Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Integration with PVGIS 5.2 #134

Open
giobetti opened this issue Apr 22, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Integration with PVGIS 5.2 #134

giobetti opened this issue Apr 22, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@giobetti
Copy link
Contributor

This is just a note/food for thought not a direct integration request

I just came across this website by the EU, that allows to download EPW files for just about ANYWHERE in the world:
https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/#TMY

it also offers some API endpoints:
https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/pvgis-photovoltaic-geographical-information-system/getting-started-pvgis/api-non-interactive-service_en

I am not sure about the quality of data, but it seems certainly interesting. I have tested a few weather files and they seem to work fine, only issues found are:

  1. the location is not contained (is marked as unknown, unknown)
  2. the cloud cover is expressed in percentage rather than in tenths.

screenshot of the interface 👇
image

@giobetti giobetti added the enhancement New feature or request label Apr 22, 2022
@hansukyang
Copy link

Hi @giobetti - fyi, PVGIS is an excellent source. These reanalysis datasets represent the current state-of-art reconstruction of past weather, free from observation biases and consistent with laws of physics.

Climate One Building recently updated all their data files using ERA5 solar radiation data, which PVGIS also uses. In fact, it looks like PVGIS 5.2 is using ERA5-Land dataset (9km), which is higher resolution than ERA5 (~30km).

@giobetti
Copy link
Contributor Author

giobetti commented May 8, 2022 via email

@hansukyang
Copy link

It really depends on the application because wind is heavily affected by topology but for the level of accuracy needed for building energy simulation I'm of the opinion that it's more or less sufficient (for a bit of a disclaimer, we provided the ERA5 data that Dru and Linda used to update Climate One Building files). One paper on ERA5 wind speed that I found is this:

The paper basically mentions that for coastal regions and hilly areas the coarse model resolution (~30km) results in larger errors but works well in offshore wind and inland, which I think aligns with intuition.

Regards,
Joseph

@phuongdoan13
Copy link
Contributor

Per the discussion, de-scope for our project

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants