncertainty of 2.3 %
caused by the greater number of planned WTG sites.
Power curve: The TR6 gives preference to measured power curves. For the planned WTG types
measured power curves were available which lead to almost the same results (deviation >2 %).
When using power curves based on manufacturer calculations an uncertainty of 5.0% may be still
acceptable, provided that the manufacturer guarantees 95 % of estimated energy yield when us-
ing the calculated power curve at the examined wind turbine site Vientos del Secano. If such a
guarantee has not been negotiated additional uncertainties have to be considered.
All uncertainties as given in Table 13 can be assumed to be statistically independent. Thus, the
total uncertainty is given as the RMS-error (square root of sum of squares). Thus, the total calcu-
lation uncertainty (rms or standard error) results 13.1 %, 13.3 %, and 13.1 % (for 15 years of
WTG operation time depending on wind farm variant) of the energy yield figures presented in
chapter 3.
By assuming a Gaussian distribution of these errors and defining a tolerable risk or acceptable
probability of exceedance the required safety reductions onto the derived p50 values may be ap-
plied. Table 13 shows safety reductions required to obtain a 90 % safety (p90-value) equivalent to
a risk of 13.1% (variant I) for a future WTG operation time of 15 years. The tables below show
safety reductions and resulting net energy yield for variant I, variant II and variant III with respect
to often required probabilities of exceedance of 75 %, 90 %, 95% und 99 % and future WTG op-
eration periods of 1, 2, 5, 10, 15 and 20 years. Fig. 5 presents these aspects for variant I in
graphical form. Since the given numbers represent energy yield reductions required to account
for losses like self consumption and grid losses already have not been incorporated.
Fig. 5: Safety reductions () in dependence of future WTG operation period and probability of exceedance
for variant I
p50 p75 p90 p95 p99

Variant I NEP rms NEP NEP NEP NEP
1 years 10.8 182,293 -7.3% 169,402 -13.8% 161,687 -17.8% 147,216 -25.1%
2 Years 10.6 182,558 -7.1% 169,906 -13.6% 162,334 -17.4% 148,131 -24.7%
5 Years 10.4 182,823 -7.0% 170,410 -13.3% 162,981 -17.1% 149,046 -24.2%
196,615
10 Years 10.2 183,088 -6.9% 170,914 -13.1% 163,628 -16.8% 149,961 -23.7%
15 Years 10.2 183,088 -6.9% 170,914 -13.1% 163,628 -16.8% 149,961 -23.7%
20 Years 10.2 183,088 -6.9% 170,914 -13.1% 163,628 -16.8% 149,961 -23.7%
Table 14: Net energy yield (NEP [MWh/a]) and safety reductions () in dependence of future WTG opera-
tion period and probability of exceedance for variant I
p50 p75 p90 p95 p99

Variant II NEP rms NEP NEP NEP NEP
1 years 11.0 204,657 -7.4% 189,896 -14.1% 181,061 -18.1% 164,490 -25.6%
2 Years 10.7 205,104 -7.2% 190,745 -13.7% 182,152 -17.6% 166,033 -24.9%
5 Years 10.5 205,403 -7.1% 191,312 -13.5% 182,879 -17.3% 167,061 -24.4%
221,058
10 Years 10.4 205,552 -7.0% 191,595 -13.3% 183,243 -17.1% 167,575 -24.2%
15 Years 10.4 205,552 -7.0% 191,595 -13.3% 183,243 -17.1% 167,575 -24.2%
20 Years 10.4 205,552 -7.0% 191,595 -13.3% 183,243 -17.1% 167,575 -24.2%
tion period and probability of exceedance for variant II
p50 p75 p90 p95 p99

Variant III NEP rms NEP NEP NEP NEP
1 years 10.8 182,840 -7.3% 169,911 -13.8% 162,173 -17.8% 147,659 -25.1%
2 Years 10.6 183,106 -7.1% 170,416 -13.6% 162,822 -17.4% 148,576 -24.7%
5 Years 10.4 183,372 -7.0% 170,922 -13.3% 163,471 -17.1% 149,494 -24.2%
197,206
10 Years 10.2 183,638 -6.9% 171,427 -13.1% 164,119 -16.8% 150,411 -23.7%
15 Years 10.2 183,638 -6.9% 171,427 -13.1% 164,119 -16.8% 150,411 -23.7%
20 Years 10.2 183,638 -6.9% 171,427 -13.1% 164,119 -16.8% 150,411 -23.7%
tion period and probability of exceedance for variant III
5. Bibliography
Bundesverband WindEnergie Service GmbH (Hrsg.) (2011 und ltere Jahrgnge): Wind-
energie 2011. Marktbersicht. 21. Ausgabe. Berlin. 210 S.
Christoffer. J. und M. Ulbricht-Eissing (1989): Die bodennahen Windverhltnisse in der Bun-

desrepublik Deutschland. 2. vollstndig neu bearbeitete Auflage. Bericht des Deutschen Wetter-
dienstes Nr. 147. Selbstverlag. Offenbach a. M.
Frdergesellschaft Windenergie e. V. (Hrsg.. 2008): Technische Richtlinien fr Windenergie-
anlagen. Teil 5 Bestimmung und Anwendung des Referenzertrages. Revision 4. Kiel. 24 S.
Frdergesellschaft Windenergie e. V. (Hrsg.. 2011): Technische Richtlinien fr Windenergie-

anlagen. Teil 6 Bestimmung von Windpotenzial und Energieertrgen. Revision 8. Kiel. 23 S.
Grtzner. A. (2008): Was ist eigentlich ein 100%-Jahr. Erneuerbare Energien. 11/2008.
Hui. S. and Crockford A. (2007): Wind profiles and forests. M.Sc. Thesis Project. Technical Uni-
versity of Denmark.
Hunter. S.R. et al. (1999): 11. Wind speed measurement and use of cup anemometry. Expert
group study on recommended practices for wind turbine testing and evaluation. Edition 1.
IEC (2005): IEC 61400-12-1: Wind turbines Part 12-1: Wind turbine power performance meas-
urements of electricity producing wind turbines. Edition 1.
Jensen. N.O. (1986): A simple model for cluster efficiency. EWEA conference and exhibition.
Rome. Italy.
Keiler-Huserindex Version 2011: Betreiber-Datenbasis:. http://www.btrdb.de/btrdb (Januar

2012).
MEASNET Organisation (2009): MEASNET procedure - Evaluation of Site Specific Wind Condi-
tions. Version 1. November 2009.
Nielsen. P. (2010): WindPRO 2.7 Handbuch. EMD International A/S. Aalborg. Denmark
Petersen. E. L.. Troen. I.. Frandsen. K. and Hedegaard (1981): Windatlas for Denmark. A ra-
tional method for wind energy siting. Ris-R-428. Ris National Laboratory. Denmark. 229 pp.
Traup. S. et al. (1996): Wind- und Windenergiepotentiale in Deutschland. 'Winddaten fr Wind-

energienutzer'. Deutscher Wetterdienst. Selbstverlag. Offenbach a. M.
Troen. I. and E. L. Petersen. (1988): European Wind Atlas. Ris National Laboratory. Denmark.
600 pp.
09-1-2084a Wind Energy Expertise Vientos del Secano (Appendix)
Appendix I Calculation methods
CUBE wind studies: method of calculation
CUBE wind studies: methods of calculation
To get an estimate of the future average wind conditions being expected for the operation
period of a planned wind turbine wind data taken in the past are usually applied. Since wind
conditions may vary considerably from year to year, it is necessary to consider periods of
sufficient length (>10 years) both for the past measurements and the future project operation
time. For such longer periods usually the assumption is taken that the wind conditions do not
vary any more: The past is projected into the future. In climatological science such a proce-
dure is called persistence forecast which usually leads to satisfying results7. But even aver-
ages for longer periods are not constant in time, although the fluctuations become smaller for
extended averaging periods. Due to that and the fact that the lifetime of a planned wind tur-
bine is limited, a profound persistence forecast in a climatological sense is obtained only
when the variability range of the expected long term wind conditions is also and included in-
to the uncertainty considerations. (see sections 4.2). The uncertainty of the long term wind
conditions is addressed by CUBE on the basis of observed wind fluctuations and Monte-
Carlo-simulations (Grtzner 2008).
In general. a wind study is based on a wind measurement either taken directly at the pro-
posed wind farm site or somewhere in the closer surroundings. To perform such a measure-
ment is not an easy task and requires the effort of specialists to get reliable results. CUBE
follows the Technical Guidelines No. 6. the IEC-61400-12 and the MEASNET suggestions to
perform and analyze high standard wind measurements.
Project related measurements generally cover about a year being too short to be representa-
tive for the long term climate. Thus, an adjustment to the long term climate conditions is re-
quired taking into account suitable reference data, either from weather stations of from nu-
merical weather reanalysis. To perform the transfer of the short term measurement to a long
term representative period, CUBE applies a Measure-Correlate-Predict (MCP). A sec-
tor-dependent regression model, based on data of the measurement and the data of the
7
Long term climate changes as e.g. caused by the anthropogenic greenhouse warming are not covered by such
a statistical persistence model. However, scientific climate change studies did not show significant changes in the
wind conditions for the next decades.
chosen reference index, is used. A long term time series representative for the measuring
lon lon
site x (t ) is reconstructed from the given long term reference dataset y (t ) :
x lon (t ) F ( y lon (t ))
The transfer function F F ( x

short
(t ); y short (t ); ) is estimated from the concurrent short term
wind speed values and directions. Here. a sector depending scaling of mean and variance
has been chosen. This model allows a sector-dependent and energy consistent conversion
of wind speed and the reconstruction of a time series and frequency distribution that
represents the long-term time frame. Deviations of the directional distribution between short
term and long term period might be considered also. The long term adjustment crucially
depends on the quality of the reference data. Data inconsistencies, especially unrealistic
trends, may cause totally misleading results. Thus, CUBE tries, wherever possible, to apply
at least two independent indices to discover inconsistencies in the long term data. The
spread in the results obtained by different indices gives a measure of uncertainty related to
the long term adjustment of the short term measurement.
In general, it is not feasible to perform height measurements at each individual WTG position
at a proposed wind farm site. Usually, a physical model has to be applied to convert the wind
data from the measuring site to the WTG under consideration. Thus, the quality of the wind
study crucially depends on the quality of the model. A huge range in model complexity is
available. The choice of the particular model depends on the complexity of the sites topo-
graphical and meteorological conditions.
A widely accepted method to transfer wind data from one point to another is the so called
WINDATLAS Method. The Danish National Research Centre in Ris, Denmark, has studied
a variety of long term wind data from several European countries with respect to their ap-
plicability for wind energy purposes. A physical method has been worked out which allows for
the transfer of measured wind speeds from a certain measuring point to another site or even
a whole region (Troen and Petersen. 1988). The result of this effort, the so called
WINDATLAS-method, has been published in the European Windatlas. An overview sketch of
the method is shown in Fig. 6.
Wind data of a local measurement or from a mete-

orological station with its characteristic individual
terrain conditions (obstacles. roughness and orog-
raphy) are transformed into regional wind climatolo-
gy. This so called Windatlas represents a regional
wind climatology when all local topographic condi-
tions are removed and may be understood as the
geostrophic wind of the free atmosphere independ-
ent from the boundary layer. By using such a re-
gional wind statistics as the physical wind supply
with regard to the Weibull parameters related to di-
rection the wind climate of the considered micro-
site can be determined by invoking the specific
topographical conditions for that point and nearly
each height of the site (see downward arrow in Fig.
6). These transformations are performed by the
simplified linear flow model WAsP (Wind Atlas Anal-
ysis and Application Program) which has been con-
ceived for simple and moderate complex terrain
such as low mountain ranges. The method has
been developed over a long period and has been
applied successfully in numerous cases. It may be
viewed as the current state of art of technology.
The simulation of wind conditions with the numerical

Fig. 6: Method for the evaluation of the wind
flow model WAsP is part of the wind energy planning
potential of individual sites (see: European
software developed by Energi- and Miljdata (EMD.
Windatlas)
www.emd.dk). By means of digital input describing
surface roughness, obstacles and orography and the choice of a suitable wind statistics, e.g.
derived from an in-situ measurement, the probability distribution of the wind in form of a
Weibull distribution depending on direction will be calculated for each height and position. To
obtain the expected energy output the power curves of the proposed WTG have to be con-
sidered. These may be either calculated by the manufacturer or measured by an independ-

ent institute. Linking the power curve to the derived probability distribution of the wind yields
figures for the expected energy production.
It has to be considered that every physical model is just an image of reality which is valid on-
ly under specific circumstances and might afflicted with uncertainties which have to be part of
the analyses. On the one hand uncertainties exist within the method itself such as the
representativity of the chosen wind statistics or the accuracy of terrain description. On the
other hand each method possesses limitations outside of those the reliability of analyses is
strongly limited. The WAsP-Model is hardly applicable in extremely complex terrain as its lin-
ear assumption is not able to account several physical phenomena e.g. flow separations at
steep slopes and edges. Thermodynamic processes will also not be treated so that the influ-
ence of extreme atmospheric layering such as in offshore regions or the effects of local
thermal wind systems cannot be considered.
The WINDATLAS-method has been designed for the surface boundary layer. which is typi-
cally 50-80 m thick. Actual studies indicate that larger heights are affected by processes not
being covered by the WAsP model totally. However, production data of WTG with large hub
heights being available so far tend to be larger than the energy yield figures being obtained
by applying the WINDATLAS-method. Thus, these calculations may be viewed to be con-
servative in general and the connected uncertainties may be tolerable. But for extrapolations
to extremely large hub heights one should adopt uncertainties larger than for the near sur-
face layers. The Technical Guideline No.6 requires a minimum measuring height of at least
2/3 of the planned WTG hub height to limit errors related to model based vertical extrapola-
tions. For lower measurements extrapolation errors possibly lead to totally useless results.
Besides the wind conditions the power curves of wind energy converters that depend on the
wind speed are of great significance for the assessment of the expected energy yield. Please
note that especially theoretically derived power curves may contain large uncertainties. But
also measured power curves may be afflicted by uncertainties. Power curve measurements
take place under special but exactly specified conditions that probably do not exist at the
planned wind farm site in the same way. Turbulence, vertical shear and flow inclination may
be completely different to the power curves measuring conditions. When estimating the en-
ergy yield it is usually assumed that the wind speed is uniform over the swept rotor area. In
situations of extreme vertical wind shear this assumption no longer applies and significant
production losses may occur. Thus, at sites with special wind characteristics enhanced un-
certainties for the power curves have to be adopted.
Turbulence (gustiness. fluctuations of wind direction) cannot be handled with the WAsP-
model. It has implications for the energy content of the wind and may lead to production de-
creases, although this will depend on the WTG controlling systems. Such uncertainties de-
pending on the concept of the chosen wind turbine cannot be handled with todays technolo-
gy. But this surely should be considered as an additional economic calculation figure for criti-
cal sites.
Page 42 of 143
Appendix II Site information
Topographic map (proposed WTG and wind measurement)
Site orography
Panorama pictures (360)
Photo of wind measurement
Measurement installation and history documentation
Calibration certificates
Quality rating of wind measurement
Power curves
Accreditation certificate CUBE Engineering GmbH
09-1-2084a Wind Energy Expertise Vientos del Secano (Appendix) Page 43 of 143
Wind expertise Vientos

del Secano
Topographic map
scale 1 : 50000
,
Source: Institut Geografico Militar
Editor: Dipl.-Geogr. F. Pfeil

Panorama 1 Mayor Buratovich
Panorama 6 Mayor Buratovich

Page 45 of 143
Page 46 of 143

CUBE's documentation of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich
name country
Site Mayor Buratovich Argentina
name date
Site visit F.Pfeil 01.09.2009
X Y System source comment
Detailed coordinates 536830 5660758 WGS 84 site visit
Geodetic height 15 terrain modell
available source comment

Topographic map 0 0
360 Panorama 0 0
Detail pictures 0 0
Measurement period date comments

start 2008-04-25
end 2012-09-18 still in operation
time zone - 3h check with reference data
data failure log
from to failure type sensors affected from documentation from data check Comments
02.06.2008 18:20 03.06.2008 00:10 logger failure x 1.) serial number of the top wind vane not plausible
21.07.2008 00:00 22.07.2008 00:10 logger failure x 2.) since 19.10.2011 wind vane 71m defective
39741 21.10.2008 00:10 logger failure x 3.) 24.11.2011 12:00h all anemometers exchanged
30.10.2008 15:50 01.11.2008 00:10 logger failure x 4.) 16.07.2012 exchange wind vane on 71m
15.12.2008 00:00 26.12.2008 00:10 logger failure x 5.) wind vane on 50m used for validation (reasons: greater availability & wind direction distribution in better accordance with reference data)
21.07.2010 09:10 21.07.2010 10:00 icing 30m x 6.) wind vane offsets not documented
04.08.2010 07:20 04.08.2010 10:20 icing 30m x 7.)
02.12.2010 13.00 03.12.2010 15:30 logger failure x
40 66
40766 12 08 2011 00
12,08.2011 00:00
00 l
logger ffailure
il x
40795 40795,47222 logger failure x
Measurement set-up
Measurement principle mast with anemometers
Mast type lattice
power supply solar panel
initial measurement instrumentation instrument data logger Correction coefficients

vertical boom calibration institute and scaling
2008-04-25 to 2011-11-24 sensor type height [m] mast [mm] boom length [mm] orientation [] type serial number slope offset slope offset slope offset Channel Comments
distance [mm] number factor
Sensor 1 cup anemometer 72,5 400 top 0 / 360 300 Thies FC 108428 DKD 08_0554 0,04776 0,257 0,0478 0,2570 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 1
Sensor 2 cup anemometer 50 400 1500 315 300 Thies FC 108431 DKD 08_0550 0,04792 0,246 0,0479 0,2460 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 2
Sensor 3 cup anemometer 30 400 1500 315 300 Thies FC 108429 DKD 08_0549 0,04782 0,275 0,0478 0,2750 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 3
Sensor 4 wind vane 71 400 1500 315 300 Thies Classic 1,00 0,00000 4
Sensor 5 wind vane 50 400 1500 135 300 Thies Classic 1005024 1,00 0,00000 5
Sensor 6 temperature 10 400 1,00 6
Sensor 7 pressure 4 400 1,00
measurement modifications instrument data logger Correction coefficients

vertical boom calibration institute and scaling
2011-11-24 to 2012-09-18 sensor type height [m] mast [mm] boom length [mm] orientation [] type serial number slope offset slope offset slope offset Channel comments
distance [mm] number factor
Sensor 1 cup anemometer 72,5 400 top 0 / 360 300 Thies FC Advanced 6114018 DKD 13514 0,04588 0,251 0,0459 0,2510 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 1
Sensor 2 cup anemometer 50 400 1500 315 300 Thies FC Advanced 2113336 DKD 13094 0,04599 0,213 0,0460 0,2130 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 2
Sensor 3 cup anemometer 30 400 1500 315 300 Thies FC Advanced 6114015 DKD 13511 0,04589 0,243 0,0459 0,2430 1,00 1,00000 0,00000 3
Sensor 4 wind vane 71 400 1500 315 300 Thies Classic 1,00 0,00000 4
Sensor 5 wind vane 50 400 1500 135 300 Thies Classic 1005024 1,00 0,00000 5
Sensor 6 temperature 10 1,00 6
Sensor 7 pressure 4 1,00
data logger type serial number height [m] orientation [] sampling period averaging period
Wilmers 2367 4 0 1Hz 10min
obstruction lights type height [m] orientation [] dimensions [mm] comments
0 0 0 0
solar panel height [m] orientation [] comments
0 0
lightning rod height [m] orientation [] comments
73 approx. 135
Page 49 of 143
Kalibrierlaboratorium I Calibration laboratory

Akkreditiert durch die / accreditedby the
Akkreditierungsstelle des Deutschen Kalibrierdienstes tj
Deutsche WindGuard
Wind Tunnel Services GmbH cm
Varel DKD-K- 36801
Kalibrierschein Kalibrierzeichen
Calibration Certificate Calibration label
Gegenstand Anemometer Dieser Kalibrierschein dokumentiert die

Obj6ct RckfOhrung auf nationale Normale zur
Darstellung der Einheiten in bereinstimmung
mit dem Internationalen Einheitensystem (SI).
Hersteller Thies Clima
Der DKD ist Unterzeichner der multilateralen
Manufacturer 0-37083 GOttingen bereinkommen der European co-operation tor
Accreditation (EA) und der International
Typ 4.3350.00.000 Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
Type zur gegenseitigen Anerkennung der
Kalibrierscheine.
FabrikatlSerien-Nr. Fr die Einhaltung einer angemessenen Frist
Sens'number Body:0108428
Cup: 0108428 zur Wiederholung der Kalibrierung ist der
Benutzer verantwortlich.
Auftraggeber This calibration certificate documents the
Customer Wilmers Messtechnik
022089 Hamburg traceability to national standards, which realize
the units 0' measurement according to the
International System 0' Units (SI).
Auftragsnum mer The DKD is signatory to the multilateral
OrderNO. VTO8131 agreements 0' the European co-operation 'or
Accreditation (EA) end 0' the International
Anzahlder Seiten des Kalibrierscheines 3 Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
Number o( pages of the certificste
'or the mutual recognition 0' calibration
certificates.
Datum der Kalibrierung 08.02.2008 The user is obliged to have the object
Date0' calibration
recalibrated at appropriate intervals.
Dieser Kalibrierschein darf nur vollstndig und unverndert weiterverbreitet werden. AuszOge oder nderungen bedOrfen
der Genehmigung sowohl der Akkreditierungsstelle des DKD als auch des ausstellenden Kalibrierlaboratoriums.
Kalibrierscheine ohne Unterschrift und Stempel haben keine GOltigkeit.
This calibration cerlificate may not be reproduced other than in full except with the pennission of both the Accreditation
Sooy of the DKD aOO the issuing laboratory. Calibration cerlificates without signature and seal are not valid.
r .1A in~ -
eh. Ass. InfoH. Westermann
DeutscheWindGuard Wind Tunnel Services GmbH

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
Kalibriergegenstand
Object Anemometer
Kalibrierverfahren
Calibration procedure IEC 61400 12 1 - Wind Turbine Power Performance Testing 122005
MEA5NET - Cup Anemometer Calibration Procedure - 09 1997
-
ISO 3966 Measurement of fluid in closed conduits - 1977
Ort der Kalibrierung
Place 0' calibration Windtunnel of Deutsche WindGuard, Varel
Messbedingungen
wind tunnel area 1)
Test Conditions 10000cm2
anemometer frontal area 2)
230cm2
diameter of mounting pipe 3)
34mm
blockage ratio 4)
0.023 [-]
blockage correction 5)
1.000[-]
average WindGuard reference 6) 203.8 1/s (Thies First Class)
present WindGuard reference 7) 203.8 1/8
Umgebungsbedingungen
Test conditions air temperature 16.9deg
air pressure 1036.6hPa
relative air humidity 43.0%

Dateiinformation
File info
Anmerkungen
Remarks
Auswertesoftware
Software version 3.0
1) Querschnlttsftlche der "'-I8S8dOse des Windkanals
2) Verelnf8cht8 QuerICh;.III8IIIche (Schatlenwur1) des Protlings inkJ. Montagllohr
3) Durchmesser des MonI8gerohrs
4) Verhlllnil von 2) zu 1)
5) Korrek1urf8Idordurch die VerdrIngung der StrOmungdurch den PrOfting

8) R~ des Refenmzanemometenl bei 10 mIs (Mitte1Mrt)
7) AktuellerWertdes Referenzanemometers
Dieser Kalibrierschein wurde elektronisch erzeugt

This calibration certificate has been generated electronically
DeutscheWlndGuard WInd Tunnel Services GmbH

OldenburgerStr. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O554
DKD-K-
36801
02.2008
Kalibrierergebnis:
Result:
Angegeben ist die erweiterte Messunsicherheit,die sich aus der Standardmessunsicherheitdurch

Multiplikation mit dem Erweiterungsfaktor k=2 ergibt. Sie wurde gema DKD-3 ermittelt. Der Wert der
Messgre liegt mit einer Wahrscheinlichkeit von 95 % im zugeordneten Wertintervall.
Der Deutsche Kalibrierdienst ist Unterzeichner der multilateralen bereinkommen der European co-
operation tor Accreditation (EA) und der International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) zur
gegenseitigen Anerkennung der Kalibrierscheine. Die weiteren Unterzeichner innerhalb und auerhalb
Europas sind den Internetseiten von EA (www.european-accreditation.org) und ILAC(www.ilac.org) zu
entnehmen.
Theexpandeduncertainty assigned to the mea-surement results is obtained by multiplying the standard

uncertainty by the coverage factor k = 2. It has been determined in accordance with DKD-3. The value of the
measurand lies within the assigned range of values with a probability of 95%.
The DKD is signatoryto the multilateral agree-ments ot the European co-operation tor Accredita-tion (EA)
and ot the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) tor the mutual recognition ot calibration
cerlificates.

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O554
1
1 Detailed MEASNET Calibration Results
DKD calibration no. 08_O554 ~\ndGuc9~qt
~
~fl} ~ ","
c,
Bodyno. 0108428 .... -:::>
Q.
;:,
Cup no. 0108428 Q) -f
Date 08.02.2008 0 c:
::J
Air temperature 16.9deg ::J
Air pressure 1036.6hPa
43.0% ~9 .. \ ~ C:> ~
Humidity
(qS '8:)\~
Linear regression analysis
Siope 0.04776 (mIs)/(1/s) :t0.000O4 (mIs)/(1/s)

Offset 0.257 m/s :t0.009m/s
Sterr(Y) 0.005 mIs
Correlation coefficient 0.999996
Remarks no
111
E
-111
ii
:I
"0
"i
0::
Anemometer output /1/8

lIope: 0.04778
off.1: 0.257
correlatlon: 0.999996
Output at 10 mit: 204.002
. Residuals . Wind speed
C :\AKldaI\RO W\O2081 032.row
1) According to MEASNET CUp Anemometer Calibration Procedure 09/1997.

Deutsche WindGuard Wind Tunnel Services is accredited by MEASNET and by the Deutscher Kalibrierdienst
- DKD ( German Calibration Service). Registration: DKD - K - 36801

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316 Varel ; Tel. ++49 (0)4451 95150
08_O554
2 Instrumentation
3 Photo of the calibration set-up
...
Calibration set-up of the anemometer calibration in the wind tunnel

of DeutscheWindGuard,Varel.
The anemometershownis of the sametype as the calibratedooe.
Remark:The proportionof the set-upare not true to scaladue to
imaginggeometry.
4 Deviation to MEASNETprocedure
The calibration procedure is in all aspects in accordance with the IEC 61400-12-1 Procedure
5 References
[1] J. Mander. D. Westermann, 1212007- Verfahrensanweisung DKD-Kalibrierung von Windgeschwindigkeitssensoren

[2] IEC 6140()"12-1 1212005- Wind Turbine Power Performance Testing
[3] ISO 3966 1977 - Measurement 01fluid flow in closed conduits
-
["]MEASNET09 1997 CupAnemometerCalibrationProcedure
DeutscheWlndGuard Wind Tunnel Services GmbH

OldenburgerStr. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
D
Akkreditierungsstelle des Deutschen Kalibrierdienstes ti
Deutsche WindGuard
Wind Tunnel Services GmbH
Varel DKD-K- 36801
Kalibrierschein Kalibrierzeichen
Calibration Certificate Calibration label
Gegenstand Anemometer Dieser Kalibrierscheindokumentiert die

Object Rckfhrung auf nationale Normale zur
Darstellung der Einheiten in bereinstimmung
Hersteller Thies Clima mit dem Internationalen Einheitensystem (SI).
Manufaeturer D-37083 GOttingen Der DKD ist Unterzeichner der multilateralen
bereinkommen der European co-operation for
TYPe zur gegenseitigen Anerkennung der
Kalibrierscheine.
FabrikatiSerien-Nr.
Seriat number Body:0108431 Fr die Einhaltung einer angemessenen Frist
Auftraggeber
Customer Wilmers Messtechnik This ca/ibration cettificate documents the
022089 Hamburg traceability to national standards. which rea/ize
the units of measurement according to the
Intemational System of Units (SI).
Auftragsnummer The DKD is signa tory to the multilateral
OrderNO. VTO8131
agreements of the European co-operation tor
Accreditation (EA) end of the Intemational
Anzahl der Seiten des Kalibrierscheines 3
Numbero( pages o( the certificate Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
for the mutual recognition of ca/ibration
Datum der Kalibrierung cettificates.
Date 0' ca/ibration 06.02.2008 The user is ob/iged to have the object
f9Calibrated at appropriate intervals.
Dieser Kalibrierschein darf nur vollstndig und unverndert weiterverbreitet werden. Auszge oder nderungen bedrfen
der Genehmigungsowohl der Akkreditierungsstelledes DKD als auch des ausstellendenKalibrierlaboratoriums.
Kalibrierscheineohne Unterschriftund Stempelhabenkeine Gltigkeit.
This calibration certificate may not be reproduced other than in full except with the pennission 0' both the Accreditation
SOOy 0' the DKD and the issuing laboratory. Calibration cettificates without signature and seal am not valid.
In '!:::--
1A -
. Ass.InfoH.Westermann
Deutsche WindGuard Wind Tunnel Services GmbH

Oldenburger Str. 65 O"UhdH": .l..
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
~!~-~g~~
08_O550
DKD-K-
36801
02.2008
Kalibrie rgegenstand
abject Anemometer
Kalibrierverfahren
MEASNET - Cup Anemometer Calibration Proceclure - 09 1997
ISO 3966 - Measurement of fluid in closed conduits - 1977
PlaGeof calibration Windtunnel of Deutsche WindGuard, Varel
Messbedlngungen
Test Conditions wind tunnel area 1)
10000cm2
230cm2
34mm
blockage ratio 4)
0.023 [-]
1.000[-]
average WindGuard reference 8)
203.8 1/s (Thies First Class)
present WindGuard reference 7)
203.8 1/s
Test conditions air temperature 18.7 deg
air pressure 1018.2 hPa

Dateiinformation
File info
Anmerkungen
Remarks
Auswertesoftware
Softwareversion 3.0
1) Querschnlt1sfllche der A'III811dO1e des WIndkanala
2) Verelnf8cht8 Querschnitt8lllc: (Schattenwurf) des PYOtIIngsinkl.MonI8geIOhr
31 Durchm- des Mont8geroh18
4) Verhlltnis von 2) zu 1)
5) Korrekturfaktor durch die Verdrlngung der SIrOmung dufctt den PrOfIIng
8) Referenzwert des Referenzanemome bei 10 mIs (MIttelwert)
1) Aktueller Wert des Refefenzanemometers

This calibration certificate has beengeneratedelectronically
Deutsche WindGuardWind Tunnel Services GmbH

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316 Varel ; Tel. ++49 (0)4451 95150
08_O550
DKD-K-
36801
02.2008
Kalibrierergebn is:
Result:

Multiplikation mit dem Erweiterungsfaktor k=2 ergibt. Sie wurde gema DKD-3 ermittelt. Der Wert der
Der Deutsche Kalibrierdienst ist Unterzeichner der multilateralen bereinkommen der European cQ-
Europas sind den Internetseiten von EA (www.european-accreditation.org) und ILAC (www.ilac.org) zu
entnehmen.
The expanded uncertainty assigned to the mea-surement results is obtained by multiplying the standard
uncertainty by the coverage facto, k = 2. It has been determined in accordance with DKD-3. The value of the
measurand lies within the assigned range o( values with a probability o( 95%.
The DKD is signatory to the multilateral agree-ments 0' the European co-operation 'or Accredita-tion (EA)
end 0' the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) for the mutual recognition 0' calibration
certificates.

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316 Varel ; Tel. ++49 (0)4451 95150
08_O550
1 Detailed MEASNET1 Calibration Results

~\ nd_Gu". 0'
DKD calibration no. 08_0550
~
~flJ ~,,'
BocIyno. 0108431 ..." ~
0-
::J
Cup no. 0108431 CI) l-i
Date 06.02.2008 (::) .c::
~
Air temperature 18.7 deg ~
Air pressure 1018.2 hPa
41.3% "Y9 . ~~ ~
Humidity
l(,O $e~\t-~
Siope 0.04792 (mIs)/(1/s) :tO.OOOO6

(mIs)/(1/s)
Offset 0.246 mIs :t0.014 m/s
Sterr(Y) 0.016 mIs
Remarks no
If)
E
-
If)
Ci
;:,
'C
!
lIope: 0.04792
off.1: 0.248
conelation: 0.99999
. Residuals . Windspeed
Output st 10 mle; 203.559 C:\AKldeI\RO W\O2061547.row


OldenburgerStr. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O550
2 Instrumentation
Pol. SenIor Mn. lcIInIItIc8IUon
,
C8IIbr8Iian I-
\ 0 r" 0
~!
1 Pilot 8I8tic:l\.tNt AIr1Iow 048318Nr. 000142 08102 '"
2 Pilot8I8tic:l\.tNt AIr1Iow 048318

Nr. 000143 08102 ~v ,
3
4 PIlOt
Pilot lI8IIc l\.tNt AIr1Iow 48318Nr. 000145
048318 000144 08102 Ci) / ' 1/,+\..Y',
\\;;:::Y '-/<}. ~
//{' '
, -": ,~-, ," ,
~ ~0
,, ,
8 P ~ 88Ir8 C 239 Nr. 1688082 ... 1-r'1\ J-.,\" '

5 P-.e ~ 88Ir8 C 239 Nr. 1688081 ~ Cb, I 1
( \ \.-\'X\
"X , ,
1 PrMMnlr8n8duc8r lI8Ir8 C239Nr.1688083 03K17 = . 1\{, r- -, ' iI

,
S ,
~n
'
8 PrMMn lr8n8duc8r 88Ir8 C 239 Nr. 18880&4 1IMI!i'" 't:I

.I CD
e EJ.lIIromI48r V"" 100A Nr.)(2010004 DWG121O1 ';. ---~/ /' Cb
10
11 EJ. ~
EJ. HumidilvMl18Or 08IIIC
~ KPK 11&-ME
1<PK1/$-ME DWO121O1
DWG121O1 \~ ~~,
'"~."," , "--1'
--\-
"
, -'.-t/. .,U
,I;J)'> ,
12 Wlndlumllcontrol
- - - - / ""~ ~
13
14
CAN-BUS/PC
~
8Id -- 04 OMM 611I J n s e ~
.
15 Uni_118oI8tor Knick -
P21oo 58285181&8430 Oll 01,108
Table I Description ofthc data acquisitioo system
..
Calibratlon set-up of the anemometer callbratlon in the wind tunnel

of Deutsche WindGuard, Varel.
The anemometer shown is of the same type as the calibrated one.
Remark: The proportion of the set-up are not true to scale due to
imaging geometry.
The calibration procedure is in all aspects in accordance with the IEC 61400-12-1 Procedure
5 References
[1] J. Mander.D. Westennann,1212007- Verfahrensanweisung DKD-Kalibrierung von Windgeschwindigkeitssensoren

[2] IEC 61400-12-1 1212005- Wind Turbine Power Perfonnance Testing
-
[3) ISO 3966 1977 Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits
-
[4] MEASNET 09 1997 Cup Anemometer Ca libration Procedure

Oidenburger Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150

Akkreditierungsstelle des Deutschen Kalibrierdienstes
Deutsche WindGuard
Wind Tunnel Services GmbH lJti
Varel DKD-K- 36801
08_O549
DKD-K-
Kalibrierschein Kalibrierzeichen 36801
Calibration Certificate Calibration label 02.2008
Gegenstand Anemometer Dieser Kalibrierschein dokumentiert die

Object Rckfhrung auf nationale Normale zur
Darstellungder Einheitenin bereinstimmung
Hersteller Thies Clima mit dem InternationalenEinheitensystem(SI).
Manufacturer
0-37083 Gttingen Der DKD ist Unterzeichnerder multilateralen
bereinkommender Europeanco-operationtor
TYPe zur gegenseitigen Anerkennung der
Kalibrierscheine.
FabrikaUSerien-Nr.
Seri8/ nUmbef Body:O108429 Fr die Einhaltung einer angemessenen Frist
Auftraggeber
Customer Wilmers Messtechnik This calibration certificate documents the
D22089 Hamburg traceability to national standards, which realize
the units 0' measurement according to the
International System 0' Units (SI).
Auftragsnummer The DKD is signatory to the multilateral
Order NO. VT08131 agreements 0' the European co-operation 'or
Accreditation (EA) and 0' the International
Anzahlder Seiten des Kalibrierscheines 3 Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
Number o( pages o( the certiflCste
rar the mutual recognition 0' calibration
certificates.
Datum der Kalibrierung
Date o( calibration 06.02.2008 The user is obliged to have the object
TeCalibratedat appropriate intervals.
Dieser Kalibrierschein darf nur vollstndig und unverndert weiterverbreitet werden. Auszge oder nderungen bedrfen
der Genehmigung sowohl der Akkreditierungsstelle des DKD als auch des ausstellenden Kalibrierlaboratoriums.
Kalibrierscheine ohne Unterschrift und Stempel haben keine Gltigkeit.
This calibration certificate may not be reproduced other than in roll except with the permission 0' both the Accreditation
SOOy0' the DKD and the issuing laooratol}'. Calibration certificates without signature and seal are not valid.
l ' the ca/ibration /ab0r8tory
. W~"'
/, ~~(/"-
I .
n in
1A
~
eh. Aas.lnf. H. Westermann
-
Dip!. Phys. D. Westermann

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
Kallbriergegenstand
Object Anemometer
Kalibrierverfahren
MEASNET - Cup Anemometer Calibration Procedure - 09 1997
ISO 3966 - Measurement of fluid in closed conduits - 1977
PlaGe0' ca/ibration Windtunnel of Deutsche WindGuard, Varel
Messbedingungen
Test Conditions wind tunnel area 1)
10000cm2
230cm2
34mm
blockage ratio 4)
0.023 [-]
1.000 [-]
average WindGuard reference 6)
203.8 1/s (Thies First Class)
present WindGuard reference 7)
203.8 1/8
Test conditions air temperature 18.5deg
air pressure 1017.2hPa

DateIinformation
File info
Anmerkungen
Remarks
Auswertesoftware
Softwareversion 3.0
1) Cuer'8chnitI8II der Au8las8d0ee des Windkanals

2) Vereinf8chte Querschnltllftlche (Schat1IInwurf) des PrOfIings Ink!. MoIIt8gerotIr
31 Dun:hmesser des MontageIohrs
'I VemIItnIs von 2) zu 1)
51 Korrek1urfak1or dI.Wch die Venlrangung der S1rOmung dun:h den PrOfIlng

51 ReferenzMrt des Ref8r8nzanemometers bei 10 mls (Mittehw8rt)
1) Aktueller Wert des Referenzanemometers

This calibration certificate has been generated e/ectronically

OldenburgerStr. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O549
DKD-K-
36801
02.2008
Kalibrierergebnis:
Result:

Multiplikation mit dem Erweiterungsfaktor k=2 ergibt. Sie wurde gem DKD-3 ermittelt. Der Wert der
Der Deutsche Kalibrierdienst ist Unterzeichner der multilateralen bereinkommen der European co-
Europas sind den Internetseiten von EA (www.european-accreditation.org) und ILAC(www.ilac.org) zu
entnehmen.
The expanded uncertainty assigned to the mea-surement results is obtained by multiplying the standard
uncertainty by the coverage facto, k = 2. It has been determined in accordance with DKD-3. The value of the
measurand lies within the assigned range of values with a probability of 95%.
The DKD is signatory to the multilateral agf98-ments 0' the European co-operation 'or Accredita-tion (EA)
end 0' the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) rar the mutual recognition 0' calibration
certificates.

OldenburgerStr. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O549
1 Detailed MEASNET 1 CalibrationResults
DKD calibration no. 08_0549
Body no. 0108429

Cup no. 0108429
Date 06.02.2008
Air temperature 18.5 deg
Air pressure 1017.2 hPa
Humidity 41.5%
Siope 0.04782 (mIs)/(1/s) :1:0.00006(m/s)/(1/s)

Offset 0.275 m/s :i:0.012m/s
Sterr(Y) 0.013 m/s
Remarks no
11)
E
-11)
ii
:J
"
_opa: 0.04782
on_t: 0.275
correlatlon: 0.999993
Output at 10 rn/I: 203.382
. Residuals . Wind speed
C:\AK\deI\RO W\O2061514.row

Deutsche WindGuard WInd Tunnel Services GmbH

Oldenburger Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
08_O549
2 Instrumentation
Calibration set-up of the anemometer calibration in the wind tunnel

of Deutsche WindGuard, Varel.
The anemometer shown is 01the same type as the calibrated one.
Remark: The proportion of the set-up are not true to seele due to
imaging geometry.
The calibration procedure is in all aspects in accordance with the IEC 61400-12-1Procedure
5 References
[1JJ. Mander, D. Westermann, 12/2007 - Verfahrensanweisung DKD-Kalibrierung von Windgeschwindigkeitssensoren

(2] IEC 61400-12-1 1212005- Wind Turbine Power Performance Testing
-
[3] ISO 3966 1977 Measurement of fluid flow in closed conduits
-
[4] MEASNET09 1997 Cup Anemometer Calibration Procedure
DeutscheWlndGuardWind Tunnel Services GmbH

Oldenburger
Str. 65
26316Varel ; Tel. ++49(0)445195150
minor deviation
major deviation
Quality rating of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich Remarks
fulfilled
1. Representativeness of the measurement site (TR6) x
2. 1 year of measurement (TR6) x
3. Deployment of cup anemometers and wind vanes. (TR6) x
4. Deployment of classified cup anemometers (TR6) x
5. Cup anemometers calibrated to MEASNET / DKD standard (TR6) x
Uppermost measurement height shall be at least 2/3 of the hub

6. x
height. (TR6)
Top anemometer should be subject to free flow from all directions.
7. x lightning rod in minor wind direction
(TR6)
8. At least two cup anemometers with at least 20m distance (TR6) x
Impeding effects between sensors should be minimised as far as

9. x
possible (TR6)
Diameters of the anemometer mounting tubes must correspond to
10. x
those used for calibration.(TR6)
12 sufficient
12. ffi i b
boom l h with
length i h respect to mast diameter
di (IEC) x
13. sufficient vertical boom lenghts (IEC) x
anemometers at 50.0 m and 30.0 m aligned

reasonable horizontal alignment of booms with respects to main towards prevailing wind direction but long
14. x
wind direction (IEC) term reconstruction performed wtih top
anemometer
15. accuarate mounting of the sensors (IEC) x
Cut-in wind speed of wind vanes 0,5m/s at 90, resolution of at least

16. x
2,5 (TR6)
Documentation of offset between real and measured wind direction
17. x offset not documented
(TR6)
18. Registration of time series with quality checked data logger (TR6) x no information
Sampling frequency 0,5Hz, storage interval 10min, wind speed as

19. x
mean, maximum and standard deviation, wind direction as mean
20. Measurement of air temperature and pressure x
some information missing e.g. offset wind

21. Complete and traceable installation report (TR6) x
vanes
Regular checks of the data recording system and maintenance
22. x not documented
(TR6)
23. Seamless station diary (TR6) x not available
24. Timely inspection of measurement installation and site (TR6) x site visit 3 years ago
25. assurance of data integrity (MEASNET) x logger data files
26. further aspects

WindPRO version 2.7.490 Sep 2011
Printed/Page
13.11.2012 11:18 / 1
Licensed user:
Calculated:
13.11.2012 11:18
Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O!

File Q:\2000 - ABT Wind Assessment\Projekte\09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\3 - Power Curves & Reports\Siemens SW
Company Siemens
Type/Version SWT 2.3MW/93 VS
Rated power 2.300,0 kW
Secondary generator 0,0 kW
Rotor diameter 93,0 m
Tower Tubular
Grid connection 50 Hz
Origin country DK
Blade type B 45
Generator type Variable
Rpm, rated power 16,0 rpm
Rpm, initial 6,0 rpm
Hub height(s) 93,0; 88,0; 103,0 m
Maximum blade width 0,00 m
Blade width for 90% radius 0,00 m
Valid Yes
Creator USER
Created 06.10.2008 13:06
Edited 06.10.2008 13:06
Power curve: Hersteller 01/08

Source Siemens
Source date Creator Created Edited

Default Stop windSpeed Air density Tip angle Power control CT curve type
[m/s] [kg/m3] []
22.01.2008 00:00 USER 06.08.2009 11:20 06.08.2009 12:09 Yes 25,0 1,225 0,0 Pitch User defined
Standard-KL laut Herstellerdokument PG-R-CTO-40-0000-0100-00 vom 22.01.2008 (SM060809).
ct-Werte laut Hersteller-Dokument PG-RCTO-40-0000-0133-00 vom 07.04.2008 (SM060809).
Power curve
Wind speed [m/s] 4,00 5,00 6,00 7,00 8,00 9,00 10,00 11,00 12,00 13,00 14,00 15,00 16,00 17,00 18,00
Power [kW] 98,00 210,00 376,00 608,00 914,00 1.312,00 1.784,00 2.164,00 2.284,00 2.299,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00
Ce 0,368 0,404 0,418 0,426 0,429 0,433 0,429 0,391 0,318 0,252 0,201 0,164 0,135 0,113 0,095
Wind speed [m/s] 19,00 20,00 21,00 22,00 23,00 24,00 25,00
Power [kW] 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00 2.300,00
Ce 0,081 0,069 0,060 0,052 0,045 0,040 0,035
Ct curve
Wind speed [m/s] 4,00 5,00 6,00 7,00 8,00 9,00 10,00 11,00 12,00 13,00 14,00 15,00 16,00 17,00 18,00 19,00 20,00 21,00 22,00 23,00 24,00 25,00
Ct 0,86 0,86 0,86 0,85 0,86 0,86 0,82 0,73 0,46 0,34 0,27 0,22 0,18 0,15 0,13 0,11 0,09 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,06 0,05
HP curve comparison The table shows comparison between annual energy production calculated on basis of simplified
"HP-curves" which assume that all WTGs performs quite similar - only specific power loading (kW/m^2)
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10
and single/dual speed or stall/pitch decides the calculated values. Productions are without wake losses.
HP value [MWh] 3.115 4.975 6.872 8.699 10.215 11.569 For further details, ask at the Danish Energy Agency for project report J.nr. 51171/00-0016 or see
WindPRO manual chapter 3.5.2.
The method is refined in EMD report "20 Detailed Case Studies comparing Project Design Calculations
Hersteller 01/08 [MWh] 3.372 5.284 7.197 8.942 10.444 11.669 and actual Energy Productions for Wind Energy Projects worldwide", jan 2003.
Check value [%] -8 -6 -5 -3 -2 -1 Use the table to evaluate if the given power curve is reasonable - if the check value are lower than -5%,
the power curve probably is too optimistic due to uncertainty in power curve measurement.
WindPRO is developed by EMD International A/S, Niels Jernesvej 10, DK-9220 Aalborg , Tlf. +45 96 35 44 44, Fax +45 96 35 44 46, e-mail: windpro@emd.dk
Printed/Page
13.11.2012 11:18 / 2
Licensed user:
Calculated:
13.11.2012 11:18
Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O!

File Q:\2000 - ABT Wind Assessment\Projekte\09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\3 - Power Curves & Reports\Siemens SW
Power curve Ce and Ct curve

0,5 1
2.200
2.000 Ce Ct
0,4 0,8
1.800
1.600
Power [kW]
1.400 0,3 0,6

1.200
1.000
0,2 0,4
800
600
0,1 0,2
400
200
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Wind speed [m/s] Wind speed [m/s]
Printed/Page
14.01.2013 14:56 / 1
Licensed user:
Calculated:
14.01.2013 14:56
NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-!

File X:\ENERARCH\ZZ 09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\3 - Power Curves & Reports\NORDEX N90-2500 HS 2500 90.0 !
Company NORDEX
Type/Version N90/2500 HS
Tower Other - unknown
Origin country DE
Blade type NR45, LM 43.8
Hub height(s) 100,0; 80,0; 70,0 m
Valid No
Creator USER
Created 17.11.2009 16:15
Edited 17.11.2009 16:15
Power curve: Hersteller12/2010

Source Nordex

[m/s] [kg/m3] []
Nach Dokument F008_136_A05_EN (26.01.2011, SM).
ct-Werte nach Dokument F008_136_A06_EN (26.01.2011, SM).
Power curve
Wind speed [m/s] 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00 5,50 6,00 6,50 7,00 7,50 8,00 8,50 9,00 9,50 10,00 10,50
Power [kW] 29,00 76,00 136,00 207,00 292,00 390,00 504,00 635,00 787,00 958,00 1.147,00 1.352,00 1.570,00 1.799,00 2.036,00
Ce 0,174 0,305 0,383 0,425 0,450 0,463 0,471 0,475 0,479 0,480 0,479 0,476 0,470 0,462 0,451
Wind speed [m/s] 11,00 11,50 12,00 12,50 13,00 13,50 14,00 14,50 15,00 15,50 16,00 16,50 17,00 17,50 18,00
Power [kW] 2.231,00 2.368,00 2.454,00 2.496,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00
Ce 0,430 0,400 0,364 0,328 0,292 0,261 0,234 0,210 0,190 0,172 0,157 0,143 0,131 0,120 0,110
Wind speed [m/s] 18,50 19,00 19,50 20,00 20,50 21,00 21,50 22,00 22,50 23,00 23,50 24,00 24,50 25,00
Power [kW] 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00
Ce 0,101 0,094 0,087 0,080 0,074 0,069 0,065 0,060 0,056 0,053 0,049 0,046 0,044 0,041
Ct curve
Wind speed [m/s] 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00 5,50 6,00 6,50 7,00 7,50 8,00 8,50 9,00 9,50 10,00 10,50 11,00 11,50 12,00 12,50 13,00 13,50 14,00 14,50 15,00 15,50 16,00 16,50 17,00 17,50 18,00
Ct 1,33 1,20 1,11 1,04 0,98 0,93 0,88 0,87 0,87 0,86 0,86 0,83 0,80 0,76 0,73 0,70 0,67 0,62 0,50 0,43 0,37 0,33 0,29 0,26 0,23 0,21 0,19 0,17 0,16 0,15 0,14
Ct curve
Wind speed [m/s] 18,00 18,50 19,00 19,50 20,00 20,50 21,00 21,50 22,00 22,50 23,00 23,50 24,00 24,50 25,00
Ct 0,14 0,13 0,12 0,11 0,10 0,09 0,09 0,08 0,08 0,07 0,07 0,06 0,06 0,06 0,05
"HP-curves" which assume that all WTGs performs quite similar - only specific power loading (kW/m^2)
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10
HP value [MWh] 2.959 4.860 6.837 8.762 10.390 11.830 For further details, ask at the Danish Energy Agency for project report J.nr. 51171/00-0016 or see
The method is refined in EMD report "20 Detailed Case Studies comparing Project Design Calculations
Hersteller12/2010 [MWh] 3.455 5.471 7.513 9.399 11.035 12.382 and actual Energy Productions for Wind Energy Projects worldwide", jan 2003.
Check value [%] -14 -11 -9 -7 -6 -4 Use the table to evaluate if the given power curve is reasonable - if the check value are lower than -5%,
the power curve probably is too optimistic due to uncertainty in power curve measurement.
Printed/Page
14.01.2013 14:56 / 2
Licensed user:
Calculated:
14.01.2013 14:56
NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-!

File X:\ENERARCH\ZZ 09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\3 - Power Curves & Reports\NORDEX N90-2500 HS 2500 90.0 !
Printed/Page
13.11.2012 11:17 / 1
Licensed user:
Calculated:
13.11.2012 11:17
VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O!

File Q:\2000 - ABT Wind Assessment\Projekte\09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\3 - Power Curves & Reports\VESTAS V90
Company VESTAS
Type/Version V90-1.8MW
Tower Tubular
Origin country DK
Blade type VESTAS 44
Hub height(s) 105,0; 80,0; 95,0 m
Valid Yes
Creator USER
Created 10.05.2007 11:29
Edited 10.05.2007 11:29
Power curve: Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225)

Source Vestas

[m/s] [kg/m3] []
gem Vestasspezifikation 9500019.R5 vom 07.09.2005 Rev.5, (AG 210306)
Power curve
Wind speed [m/s] 4,00 5,00 6,00 7,00 8,00 9,00 10,00 11,00 12,00 13,00 14,00 15,00 16,00 17,00 18,00
Power [kW] 91,00 200,00 362,00 588,00 889,00 1.255,00 1.604,00 1.769,00 1.798,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00
Ce 0,365 0,411 0,430 0,440 0,446 0,442 0,412 0,341 0,267 0,210 0,168 0,137 0,113 0,094 0,079
Wind speed [m/s] 19,00 20,00 21,00 22,00 23,00 24,00 25,00
Power [kW] 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00 1.800,00
Ce 0,067 0,058 0,050 0,043 0,038 0,033 0,030
Ct curve
Wind speed [m/s] 4,00 5,00 6,00 7,00 8,00 9,00 10,00 11,00 12,00 13,00 14,00 15,00 16,00 17,00 18,00 19,00 20,00 21,00 22,00 23,00 24,00 25,00
Ct 0,86 0,84 0,84 0,84 0,82 0,76 0,66 0,50 0,36 0,28 0,22 0,18 0,14 0,12 0,10 0,09 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,05 0,04
"HP-curves" which assume that all WTGs performs quite similar - only specific power loading
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10 (kW/m^2) and single/dual speed or stall/pitch decides the calculated values. Productions are
HP value [MWh] 2.875 4.454 6.054 7.545 8.752 9.843 without wake losses.
For further details, ask at the Danish Energy Agency for project report J.nr. 51171/00-0016 or see
Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) [MWh] 3.119 4.744 6.295 7.661 8.806 9.721 The method is refined in EMD report "20 Detailed Case Studies comparing Project Design
Calculations and actual Energy Productions for Wind Energy Projects worldwide", jan 2003.
Check value [%] -8 -6 -4 -2 -1 1 Use the table to evaluate if the given power curve is reasonable - if the check value are lower than
-5%, the power curve probably is too optimistic due to uncertainty in power curve measurement.

1.800 0,5 1
1.600 Ce Ct
0,4 0,8
1.400
1.200
Power [kW]
0,3 0,6
1.000
800
0,2 0,4
600
400 0,1 0,2
200
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Page 87 of 143
Appendix III Wind measurement results for Mayor Buratovich:
2008-04-25 until 2012-09-18 at 72.5 m, 50.0 m and 30.0m m a.g.l.
Statistics for time series and data availability
Time series overview graph incl. monthly means
Probability distribution table data
Probability distribution overview graphs
Weibull data (table and graphics)
Project: Description: Printed/Page
Wind energy expertise Parque Elico
09-1-2084 ARG Parque Elico Vientos del Secano S.A Vientos del Secano S.A. and analysis of
12.11.2012 09:39 / 1
wind measurement Mayor Buratovich, Licensed user:
Province of Buenos Aires, ARG. CUBE Engineering
ABO Wind Energas Renovables S.A. RP 'WM Mayor Buratovich' app. 15 m Breitscheidstrae 6
Av. Alicia Moreau de Justo 1050 above sea level, 7 km northeast of Mayor DE-34119 Kassel
Buratovich.
AR - C1107AAP Puerto Madero (Buenos Aires) +49 (0) 561 28 85 73 0
Long term adjustment for the 10-years F. Pfeil / f.pfeil@cube-engineering.com
period (2002 - 2011) using MERRA Calculated:
Reanalysis Data. 12.11.2012 09:39
Meteo data report - Main results

Mast: WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 10minverified with dir50mPeriod: Full period: 25.04.2008 - 18.09.2012 (52,8 months)
Mast position: Geo WGS 84 East: -6234'24,44" North: -3912'05,99"
Measurement heights and wind speeds (in this report)

Disabled data not included in overview table below
ID Height Data recovery Records U_max U_mean *)

[m] [%] [m/s] [m/s]
72,5m - v72,5 72,5 98,9 228974 28,1 8,2
50,0m - v50 50,0 98,9 228974 27,1 7,4
30,0m - v30 30,0 98,9 228974 24,9 6,5
*) U_mean is simple arithmetic average Scale: 50.000
Mean wind profile for all concurrent data and terrain profile for the most frequent sector of height: 72,5m- v72,5: NNW(left side)
Direction distribution 150

72,5m- v72,5 140
50,0m- v50
N
30,0m- v30 130

E
NN
NN
W
120
Height above ground level (m)
WN 15
W E 110
EN
10
100
15 10 5
5 90
W E
5
5 10 15 80
10 70
70 NNW ES
W
WS 15
E 60
60
50
W
SS
SS
50
E
Height above sea level (m)
40
40 30
30 20
10
Wind speed (m/s)
20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
0
10
-10
-20
-30
-1.400 -1.200 -1.000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 1.400
Distance frommast (m)
Power law Logarithmic Measured
Profile characteristics for best curve fit through all data (Note: Values are only fully valid in flat terrain)
Shear exponent 0,2957 (Power law profile)
Roughness lenght 1,5529 m class 3,98 (Equivalent roughness for logarithmic profile)
12.11.2012 09:39 / 2
Buratovich.

Statistics
Signal Unit Count Of Mean Weibull Weibull Weibull
period mean A k
[%]
72,5m - v72,5 Mean wind speed, all m/s 228974 98,9 8,17 8,33 9,29 3,26
72,5m - v72,5 Wind direction, all Degrees 228999 98,9 316,07
72,5m - v72,5 Turbulence intensity, all 228971 98,9 0,10
72,5m - v72,5 Turbulence intensity, enabled 206494 89,2 0,09
50,0m - v50 Mean wind speed, all m/s 228974 98,9 7,36 7,46 8,34 3,10
50,0m - v50 Wind direction, all Degrees 228999 98,9 316,07
50,0m - v50 Turbulence intensity, all 228961 98,9 0,11
50,0m - v50 Turbulence intensity, enabled 202504 87,5 0,10
30,0m - v30 Mean wind speed, all m/s 228974 98,9 6,49 6,42 7,23 2,58
30,0m - v30 Wind direction, all Degrees 228999 98,9 316,07
30,0m - v30 Turbulence intensity, all 228964 98,9 0,12
30,0m - v30 Turbulence intensity, enabled 194237 83,9 0,12
Hourly mean wind speed Hourly mean wind direction

360
8,5
340
8
320
7,5
300
7
280
6,5
260
6
240
5,5
220
5
200
4,5 180
4 160
3,5 140
3 120
2,5 100
2 80
1,5 60
1 40
0,5 20
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Wind speed, Averaging: Day
25
20
15
10
5
0
01.06.2008 29.09.2008 27.01.2009 27.05.2009 24.09.2009 22.01.2010 22.05.2010 19.09.2010 17.01.2011 17.05.2011 14.09.2011 12.01.2012 11.05.2012 08.09.2012
Wind direction, Averaging: Day
300
200
100
0
01.06.2008 29.09.2008 27.01.2009 27.05.2009 24.09.2009 22.01.2010 22.05.2010 19.09.2010 17.01.2011 17.05.2011 14.09.2011 12.01.2012 11.05.2012 08.09.2012
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30
12.11.2012 09:39 / 3
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Import filters, files and heights

Import filter: I1
Files/Folders
C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\f.pfeil\Desktop\09-1-2084 ARG Mayor Buratovich-ABO fp\09-1-2084a Mayor Buratovich\4 - WM\WM M Buratovich\Raw data ver
Time zone for measurements: (GMT-03:00) Buenos Aires

Line with header: 50
Header field separator: "Tab"
First line with data: 51
Data field separator: "Tab"
Column Channel Type Sub type Unit Height Name Scale Offset
1 Time stamp Date&Time d.m.y h:m:s 1,0000 0,0000
2 1 Wind direction Mean Degrees 50,0 m dir50 1,0000 0,0000
3 1 Wind direction StdDev Degrees 50,0 m CH1SD 1,0000 0,0000
6 2 Wind speed Mean m/s 72,5 m v72,5 1,0000 0,0000
7 2 Wind speed StdDev m/s 72,5 m CH2SD 1,0000 0,0000
8 2 Wind speed Max m/s 72,5 m CH2Max 1,0000 0,0000
10 3 Wind speed Mean m/s 50,0 m v50 1,0000 0,0000
14 4 Wind speed Mean m/s 30,0 m v30 1,0000 0,0000
12.11.2012 09:39 / 4
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Missing data wind speed and direction - calendar view
Height: 72,5m - v72,5 - some records missing, disabled, erroneous, or out of range current day
- all records missing, disabled, erroneous, or out of range current day
Day
Month/Year % Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Apr.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2008 0,8 34 0 33 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2008 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2008 7,5 336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 144
Nov.2008 0,0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2008 35,5 1584 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 1 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2010 0,1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2010 0,4 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2010 3,5 158 0 65 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2011 0,1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2011 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2011 1,6 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1,1 2496
12.11.2012 09:39 / 5
Buratovich.
Height: 50,0m - v50 - some records missing, disabled, erroneous, or out of range current day
Day
Month/Year % Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Apr.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2008 0,8 34 0 33 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2008 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2008 7,5 336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 144
Nov.2008 0,0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2008 35,5 1584 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 1 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2010 0,1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2010 0,4 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2010 3,5 158 0 65 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2011 0,1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2011 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2011 1,6 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1,1 2496
12.11.2012 09:39 / 6
Buratovich.
Height: 30,0m - v30 - some records missing, disabled, erroneous, or out of range current day
Day
Month/Year % Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Apr.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2008 0,8 34 0 33 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2008 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2008 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2008 7,5 336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 144
Nov.2008 0,0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2008 35,5 1584 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 1 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2009 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2010 0,1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2010 0,4 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2010 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2010 3,5 158 0 65 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2011 0,1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2011 3,2 144 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2011 1,6 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oct.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nov.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dec.2011 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jan.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Feb.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mar.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Apr.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
May.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jun.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Jul.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aug.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sep.2012 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 1,1 2496
12.11.2012 09:39 / 7
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Time series graphs

Mean wind speed, Averaging: None

28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
02.05.2008 01.06.2008 01.07.2008 31.07.2008 30.08.2008 29.09.2008 29.10.2008 28.11.2008 28.12.2008 27.01.2009 26.02.2009 28.03.2009
Wind direction, Averaging: None

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
02.05.2008 01.06.2008 01.07.2008 31.07.2008 30.08.2008 29.09.2008 29.10.2008 28.11.2008 28.12.2008 27.01.2009 26.02.2009 28.03.2009
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30

28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
27.04.2009 27.05.2009 26.06.2009 26.07.2009 25.08.2009 24.09.2009 24.10.2009 23.11.2009 23.12.2009 22.01.2010 21.02.2010 23.03.2010

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
27.04.2009 27.05.2009 26.06.2009 26.07.2009 25.08.2009 24.09.2009 24.10.2009 23.11.2009 23.12.2009 22.01.2010 21.02.2010 23.03.2010
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30
12.11.2012 09:39 / 8
Buratovich.


28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
22.04.2010 22.05.2010 21.06.2010 21.07.2010 20.08.2010 19.09.2010 19.10.2010 18.11.2010 18.12.2010 17.01.2011 16.02.2011 18.03.2011

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
22.04.2010 22.05.2010 21.06.2010 21.07.2010 20.08.2010 19.09.2010 19.10.2010 18.11.2010 18.12.2010 17.01.2011 16.02.2011 18.03.2011
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30

28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
17.04.2011 17.05.2011 16.06.2011 16.07.2011 15.08.2011 14.09.2011 14.10.2011 13.11.2011 13.12.2011 12.01.2012 11.02.2012 12.03.2012

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
17.04.2011 17.05.2011 16.06.2011 16.07.2011 15.08.2011 14.09.2011 14.10.2011 13.11.2011 13.12.2011 12.01.2012 11.02.2012 12.03.2012
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30
12.11.2012 09:39 / 9
Buratovich.


28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
11.04.2012 26.04.2012 11.05.2012 26.05.2012 10.06.2012 25.06.2012 10.07.2012 25.07.2012 09.08.2012 24.08.2012 08.09.2012

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
11.04.2012 26.04.2012 11.05.2012 26.05.2012 10.06.2012 25.06.2012 10.07.2012 25.07.2012 09.08.2012 24.08.2012 08.09.2012
72,5m- v72,5 50,0m- v50 30,0m- v30
12.11.2012 09:39 / 10
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Monthly wind speeds

Monthly wind speeds
72,5m - v72,5
Month 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mean Mean of month
January 8,86 9,05 8,64 8,19 8,68 8,69
February 8,43 8,06 8,07 8,28 8,21 8,21
March 7,40 7,47 8,18 7,78 7,71 7,71
April 7,69 8,43 8,02 8,41 7,17 7,99 7,94
May 7,88 8,03 7,69 8,21 8,17 7,99 8,00
June 8,24 8,31 8,15 7,95 8,90 8,31 8,31
July 7,66 8,47 8,03 8,37 8,91 8,29 8,29
August 8,40 8,12 8,49 7,92 7,33 8,06 8,05
September 7,68 8,13 7,59 8,71 7,44 7,95 7,91
October 8,28 8,68 7,91 7,89 8,19 8,19
November 9,66 8,34 7,46 8,47 8,48 8,48
December 7,95 7,84 8,93 7,97 8,19 8,17
mean, all data 8,21 8,25 8,07 8,23 8,05
mean of months 8,16 8,25 8,07 8,23 8,02 8,16
Monthly wind speeds

50,0m - v50
January 8,10 8,31 7,89 7,51 7,95 7,95
February 7,66 7,37 7,43 7,52 7,49 7,50
March 6,68 6,82 7,40 7,04 6,98 6,98
April 6,97 7,51 7,15 7,56 6,36 7,14 7,11
May 6,69 7,15 6,89 7,33 7,23 7,06 7,06
June 7,20 7,37 7,21 7,11 7,81 7,34 7,34
July 6,77 7,57 7,19 7,40 7,82 7,35 7,35
August 7,48 7,26 7,62 7,17 6,57 7,22 7,22
September 6,91 7,32 6,92 7,95 6,67 7,19 7,15
October 7,56 7,92 7,25 7,31 7,51 7,51
November 8,87 7,63 6,92 7,75 7,80 7,79
December 7,33 7,20 8,21 7,28 7,52 7,50
mean, all data 7,34 7,45 7,32 7,46 7,19
mean of months 7,31 7,45 7,32 7,46 7,17 7,37
Monthly wind speeds

30,0m - v30
January 7,40 7,58 7,01 6,85 7,21 7,21
February 6,89 6,60 6,63 6,75 6,72 6,72
March 5,94 6,02 6,47 6,29 6,18 6,18
April 6,11 6,55 6,10 6,55 5,55 6,18 6,17
May 6,02 6,18 5,92 6,27 6,25 6,13 6,13
June 6,21 6,37 6,14 6,04 6,70 6,29 6,29
July 5,83 6,55 6,15 6,25 6,69 6,30 6,29
August 6,52 6,32 6,55 6,22 5,79 6,28 6,28
September 6,17 6,54 6,07 6,93 5,86 6,35 6,31
October 6,79 7,15 6,46 6,57 6,74 6,74
November 8,12 6,85 6,18 6,92 7,02 7,02
December 6,72 6,55 7,33 6,60 6,80 6,80
mean, all data 6,53 6,61 6,42 6,54 6,32
mean of months 6,50 6,61 6,42 6,54 6,30 6,51
12.11.2012 09:39 / 11
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Frequency distribution (TAB file data)

Frequency distribution (TAB file data)
72,5m - v72,5
Bin Start End Sum 0-N 1-NNE 2-ENE 3-E 4-ESE 5-SSE 6-S 7-SSW 8-WSW 9-W 10-WNW 11-NNW
Mean 8,17 8,48 7,35 7,65 7,65 7,02 6,80 7,04 7,59 8,25 8,24 8,39 9,44
0 0,49 85 8 4 8 6 7 7 5 9 5 11 6 9
1 0,50 1,49 2111 176 186 146 148 170 183 168 177 194 198 194 171
2 1,50 2,49 5499 558 404 420 390 373 450 433 438 525 539 500 469
3 2,50 3,49 8993 932 660 672 589 549 624 724 754 808 890 867 924
4 3,50 4,49 12710 1285 897 960 739 690 854 1094 1158 1196 1173 1273 1391
5 4,50 5,49 16767 1561 1129 1303 1078 720 1093 1354 1671 1475 1529 1895 1959
6 5,50 6,49 21042 1962 1273 1866 1360 992 1432 1631 2059 1806 1719 2336 2606
7 6,50 7,49 25188 2356 1554 2209 1912 1185 1325 1849 2331 2155 2025 2820 3467
8 7,50 8,49 28020 2678 1711 2732 2032 1187 1204 1666 2495 2259 2220 3456 4380
9 8,50 9,49 29005 3230 1750 2835 2075 988 922 1343 2145 2381 2267 3760 5309
10 9,50 10,49 27535 3649 1514 2161 1548 676 568 811 1472 2394 2510 3982 6250
11 10,50 11,49 22158 3218 941 1339 876 438 393 571 882 1840 2123 3367 6170
12 11,50 12,49 14248 1937 353 535 540 208 266 374 575 1098 1352 2094 4916
13 12,50 13,49 7964 880 108 173 299 139 157 191 358 679 817 858 3305
14 13,50 14,49 3882 327 40 62 117 75 105 87 280 432 394 310 1653
15 14,50 15,49 1773 163 13 10 30 30 51 58 150 286 209 111 662
16 15,50 16,49 971 111 6 6 2 12 20 38 90 153 112 65 356
17 16,50 17,49 514 57 4 3 2 6 15 26 68 88 51 24 170
18 17,50 18,49 263 44 3 0 2 1 9 19 34 57 23 7 64
19 18,50 19,49 118 13 1 0 1 1 3 9 15 34 11 4 26
20 19,50 20,49 66 7 0 1 0 0 1 6 21 20 0 1 9
21 20,50 21,49 23 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 7 1 0 1
22 21,50 22,49 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 3 0 0 4
23 22,50 23,49 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 0 0 0
24 23,50 24,49 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3
25 24,50 25,49 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1
26 25,50 26,49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
27 26,50 27,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
28 27,50 28,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
29 28,50 29,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 29,50 30,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 30,50 31,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
32 31,50 32,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
33 32,50 33,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
34 33,50 34,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 34,50 35,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36 35,50 36,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
37 36,50 37,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
38 37,50 38,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
39 38,50 39,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
40 39,50 40,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 40,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12.11.2012 09:39 / 12
Buratovich.

50,0m - v50
Mean 7,36 7,49 6,54 6,93 7,14 6,64 5,97 6,60 7,08 7,47 7,42 7,50 8,38
0 0,49 151 6 7 10 9 15 20 12 11 13 15 13 20
1 0,50 1,49 2334 215 204 160 183 182 230 194 189 203 205 187 182
2 1,50 2,49 6400 663 481 473 455 458 560 474 487 578 613 590 568
3 2,50 3,49 10496 1156 730 761 672 558 820 835 843 948 1013 1002 1158
4 3,50 4,49 15465 1537 1034 1144 837 810 1314 1311 1421 1365 1404 1515 1773
5 4,50 5,49 21165 1983 1386 1666 1328 850 1596 1649 2057 1850 1803 2381 2616
6 5,50 6,49 27844 2864 1762 2586 1878 1160 1405 1987 2659 2447 2222 3091 3783
7 6,50 7,49 33134 3574 2243 3146 2234 1226 1178 1799 2725 2773 2662 4191 5383
8 7,50 8,49 35526 4087 2268 3386 2105 1121 965 1506 2350 3042 3033 4935 6728
9 8,50 9,49 30760 3974 1555 2257 1584 797 641 967 1551 2552 2860 4624 7398
10 9,50 10,49 19736 2426 571 1057 1069 555 371 651 918 1482 1859 2929 5848
11 10,50 11,49 11620 1193 185 516 695 313 274 454 671 919 1073 1422 3905
12 11,50 12,49 6674 692 73 182 419 187 157 310 454 627 633 591 2349
13 12,50 13,49 3685 362 29 74 202 124 77 119 345 464 350 243 1296
14 13,50 14,49 1878 190 12 16 59 52 42 71 213 284 219 118 602
15 14,50 15,49 1036 108 3 4 12 25 14 47 118 146 125 61 373
16 15,50 16,49 555 57 5 2 2 9 13 34 82 94 59 21 177
17 16,50 17,49 273 49 3 0 2 4 3 17 43 55 18 9 70
18 17,50 18,49 125 11 0 1 1 1 2 13 27 27 7 5 30
19 18,50 19,49 58 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 17 19 1 2 8
20 19,50 20,49 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 6 8 3 0 0 4
21 20,50 21,49 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 5 0 0 0
22 21,50 22,49 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 6 0 0 1
23 22,50 23,49 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3
24 23,50 24,49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1
25 24,50 25,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
26 25,50 26,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
27 26,50 27,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
28 27,50 28,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 28,50 29,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 29,50 30,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 30,50 31,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
32 31,50 32,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
33 32,50 33,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
34 33,50 34,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 34,50 35,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36 35,50 36,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
37 36,50 37,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
38 37,50 38,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
39 38,50 39,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
40 39,50 40,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 40,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12.11.2012 09:39 / 13
Buratovich.

30,0m - v30
Mean 6,49 6,48 5,51 6,10 6,51 5,97 5,42 6,07 6,49 6,46 6,48 6,53 7,37
0 0,49 140 18 4 15 12 16 14 17 4 9 11 6 14
1 0,50 1,49 2758 255 219 207 246 286 259 221 198 203 207 233 224
2 1,50 2,49 8038 903 587 600 570 563 736 597 576 725 754 661 766
3 2,50 3,49 13844 1466 1002 1020 792 767 1148 1122 1171 1281 1293 1302 1480
4 3,50 4,49 22313 2298 1566 1687 1279 1045 1782 1618 2036 2105 1943 2250 2704
5 4,50 5,49 33069 3700 2296 2937 1985 1140 1586 2213 2782 3177 2768 3889 4596
6 5,50 6,49 41470 4807 3278 3809 2390 1219 1254 1958 2971 3797 3614 5458 6915
7 6,50 7,49 38687 4428 2346 3206 1921 1112 980 1522 2392 3037 3640 5981 8122
8 7,50 8,49 25447 2797 742 1934 1400 769 767 1088 1640 1827 2319 3829 6335
9 8,50 9,49 16477 1763 250 1035 1290 642 462 781 1093 1218 1358 1960 4625
10 9,50 10,49 10812 1058 139 607 916 375 323 513 751 867 846 1142 3275
11 10,50 11,49 7139 732 74 269 522 232 191 386 553 632 590 679 2279
12 11,50 12,49 4214 445 27 82 304 149 98 194 379 443 401 289 1403
13 12,50 13,49 2320 248 11 26 92 86 40 97 287 262 230 139 802
14 13,50 14,49 1139 111 7 5 21 28 23 51 161 152 123 65 392
15 14,50 15,49 603 59 3 1 5 12 12 36 92 82 53 28 220
16 15,50 16,49 281 45 0 1 1 6 5 22 47 43 19 16 76
17 16,50 17,49 118 17 0 0 0 0 2 12 27 21 4 2 33
18 17,50 18,49 50 4 0 0 0 0 0 7 18 9 1 1 10
19 18,50 19,49 25 4 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 4 0 0 1
20 19,50 20,49 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 5 0 0 1
21 20,50 21,49 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 0 0 3
22 21,50 22,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
23 22,50 23,49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
24 23,50 24,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
25 24,50 25,49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
26 25,50 26,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
27 26,50 27,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 27,50 28,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 28,50 29,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 29,50 30,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 30,50 31,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
32 31,50 32,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
33 32,50 33,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
34 33,50 34,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 34,50 35,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36 35,50 36,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
37 36,50 37,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
38 37,50 38,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
39 38,50 39,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
40 39,50 40,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 40,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12.11.2012 09:39 / 14
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Monthly graphs aggregated

Mean wind speed
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Turbulence intensity
0,13
0,12
0,11
0,1
0,09
0,08
0,07
0,06
0,05
0,04
0,03
0,02
0,01
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Wind direction
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
12.11.2012 09:39 / 15
Buratovich.
Meteo data report - Weibull data overview

Height: 72,5m - v72,5
Weibull data
Sector A k f Mean wind speed
[m/s] [m/s]
0-N 9,67 3,789 10,99 8,74
1-NNE 8,39 3,503 5,48 7,55
2-ENE 8,65 3,990 7,62 7,84
3-E 8,67 3,522 6,00 7,80
4-ESE 8,05 2,961 3,69 7,18
5-SSE 7,69 2,498 4,23 6,82
6-S 7,98 2,614 5,45 7,09
7-SSW 8,57 2,710 7,51 7,62
8-WSW 9,40 2,919 8,69 8,38
9-W 9,40 3,194 8,81 8,41
10-WNW 9,48 3,879 12,20 8,58
11-NNW 10,61 4,150 19,34 9,64
Mean 9,29 3,260 100,00 8,33
17,5
17
16,5
16
15,5
15
14,5
14
13,5
13
12,5
12
11,5
11
10,5
10
9,5
9
[%]
8,5
8
7,5
7
6,5
6
5,5
5
4,5
4
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
[m/s]
All A: 9,3m/s k: 3,26Vm: 8,3m/s N A: 9,7m/s k: 3,79Vm: 8,7m/s NNEA: 8,4m/s k: 3,50Vm: 7,5m/s ENEA: 8,6m/s k: 3,99Vm: 7,8m/s
EA: 8,7m/s k: 3,52Vm: 7,8m/s ESEA: 8,0m/s k: 2,96Vm: 7,2m/s SSEA: 7,7m/s k: 2,50Vm: 6,8m/s SA: 8,0m/s k: 2,61Vm: 7,1m/s
SSWA: 8,6m/s k: 2,71Vm: 7,6m/s WSWA: 9,4m/s k: 2,92Vm: 8,4m/s WA: 9,4m/s k: 3,19Vm: 8,4m/s WNWA: 9,5m/s k: 3,88Vm: 8,6m/s
NNWA: 10,6m/s k: 4,15Vm: 9,6m/s
12.11.2012 09:39 / 16
Buratovich.

Height: 50,0m - v50
Weibull data
[m/s] [m/s]
0-N 8,51 3,445 10,99 7,65
1-NNE 7,45 3,869 5,48 6,74
2-ENE 7,80 3,946 7,62 7,06
3-E 8,06 3,177 6,00 7,22
4-ESE 7,60 2,759 3,69 6,77
5-SSE 6,69 2,298 4,23 5,93
6-S 7,40 2,411 5,45 6,56
7-SSW 7,88 2,421 7,51 6,99
8-WSW 8,46 2,790 8,69 7,53
9-W 8,46 3,195 8,81 7,58
10-WNW 8,45 3,950 12,20 7,65
11-NNW 9,38 3,673 19,34 8,47
Mean 8,34 3,102 100,00 7,46
19,5
19
18,5
18
17,5
17
16,5
16
15,5
15
14,5
14
13,5
13
12,5
12
11,5
11
10,5
[%]
10
9,5
9
8,5
8
7,5
7
6,5
6
5,5
5
4,5
4
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
[m/s]
NNWA: 9,4m/s k: 3,67Vm: 8,5m/s
12.11.2012 09:39 / 17
Buratovich.

Height: 30,0m - v30
Weibull data
[m/s] [m/s]
0-N 7,21 2,622 10,99 6,41
1-NNE 6,25 3,924 5,48 5,66
2-ENE 6,82 3,254 7,62 6,11
3-E 7,25 2,620 6,00 6,44
4-ESE 6,80 2,395 3,69 6,03
5-SSE 6,00 2,095 4,23 5,31
6-S 6,71 2,174 5,45 5,94
7-SSW 7,09 2,129 7,51 6,28
8-WSW 7,08 2,224 8,69 6,27
9-W 7,27 2,685 8,81 6,46
10-WNW 7,30 3,278 12,20 6,54
11-NNW 8,11 2,750 19,34 7,21
Mean 7,23 2,578 100,00 6,42
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
[%]
12
11
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
[m/s]
NNWA: 8,1m/s k: 2,75Vm: 7,2m/s
Page 105 of 143
Appendix IV Long term wind data for Mayor Buratovich for the reference period
2002 - 2011 at 72.5 m a.g.l.
Time series overview graph incl. monthly means
Probability distribution table data
Probability distribution overview graphs
Weibull data (table and graphics)
Wind energy expertise Parque Elico Vientos 14.11.2012 12:17 / 1
09-1-2084a WEE Vientos del Secano S.A del Secano S.A. and analysis of wind Licensed user:
measurement Mayor Buratovich, Province of
Buenos Aires, ARG. CUBE Engineering
ABO Wind Energas Renovables S.A. Breitscheidstrae 6
Av. Alicia Moreau de Justo 1050 RP 'WM Mayor Buratovich' approx. 15 m above DE-34119 Kassel
sea level, 7 km northeast of Mayor Buratovich. +49 (0) 561 28 85 73 0
F. Pfeil / f.pfeil@cube-engineering.com
Long term adjustment for the 10-years period Calculated:
(2002 - 2011) using MERRA Reanalysis Data. 14.11.2012 12:17

Mast: LRek 72,5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 1h 1998-2011 / 2002-2011Period: Full period: 31.12.2001 - 31.12.2011 (120,0 months)
Mast position: UTM WGS 84 South Zone: 20 East: 536.830 North: 5.660.758
Measurement heights and wind speeds (in this report)

Disabled data not included in overview table below
ID Height Data Records U_max U_mean

recovery *)
[m] [%] [m/s] [m/s]
72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011 72,5 100,0 87648 21,3 8,2
*) U_mean is simple arithmetic average Scale: 50.000
Mean wind profile for all concurrent data and terrain profile for the most frequent sector of height: 72,5m- v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011: NNW(left side)
Direction distribution 150

72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011 140
130
120
Height above ground level (m)
110
E
NN
NN
W
WN 100
W E
10 10 EN
90
W E
10 10 80
W ES
E
WS
W
70
SS
NNW
S
70
SS
60
60
50
50
Height above sea level (m)
40
40 30
30 20
10
Wind speed (m/s)
20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
0
10
-10
-20
-30
-1.400 -1.200 -1.000 -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 1.400
Distance frommast (m)
Power law Logarithmic Measured
No profiles when only one height is selected.

Statistics
Signal Unit Count Of Mean Weibull Weibull Weibull
period mean A k
[%]
72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011 Mean wind speed, all m/s 87648 100,0 8,19 8,29 9,28 3,07
72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011 Wind direction, all Degrees 87648 100,0 310,78
Hourly mean wind speed Hourly mean wind direction

360
8 340
7,5 320
7 300
6,5 280
6 260
5,5 240
220
5
200
4,5
180
4
160
3,5
140
3
120
2,5
100
2 80
1,5 60
1 40
0,5 20
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
Wind speed, Averaging: Week

20
15
10
0
05.12.2001 05.12.2002 05.12.2003 04.12.2004 04.12.2005 04.12.2006 04.12.2007 03.12.2008 03.12.2009 03.12.2010 03.12.2011
Wind direction, Averaging: Week
300
200
100
0
05.12.2002 05.12.2003 04.12.2004 04.12.2005 04.12.2006 04.12.2007 03.12.2008 03.12.2009 03.12.2010 03.12.2011
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
04.01.2002 05.03.2002 04.05.2002 03.07.2002 01.09.2002 31.10.2002 30.12.2002 28.02.2003 29.04.2003 28.06.2003 27.08.2003 26.10.2003

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
04.01.2002 05.03.2002 04.05.2002 03.07.2002 01.09.2002 31.10.2002 30.12.2002 28.02.2003 29.04.2003 28.06.2003 27.08.2003 26.10.2003
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
25.12.2003 23.02.2004 23.04.2004 22.06.2004 21.08.2004 20.10.2004 19.12.2004 17.02.2005 18.04.2005 17.06.2005 16.08.2005 15.10.2005

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
25.12.2003 23.02.2004 23.04.2004 22.06.2004 21.08.2004 20.10.2004 19.12.2004 17.02.2005 18.04.2005 17.06.2005 16.08.2005 15.10.2005
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
14.12.2005 12.02.2006 13.04.2006 12.06.2006 11.08.2006 10.10.2006 09.12.2006 07.02.2007 08.04.2007 07.06.2007 06.08.2007 05.10.2007

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
14.12.2005 12.02.2006 13.04.2006 12.06.2006 11.08.2006 10.10.2006 09.12.2006 07.02.2007 08.04.2007 07.06.2007 06.08.2007 05.10.2007
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
04.12.2007 02.02.2008 02.04.2008 01.06.2008 31.07.2008 29.09.2008 28.11.2008 27.01.2009 28.03.2009 27.05.2009 26.07.2009 24.09.2009 23.11.2009

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
04.12.2007 02.02.2008 02.04.2008 01.06.2008 31.07.2008 29.09.2008 28.11.2008 27.01.2009 28.03.2009 27.05.2009 26.07.2009 24.09.2009 23.11.2009
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011

20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
22.01.2010 23.03.2010 22.05.2010 21.07.2010 19.09.2010 18.11.2010 17.01.2011 18.03.2011 17.05.2011 16.07.2011 14.09.2011 13.11.2011

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
22.01.2010 23.03.2010 22.05.2010 21.07.2010 19.09.2010 18.11.2010 17.01.2011 18.03.2011 17.05.2011 16.07.2011 14.09.2011 13.11.2011
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
01.12.2011 03.12.2011 05.12.2011 07.12.2011 09.12.2011 11.12.2011 13.12.2011 15.12.2011 17.12.2011 19.12.2011 21.12.2011 23.12.2011 25.12.2011 27.12.2011 29.12.2011 31.12.2011

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
03.12.2011 05.12.2011 07.12.2011 09.12.2011 11.12.2011 13.12.2011 15.12.2011 17.12.2011 19.12.2011 21.12.2011 23.12.2011 25.12.2011 27.12.2011 29.12.2011 31.12.2011
72,5m- v72,5LRekMERRA 2002-2011
Meteo data report - Monthly wind speeds

Monthly wind speeds

72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011
Month 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Mean Mean of month
January 8,47 8,24 8,02 8,85 8,45 8,80 8,22 9,10 8,92 8,74 8,58 8,58
February 7,92 8,93 7,29 7,17 7,99 7,62 7,40 8,26 8,60 8,28 7,94 7,95
March 7,85 7,93 8,05 8,21 8,37 7,50 8,23 7,39 7,91 8,43 7,99 7,99
April 8,38 7,56 8,64 8,08 8,07 7,98 8,08 8,14 8,00 8,53 8,15 8,15
May 7,88 7,87 6,81 9,10 7,48 7,92 7,60 7,68 7,75 8,25 7,84 7,83
June 8,14 9,02 9,10 7,89 7,85 7,99 8,50 8,25 8,59 8,09 8,34 8,34
July 7,50 8,79 9,01 7,75 8,73 8,38 7,23 8,48 8,08 8,45 8,24 8,24
August 8,56 8,50 7,43 8,11 8,20 7,82 8,59 8,35 8,17 8,25 8,20 8,20
September 7,21 8,42 8,86 7,67 7,45 8,49 7,52 7,76 7,15 8,69 7,92 7,92
October 8,68 8,65 8,91 8,22 7,83 7,86 8,05 8,56 7,69 7,65 8,21 8,21
November 8,49 8,35 7,27 9,08 9,32 8,70 9,41 8,26 7,71 8,16 8,48 8,47
December 7,89 8,27 9,40 8,66 8,27 8,76 8,63 7,83 7,86 8,66 7,64 8,40 8,35
mean, all data 7,89 8,11 8,47 8,17 8,21 8,21 8,14 8,05 8,18 8,10 8,26
mean of months 7,89 8,11 8,47 8,17 8,20 8,21 8,14 8,05 8,17 8,10 8,26 8,19


72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011
Mean 8,19 8,77 7,44 7,15 7,12 6,91 6,90 7,14 7,60 8,14 8,61 8,63 9,32
0 0,49 65 3 0 2 8 10 2 1 0 5 16 15 3
1 0,50 1,49 747 55 16 38 64 85 69 55 57 74 83 77 74
2 1,50 2,49 1969 176 93 169 163 150 174 135 198 168 140 217 186
3 2,50 3,49 3399 276 172 281 240 244 292 265 322 340 245 302 420
4 3,50 4,49 4817 411 251 392 299 313 350 392 460 509 386 460 594
5 4,50 5,49 6592 567 402 585 437 358 422 520 610 686 549 713 743
6 5,50 6,49 8455 796 521 686 577 486 532 610 712 775 756 902 1102
7 6,50 7,49 10174 1026 612 986 702 526 543 640 913 878 853 1075 1420
8 7,50 8,49 11039 1214 563 988 662 516 491 647 949 1015 976 1215 1803
9 8,50 9,49 10500 1286 481 810 596 427 377 488 705 936 1028 1329 2037
10 9,50 10,49 9325 1283 336 492 402 268 319 368 604 727 897 1311 2318
11 10,50 11,49 7689 1244 209 280 205 165 252 205 428 645 836 1010 2210
12 11,50 12,49 5576 839 182 114 135 115 132 146 264 513 581 893 1662
13 12,50 13,49 3515 522 86 52 65 59 47 84 160 352 424 537 1127
14 13,50 14,49 1936 271 25 8 22 28 26 56 110 204 227 265 694
15 14,50 15,49 1061 146 13 5 2 12 13 32 66 87 167 157 361
16 15,50 16,49 466 49 3 0 2 6 4 13 24 55 75 81 154
17 16,50 17,49 209 11 0 0 0 4 1 6 12 43 34 33 65
18 17,50 18,49 81 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12 12 10 38
19 18,50 19,49 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 2 5 12
20 19,50 20,49 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0
21 20,50 21,49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0
22 21,50 22,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 22,50 23,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24 23,50 24,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
25 24,50 25,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
26 25,50 26,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
27 26,50 27,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
28 27,50 28,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
29 28,50 29,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
30 29,50 30,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 30,50 31,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
32 31,50 32,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
33 32,50 33,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
34 33,50 34,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
35 34,50 35,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36 35,50 36,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
37 36,50 37,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
38 37,50 38,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
39 38,50 39,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
40 39,50 40,49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
41 40,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Meteo data report - Monthly graphs aggregated

Mean wind speed
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Wind direction
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Height: 72,5m - v72,5 LRek MERRA 2002-2011
Weibull data
[m/s] [m/s]
0-N 9,88 3,603 11,61 8,90
1-NNE 8,31 3,003 4,52 7,42
2-ENE 8,07 3,652 6,72 7,28
3-E 8,08 3,242 5,23 7,24
4-ESE 7,91 2,850 4,30 7,05
5-SSE 7,82 2,714 4,62 6,96
6-S 8,06 2,729 5,32 7,17
7-SSW 8,58 2,790 7,54 7,64
8-WSW 9,19 2,806 9,16 8,19
9-W 9,72 3,099 9,46 8,69
10-WNW 9,77 3,303 12,11 8,76
11-NNW 10,50 3,816 19,42 9,49
Mean 9,28 3,071 100,00 8,29
17
16,5
16
15,5
15
14,5
14
13,5
13
12,5
12
11,5
11
10,5
10
9,5
9
[%]
8,5
8
7,5
7
6,5
6
5,5
5
4,5
4
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
[m/s]
NNWA: 10,5m/s k: 3,82Vm: 9,5m/s
Page 115 of 143
Appendix V WindPRO-results for single turbine (WASP-INTERFACE)
Main results
Production analyses
Power curve analyses
Analyses of wind conditions
Wind profile
Map
(2002 - 2011) using MERRA Reanalysis Data. 14.01.2013 15:04/2.7.490
WAsP interface - Main Result

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'
Name RP `Mayor Buratovich Suppl.
Site Coordinates
UTM WGS 84 South Zone: 20 East: 536.830 North: 5.660.758
Air density calculation mode Individual per WTG
Result for WTG at hub altitude 1,213 kg/m
Air density relative to standard 99,0 %
Hub altitude above sea level (asl) 95,4 m
Annual mean temperature at hub alt. 15,1 C
Pressure at WTGs 1.003,9 hPa
Calculation is based on "RP `Mayor Buratovich Suppl. ", using WAsP

(WAsP 10 for Windows RVEA0151 1, 5, 5, 0) to convert the wind statistics
and the terrain classification to a site specific wind speed distribution.
Using the selected power curve, the expected annual energy production is
calculated.
Wind statisticsAR v72,5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h 2002-2011 - v72,5 .wws
WAsP version WAsP 10 for Windows RVEA0151 1, 5, 5, 0
Scale 1:35.000
Site Data
Calculation Results
Key results for height 80,0 m above ground level
Wind energy: 4.671 kWh/m; Mean wind speed: 8,5 m/s; Equivalent roughness: 1,6
Calculated Annual Energy

WTG type Power curve Annual Energy
Valid Manufact. Type-generator Power, Rotor Hub Creator Name Result p90 Mean Capacity
rated diameter height value wind factor
-13,1% speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [m/s] [%]
No NORDEX N90/2500 HS-2.500 2.500 90,0 80,0 USER Hersteller12/2010 10.821,8 9.404 8,54 49,4
Yes Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS-2.300 2.300 93,0 80,0 USER Hersteller 01/08 10.348,2 8.993 8,54 51,3
Yes VESTAS V90-1.8MW-1.800 1.800 90,0 80,0 USER Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) 8.978,4 7.802 8,54 56,9
WAsP interface - Production Analysis

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-!, Hub height: 80,0 m, Air density: 1,213 kg/m
Directional Analysis
Sector 0N 1 NNE 2 ENE 3 E 4 ESE 5 SSE 6 S 7 SSW 8 WSW 9 W 10 WNW 11 NNW Total
Roughness based energy [MWh] 1.440,9 416,2 539,7 432,0 343,2 358,4 436,9 690,9 991,5 1.164,4 1.466,4 2.618,5 10.898,9
-Decrease due to obstacles [MWh] 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,0 0,0 27,6 41,4 0,0 0,0 69,1
+Increase due to hills [MWh] 3,0 3,3 1,9 -1,3 -2,3 -1,6 0,7 3,5 3,0 -2,7 -7,4 -8,1 -7,9
Resulting energy [MWh] 1.443,9 419,4 541,6 430,7 340,9 356,7 437,5 694,5 966,9 1.120,3 1.459,0 2.610,5 10.821,8
Specific energy [kWh/m] 1.701
Specific energy [kWh/kW] 4.329
Decrease due to obstacles [%] 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 2,8 3,6 0,0 0,0 0,63
Increase due to hills [%] 0,2 0,8 0,4 -0,3 -0,7 -0,4 0,1 0,5 0,3 -0,2 -0,5 -0,3 -0,07
Directional Distribution [%] 13,3 3,9 5,0 4,0 3,2 3,3 4,0 6,4 8,9 10,4 13,5 24,1 100,0
Utilization [%] 36,4 39,7 43,6 42,0 40,5 39,9 39,0 37,2 34,9 34,4 35,3 34,6 36,4
Operational [Hours/year] 1.005 406 570 451 372 398 460 645 785 818 1.049 1.640 8.600
Full Load Equivalent [Hours/year] 578 168 217 172 136 143 175 278 387 448 584 1.044 4.329
A- parameter [m/s] 10,2 8,7 8,3 8,3 8,2 8,1 8,3 8,9 9,5 10,1 10,1 10,8 9,6
Mean wind speed [m/s] 9,2 7,7 7,5 7,5 7,3 7,2 7,4 7,9 8,5 9,0 9,0 9,7 8,5
k- parameter 3,46 2,87 3,38 3,04 2,71 2,60 2,61 2,67 2,76 3,03 3,19 3,70 2,97
Frequency [%] 11,7 4,7 6,6 5,2 4,3 4,6 5,3 7,5 9,1 9,5 12,2 19,1 100,0
Power density [W/m] 533
Energy vs. sector Energy vs. wind speed

2.600 1.700
2.400 1.600
1.500
2.200
1.400
2.000
1.300
Energy [MWh/year]
Energy [MWh/year]
1.800 1.200
1.600 1.100
1.000
1.400
900
1.200
800
1.000 700
800 600
500
600
400
400
300
200 200
0 100
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Sector Wind speed [m/s]
Impact of hills and obstacles vs. sector
-5
Energy [MWh/year]
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O!, Hub height: 80,0 m, Air density: 1,213 kg/m
Roughness based energy [MWh] 1.374,8 400,9 523,3 417,8 331,4 346,0 420,9 663,2 946,1 1.107,6 1.398,0 2.488,1 10.418,1
Resulting energy [MWh] 1.377,5 403,9 525,2 416,6 329,3 344,4 421,5 666,4 923,6 1.067,6 1.391,3 2.480,9 10.348,2
Utilization [%] 32,5 35,8 39,6 38,0 36,6 36,1 35,2 33,4 31,2 30,7 31,6 30,8 32,6
Operational [Hours/year] 992 401 563 445 367 393 453 636 775 807 1.035 1.618 8.486
A- parameter [m/s] 10,2 8,7 8,3 8,3 8,2 8,1 8,3 8,9 9,5 10,1 10,1 10,8 9,6
k- parameter 3,46 2,87 3,38 3,04 2,71 2,60 2,61 2,67 2,76 3,03 3,19 3,70 2,97
Frequency [%] 11,7 4,7 6,6 5,2 4,3 4,6 5,3 7,5 9,1 9,5 12,2 19,1 100,0

2.400 1.600
1.500
2.200
1.400
2.000 1.300
1.800 1.200
Energy [MWh/year]
Energy [MWh/year]
1.600 1.100
1.000
1.400
900
1.200 800
1.000 700
800 600
500
600
400
400 300
200 200
0 100
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
-5
Energy [MWh/year]
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O!, Hub height: 80,0 m, Air density: 1,213 kg/m
Roughness based energy [MWh] 1.184,3 355,4 474,6 375,1 295,8 308,3 373,2 581,6 816,1 946,8 1.202,1 2.116,6 9.030,0
Resulting energy [MWh] 1.186,3 357,8 476,1 374,1 294,1 307,1 373,7 584,2 799,2 917,4 1.197,2 2.111,5 8.978,4
Utilization [%] 29,9 33,8 38,3 36,5 34,9 34,4 33,4 31,3 28,8 28,2 29,0 28,0 30,2
A- parameter [m/s] 10,2 8,7 8,3 8,3 8,2 8,1 8,3 8,9 9,5 10,1 10,1 10,8 9,6
k- parameter 3,46 2,87 3,38 3,04 2,71 2,60 2,61 2,67 2,76 3,03 3,19 3,70 2,97
Frequency [%] 11,7 4,7 6,6 5,2 4,3 4,6 5,3 7,5 9,1 9,5 12,2 19,1 100,0
2.000 1.400
1.300
1.800
1.200
1.600 1.100
Energy [MWh/year]
Energy [MWh/year]
1.400 1.000
900
1.200
800
1.000
700
800 600
500
600
400
400
300
200 200
100
0
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

2
0
-2
-4
Energy [MWh/year]
-6
-8
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
-22
-24
-26
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle
WAsP interface - Power Curve Analysis

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-! Hersteller12/2010, Hub height: 80,0 m
Name: Hersteller12/2010
Source: Nordex
Source/Date Created by Created Edited

Stop wind speed Power control CT curve type
[m/s]
14.12.2010 USER 17.11.2009 26.01.2011 25,0 Pitch User defined
Nach Dokument F008_136_A05_EN (26.01.2011, SM).
ct-Werte nach Dokument F008_136_A06_EN (26.01.2011, SM).
HP curve comparison - Note: For standard air density and weibull k parameter = 2
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10
HP value [MWh] 2.959 4.860 6.837 8.762 10.390 11.830
NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-! Hersteller12/2010 [MWh] 3.455 5.471 7.513 9.399 11.035 12.382
Check value [%] -14 -11 -9 -7 -6 -4
The table shows comparison between annual energy production calculated on basis of simplified "HP-curves" which assume that all WTGs performs quite similar - only specific power loading (kW/m^2)
For further details, ask at the Danish Energy Agency for project report J.nr. 51171/00-0016 or see WindPRO manual chapter 3.5.2.
The method is refined in EMD report "20 Detailed Case Studies comparing Project Design Calculations and actual Energy Productions for Wind Energy Projects worldwide", jan 2003.
Use the table to evaluate if the given power curve is reasonable - if the check value are lower than -5%, the power curve probably is too optimistic due to uncertainty in power curve measurement.
Power curve Power, Efficiency and energy vs. wind speed

Original data from Windcat, Air density: 1,225 kg/m Data used in calculation, Air density: 1,213 kg/m New WindPRO method (adjusted
Wind speed Power Ce Wind speed Ct curve IEC method, improved to match turbine control) <RECOMMENDED>
[m/s] [kW] [m/s]
3,5 29,0 0,17 3,0 1,33 Wind speed Power Ce Interval Energy Acc.Energy Relative
4,0 76,0 0,30 3,5 1,20
4,5 136,0 0,38 4,0 1,11 [m/s] [kW] [m/s] [MWh] [MWh] [%]
5,0 207,0 0,42 4,5 1,04
5,5 292,0 0,45 5,0 0,98
1,0 0,0 0,00 0,50- 1,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
6,0 390,0 0,46 5,5 0,93 2,0 0,0 0,00 1,50- 2,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
6,5 504,0 0,47 6,0 0,88
7,0 635,0 0,48 6,5 0,87 3,0 0,0 0,00 2,50- 3,50 5,0 5,0 0,0
7,5 787,0 0,48 7,0 0,87 4,0 74,7 0,30 3,50- 4,50 41,8 46,8 0,4
8,0 958,0 0,48 7,5 0,86
8,5 1.147,0 0,48 8,0 0,86 5,0 204,6 0,42 4,50- 5,50 144,7 191,5 1,8
9,0 1.352,0 0,48 8,5 0,83 6,0 386,1 0,46 5,50- 6,50 336,9 528,5 4,9
9,5 1.570,0 0,47 9,0 0,80
10,0 1.799,0 0,46 9,5 0,76 7,0 628,9 0,48 6,50- 7,50 630,9 1.159,3 10,7
10,5 2.036,0 0,45 10,0 0,73
11,0 2.231,0 0,43 10,5 0,70
8,0 948,7 0,48 7,50- 8,50 1.005,8 2.165,1 20,0
11,5 2.368,0 0,40 11,0 0,67 9,0 1.338,4 0,48 8,50- 9,50 1.387,7 3.552,9 32,8
12,0 2.454,0 0,36 11,5 0,62
12,5 2.496,0 0,33 12,0 0,50 10,0 1.779,3 0,46 9,50-10,50 1.668,3 5.221,2 48,2
13,0 2.500,0 0,29 12,5 0,43 11,0 2.208,9 0,43 10,50-11,50 1.709,1 6.930,3 64,0
13,5 2.500,0 0,26 13,0 0,37
14,0 2.500,0 0,23 13,5 0,33 12,0 2.441,8 0,37 11,50-12,50 1.459,9 8.390,2 77,5
14,5 2.500,0 0,21 14,0 0,29 13,0 2.499,4 0,29 12,50-13,50 1.055,5 9.445,8 87,3
15,0 2.500,0 0,19 14,5 0,26
15,5 2.500,0 0,17 15,0 0,23 14,0 2.500,0 0,24 13,50-14,50 668,5 10.114,2 93,5
16,0 2.500,0 0,16 15,5 0,21
16,5 2.500,0 0,14 16,0 0,19
15,0 2.500,0 0,19 14,50-15,50 378,9 10.493,2 97,0
17,0 2.500,0 0,13 16,5 0,17 16,0 2.500,0 0,16 15,50-16,50 191,4 10.684,5 98,7
17,5 2.500,0 0,12 17,0 0,16
18,0 2.500,0 0,11 17,5 0,15 17,0 2.500,0 0,13 16,50-17,50 85,7 10.770,3 99,5
18,5 2.500,0 0,10 18,0 0,14 18,0 2.500,0 0,11 17,50-18,50 34,1 10.804,3 99,8
19,0 2.500,0 0,09 18,5 0,13
19,5 2.500,0 0,09 19,0 0,12 19,0 2.500,0 0,09 18,50-19,50 12,1 10.816,4 99,9
20,0 2.500,0 0,08 19,5 0,11 20,0 2.500,0 0,08 19,50-20,50 3,9 10.820,3 100,0
20,5 2.500,0 0,07 20,0 0,10
21,0 2.500,0 0,07 20,5 0,09 21,0 2.500,0 0,07 20,50-21,50 1,1 10.821,4 100,0
21,5 2.500,0 0,06 21,0 0,09
22,0 2.500,0 0,06 21,5 0,08
22,0 2.500,0 0,06 21,50-22,50 0,3 10.821,7 100,0
22,5 2.500,0 0,06 22,0 0,08 23,0 2.500,0 0,05 22,50-23,50 0,1 10.821,8 100,0
23,0 2.500,0 0,05 22,5 0,07
23,5 2.500,0 0,05 23,0 0,07 24,0 2.500,0 0,05 23,50-24,50 0,0 10.821,8 100,0
24,0 2.500,0 0,05 23,5 0,06 25,0 2.500,0 0,04 24,50-25,50 0,0 10.821,8 100,0
24,5 2.500,0 0,04 24,0 0,06
25,0 2.500,0 0,04 24,5 0,06
25,0 0,05

Data used in calculation 0,5 1
2.400 Ce Ct
2.200 0,4 0,8

2.000
1.800
1.600 0,3 0,6

Power [kW]
1.400
1.200
0,2 0,4
1.000
800
600
0,1 0,2
400
200
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O! Hersteller 01/08, Hub height: 80,0 m
Name: Hersteller 01/08
Source: Siemens

[m/s]
Standard-KL laut Herstellerdokument PG-R-CTO-40-0000-0100-00 vom 22.01.2008 (SM060809).
ct-Werte laut Hersteller-Dokument PG-RCTO-40-0000-0133-00 vom 07.04.2008 (SM060809).
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10
HP value [MWh] 3.115 4.975 6.872 8.699 10.215 11.569
Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O! Hersteller 01/08 [MWh] 3.372 5.284 7.197 8.942 10.444 11.669
Check value [%] -8 -6 -5 -3 -2 -1

[m/s] [kW] [m/s] Wind speed Power Ce Interval Energy Acc.Energy Relative
4,0 98,0 0,37 4,0 0,86 [m/s] [kW] [m/s] [MWh] [MWh] [%]
5,0 210,0 0,40 5,0 0,86 1,0 0,0 0,00 0,50- 1,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
2,0 0,0 0,00 1,50- 2,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
6,0 376,0 0,42 6,0 0,86 3,0 0,0 0,00 2,50- 3,50 7,2 7,2 0,1
7,0 608,0 0,43 7,0 0,85 4,0 96,5 0,37 3,50- 4,50 49,1 56,3 0,5
8,0 914,0 0,43 8,0 0,86 5,0 208,1 0,40 4,50- 5,50 150,1 206,4 2,0
9,0 1.312,0 0,43 9,0 0,86 6,0 372,7 0,42 5,50- 6,50 331,8 538,2 5,2
7,0 602,6 0,43 6,50- 7,50 611,9 1.150,1 11,1
10,0 1.784,0 0,43 10,0 0,82 8,0 905,7 0,43 7,50- 8,50 973,9 2.124,0 20,5
11,0 2.164,0 0,39 11,0 0,73 9,0 1.298,8 0,43 8,50- 9,50 1.357,4 3.481,3 33,6
12,0 2.284,0 0,32 12,0 0,46 10,0 1.763,7 0,43 9,50-10,50 1.631,1 5.112,4 49,4
13,0 2.299,0 0,25 13,0 0,34 11,0 2.142,5 0,39 10,50-11,50 1.636,8 6.749,3 65,2
12,0 2.275,5 0,32 11,50-12,50 1.362,0 8.111,3 78,4
14,0 2.300,0 0,20 14,0 0,27 13,0 2.297,8 0,25 12,50-13,50 971,0 9.082,3 87,8
15,0 2.300,0 0,16 15,0 0,22 14,0 2.299,9 0,20 13,50-14,50 614,9 9.697,2 93,7
16,0 2.300,0 0,13 16,0 0,18 15,0 2.300,0 0,17 14,50-15,50 348,6 10.045,8 97,1
17,0 2.300,0 0,11 17,0 0,15 16,0 2.300,0 0,14 15,50-16,50 176,1 10.221,9 98,8
17,0 2.300,0 0,11 16,50-17,50 78,9 10.300,7 99,5
18,0 2.300,0 0,09 18,0 0,13 18,0 2.300,0 0,10 17,50-18,50 31,3 10.332,1 99,8
19,0 2.300,0 0,08 19,0 0,11 19,0 2.300,0 0,08 18,50-19,50 11,1 10.343,2 100,0
20,0 2.300,0 0,07 20,0 0,09 20,0 2.300,0 0,07 19,50-20,50 3,6 10.346,7 100,0
21,0 2.300,0 0,06 21,0 0,08 21,0 2.300,0 0,06 20,50-21,50 1,0 10.347,8 100,0
22,0 2.300,0 0,05 21,50-22,50 0,3 10.348,1 100,0
22,0 2.300,0 0,05 22,0 0,07 23,0 2.300,0 0,05 22,50-23,50 0,1 10.348,1 100,0
23,0 2.300,0 0,05 23,0 0,06 24,0 2.300,0 0,04 23,50-24,50 0,0 10.348,2 100,0
24,0 2.300,0 0,04 24,0 0,06 25,0 2.300,0 0,04 24,50-25,50 0,0 10.348,2 100,0
25,0 2.300,0 0,04 25,0 0,05

2.200 Ce Ct
2.000 0,4 0,8
1.800
1.600
0,3 0,6
Power [kW]
1.400
1.200
1.000 0,2 0,4
800
600
0,1 0,2
400
200
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O! Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225), Hub height: 80,0 m
Name: Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225)
Source: Vestas

[m/s]
gem Vestasspezifikation 9500019.R5 vom 07.09.2005 Rev.5, (AG 210306)
Vmean [m/s] 5 6 7 8 9 10
HP value [MWh] 2.875 4.454 6.054 7.545 8.752 9.843
VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O! Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) [MWh] 3.119 4.744 6.295 7.661 8.806 9.721
Check value [%] -8 -6 -4 -2 -1 1

[m/s] [kW] [m/s] Wind speed Power Ce Interval Energy Acc.Energy Relative
4,0 91,0 0,36 4,0 0,86 [m/s] [kW] [m/s] [MWh] [MWh] [%]
5,0 200,0 0,41 5,0 0,84 1,0 0,0 0,00 0,50- 1,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
2,0 0,0 0,00 1,50- 2,50 0,0 0,0 0,0
6,0 362,0 0,43 6,0 0,84 3,0 0,0 0,00 2,50- 3,50 6,3 6,3 0,1
7,0 588,0 0,44 7,0 0,84 4,0 89,5 0,36 3,50- 4,50 45,8 52,0 0,6
8,0 889,0 0,45 8,0 0,82 5,0 198,2 0,41 4,50- 5,50 143,3 195,4 2,2
9,0 1.255,0 0,44 9,0 0,76 6,0 358,7 0,43 5,50- 6,50 319,6 515,0 5,7
7,0 582,7 0,44 6,50- 7,50 592,6 1.107,6 12,3
10,0 1.604,0 0,41 10,0 0,66 8,0 880,8 0,45 7,50- 8,50 941,1 2.048,6 22,8
11,0 1.769,0 0,34 11,0 0,50 9,0 1.242,9 0,44 8,50- 9,50 1.278,6 3.327,3 37,1
12,0 1.798,0 0,27 12,0 0,36 10,0 1.589,0 0,41 9,50-10,50 1.452,1 4.779,3 53,2
13,0 1.800,0 0,21 13,0 0,28 11,0 1.759,6 0,34 10,50-11,50 1.362,7 6.142,0 68,4
12,0 1.795,9 0,27 11,50-12,50 1.084,1 7.226,1 80,5
14,0 1.800,0 0,17 14,0 0,22 13,0 1.799,8 0,21 12,50-13,50 761,6 7.987,7 89,0
15,0 1.800,0 0,14 15,0 0,18 14,0 1.800,0 0,17 13,50-14,50 481,3 8.469,0 94,3
16,0 1.800,0 0,11 16,0 0,14 15,0 1.800,0 0,14 14,50-15,50 272,8 8.741,8 97,4
17,0 1.800,0 0,09 17,0 0,12 16,0 1.800,0 0,11 15,50-16,50 137,8 8.879,6 98,9
17,0 1.800,0 0,09 16,50-17,50 61,7 8.941,3 99,6
18,0 1.800,0 0,08 18,0 0,10 18,0 1.800,0 0,08 17,50-18,50 24,5 8.965,8 99,9
19,0 1.800,0 0,07 19,0 0,09 19,0 1.800,0 0,07 18,50-19,50 8,7 8.974,5 100,0
20,0 1.800,0 0,06 20,0 0,08 20,0 1.800,0 0,06 19,50-20,50 2,8 8.977,3 100,0
21,0 1.800,0 0,05 21,0 0,07 21,0 1.800,0 0,05 20,50-21,50 0,8 8.978,1 100,0
22,0 1.800,0 0,04 21,50-22,50 0,2 8.978,4 100,0
22,0 1.800,0 0,04 22,0 0,06 23,0 1.800,0 0,04 22,50-23,50 0,1 8.978,4 100,0
23,0 1.800,0 0,04 23,0 0,05 24,0 1.800,0 0,03 23,50-24,50 0,0 8.978,4 100,0
24,0 1.800,0 0,03 24,0 0,05 25,0 1.800,0 0,03 24,50-25,50 0,0 8.978,4 100,0
25,0 1.800,0 0,03 25,0 0,04

1.800
1.700 Ce Ct
1.600
0,4 0,8
1.500
1.400
1.300
1.200 0,3 0,6
Power [kW]
1.100
1.000
900
800 0,2 0,4
700
600
500
400 0,1 0,2
300
200
100
0 0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
WAsP interface - Wind Data Analysis

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'Wind data: A - RP `Mayor Buratovich Suppl. ; Hub height: 80,0
Site Coordinates Weibull Data
UTM WGS 84 South Zone: 20 East: 536.830 North: 5.660.758
Current site Reference: Roughness class 1
NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-! Sector A- Wind k- Frequency A- k- Frequency
Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O! parameter speed parameter parameter parameter
VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O! [m/s] [m/s] [%] [m/s] [%]
Wind statistics 0N 10,19 9,16 3,463 11,7 10,64 3,456 11,3
1 NNE 8,66 7,72 2,865 4,7 8,90 2,862 4,6
AR v72,5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h 2002-2011 - v72,5 .wws
2 ENE 8,34 7,49 3,385 6,6 8,69 3,392 6,6
3E 8,35 7,46 3,045 5,2 8,71 3,039 5,2
4 ESE 8,18 7,28 2,713 4,3 8,48 2,705 4,3
5 SSE 8,09 7,19 2,596 4,6 8,53 2,598 4,7
6S 8,33 7,40 2,607 5,3 8,79 2,618 5,4
7 SSW 8,86 7,87 2,666 7,5 9,38 2,665 7,6
8 WSW 9,52 8,47 2,756 9,1 10,24 2,759 9,1
9W 10,05 8,98 3,025 9,5 10,74 3,029 9,6
10 WNW 10,09 9,03 3,193 12,2 10,55 3,209 12,5
11 NNW 10,78 9,72 3,701 19,1 11,20 3,706 19,1
All 9,57 8,54 2,975 100,0 10,04 2,969 100,0
Weibull Distribution Energy Rose (kWh/m/year)

12 Reference
Current site
11
N
10
E
NN
NN
9 1.250
W
Frequency [%]
8 1.000
W
7 NW 750 E
EN
6 500
5 250
4 W E
500 1.000
3
2
1 ES
SW E
0 W
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
W
Wind speed [m/s]

SS
SS
E
S
Reference: A=10,04;k=2,969;Vmean=9,0m/s
Current site: A=9,57;k=2,975;Vmean=8,5m/s
Mean wind speed (m/s) Frequency (%)

Reference Reference
Current site Current site
N
N
E
E
NN
NN
10
NN
NN
17,5
W
8 15
W W 12,5
NW 6 E NW E
EN 10 EN
4 7,5
5
2
2,5
W E W E
2 4 6 8 10 5 10 15
ES ES
SW E SW E
W W
W
W
SS
SS
SS
SS
E
E
S
WAsP interface - Wind profile detailed

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-! Hersteller12/2010, Hub height: 80,0 m
Site Data RP `Mayor Buratovich Suppl.
Site Coordinates UTM WGS 84 South Zone: 20 East: 536.830 North: 5.660.758
Air density calculation mode Individual per WTG All sectors
Result for WTG at hub altitude 1,213 kg/m
Air density relative to standard 99,0 % 200
Hub altitude above sea level (asl) 95,4 m
Annual mean temperature at hub alt. 15,1 C 195
Pressure at WTGs 1.003,9 hPa
190
Wind statisticsAR v72,5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h 2002-2011 - v72,5 .wws
185
All sectors
180
Height Mean A- k- Wind Yield Yield Orography Obstacle
wind parameter parameter energy change 175
speed 170
[m/s] [m/s] [kWh/m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [%]
50 7,58 8,5 2,82 3.374 8.598 -2.223 -0,2 -2,7 165
55 7,77 8,7 2,85 3.614 9.056 -1.765 -0,1 -2,2
160
60 7,95 8,9 2,88 3.846 9.474 -1.348 -0,1 -1,8
65 8,12 9,1 2,91 4.066 9.855 -967 -0,1 -1,4 155
70 8,27 9,3 2,93 4.277 10.205 -617 -0,1 -1,1
150
75 8,41 9,4 2,96 4.477 10.525 -297 -0,1 -0,8
80 8,54 9,6 2,97 4.671 10.822 0 -0,1 -0,6 145
85 8,66 9,7 2,99 4.856 11.097 275 -0,1 -0,5
90 8,78 9,8 3,01 5.037 11.351 529 -0,1 -0,4 140
95 8,89 9,9 3,03 5.204 11.588 766 -0,1 -0,3 135

Height abovegroundlevel [m]
100 8,99 10,1 3,04 5.368 11.808 986 -0,1 -0,2

105 9,13 10,2 3,04 5.631 12.096 1.274 -0,1 -0,1 130
110 9,27 10,4 3,03 5.888 12.362 1.540 -0,1 -0,1
125
115 9,39 10,5 3,02 6.142 12.610 1.788 -0,1 -0,1
120 9,52 10,7 3,01 6.392 12.839 2.017 0,0 0,0 120
125 9,64 10,8 3,01 6.634 13.053 2.232 0,0 0,0
115
130 9,75 10,9 3,01 6.870 13.253 2.431 0,0 0,0
135 9,86 11,0 3,00 7.108 13.440 2.619 0,0 0,0 110
140 9,96 11,2 2,99 7.337 13.616 2.794 0,0 0,0
145 10,06 11,3 2,99 7.563 13.781 2.959 0,0 0,0 105
150 10,16 11,4 2,99 7.785 13.937 3.115 0,0 0,0 100
155 10,25 11,5 2,98 8.005 14.084 3.262 0,0 0,0
160 10,34 11,6 2,98 8.221 14.224 3.403 0,0 0,0 95
165 10,43 11,7 2,97 8.433 14.355 3.533 0,0 0,0
90
170 10,52 11,8 2,97 8.643 14.481 3.659 0,0 0,0
175 10,60 11,9 2,97 8.850 14.599 3.778 0,0 0,0 85
180 10,68 12,0 2,97 9.047 14.713 3.891 0,0 0,0
80
185 10,76 12,1 2,96 9.247 14.822 4.000 0,0 0,0
190 10,84 12,1 2,96 9.445 14.924 4.102 0,0 0,0 75
195 10,91 12,2 2,96 9.639 15.022 4.200 0,0 0,0
200 10,98 12,3 2,96 9.824 15.116 4.294 0,0 0,0 70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Wind speed [m/s]
Meanwindspeed
Without Orography/Obstacles
WTGrotor
WAsP interface - Map

Calculation: RP 'WM M. Buratovich'WTG: VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O! Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225), Hub height: 80,0 m
0 500 1000 1500 2000 m

Map: , Print scale 1:50.000, Map center UTM WGS 84 South Zone: 20 East: 537.326 North: 5.661.089
Site Data
Page 126 of 143
Appendix VI WindPRO-results (PARK) Variant I: 21Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 (80 m)
Main results
Production analyses
Map
PARK - Main Result

Calculation: Var.I: 21x SWT2.3-93 with 80m hub height
Wake Model N.O. Jensen (RIS/EMD)
Calculation Settings
Result for WTG at hub altitude 1,213 kg/m to 1,214 kg/m
Hub altitude above sea level (asl) 93,0 m to 96,6 m
Annual mean temperature at hub alt. 15,0 C to 15,1 C
Pressure at WTGs 1.003,7 hPa to 1.004,2 hPa
Wake Model Parameters

Wake Decay Constant 0,075 Open farmland
Wake calculation settings

Angle [] Wind speed [m/s]
start end step start end step
0,5 360,0 1,0 0,5 30,5 1,0
Wind statistics AR v72,5 WM M. Buratovich 20080425-20120918 LRek MERRA 1h 2002-2011 - v72,5 .wws
Scale 1:90.000
New WTG Site Data

Terrain UTM WGS84 S Zone: 20
East North Name of wind distribution Type Wind Mean wind Equivalent
energy speed roughness
[kWh/m] [m/s]
A 536.830 5.660.758 RP `Mayor Buratovich Suppl. WAsP (WAsP 10 for Windows RVEA0151 1, 5, 5, 0) 4.673 8,5 1,6
B 537.213 5.659.391 RP `SW 1. Supple. WAsP (WAsP 10 for Windows RVEA0151 1, 5, 5, 0) 4.698 8,6 1,6
C 538.450 5.659.033 RP `SE 1. Supple. WAsP (WAsP 10 for Windows RVEA0151 1, 5, 5, 0) 4.682 8,5 1,6
Calculated Annual Energy for Wind Farm

Specific results)
WTG combination Result p90 value-13,1% GROSS (no loss) Park Capacity Mean WTG Full load Mean wind speed
PARK Free WTGs efficiency factor result hours @hub height
[MWh/y] [MWh] [MWh/y] [%] [%] [MWh/y] [Hours/year] [m/s]
Wind farm 196.615,0 170.858,4 216.455,7 90,8 40,4 8.136,1 3.537 8,5
) Based on p90 value-13,1%
Calculated Annual Energy for each of 21 new WTGs with total 48,3 MW rated power
WTG type Power curve Annual Energy Park
Terrain Valid Manufact. Type-generator Power, Rotor Hub Creator Name Result p90 Efficiency Mean
rated diameter height value-13,1% wind
speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
1 B Yes Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS-2.300 2.300 93,0 80,0 USER Hersteller 01/08 9.511,0 8.265 92,7 8,50
3 C Yes Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS-2.300 2.300 93,0 80,0 USER Hersteller 01/08 9.076,7 7.888 87,9 8,53
14 A Yes Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS-2.300 2.300 93,0 80,0 USER Hersteller 01/08 9.889,5 8.594 95,6 8,54
To be continued on next page...

PARK - Main Result

...continued from previous page
speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
WTG siting
UTM WGS84 S Zone: 20
East North Z Row data/Description
UTM WGS84 S Zone: 20 [m]
1 New 536.998 5.658.703 15,0 Siemens SWT 2.3MW/93 VS 2300 93.0 !O! hub: 80,0 m (215)
PARK - Production Analysis

Calculation: Var.I: 21x SWT2.3-93 with 80m hub heightWTG: All new WTGs, Air density 1,213 kg/m
Sector 0N 1 NNE 2 ENE 3E 4 ESE 5 SSE 6S 7 SSW 8 WSW 9W 10 WNW 11 NNW Total
Roughness based energy [MWh] 28.799,4 8.361,9 10.957,1 8.802,2 6.790,6 7.173,6 8.656,2 13.659,9 19.559,5 23.211,5 29.381,0 52.072,9 217.425,7
+Increase due to hills [MWh] -72,3 -8,0 -14,7 -11,2 -14,1 -22,5 -28,0 -27,7 -23,0 -23,6 -32,5 -124,1 -401,7
-Decrease due to array losses [MWh] 2.088,1 485,9 236,6 2.773,7 489,4 838,9 801,8 735,7 281,9 5.421,0 1.516,7 4.171,1 19.840,7
Resulting energy [MWh] 26.572,1 7.859,5 10.704,9 6.016,3 6.286,7 6.304,6 7.796,9 12.839,0 19.192,9 17.742,0 27.677,9 47.622,3 196.615,0
Increase due to hills [%] -0,3 -0,1 -0,1 -0,1 -0,2 -0,3 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 -0,1 -0,1 -0,2 -0,18
Decrease due to array losses [%] 7,3 5,8 2,2 31,6 7,2 11,7 9,3 5,4 1,4 23,4 5,2 8,1 9,17
Utilization [%] 30,2 33,9 38,8 26,0 34,3 32,0 32,3 32,1 30,6 22,8 30,1 28,6 29,6
Full Load Equivalent [Hours/year] 550 163 222 125 130 131 161 266 397 367 573 986 4.071
Energy vs. sector

50.000
45.000
40.000
Energy [MWh/year]
35.000
30.000
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Annual Energy ArrayLosses

0
-10
-20
-30
Energy [MWh/year]
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
-150
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle
PARK - WTG distances

WTG distances
Z Nearest WTG Z Horizontal distance Distance in
rotor diameters
[m] [m] [m]
1 15,0 2 15,0 373 4,0
2 15,0 3 16,0 373 4,0
3 16,0 2 15,0 373 4,0
4 14,0 3 16,0 373 4,0
5 13,0 6 13,4 373 4,0
6 13,4 5 13,0 373 4,0
7 15,6 6 13,4 373 4,0
8 14,8 9 14,2 373 4,0
9 14,2 8 14,8 373 4,0
10 16,0 11 14,0 373 4,0
11 14,0 10 16,0 373 4,0
12 16,6 11 14,0 373 4,0
13 15,7 12 16,6 373 4,0
14 16,0 15 15,0 373 4,0
15 15,0 16 13,9 373 4,0
16 13,9 15 15,0 373 4,0 Scale 1:90.000
17 13,3 18 14,3 373 4,0 New WTG Site Data
18 14,3 17 13,3 373 4,0
19 16,2 20 15,0 373 4,0
20 15,0 19 16,2 373 4,0
21 16,0 19 16,2 767 8,2
PARK - Map
0 500 1000 1500 2000 m

New WTG Site Data
Page 132 of 143
Appendix VI WindPRO-results (PARK) Variant II: 27Vestas V90/1.8MW (80 m)
Main results
Production analyses
Map
PARK - Main Result

Calculation: Var.II: 27x V90/1.8MW with 80m hub height


0,5 360,0 1,0 0,5 30,5 1,0
Scale 1:90.000
New WTG Site Data

[kWh/m] [m/s]

Specific results)
Wind farm 221.058,4 191.657,6 240.869,1 91,8 45,0 7.098,4 3.944 8,5
speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
1 B Yes VESTAS V90-1.8MW-1.800 1.800 90,0 80,0 USER Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) 8.405,3 7.287 94,6 8,48
4 C Yes VESTAS V90-1.8MW-1.800 1.800 90,0 80,0 USER Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) 7.950,4 6.893 88,7 8,54
19 A Yes VESTAS V90-1.8MW-1.800 1.800 90,0 80,0 USER Mode 0 (poweropt. rho=1.225) 8.435,5 7.314 94,1 8,53

PARK - Main Result

speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
WTG siting
1 New 536.897 5.658.610 14,3 VESTAS V90-1.8MW 1800 90.0 !O! hub: 80,0 m (236)

Calculation: Var.II: 27x V90/1.8MW with 80m hub heightWTG: All new WTGs, Air density 1,213 kg/m
-Decrease due to array losses [MWh] 2.394,1 703,7 413,2 2.617,8 397,6 972,4 1.017,1 1.051,4 468,0 4.534,5 1.091,6 4.149,4 19.810,7
Utilization [%] 27,7 31,6 37,2 27,1 33,7 30,6 30,4 29,8 28,1 22,5 28,2 26,3 27,8
Energy vs. sector

55.000
50.000
45.000
Energy [MWh/year]
40.000
35.000
30.000
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector

0
-20
-40
Energy [MWh/year]
-60
-80
-100
-120
-140
-160
-180
-200
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle

WTG distances
rotor diameters
[m] [m] [m]
1 14,3 2 14,0 361 4,0
2 14,0 1 14,3 361 4,0
3 14,0 2 14,0 361 4,0
4 16,0 5 13,0 361 4,0
5 13,0 4 16,0 361 4,0
6 13,0 5 13,0 361 4,0
7 15,2 6 13,0 361 4,0
8 13,0 9 14,0 361 4,0
9 14,0 8 13,0 361 4,0
10 14,0 11 13,0 361 4,0
11 13,0 10 14,0 361 4,0
12 13,4 11 13,0 361 4,0
13 13,5 12 13,4 361 4,0
14 15,2 15 14,0 361 4,0
15 14,0 14 15,2 361 4,0
16 14,1 17 14,0 361 4,0 Scale 1:90.000
17 14,0 16 14,1 361 4,0 New WTG Site Data
18 14,3 17 14,0 361 4,0
19 16,0 20 17,8 361 4,0
20 17,8 19 16,0 361 4,0
21 13,1 20 17,8 361 4,0
22 15,0 23 14,6 361 4,0
23 14,6 22 15,0 361 4,0
24 14,0 23 14,6 361 4,0
25 14,9 22 15,0 685 7,6
26 19,0 27 19,1 361 4,0
27 19,1 26 19,0 361 4,0
PARK - Map
0 500 1000 1500 2000 m

New WTG Site Data
Page 138 of 143
Appendix VII WindPRO-results (PARK) Variant III: 20Nordex N90/2.5MW HS (80 m)
Main results
Production analyses
Map
PARK - Main Result

Calculation: Var.III: 20x N90/2.5HS with 80m hub height


0,5 360,0 1,0 0,5 30,5 1,0
Scale 1:90.000
New WTG Site Data

[kWh/m] [m/s]

Specific results)
Wind farm 197.205,6 171.371,6 215.434,8 91,5 39,1 8.568,6 3.427 8,5
speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
1 B No NORDEX N90/2500 HS-2.500 2.500 90,0 80,0 USER Hersteller12/2010 10.010,0 8.699 93,3 8,50
3 C No NORDEX N90/2500 HS-2.500 2.500 90,0 80,0 USER Hersteller12/2010 9.577,1 8.322 88,7 8,53
14 A No NORDEX N90/2500 HS-2.500 2.500 90,0 80,0 USER Hersteller12/2010 10.340,9 8.986 95,9 8,53
PARK - Main Result

speed
[kW] [m] [m] [MWh] [MWh] [%] [m/s]
WTG siting
1 New 537.015 5.658.711 15,1 NORDEX N90/2500 HS 2500 90.0 !-! hub: 80,0 m (263)

Calculation: Var.III: 20x N90/2.5HS with 80m hub heightWTG: All new WTGs, Air density 1,213 kg/m
-Decrease due to array losses [MWh] 1.926,6 424,4 189,1 2.720,3 424,8 736,0 750,7 645,6 231,1 5.268,0 1.314,5 3.598,3 18.229,3
Utilization [%] 33,9 37,8 42,9 28,8 38,3 36,0 36,0 35,9 34,3 25,8 34,0 32,5 33,4
Full Load Equivalent [Hours/year] 534 157 211 118 125 126 155 256 384 358 556 965 3.944
Energy vs. sector

50.000
45.000
40.000
Energy [MWh/year]
35.000
30.000
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector

0
-20
-40
Energy [MWh/year]
-60
-80
-100
-120
-140
-160
W
SSW
WSW
WNW
NNW
NNE
ENE
ESE
SSE
S
N
Sector
Hill Obstacle

WTG distances
rotor diameters
[m] [m] [m]
1 15,1 2 14,9 361 4,0
2 14,9 1 15,1 361 4,0
3 16,0 2 14,9 361 4,0
4 14,0 3 16,0 361 4,0
5 13,0 6 14,0 361 4,0
6 14,0 5 13,0 361 4,0
7 14,0 6 14,0 361 4,0
8 14,4 9 14,0 361 4,0
9 14,0 10 16,8 361 4,0
10 16,8 9 14,0 361 4,0
11 14,0 12 17,0 361 4,0
12 17,0 11 14,0 361 4,0
13 17,0 12 17,0 361 4,0
14 16,2 15 15,3 361 4,0
15 15,3 16 14,0 361 4,0
16 14,0 15 15,3 361 4,0 Scale 1:90.000
17 14,0 16 14,0 361 4,0 New WTG Site Data
18 15,9 19 15,0 361 4,0
19 15,0 18 15,9 361 4,0
20 16,0 18 15,9 760 8,4
PARK - Map
0 500 1000 1500 2000 m

New WTG Site Data

Wind Energy Expertise for Planned Wind Farm Vientos del Secano in Argentina

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Wind Energy Expertise for Planned Wind Farm Vientos del Secano in Argentina

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

1.

Supplement of Wind Energy Expertise for

Vientos del Secano

Date: November 21, 2012

Kassel, November 21, 2012

Appendix I Calculation methods

Appendix II Site information and documentation of wind measurement

Appendix III Wind measurement results for WM Mayor Buratovich:

2008-04-25 until 2012-08-31 at 72.5 m, 50.0 m and 30.0m a.g.l.

Appendix V WindPRO-results single turbine (WASP-INTERFACE single turbine)

Appendix VI WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant I: 21Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 (80 m)

Appendix VII WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant II: 27Vestas V90/1.8MW (80 m)

Appendix VIII WindPRO-Calculations (PARK) Variant III: 20Nordex N90/2.5MW HS (80 m)

Wind conditions at site Vientos del Secano (RP 'M. Buratovich')

Average wind speed at 50 m above ground 7.6 m/s

Average wind speed at 80 m above ground 8.5 m/s

WTG type hub height Annual energy yield p50-value

Vestas V90/1.8MW 80 m 8,978

Nordex N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 10,822

Gross energy Energy

Var.I: 21 SWT 2.3MW-93 80 m 216,449 90.9% 196,615 170,858

Var.II: 27 V90/1.8MW 80 m 240,900 91.8% 221,058 191,658

Var.III: 20 N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 215,428 91.6% 197,206 171,372

Vientos del Secano (RP 'M. Buratovich') Height a.s.l 15 m

Geographical Coordinates [WGS84] -6234'24,44" -3912'05,99"

UTM-WGS84 [m], Zone 20 (South) Westing: 536,830 Southing: 5,660,758

Table 3: Coordinates of reference point RP 'M. Buratovich'

2.1 Site visit

2.2 Wind measurement Mayor Buratovich

Coordinates UTM WGS84 (20) South X: 536,830 Y: 5,660,758

Measurement period 04/2008 - 09/2012

evaluated period 2008-04-25 until 2012-09-18

Table 4: Site of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich

2.2.1 History and plausibility check of wind measurement Mayor Buratovich

2.2.2 Results for the measuring period 2008-04-25 to 2012-09-18

Wind conditions at WM Mayor Buratovich

Table 5: Averages of wind measurement for the measuring period

2.2.3 Long term wind conditions and adjustment

Fig. 2: Time series of reference indices

2.2.4 Results for the long term period 2002 - 2011

72.5 8.3 9.3 3.07 480

Table 6: Averages of wind measurement for the long term period

Fig. 4: Relief around site Vientos del Secano (5 km radius)

2.4 Roughness classification

2.6 Power curve

Siemens Vestas Nordex

Rated power 2.300 kW 2500 kW 2.500 KW

calculated calculated calculated

Generator concept Synchronous Asynchronous Asynchronous

Control system pitch pitch pitch

ct values WindPRO Standard WindPRO Standard WindPROStandard

Table 7: Technical data of WTG

3.1 Wind conditions

Table 8: Calculated wind profile at the micro site of RP 'M. Buratovich'

3.2 Calculation of energy yield

WTG type hub height Energy yield p50-value

Vestas V90/1.8MW 80 m 8,978

Nordex N90/2.5MW HS 80 m 10,822

3.2.2 Wind farm energy yield and array losses

Variant I: 21Siemens SWT 2.3MW-93 with 80 m hub height

WTG max. (21) 8.6 98.2% 10,209 8,872

WTG min. (10) 8.5 87.1% 8,986 7,808

WTG mean 8.5 90.9% 9,363 8,136