1 / 23

Kingston, MA Shadow Flicker Study

Kingston, MA Shadow Flicker Study. Elizabeth King Wind Analyst Chester Harvey GIS Specialist 256 Farrell Farm Rd. Norwich, VT 05055 Ph: 802.649.1511. Goals. Estimate shadow flicker time by location Estimate curtailment time required to meet example shadow flicker thresholds

galya
Télécharger la présentation

Kingston, MA Shadow Flicker Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Kingston, MAShadow Flicker Study Elizabeth King Wind Analyst Chester Harvey GIS Specialist 256 Farrell Farm Rd. Norwich, VT 05055 Ph: 802.649.1511

  2. Goals Estimate shadow flicker timeby location Estimate curtailment time required to meet example shadow flicker thresholds Document areas withline-of-sight to turbine(s)

  3. Site Overview • 5 Wind Turbines • 1083 Receptors within 1.6 km of turbines

  4. Methodology • Desktop estimate of shadow flicker exposure • Shadow flicker modeled using WindPRO • Incorporates GIS terrain model, daily sun pathsbased on latitude, local weather data and wind data • Receptors identified using aerial images & GIS data • No tree or building obstacles are accounted for • Field documentation of line-of-sight • Assessed by car from public streets

  5. Flicker Modeling • Theoretical Worst Case • Maximum possible shadow hours for a given location • Sun always shining; wind turbines always operating • Is a step in process for deriving realistic case estimates • Realistic Case • Incorporates sunshine probability and likely wind turbine operational hours • Sunshine data, 61 years – Boston, MA (National Climatic Data Center) • Wind data, 1 year (July 05 – July 06) – Kingston, MA (UMass Amherst)

  6. Receptors • 20 meters wide x 10 meters tall • Intended to simulate the façade of a house • Each receptor modeled so that it faces perpendicular to each wind turbine in each iteration of analysis (Greenhouse Mode)

  7. Receptors

  8. Receptors 20 meters wide 10 meters tall Shadow modeled on receptor area Receptor area facing perpendicular to direct line to turbine 1.5 m figure for scale Receptor point at bottom-center of modeled receptor area

  9. WindPRO Inputs 9

  10. WindPRO Inputs 10

  11. WindPRO Inputs 11

  12. WindPRO Inputs 12

  13. Hours per Yearat 1.5 metersabove ground level Isolines show shadow flicker estimates derived from a realistic casemodel using a 10 m grid resolution

  14. WindPRO Report

  15. WindPRO Report

  16. WindPRO Report Calendar Graphs Receptor A Receptor B

  17. WindPRO Report

  18. Flicker Results

  19. Line-of-Sight Survey • Assesses line-of-sight to each turbine from public streets within thestudy area • Accounts for trees and buildings that block line-of-sight to turbines • Line-of-sight results are not incorporated into modeling results

  20. Photo 27

  21. Curtailment Analysis • Only receptors for existing residential structures are included • Accounts for coincident flicker across multiple receptors

  22. Curtailment Results

More Related