Respected readers, authors and reviewers, you can add comments to this page on any questions about the contribution, review, editing and publication of this journal. We will give you an answer as soon as possible. Thank you for your support!
XU Jingwei, ZHANG Xiuzhi, LUO Yong, XU Min. The validation analysis of QuikSCAT wind speed and the wind distribution in China’s offshore areas[J]. Haiyang Xuebao, 2013, 35(5): 76-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4193.2013.05.008
Citation:
XU Jingwei, ZHANG Xiuzhi, LUO Yong, XU Min. The validation analysis of QuikSCAT wind speed and the wind distribution in China’s offshore areas[J]. Haiyang Xuebao, 2013, 35(5): 76-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4193.2013.05.008
XU Jingwei, ZHANG Xiuzhi, LUO Yong, XU Min. The validation analysis of QuikSCAT wind speed and the wind distribution in China’s offshore areas[J]. Haiyang Xuebao, 2013, 35(5): 76-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4193.2013.05.008
Citation:
XU Jingwei, ZHANG Xiuzhi, LUO Yong, XU Min. The validation analysis of QuikSCAT wind speed and the wind distribution in China’s offshore areas[J]. Haiyang Xuebao, 2013, 35(5): 76-86. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-4193.2013.05.008
Key Laboratory of Meteorological Disaster of Ministry of Education, Center for Data Assimilation Research and Application, College of Atmospheric Science, Nanjing University of Information Science & Technology, Nanjing, 210044, China
2.
National Climate Center, China Meteorological Administration, Beijing 100081, China
3.
Research Center for Earth System Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
4.
Jiangsu ProvinceMeteorological Bureau, Nanjing 210008, China
QuikSCAT satellite remote sensing wind data over China's offshore areas(0°—45°N, 105°—135°E) are compared with in-situ wind measurement data from platforms located in the East China Sea and Bohai Sea, offshore wind mast in Shanghai and the island stations at Shanhu Island and Xisha Island. It is found that the correlation coefficients of in-situ wind speed and QuikSCAT wind speed nearby in-situ sites are greater than 0.7. The root mean square error of QuikSCAT wind speed at these sites is about 1.5 m/s. The error is relatively large for offshore wind mast and island stations. QuikSCAT mean wind speed is higher than the measured values and the difference is in the range of 0.1—1.3 m/s. The difference of Weibull shape parameter K of QuikSCAT wind is smaller at offshore oil platforms and offshore wind mast (the absolute value: 0.04—0.43). It is clear that the wind speed distribution of QuikSCAT and the measurements are consistent. Overall, QuikSCAT wind data reasonably reflect the wind speed distribution in China's offshore areas. With the QuikSCAT wind speed data from 2000 and 2009, we calculate the annual and seasonal mean wind speed in China's offshore areas and adjacent area. The results are as follows: (1) The largest offshore wind speed is in Taiwan Strait and in the area from Taiwan Strait to Japan Sea and the area near 115°E to Bahrain Tong Strait(8.0—8.5 m/s) is the second highest wind speed area. (2) From 28°N of East China Sea to the Yangtze River, the annual wind speed is 7.0—7.5 m/s, and the wind at Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea is about 5.5—7.0 m/s. It is interesting to find that the wind speed decreases from east to west in the northern South China Sea from 8.5 m/s to 6.0 m/s, and the highest wind area in Beibu Gulf is located in offshore area near Dongfang City.
Hasager C B, Barthelmie R J, Christiansen M B, et al. Quantifying offshore wind resources from satellite wind maps: study area the North Sea[J].Wind Energy,2006,9(1/2):63-74.
Scott Dunbar, Barry Weiss, Bryan Stiles, et al. QuikSCAT Science Data Product User Manual[M]. Version 3.0, JPL Document D-18053-Rev A,2006.
Sempreviva A M, Furevik B, Barthelmie R J, et al.Offshore wind energy potential in the Mediterranean Basin[C]//Offshore Wind Energy in Mediterranean and Other European Seas Proceeding. OWEMES, Civitavecchia, Italy 19-21 April 2006,2006.
Dudley B Chelton, Michael H Freilich.Scatterometer-based assessment of 10-m wind analyses from the operational ECMWF and NCEP numerical weather prediction models[J]. Mon Wea Rev,2005,133: 409-429.
Dickinson S, Kelly K A,Caruso M J, et al. Comparisons between the TAO buoy and NASA scatterometer wind vectors[J]. J Atmos Oceanic Technol, 2001,18: 799-806.
DownLoad: