Arp 22 48

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
King Abdulaziz City For

Science and Technology
General Directorate of
Research Grants Programs
AT-48-22
FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT
STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF WIND ENERGY FOR

PUMPING UNDERGROUND WATER IN THE KINGDOM
OF SAUDI ARABIA
Dr. Abdurrahman Al-Ahmari1
Dr. Ahmet Bolat1
Dr. Ahmet Z. Sahin2
Dr. Naif Al-Abbadi3
KING SAUD UNIVERSITY

KING FAHD UNIVERSITY OF PETRELOUM AND MINERALS
3
KING ABDULAZIZ CITY FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Ramadan 1427
October 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 1
. 2
Summary .................................................................................................................................... 3
1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 5
2
LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 6
2.1
Wind Energy for Electric Power Generation .............................................................. 7
2.2
Hybrid Usage of Wind Energy ................................................................................. 12
2.3
Wind Energy in Saudi Arabia ................................................................................... 14
2.4
Wind Energy used for Water Pumping ..................................................................... 22
2.5
Recent Simulation Studies ........................................................................................ 29
3
AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI ARABIA ......................... 32
3.1
Traditional Agriculture ............................................................................................. 32
3.2
Current Situation in Agriculture ............................................................................... 33
3.3
Water Needs and Resources...................................................................................... 35
4
RECENT STUDIES ON WIND AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI ARABIA . 37
5
WATER PUMPING ....................................................................................................... 40
5.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 40
5.2
Water Demand .......................................................................................................... 41
5.3
Water Production ...................................................................................................... 44
5.4
Underground Water Resource................................................................................... 45
5.5
Static and Dynamic Heads ........................................................................................ 46
5.6
Selection of Pumping Equipment ............................................................................. 47
5.7
Water Storage............................................................................................................ 49
5.8
Batteries .................................................................................................................... 50
5.9
Water Distribution .................................................................................................... 50
6
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER PUMPS ..................................................................... 51
6.1
Positive Displacement (volumetric) Pumps .............................................................. 51
6.2
Rotodynamic Pumps ................................................................................................. 52
6.3
MotorPump Subsystems ......................................................................................... 53
7
WIND TURBINEPUMP SYSTEMS............................................................................ 55
7.1
Main Components ..................................................................................................... 55
7.2
Mechanical Wind Pumps .......................................................................................... 56
7.3
Electrical Wind Pumps ............................................................................................. 57
7.4
Size of Wind Pump System ...................................................................................... 58
8
WIND ENERGY POTENTIAL...................................................................................... 61
9
POWER GENERION FROM A WIND TURBINE ....................................................... 63
10 WIND DATA COLLECTION........................................................................................ 64
11 UTILIZING WIND DATA............................................................................................. 66
11.1 Wind Power Density (WPD) .................................................................................... 66
11.2 Wind Energy Generation .......................................................................................... 67
11.3 Water Pumping Capacity .......................................................................................... 69
11.4 Determination of Pump Size ..................................................................................... 70
12 ECONOMICS AND PERFORMANCE OF WIND PUMP SYSTEMS ........................ 72
12.1 Cost of Wind Power .................................................................................................. 72
12.2 Piping ........................................................................................................................ 73
i
12.3 System Performance ................................................................................................. 74

PROMOTING WIND ENERGY USAGE ..................................................................... 75
13.1 Incentives in Leading Countries ............................................................................... 75
13.2 Situation in Saudi Arabia .......................................................................................... 76
13.3 Findings of the Trip to Al-Kharj Area ...................................................................... 77
13.4 Trip To Saihat-Qatif-Dammam Area ........................................................................ 80
13.5 Visit of Al-Khaldi Farm ............................................................................................ 80
13.6 Visit of Al-Wabel Trading and Maintenance Company ........................................... 81
14 CASE STUDY 1: DHAHRAN ....................................................................................... 83
14.1 Wind Energy Potential for Dhahran ......................................................................... 83
14.2 Annual Power Generation ......................................................................................... 98
14.3. Seasonal Power Generation .................................................................................... 102
15 CASE STUDY 2: GASSIM .......................................................................................... 111
15.1. Wind Energy Potential for Gassim ......................................................................... 111
15.2. Annual Power Generation ....................................................................................... 126
16 CASE STUDY 3: YANBU ........................................................................................... 138
16.1. Wind Energy Potential for Yanbu........................................................................... 138
17 CASE STUDY 4: ARAR .............................................................................................. 165
17.1. Wind Energy Potential for Arar .............................................................................. 165
18 CASE STUDY 5: DHULOM ....................................................................................... 192
18.1. Wind Energy Potential for Dhulom ........................................................................ 192
19 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF WIND POWER............................................................ 219
APPENDIX A: MATLAB PROGRAM FOR STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF RAW WIND
DATA .................................................................................................................................... 230
A.1. Loading Data and constraint of Variable names: ....................................................... 231
A.2. Running the program ................................................................................................. 232
A.3. Common error messages ............................................................................................ 232
A.4. Listing of the matlab program.................................................................................... 234
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 284
13
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1: Agricultural Water Demand in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (million m3) .......... 35
Table 3.2: Available Water Capacity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (million m3).............. 35
Table 5.1: Typical daily water consumption for farm animals (Argaw, 2003) ....................... 41
Table 5.2: Approximate water supply requirements ................................................................ 42
Table 5.3: Estimated maximum daily water demand for various types of crop irrigation ...... 43
Table 5.4: Frictional head losses of 1.5-inch pipes.................................................................. 47
Table 11.1: Technical data of Wind Machines from Nordex. ................................................. 67
Table 11.2: Power generation of seven different sizes of wind machines at various wind
speeds ....................................................................................................................................... 68
Table 11.3: Technical specifications of pumps from Goulds Pump Company ....................... 71
Table 13.1: Characteristics of the wells in Nowara Farm and Nurseries ................................ 78
Table 13.2: Operating hours of each pump during one month period ..................................... 79
Table 13.3: List of farms in Dammam-Qatif-Saihat Area. ...................................................... 81
Table 13.4: Al-Khaldi Farm well data. .................................................................................... 81
Table 14.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Dhahran at a height of 30 m. .................... 94
Table 14.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Dhahran at a height of 40 m. .................... 96
Table 15.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Gassim at a height of 30 m. .................... 122
Table 15.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Gassim at a height of 40 m. .................... 124
Table 16.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Yanbu at a height of 30 m. ..................... 149
Table 16.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Yanbu at a height of 40 m. ..................... 151
Table 17.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Arar at a height of 30 m.......................... 176
Table 17.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Arar at a height of 40 m.......................... 178
Table 18.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Dholum at a height of 30 m. ................... 203
Table18.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Dholum at a height of 40 m. .................... 205
Table 19.1: Total annual energy (MWh) generated by different sizes of wind machines at
various locations in Saudi Arabia .......................................................................................... 219
Table 19.2: Price of one Kwh electric energy in Saudi Arabia ............................................. 219
Table 19.3: Worth (SAR) of annual energy generated by different sizes of wind machines and
at various locations in Saudi Arabia ...................................................................................... 220
Table 19.4: Financial data (all in Saudi Arabian Riyal SAR) of Wind Machines from Nordex.
................................................................................................................................................ 221
Table 19.5: Net present value of total revenue (SAR) generated by different sizes of wind
machines at various locations in Saudi Arabia ...................................................................... 223
Table 19.6: Net present value of a Wind Project (SAR) over 30 years of operation ............ 224
Table 19.7: Net gain or compensation (SAR) for utilizing wind energy instead of utilizing
one kwh electric energy ......................................................................................................... 224
Table 19.8: The break even analysis for initial cost (SAR) of wind machines ..................... 225
iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5.1: Optimum water required for three types of fruit and nut trees analyzed for using
wind-electric drip irrigation systems ....................................................................................... 44
Figure 5.2: Definitions of total static and dynamic heads ....................................................... 45
Figure 5.3: Suitable pumping equipment versus pumping requirement .................................. 48
Figure 5.4: Selection of pumps for different pumping loads ................................................... 49
Figure 7.1: Flow rate of Bergey Excel (10 kW) for a 40m head and a 15-stage ..................... 59
3.8 kW pump (Vick et al. 2000). ............................................................................................. 59
Figure 7.2: Rough indication of water depths, required daily volume of water and typical size
of the rotor for various applications ......................................................................................... 60
Figure 9.1: Sketch of a typical output of a wind energy conversion system. .......................... 63
Figure 11.1: Power generation of seven different sizes of wind machines at various wind
speeds ....................................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 12.1: Typical chart for pump performance characteristics ........................................... 74
Figure 13.1: Number of wells at various depths dug during the year 2003. ........................... 82
Figure 14.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran .. 84
Figure 14.2: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (WPD)
(W/m2) at Dhahran ................................................................................................................... 85
Figure 14.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran ..... 86
Figure 14.4: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (WPD)
(W/m2) at Dhahran ................................................................................................................... 87
Figure 14.5: Average monthly variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran 88
Figure 14.6: Average monthly variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at
Dhahran .................................................................................................................................... 89
Figure 14.7: Average annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Dhahran
.................................................................................................................................................. 90
Figure 14.8: Average annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at
Dhahran .................................................................................................................................... 91
Figure 14.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran .................. 92
Figure 14.10: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind power densities (WPD) (W/m2) at
Dhahran .................................................................................................................................... 93
Figure 14.11: Wind rose diagram for Dhahran at a height of 30 m. ........................................ 95
Figure 14.12: Wind rose diagram for Dhahran at a height of 40 m. ........................................ 97
Figure 14.13: Wind probability density functions for Dhahran at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters ....................................................................................................................................... 98
Figure 14.14: Power generation at Dhahran using seven different sizes of wind machines ... 99
Figure 14.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Dhahran ............ 100
Figure 14.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Dhahran with 50
percent conversion efficiency and different dynamic heads. ................................................. 100
Figure 14.17: Number of pumps as function of wind turbine type and water pump capacity at
Dhahran. ................................................................................................................................. 101
Figure 14.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Dhahran. ...................... 102
Figure 14.19: Average daily flow-rate capacity for different wind turbines for the month of
January in Dhahran. ............................................................................................................... 103
Figure 14.20: Number of pumps that can be operated with different wind turbines for the
month of January in Dhahran. ................................................................................................ 104
iv
Figure 14.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Dhahran ........................... 105
April in Dhahran. ................................................................................................................... 105
month of April in Dhahran. .................................................................................................... 106
Figure 14.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Dhahran ............................. 107
July in Dhahran. ..................................................................................................................... 107
month of July in Dhahran. ..................................................................................................... 108
Figure 14.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Dhahran....................... 109
October in Dhahran. ............................................................................................................... 109
month of October in Dhahran. ............................................................................................... 110
Figure 15.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Gassim .. 112
(W/m2) at Gassim. .................................................................................................................. 113
Figure 15.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Gassim ..... 114
(W/m2) at Gassim ................................................................................................................... 115
Figure 15.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Gassim. ............ 116
Figure 15.6: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Gassim.
................................................................................................................................................ 117
Figure 15.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Gassim ......... 118
Figure 15.8: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Gassim
................................................................................................................................................ 119
Figure 15.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Gassim ........... 120
Gassim.................................................................................................................................... 121
Figure 15.11: Wind rose diagram for Gassim at a height of 30 m......................................... 123
Figure 15.12: Wind rose diagram for Gassim at a height of 40 m......................................... 125
Figure 15.13: Wind probability density functions for Gassim at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters ..................................................................................................................................... 126
Figure 15.14: Power generation at Gassim using seven different sizes of wind machines ... 127
Figure 15.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Gassim .............. 127
Figure 15.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Gassim with 50
Figure 15.17: Number of pumps as function of wind turbine type and water pump capacity.
................................................................................................................................................ 129
Figure 15.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Gassim. ........................ 130
January in Gassim. ................................................................................................................. 130
month of January in Gassim. ................................................................................................. 131
Figure 15.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Gassim ............................. 132
April in Gassim. ..................................................................................................................... 132
month of April in Gassim. ..................................................................................................... 133
Figure 15.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Gassim............................... 134
July in Gassim. ....................................................................................................................... 134
month of July in Gassim. ....................................................................................................... 135
Figure 15.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Gassim ........................ 136
October in Gassim.................................................................................................................. 136
month of October in Gassim. ................................................................................................. 137
Figure 16.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu ... 139
(W/m2) at Yanbu. ................................................................................................................... 140
Figure 16.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu ...... 141
(W/m2) at Yanbu .................................................................................................................... 142
Figure 16.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu. ............. 143
Figure 16.6: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Yanbu.
................................................................................................................................................ 144
Figure 16.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Yanbu. .......... 145
Figure 16.8: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Yanbu.
................................................................................................................................................ 146
Figure 16.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Yanbu ............ 147
Yanbu ..................................................................................................................................... 148
Figure 16.11: Wind rose diagram for Yanbu at a height of 30 m. ......................................... 150
Figure 16.12: Wind rose diagram for Yanbu at a height of 40 m. ......................................... 152
Figure 16.13: Wind probability density functions for Yanbu at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters ..................................................................................................................................... 153
Figure 16.14: Power generation at Yanbu using seven different sizes of wind machines .... 154
Figure 16.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Yanbu ............... 154
Figure 16.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Yanbu with 50
................................................................................................................................................ 156
Figure 16.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Yanbu. ......................... 157
January in Yanbu. .................................................................................................................. 157
month of January in Yanbu. ................................................................................................... 158
Figure 16.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Yanbu .............................. 159
April in Yanbu. ...................................................................................................................... 159
vi
month of April in Yanbu. ....................................................................................................... 160
Figure 16.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Yanbu ................................ 161
July in Yanbu. ........................................................................................................................ 161
month of July in Yanbu.......................................................................................................... 162
Figure 16.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Yanbu .......................... 163
October in Yanbu. .................................................................................................................. 163
month of October in Yanbu. .................................................................................................. 164
Figure 17.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar. ..... 166
(W/m2) at Arar. ...................................................................................................................... 167
Figure 17.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar .......... 168
(W/m2) at Arar ....................................................................................................................... 169
Figure 17.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar. ................. 170
Figure 17.6: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Arar.
................................................................................................................................................ 171
Figure 17.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Arar. ............. 172
Figure 17.8: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Arar. .. 173
Figure 17.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Arar................ 174
Arar ........................................................................................................................................ 175
Figure 17.11: Wind rose diagram for Arar at a height of 30 m. ............................................ 177
Figure 17.12: Wind rose diagram for Arar at a height of 40 m. ............................................ 179
Figure 17.13: Wind probability density functions for Arar at hub heights of 50 and 60 meters.
................................................................................................................................................ 180
Figure 17.14: Power generation at Arar using seven different sizes of wind machines ........ 181
Figure 17.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Arar .................. 181
Figure 17.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Arar with 50
................................................................................................................................................ 183
Figure 17.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Arar. ............................ 184
January in Arar....................................................................................................................... 184
month of January in Arar. ...................................................................................................... 185
Figure 17.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Arar ................................. 186
April in Arar........................................................................................................................... 186
month of April in Arar. .......................................................................................................... 187
Figure 17.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Arar ................................... 188
vii
July in Arar. ........................................................................................................................... 188
month of July in Arar. ............................................................................................................ 189
Figure 17.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Arar ............................. 190
October in Arar. ..................................................................................................................... 190
month of October in Arar. ...................................................................................................... 191
Figure 18.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhulom. 193
(W/m2) at Dhulom.................................................................................................................. 194
Figure 18.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhulom .... 195
(W/m2) at Dhulom.................................................................................................................. 196
Figure 18.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhulom. ........... 197
Figure 18.6: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at
Dhulom. ................................................................................................................................. 198
Figure 18.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Dhulom. ....... 199
Figure 18.8: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at Dhulom.
................................................................................................................................................ 200
Figure 18.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Dhulom .......... 201
Dhulom .................................................................................................................................. 202
Figure 18.11: Wind rose diagram for Dhulom at a height of 30 m. ...................................... 204
Figure 18.12: Wind rose diagram for Dhulom at a height of 40 m. ...................................... 206
Figure 18.13: Wind probability density functions for Dhulom at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters. .................................................................................................................................... 207
Figure 18.14: Power generation at Dhulom using seven different sizes of wind machines .. 208
Figure 18.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Dhulom............. 208
Figure 18.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Dhulom with 50
................................................................................................................................................ 210
Figure 18.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Dhulom. ....................... 211
January in Dhulom. ................................................................................................................ 211
month of January in Dhulom. ................................................................................................ 212
Figure 18.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Dhulom ............................ 213
April in Dhulom. .................................................................................................................... 213
month of April in Dhulom. .................................................................................................... 214
Figure 18.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Dhulom.............................. 215
July in Dhulom. ...................................................................................................................... 215
viii
month of July in Dhulom. ...................................................................................................... 216
Figure 18.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Dhulom ....................... 217
October in Dhulom. ............................................................................................................... 217
month of October in Dhulom. ................................................................................................ 218
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The investigators would like to express their deep appreciation to King Abdulaziz City
for Science and Technology (KACST) for offering the financial support to this project, under
grant Number:22/48 titled: "STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF WIND ENERGY FOR
PUMPING UNDERGROUND WATER IN THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA". The
investigators would like also to extend their thanks to the institute of power research at
KACST for providing the wind data for the considered sites. .

: --
" " )
- (.

.
) ( .

.

.
.
.
.

.

) ( .

.
Summary
This is the final report of KACST project AT-48-22 entitled "Study and Development
of Wind Energy for Pumping Underground Water in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia." This
report includes the work done during the three years of this project (1 Shaaban 1424 1
Shaaban 1427).
In this project, a detail investigation has been made to determine the feasibility of using wind
power for extracting underground water for irrigation purposes in the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia. Several years of recent half-hourly wind speed data collected by KACST at five sites
have been used for the analysis. These sites are Dhahran, Gasim, Yanbu, Arar and Dhulom.
Feasibility study of wind power utilization has been made for each of these sites for
underground water pumping. First, the statistical characteristics of wind including the
diurnal, daily, monthly and annual variations of both wind speed and wind power density
have been studied. Next, the directional characteristics of wind at these sites have been
determined.
The actual power generation for various sizes of wind machines was calculated at each of the
sites using the statistical wind characteristics and the wind turbine characteristics. Then, the
underground water pumping capacity at these sites for various sizes of water pumps were
determined for varying depths of underground static water level.
Average daily water
pumping capacities at these sites were obtained on the annual as well as seasonal basis.
Finally a number of water pumps that can be operated during the whole year as well as during
the various seasons by various wind turbines at these sites were calculated. Statistical
analysis of the raw wind speed data has been carried out by a computer MATLAB code
written by the investigators. Further processing of the data for obtaining the water pumping
capacities have been carried out by using Microsoft Excel program.
The economical analysis is done to identify the financial viability of the WEC systems by
using currently utilized electric energy operated systems as benchmarks. The evaluation of
economical potential of the WECs is done by utilizing the precise estimation of the expected
energy output for various areas and also by considering several economical factors.
Specifically, a complete cost-benefit analysis model is properly adapted for the Saudi
Arabian market. Moreover, investigation is extended on the impact of various parameters
such as capital cost, return on investment index, inflation rate index, installation capacity
factor, M&O cost on the economic viability and attractiveness.
INTRODUCTION
This is the final report of KACST project AT-48-22 entitled "Study and Development
of Wind Energy for Pumping Underground Water in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia." This
report includes the work done during the three years of this project (1 Shaaban 1424 1
Shaaban 1427).
The first part of this report, Section 2, provides a detail literature survey on wind
energy for electric power generation and applications of wind energy such as water pumping
and hybrid usage of wind energy. A brief discussion on the agriculture (past and current
situation) and water resources (needs and availability) in the Kingdom is given in Section 3.
Section 4, provides a survey of most recent studies of wind and ground water related studies
concerning Saudi Arabia. Water pumping and issues related to the selection of pumping
equipment were discussed in Section 5. Since pumping is an important aspect of this project,
a lengthy classification of water pump is given in Section 6. Wind turbine-pump systems
were described in Section 7. Analysis concerning wind energy potential and power
generation from a wind turbine are given in Sections 8 and 9, respectively. The source and
characteristics of wind data used in the analysis are given Section 10. Section 11 contains
technical information on the procedures to calculate wind power, water pumping capacity and
determination of water pump size. Section 12 includes information on the economics and
performance of wind pump systems. A discussion on the current situation and promoting
wind energy use is given is Section 13.
Sections 14 to 18 were devoted to the analysis of wind energy and water pumping
capacity for the sites of Dhahran, Gassim, Yanbu, Arar and Dhulom, respectively. The
analysis includes the wind energy potential, annual and seasonal power generation in each of
the respective sites. The economic analysis of a wind power system over a long period of
time for given locations is given in Section 19. Section 20 provides some recommendations
and concludes the project. The MATLAB program used in the statistical analysis of the wind
energy data together with necessary description of the program is given in Appendix A.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Renewable energies were known from early antiquity and were utilized in various
fields. For example, windmills were one of the oldest prime movers and used for more than
1400 years in Persia and more than 700 years in Europe (Ushiyama, 2000). The transition to
water pumping and high speed wind turbines for electric power generation had occurred at
the end of 19th century. During the last decade of the 20th century, it has been shown that the
wind energy industry has achieved much in the way of technological improvements and
market development so that it has the potential to supply power to the developed and
developing countries. For example, the specific energy harvested by the best machines
increased to about 1700 kWh / m2 in 1994 against only 580 kWh / m2 in 1986 and prices
came down slipping below 900 ECU/kW for turn key installations (Palz 1996). The new
larger turbines with higher capacities are expected to make the wind energy a bigger player in
the power industry (Bodamer 1999).
Due to the fast market development, wind turbine technology has experienced an
important evolution over time. The cost of wind energy was reduced by 30% between 1991
and 1997 and the cost reduction is foreseen to continue. Poulsen (1995) reported that the
Vestas group had installed more than 4,500 wind turbines (640 MW) world-wide. According
to Andersen and Jensen (2000), by the end of 1998 the global installed capacity of modern
grid connected wind turbines was some 10,000 MW, and the growth rates of installations
worldwide were 30%-40% annually. Gaudiosi (1999) believed that the total wind capacity in
Europe could increase from the 1997 value of 4450 MW up to 40 000 MW within 2010.
Similarly, the world wind capacity could increase from the 1997 value of 7200 MW up to 60
000 MW within 2010.
Over the last thirty years the assessment of wind energy potential and the way to
utilize it in most economical way have attracted many researchers. There are several survey
papers categorizing the related issues and exposing the developments in them. For example,
Ackermann and Soder (2000 and 2002) have focused on the wind turbine and wind project
issues and presented a brief overview of the different design approaches and issues like
power grid integration, economics, environmental impact and special system applications,
such as offshore wind energy. In this study, we will briefly survey the past research work,
with special emphases given on the usage of wind energy for pumping underground water
and the usage of wind energy in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This survey will consists of
(1) wind energy for electric power generation; (2) hybrid usage of wind energy with other
renewable sources; (3) wind energy in Saudi Arabia; (4) wind energy for pumping water; (5)
simulation studies.
2.1
Wind Energy for Electric Power Generation

Installed wind capacity in the USA has increased rapidly from the late 1980's and into
the early 1990's, but this growth then declined. Swisher (1998) have showed the resurgence
of installation and given a critique of the institutional and technological factors affecting the
change. In 1996, nearly 16,000 wind generators were spinning, providing for the electrical
needs of roughly one million residents in California, where just sixteen years ago, in 1980,
the state had been without wind generators. To explain this remarkable growth, Righter
(1996) have analyzed four central factors: political climate, tax incentives, the PURPA Act,
and the attitude of the public utility commission. Ushiyama (1999) have estimated that MHI
(Japan) had exported more than 800 unit middle-sized commercial wind turbine generators to
the United States and UK. Betts (2000) have believed that on-going wind tunnel tests in
United States are expected to benefit turbine developers everywhere.
Hughes and Scott (1992) studied the environmental and economic benefits of utilizing
the wind energy potential of Atlantic Canada. They showed that using current wind turbine
technology, electricity can be generated at rates that are competitive with existing thermal
power stations. They also discussed the benefits of development of a wind industry
(construction and running of wind farms) towards both the employment situation and the
environment.
Kummert (1995) has listed the conditions in Western Europe for electricity supply by
independent wind power operators. The terms under which electric prices are fixed are found
to be important criteria in assessing the cost effectiveness of wind power projects. Barthelmie
(1998) has reported that some Northern European countries had relatively detailed plans to
build wind farms with more than 2500 MW capacity by the year 2010. It is also given a short
assessment of the remaining difficulties for successful large-scale off-shore implementations.
Similarly, Bourillon (1999) has indicated that the European Union (EU) had set a target for
12% of energy to be supplied from renewable sources by 2010, including an extra 40,000
MW from large wind farms.
Kaltschnitt and Wiese (1994) have considered several renewable energy options and
discussed the chances and the restrictions in the Federal Republic of Germany, with the
largest installed capacity due to favorable federal regulation of the supply tariffs for
renewable electricity to the grids. Germany also led technological innovation in wind energy;
ABB Industrietechnik AG has embarked on ambitious projects to make the wind energy more
economical to produce.
After considering a range of physical, technical and institutional factors, Saluja and
Douglas (1996) have estimated that over 1500 km2 of land in the Tayside Region of Scotland
is suitable for wind energy development. With the overall success of the initial pilot projects,
Bailey and Boardman (1999) have discussed the steps that the UK Government took to
promote offshore wind energy to support UK's electricity needs. The large commercial
developers are anticipating the success of the first UK offshore installation.
Meibom and Sorensen (1999) have indicated that the official Danish energy plan
Energy 21' called for a very high penetration of wind energy in the electricity sector.
Consequently, Denmark is looking to install larger turbines in its existing offshore facilities,
maximizing the energy output. Soerensen et al (2000) have summarized the experiences from
the project consisting of 20 wind turbines at each 2 MW in Copenhagen harbor. Additionally,
they have drawn the perspectives for the future development of offshore wind power in
Europe.
Marini et al (1999) have studied wind measures near the Scarpino landfill in Italy to
estimate the energy content of the wind stream. Then they have determined the economical
return of a wind power station with widely diffused commercial turbines. Feretic et al (1999)
have investigated the competitiveness of wind powered generators built in Croatia. By using
Weibull wind distribution function with altitude corrections, they identified two promising
sites on the Adriatic coast. Kaldellis and Gavras (2000) have predicted a remarkable growth
of the wind energy sector and considerable investment profits in Greece. Surugiu and
Paraschivoiu (2000) have studied the environmental and social aspects of the wind energy in
Canada. Makra et al (2000) have investigated the statistical structure of the wind field over
the Great Hungarian Plain. In a limited study, Cordeiro et al (2000) have reported that wind
energy was one of the most interesting renewable energies in Portugal.
Villar and Jorge (1998) have analyzed the technical-economical feasibility aspects of
wind energy in Rio de Grande do Sul state, Brazil. With annual mean wind speed of 6.6 m/s
and power density of 310 W/m2, and commercially available 1.65 MW wind turbines, Li
(2000) has showed that a farm of 1038 MW capacity was economically feasible in Hong
Kong. Lew (2000) has stated that the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (China) has
already successfully disseminated over 150,000 small-scale wind electric generators to power
households.
In oil producing countries, there are also considerable amount of research and
developments of wind energy. For example, researchers from the Layi and Karayiannis
(1994) have discussed the research and developments on the wind energy in Nigeria. Jamil et
al (1995) have used the fifty days' wind speed measurements at the MERC-solar site (in Iran)
to find out the wind energy density and other characteristics. El-Osta et al (1995) have
reported that analysis of wind data using WASP software was very encouraging to the further
continuation of the projects in Libya. Garbacea (1996) has attempted the assessment of a part
of design and erection activities in wind energy field in western Romania. Ramirez et al
(2000) have presented the results on research and development activities in various important
Mexican institutions.
There have been serious research efforts in Muslim countries. For example, Habali et
al (2001) have estimated the cost of wind energy for the various wind regions and showed
that they became cost-competitive with conventional power generation. The Arab League
Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO), Tunis had formed a permanent
committee for renewable Energy in the Arab World since 1980s. The Wind Energy Atlas for
the Arab World, for nearly all Arab States covering latitude from 35 N to 0 (Tropic) and
longitude from nearly 20 W to 59 E, with height up to 2500 m above sea level, is among
the many distinguished activities of this committee. Alnaser et al (2002) have demonstrated
that this Atlas contains useful statistical and climatological data on wind speed, wind
direction, wind durations and frequency throughout the day, month and the year. The Wind
Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP) developed by Riso National Laboratory
of Denmark has been used to produce maps, tables and supplementary information that help
in planning and installing wind turbines and wind farms. Furthermore, estimating the wind
power using the related Weibull distribution parameters is also available in this Atlas.
In the other Muslim countries, Saleh (1994) has discussed the Egypt's energy policy
for the utilization of its wind energy and experiences gained in the last five years. Tremmel
(1995) has discussed the experience involving the construction of a 6MW wind plant,
designed and placed in operation by ABB, on the Golan Heights to the MFI Golan.
Shabbaneh and Hasan (1997) have estimated that electricity from the wind could be
generated at a cost of 0.07 $/kWh in the West Bank. Oztopal et al (2000) have given the wind
velocity, topography and wind energy variation maps obtained for Turkey with local and
regional interpretations.
Regarding to other countries and recent issues, India is one of the first developing
country that has gained a high position in the world in terms of installed wind-power
capacity. Jagadeesh (2000) has reported that Tamil Nadu state had the distinction of 719
MW capacity wind farms at the end of September 1998 out of the country's total figure of
992 MW. Van (1996) has evaluated the potential of wind energy sources for the remote areas
in Vietnam. Abramowski et al (1999) have presented the experience from the German
Government program (TERNA), which provided technical expertise and assistance in
Morocco and Namibia. Persaud et al (1999) have recommended a comprehensive wind
resource assessment program for the Guyana coastlands. Rosen et al (1999) have found that
along the lower 200 km of the Eritrean coastline wind-generated electricity is substantially
10
cheaper than the current supply. Van der Linde and Sayigh (1999) have provided a
conservative estimate: Approximately 5% to 6% of the South African energy demands can be
supplied from wind.
Wolsink (2000) has discussed attitudes of the population and institutional factors
which had impacts on wind energy facility site. Ushiyami (2000) has reviewed the novel
technologies of wind turbine such as larger machines, variable speed generators, special wing
sections, theoretical methods to determine turbine performance, offshore turbines, and control
technologies. Seguro and Lambert (2000) have recommended the maximum likelihood
method for use with time series wind data, and the modified maximum likelihood method for
use with wind data in frequency distribution format. Sen (2000) has derived a correction
factor in terms of the cross-correlation and the coefficients of variation by considering
simultaneously the temporal variability both in the wind speed and air density.
Marafia and Ashour (2003) have presented a feasibility study of adopting wind
energy in Qatar based on the on-shore data collected between 1976 and 2000 at Doha
International Airport and off-shore data collected at Haloul Island. The average on-shore
wind speed is 5.1 m/s and of-shore is 6.0 m/s. The results indicate that the costs of generating
power by using small to medium sized wind turbine generators compare favorably to that
from fossil fuel resources.
Kose et al. (2004) investigated wind energy potential in Turkey, Turkey. They
collected data on topographical and wind speed measurements at an observation station at
Dumlupinar University main campus. Wind speed measurements were made at the 10th and
30th meters of the measurement mast for 20 months between July 2001 and February 2003.
They used CALLaLOG 98 and ALWIN software programs to evaluate the data. Bechrakis,
et al. (2004) presented a method of estimating the annual wind energy potential of a selected
site using short term measurements related to one years recorded wind data at another
reference site. They used artificial neural network (ANN) and the available one-year
measured wind speed data to extrapolate the annual wind speed at another site. They did not
consider the topographical details or other meteorological data in their approach. They used
11
Weibull distribution model of the simulated wind speed to make an assessment of the annual
wind energy resource in the new area with a particular wind turbine model. They examined
three pairs of measuring stations in the southwest of Ireland, where the wind potential is high
and technically exploitable. They indicated that only a short time period of wind data
acquisition might provide the information required for a satisfactory assessment of the annual
wind energy resource in a new area.
2.2
Hybrid Usage of Wind Energy

Bin-Yatim et al (1989) have reported the performance of a 1.2 kw peak photovoltaic
(PV) water pumping system operating over a period of 3 years. The maximum overall
efficiency of the system is 3.2% and the mean efficiency over this period is 1.9%. An
increase in the temperature of the PV modules due to solar heating lowers the PV conversion
efficiency at the rate of 0.06% per C.
Habali and Saleh (1994) have proposed a reverse osmosis desalination scheme
powered by a stand-alone wind energy converter to produce fresh water from wells with a
cost of 0.98 to 1.70 US $/m3, which was less than using conventional diesel engines
especially in remote areas. In the Indo-Pakistan region, Raja and Abro (1994) have identified
the potentials of solar and wind energy and found that the prime sites for wind are coastal
area, arid zone and hill terrains in Pakistan. Nfaoui et al (1994) have described a computer
model to investigate the feasibility of using a wind/diesel system for an isolated village near
Tangiers.
Vliet et al (1996) have designed screening software to assess the economic feasibility
of renewable energy alternatives for applications in Texas. PV and wind energy are
considered for either stand-alone or grid connected for a range of hot water applications.
Bindner and Lundsager (1996) have studied wind diesel systems combined with a
desalination system to produce both electricity and potable water in remote regions. They
have found that the Simple, Robust & Reliable (SR&R) types can supply both power and
water at reasonable prices.
12
Rubab and Kandpal (1998) have compared various renewable energy resourcetechnology combinations for water pumping in rural areas. The options include solar
photovoltaic pumping systems, biogas and producer gas driven dual-fuel IC engine pumpsets
and windmill pumps. The cost per unit volume of water pumped, cost incurred per unit useful
hydraulic energy and the present value of life cycle costs over a given period of time are the
criteria for comparing the renewable options with conventional pumping systems such as
diesel engine and electric motor pumpsets. Sensitivity analysis is presented to take into
account the uncertainties in the values of some of the input parameters.
Plantikow (1999) has reported that on the island of Ruegen in the Baltic Sea, a windpowered seawater desalination demonstration plant has been in operation since 1995. This
field test has shown that an output capacity of potable water of 15 m3/h at a wind energy
production of 300 kW can be obtained with very good operational results as well as low
maintenance costs. Alnaser (1999) has reported that a solar and wind-powered mobile
generator has been constructed at the University of Bahrain to produce 1.5 kW. Rajsekhar et
al (1999) has addressed the technical and commercial concerns of both the state-run utility
and wind-power plant entrepreneurs to spur developments. Kainkwa (1999) has suggested
combined hydro-generator and wind-turbine system as a possible alternative of electric
power supply in Tanzania.
Belessiotis and Delyannis (2000) have presented the connection to desalination
methods with some examples.
Sanz et al (2002) have analyzed optimal integration of wind and water energy in a
pumping station for irrigation. Pumping station is also sized to fit watering needs for
traditional crops and for thistle crop (Cyanara Cardunculus) with energetic aims. This study
has been done in the area of "Alcala de Gurrea" (Zaragoza), and data acquisition process was
carried out over one year.
Celik (2002) carried out a techno-economic analysis for autonomous small scale
photovoltaic-wind hybrid energy system. The analysis was based on hourly measured 1996
13
weather data from a site of Cardi, UK, and considers the basic system settings at this
experimental site. He compared the hybrid photovoltaicwind system with single
photovoltaic and single wind systems in terms of techno-economic performance. Monthly
combinations of the solar and wind resources showed that energy contributions from
photovoltaic and wind generators vary greatly. In this respect three types of months were
identified; solar-biased month, wind-biased month and even month. He showed that an
optimum combination of the hybrid photovoltaicwind energy system provides higher system
performance than either of the single systems for the same system cost for every battery
storage capacity analyzed. He also showed that the magnitude of the battery storage capacity
has important bearings on the system performance of single photovoltaic and wind systems.
He concluded that the single photovoltaic system performs better than a single wind system
for 2 day storage capacity, while the single wind system performs better for 1.25 day storage
capacity for the same system cost.
Vick et al (2003) have considered solar, wind, and a combination of wind and solar
energy to power an UV (ultraviolet) water purification system for almost two years with
various wind and solar energy conditions. Five different systems have been tested and the
resulting graphs can be used to determine the feasibility of powering various other electrical
loads. Combining a 100 Watt solar system with a 500 Watt wind turbine resulted in pumping
and purifying enough water to satisfy the potable water requirements of 4000 people (16000
liters/day) at an estimated equipment cost of about $4630 (approximately $1/person).
2.3
Wind Energy in Saudi Arabia

The worldwide booms of the wind energy over the past number of years have
stimulated at the same time, the scientific and research community in Saudi Arabia to launch
a serious series of investigations into the reality of wind energy potentials in the country.
Although Saudi Arabia is the worlds biggest oil producer, yet it is trying to develop its
renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind energy. There are many important
institutions such as research centers and universities promoting and working on research,
development and analysis of renewable energy sources. Despite very favorable wind
resources in various parts, vast uninhabited land area as well as a long coastline, free from
14
man made obstacles, the industrial involvement and local implementations of wind energy
technologies are very limited. A key barrier to making use of these resources is the lack of
the expertise concerning both methods of site and technology selection, and economical
aspects of wind power. Below we survey the research work related to the wind energy in
Saudi Arabia.
Research and publications related to wind energy in Saudi Arabia can be found as
early as 1980s. Nasser (1981) studied the utilization of wind/solar energy in Saudi Arabia for
electricity generation. Later, a similar study was done by El-Shobokshy and El-Zayat (1991).
Martin (1985) has analyzed wind data for eleven stations along the east coast of the
Arabian Peninsula. Monthly average wind speeds range from 2.5 to 7.0 m/s, with a peak
between February and July and a low during the August-October period. Maximum
extractable monthly and annual average wind powers vary between 20 and 250 W/m2, 40 and
150 W/ m2, respectively. An application of wind power, i. e. the production of freshwater
with a wind-driven reverse osmosis desalination plant, is suggested. Amin and Elsamanoudy
(1985) investigated the feasibility of wind energy utilization in Saudi Arabia. Ayyash et al
(1985) have analyzed hourly mean wind speed data for Kuwait International Airport
(Kuwait), Mina Al-Ahmadi, South Pier (Kuwait) and Ras Al-Khafji (Saudi Arabia) to
establish the major characteristics of wind regimes and investigated the possibility of using
wind energy for power generation. It was found that Khafji experiences the highest mean
wind speed and the mean power density; estimated respectively, at 6. 2 m/s qnd 279 W/m2
during 1967-1983. This is followed by Ahmadi Station (5. 28 m/s and 178 W/m2) for 19601982 and Kuwait Airport Station (4. 36 m/s and 141 W/m2) for 1962-1973. It was also found
that average wind speed is about 30-50% higher in summer than in fall-winter, resulting in a
larger potential power supply in summer. Data analysis indicated that the wind resources of
Kuwait have reasonable potential for power generation.
Al-Ansari et al. (1986) studied the wind energy assessment in Saudi Arabia under the
joint program of SOLERAS. In their study hourly wind data recorded over a period of ten
years for twenty different sites were used. They established the relationship between wind
15
speed and power, analyzed the diurnal variation of mean speeds and frequency distribution of
wind directions, and plotted seasonal and annual wind speed, direction and energy contours.
Nahas et al (1987) have presented an extensive survey of literature about wind energy
and wind machines, their design and their applications. The paper has informed about this
renewable type of energy and the available machines (ranging from the simple Savonius rotor
to the powerful multi-blade windmills) that convert wind energy into useful mechanical or
electrical work as well as the advantages and shortcomings of all types. Abdel-Magid and ElAmin (1987) have considered the dynamic stability of a single wind-turbine generator,
supplying an infinite bus through a transmission line under widely varying loading
conditions. A linearized model is used and a parametric eigenvalue analysis is conducted
over a wide range of loading conditions. Conclusions are drawn as to the effects of the
system and control parameters on the dynamic stability of the wind-turbine generator. Results
obtained from a digital simulation of the system, for pseudo-typical wind gusts, are also
included for comparative purposes. Al-Shehri (1987) has proposed to utilize wind energy
with an inherent storage medium; the production of hydrogen, chlorine, and caustic soda
from electrolysis of brine. The proposed system is composed of a wind generator, a
transformer, rectifier diodes, and electrolysis cells. An electrical equivalent model of the
system that takes the variations in the system frequency and output power into account is
developed. By using wind data for Dhahran, yield of chemicals and available electrical power
from the system are predicted.
Nahas et al (1988a) have described a windmill with blades articulated by means of
cam contours. The choice of a suitable cam contour is discussed, and several alternatives are
presented. Performance predictions are described for a six-flap, horizontal-axis windmill
model with a selected cam contour. Wind tunnel experiments have been conducted on this
model and performance improvements are suggested. Nahas et al (1988b) have studied the
possibility of utilizing articulated blades (flaps) in low-speed windmills and examined
linkage configurations for suitability to flap articulation for the generation of power. It is
concluded that WM-2, equipped with a single 3 m2 flap, can deliver in excess of 200 W at a
16
winds peed of 9 m/s. The need to minimize system mass is emphasized. A vertical-axis
configuration is proposed, although horizontal axes are found to be admissible.
Khogali et al. (1991) studied wind and solar energy potential in Makkah and made
comparison with the data obtained from Red Sea coastal sites. A comparative study on the
availability of wind and solar power on the east coast of Saudi Arabia was made by AlSulaiman and Jamjoum (1992). Alnaser (1993) has considered statistical forecasting methods
to estimate the wind speed at a distance x and in direction from a reference point by using
data from 20 locations in Saudi Arabia. The correlation equation is tested by comparing with
the measured wind speed in Bahrain.
Sahin (1994) studied the wind power output from a horizontal axis type of small wind
energy conversion system rated at 100 kW at 20 sites in Saudi Arabia based on the study
made by Al-Ansari et al. (1986). He calculated the percent rated power for each site for both
Weibull and Rayleigh distributions. He showed that east and west coast areas are potentially
high wind energy areas, whereas minimal wind energy exists in the south and central parts of
the country. Sahin and Yilbas (1994) studied wind energy potential for the Dhahran site
analytically.
Rehman et al. (1994) calculated the shape and scale parameters of a Weibull density
distribution function of wind speed for 10 locations in Saudi Arabia. They used the daily
mean wind speed data from 1970 to mid-1990 for this purpose. They found that the numerical
values of the shape parameter vary between 1.7 and 2.7, whereas the value of the scale
parameter vary between 3 and 6. Statistical characteristics of wind in Saudi Arabia were
studied by Rehman and Halawani (1994).
Shaahid and Elhadidy (1994) analyzed the hourly wind-speed data for Dhahran to
determine monthly wind power. They also compared the wind power with the monthly mean
solar radiation energies for the period 1987-1990. The monthly average wind speeds for
Dhahran range from 4.46 to 6.89 m/s while the solar radiation varies from 3.46 to 7.43
kWhr/m2/day. They found that the annual maximum attainable wind power potential per unit
17
area of the wind stream is 543 kWhr/m2/year and the annual solar potential per unit area of
the earth surface is 2.03 MWhr/m2/year.
Sahin (1995) studied the plant factor variation with installation height for a 100 kW
wind energy conversion system. Alawaji (1996) discussed a research program in the Energy
Research Institute of the King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (ERI-KACST) to
study the potential of wind energy in Saudi Arabia. He presented a full description of the
equipment, instruments, site specifications and other technical needs to assess wind energy
project in Saudi Arabia. Similarly, Alawaji et al (1996) presented analysis of wind data from
five selected sites as well as preliminary evaluation of the potential of wind energy. They
recorded wind speed measurements at heights of 20, 30 and 40 meters, respectively, for a
period of several months at Ar-ar, Dhahran, Qassim, Riyadh and Yanbu. The frequency of
measurements was 30 minute at all the sites except Riyadh where wind speed data recorded
every 10 minutes.
Sahin and Aksakal (1998) and (1999) investigated the wind energy potential for the
northeastern and eastern region of Saudi Arabia based on a complete year data at coastal
locations. Suitable Weibull distributions were generated and comparisons were made with the
Rayleigh distributions of wind power densities. They considered two horizontal-axis type of
conversion system operating at fixed rpm in order to determine the extractable wind power.
They also used a quadratic output function between the cut-in speed and rated speed. First of
all, they showed that the error with the Rayleigh approximation was 10% less than the full
rated power density level. Furthermore, they concluded that small-scale wind energy systems
were suitable in the eastern part of Saudi Arabia for power generation and irrigation
purposes.
Mohandes et al (1998) has introduced neural networks technique for wind speed
prediction and compared its performance with an autoregressive model. They have studied
the statistical characteristics of mean monthly and daily wind speed in Jeddah. The stochastic
time series analysis is found to be suitable for the description of autoregressive model that
involves a time lag of one month for the mean monthly prediction and one day for the mean
18
daily wind speed prediction. The results on a testing data indicate that the neural network
approach outperforms the AR model as indicated by the prediction graph and by the root
mean square errors.
Al-Garni et al. (1999) studied and modeled the weather conditions and wind power in
the eastern part of Saudi Arabia using data collected over a period of 36 years (1961-1996).
Their study included temperature, relative humidity, fog, wind speed, wind power and dust
storms. They carried out a regression analysis technique to model the weather parameters.
Elhadidy and Shaahid (1999) analyzed hourly mean wind-speed and solar radiation
for the period of 1986-1993 recorded at Dhahran monitoring station and report the monthly
variation of wind speed and solar radiation, and probability distribution of wind speed. They
found that monthly average wind speeds were between 4.21 and 6.97 m/s, and monthly
average daily values of solar radiation were between 3.61 kwh/m2 and 7.96 kwh/ m2. They
considered a hybrid system consisting of two 10 kW wind energy conversion systems, 120
m2 of photovoltaic panels together with a battery storage and a diesel back-up system. They
reported monthly average daily energy generated from the hybrid system and the number of
operational hours of the diesel system to meet a specific annual demand of 41531 kWh. To
minimize the battery storage, the backup diesel system generates only 11% of the yearly
energy requirements.
The researchers have also become increasingly interested in combined utilization of
solar and wind energy. For example, Habib et al (1999) developed an optimization procedure
of a hybrid photovoltaic wind energy to satisfy the requirements of a given load distribution.
They applied a constant load of 5 kW required for cathodic protection in offshore platforms
and showed that the optimal solar/wind ratio was 70% with the minimum capital cost.
Sahin (2000) investigated the statistical correlation of wind and solar thermal power
availability in the northeastern part of the Arabian Peninsula. He developed simple models to
determine wind, solar, and hybrid power resources per unit area. Correlations between solar
and wind power data were carried out on hourly, daily, and monthly basis. The results of
19
correlations indicate that possible applications of hybrid systems could be considered for
efficient utilization of these resources.
Later, Elhadidy and Shaahid (2000) have studied the impact of key factors such as
photovoltaic (PV) array area, number of wind machines, and battery storage capacity on the
operation of hybrid system, while satisfying the above mentioned annual load. The monthly
average wind speeds for Dhahran range from 4.1 to 6.4 m/s. The monthly average daily
values of solar radiation for Dhahran range from 3.6 to 7.96 kWh/m2. Parametric analysis
indicates that large stand alone WECs or PV systems will be required to manage the peak
load in the months of August-November. Additionally, it is shown that with two 10 kW wind
machines together with three days of battery storage and photovoltaic deployment of 30 m2,
the diesel back-up system has to provide about 23% of the load demand. However, with
elimination of battery storage, about 48% of the load is needed to be provided by diesel
system.
Barth (2001) analyzed wind data obtained at two weather stations in the Eastern
Province of Saudi Arabia (Jabal Abu Kharuf and Abu Ali Island) during a two-year period
(September 1993 to November 1995). The data included wind speed and direction recorded
in 10 second intervals. Sand drift potential of the wind is considered. Concerning the sand
movement potential, six different wind regimes have been identified in a year:
1. high energy Mediterranean north-west regime from November to February,
2. bimodal cyclonic end-phase in March,
3. moderate eastern spring phase in April,
4. complex transition phase in May,
5. high energy summer Shamal region from June to August, and
6. low energy autumn phase in September and October.
He concluded that the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia is influenced by a unimodal wind
regime causing a sand flow from the north areas to the south.
In an ongoing investigation, Bolat and Yigit (2001), the previously collected wind
data has been evaluated for various wind systems. Typical performance curves are drawn for
20
these turbines, and optimal sizes and turbine types are identified. An economical model is
developed to analyze alternative operating policies for coupled systems. The rate of returns
estimated for certain prototype systems indicate that wind energy operated wind pumps can
be economically viable alternatives in certain parts of Saudi Arabia. Al-Shehri et al (2001)
have reported a study for supplying a remote village in Saudi Arabia with electric energy
using an alternative energy sources. The study considers the use of several options
comprising of standalone diesel, wind and solar standalone systems as well as the use of
hybrid diesel/wind/solar systems. The design parameters and system selection are highlighted
along with the preliminary results of the feasibility study.
Elhadidy (2002) has analyzed hourly wind-speed and solar radiation measurements at
Dhahran (2632' N, 5013' E) and investigated the feasibility of using hybrid (wind, solar and
diesel) energy conversion systems to meet the energy needs of twenty 2-bedroom houses.
The monthly average wind speeds range from 4.1 to 6.4 m/s and the monthly average daily
values of solar radiation range between 3.6 kWh/m2 and 7.96 kWh/m2. The performance of
hybrid systems consisting of different rated power wind farms, photovoltaic (PV) areas, and
storage capacities together with a diesel back-up are presented. The monthly average daily
energy generated from the above hybrid system configuration has been presented. The deficit
energy generated from the back-up diesel generator and the number of operational hours of
the diesel system to meet a specific annual electrical energy demand of 702,358 kWh has also
been presented.
Rehman et al (2003) have studied wind data at 20 locations in Saudi Arabia and
prepared wind duration curves to expose the duration of the availability of the wind in the
useful range of wind speed. For example, they have found that at the coastal cities such as
Dhahran, Al-Wajh, Jeddah, Yanbo and Gizan, more than 50% of the time, the wind is above
the minimum required speed. This figure slightly decreases for the other considered cities.
Additionally, they have considered 600 kW (N34), 1300 kW (N60) and 2500 kW (N80)
WEC systems manufactured by Nordex and determined cost of electrical energy generation
in various location in Saudi Arabia were determined. The cost of energy is found to decrease
as the size of wind turbines increase and the cost is found to be less at locations where
21
average wind speed is higher, such as Yanbo. The calculated cost of wind electricity varied
roughly between 2.5 and 10 cents/kWh in the sites they considered.
In another study, Elhadidy and Shaahid (2003) analyzed the same data mentioned
above, to investigate the potential of utilizing hybrid (wind + solar) energy conversion
systems to meet the load requirements of a typical commercial building. They showed that
with 30 10-kW WECS together with 150 m2 PV, and 3 days of battery storage, the diesel
back-up system has to provide 17% of the load demand and with the elimination of battery
storage, about 38% of the load needs to be provided by the diesel system.
Elhadidy, and Shaahid (2004a) have analyzed hourly mean wind-speed data for the
period 1986-1997 recorded at Dhahran and investigated the role of hybrid, wind and diesel,
energy conversion systems in meeting the load requirements of a typical commercial building
(with annual demand of 620,000 kWh). The study shows that with thirty 10 kW WECS and 3
days of battery storage, the diesel back-up system has to provide 19% of the load demand.
However, in the absence of battery storage, about 40% of the load needs to be provided by
the diesel system. In another work, Elhadidy, and Shaahid (2004b) have analyzed wind and
solar hybrid energy conversion systems to meet the load requirements of a typical
commercial building. The study shows that with 30 10-kW WECS together with 150 m2 PV,
and 3 days of battery storage, the diesel back-up system has to provide 17% of the load
demand. However, in the absence of battery storage, about 38% of the load needs to be
provided by the diesel system.
2.4
Wind Energy used for Water Pumping

Variations in wind speed, direction, and temperature, over both time and space, make
it difficult to harness any appreciable portion of a tremendous wind energy source with
reasonable economic costs. Wind energy storage and transmission are the most costly aspects
of wind energy systems. To circumvent this problem, water pumping has been proposed for
centuries. Below is a survey of related research in this aspect of the usage of wind energy.
Clark (1985) has considered hybrid systems because wind power alone normally may
have difficulty in supplying all of the energy needed for irrigation during the peak water-use
22
periods. Electrical wind-assist pumping systems can provide sufficient energy for irrigation
pumps of the same size with excess energy available in certain months depending on the
wind potential available. Batchelor and Dunn (1985) have assessed the four options of
electrical, mechanical, pneumatic, and hydraulic transmissions for the link between wind
turbine and pump in the light of the different water sources currently exploited in developing
nations. Locally manufactured wind pumps are intended for farmers who will draw their
water from streams or rivers which are either at the bottom of a valley or have a large flood
plain. The study has considered typical conditions encountered in the Rift Valley, Kenya.
Mueller and Jansen (1986) have discussed the efforts by the Consultancy Services
Wind Energy Developing Countries (CWD) of the Netherlands to promote the interest in
wind energy in developing countries. The aims are to help governments, institutions, and
private parties in the Third World with their efforts to utilize wind energy. The CWD has
developed a number of standard wind pump models and special versions with the aim to
enable local production. The analysis permits a quick, economic comparison of wind pumps
combined with storage tanks and Diesel pumps intended for use in small-scale irrigation.
Clark et al (1988) have evaluated the performance of independent wind electric
pumping systems, i.e., a wind turbine with a permanent-magnet alternator used to power
standard three-phase induction motors connected to water pumps. The wind turbine was rated
at 10 kW and produced a linear output of frequency between 30 and 90 Hz when alternator
speed changed from 85 to 275 rpm. The alternator provided a frequency of 60 Hz at 9.2 m/s
wind speed. A low head, high volume pump was thoroughly tested at several capacitances
and two pumping heads (5 m and 15 m). A high head, low volume pump was tested at 3
pumping heads (70, 88, 105 m) and one capacitance. A medium head, medium flow pump
was tested at a single head and capacitance. It was found that the motors operated at near the
same efficiency as when operated from utility power, but pump efficiency was reduced when
frequency exceeded 70 Hz.
Kamand and Clark (1988) have proposed and tested a variable stroke mechanism
which automatically varies the stroke length of a positive displacement pump with wind
23
speed. The mechanism uses two low pressure hydraulic cylinders to actuate the stroke control
device, as wind speed increases, the stroke length increases resulting in additional pumped
water. Because of the reduced starting torque requirement, the windmill is allowed to operate
at wind speeds below the cut-in speed for a standard unit. Results have showed that the cut-in
wind speed for the unit with the variable stroke was decreased by 1.5 to 2.5 m/s depending on
the pumping lift (10 to 30 m).
Tiwari et al (1989) have selected Gopalpur Meteorological Station situated in the
coastal belt of Orissa. The objectives are to determine the weekly amount of water that can be
lifted by a wind mill Apoly-12 PU 500 type and the size of the reservoir required for storing
water to supply assured irrigation under different probability levels. Orissa is a rural oriented
state having 27077 number of villages and it is located at latitude of 1916minutes N and
longitude of 8953minutes E. The study finds that the average wind speed is in the range of 9
to 28 kmph, the maximum wind energy is available during 12th to 24th week and the
maximum discharge is available during 9th to 37th week.
Sinha and Kandpal (1991) have computed the cost of irrigation water for two shallowwell, water-pumping windmill designs in India. An empirical relationship is established for
variation of the overall efficiency of the windmills with wind-speed. Weibull parameters are
computed for Indore, Madras and New Delhi and are used to estimate monthly overall
efficiencies, hydraulic outputs and the costs of delivered water.
Ushiyama and Pruwadi (1992) have proposed a simplified wind-powered water
pumping systems: Two Savonius type windmills with metal frame and with ratan frame, and
a Cretan type sailwing windmill were tested at a site in Kabupaten Kulonprogo of central
Java, in Indonesia. The test results in the field showed that the Cretan type sailwing windmill
could pump up 50-60l/min. of water when operated at the average wind velocity of 5m/sec,
while the Savonius type could pump up only 39-43l/min. of water at the same wind velocity.
The Cretan type windmill is cheaper to construct than the Savonius type and also it has a
good correspondence between the output of the windmill and the power requirement of the
rope type pump.
24
El Dam and Nagwa (1994) have made a comprehensive cost analysis of wind
pumping system both imported and locally made' versus diesel pumping systems is made.
Result of the practical experience made by Energy Research Institute during the last several
years and some private efforts are quantitatively used with emphasizes on the financialeconomic aspects. Smulders and de Jongh (1994) have reviewed the state of the art of wind
pumping, its applications, economics and potential.
Hammad (1995) has investigated the hybrid systems and found lower costs for both
the photovoltaic and mechanical wind pumping systems than diesel generation, and higher
costs for the electrical wind pumping system. The results from the sites studied revealed
lower costs for both the photovoltaic and mechanical wind pumping systems than diesel
generation, while higher costs were noted for the electrical wind pumping system. The
results of this study also showed that at low capacities it is more economical to use PVGS
than other methods. Islam et al (1995) have investigated the performance of sail-wing rotor
coupled to a diaphragm pump and found to be satisfactory in some region of Bangladesh.
Muljadi et al (1995) have analyzed a water-pumping system consisting of a wind turbine, a
permanent magnet synchronous generator, an induction motor, and a centrifugal-type water
pump.
Clark and Vick (1995) tested two different size wind turbines for pumping water at
the USDA - Agricultural Research Service, Bushland, Texas. One was a three-bladed 7.0-m
diameter wind turbine which was rated at 10 kW at a 12.1 m/s wind speed. The other was a
two-bladed 2.75-m diameter wind turbine which was rated at one kW at a 11.0 m/s wind
speed. Both wind turbines used a permanent magnet alternator to provide electrical power to
a motor which powered a submersible pump. Two different motors were tested. The 5.6 kW
motor had a 10 percent advantage in system efficiency over the 3.8 kW motor for the 10-kW
wind turbine. For the one kW wind turbine the maximum system efficiency was the same for
both the 0.38 kW and 0.56 kW motors, but occurred at different wind speeds.
25
FazlurRahman (1996) has concluded that wind speeds in the coastal regions of
Bangladesh are suitable for both water pumping and electricity generation. Muljadi et al
(1996) have analyzed a water-pumping system consisting of a wind turbine, a permanent
magnet synchronous generator, an induction motor, and a centrifugal-type water pump.
Vick and Clark (1997) have compared two wind-electric water pumping systems at a
simulated 30-m (98.4 ft) pumping depth. The have found that if the wind turbine of a windelectric system is on a 20 m tower, it will provide average more daily water volume than a
mechanical windmill on a 10 m tower for every month of the year at a 25% reduction in total
system cost (assuming Bushland wind regime). Abed (1997) has considered compressed air
storage is an attractive alternative to pumped water storage. The system consists of a wind
turbine, compressor, storage tank, and air-lift pump. The output power and capacity factor
were determined and characteristics of the air-lift pump were investigated by using a
numerical model. It was found that Wind turbines with compressed air storage and capacity
factors greater than 40% were feasible with air-lift pumps. The efficiency of the system
reached 22% when the ratio of water to air flow rate equaled 2.15 and decreased thereafter.
Mohsen and Akash (1998) have studied the annual amount of pumped water using
wind energy at eleven wind sites. The results show that these sites can be divided into three
categories. One is considered 'favorable' whose water output adds up to most of water
produced from all eleven sites combined (about 64%).
Others are considered to be
'promising', whose water output adds up to about to 28% of all water pumped at all sites
combined. The rest of sites considered are found to be 'poor', with much smaller amounts of
water output. Their combined water output adds up to less than 8% of all site combined.
Fraenkel et al (1999) has reviewed the general technical and economic requirements
for pumping water using wind energy and by way of example gives an overview of the
development of the new ITP wind-pump. It informs that more than a million windpumps
remain in regular use and then considers the future prospects for this kind of technology.
Panda and Clark (1999) have studied the wind-powered irrigation systems in Southern High
Plains of the United States to determine the effective factors and economic return conditions.
26
One electrical and two mechanical wind pumps were used at Bushland Texas under varying
conditions.
Omer (2000) has reported that about 50% of Sudan's area was suitable for generating
electricity and 75% was suitable for pumping water. Iniyan and Sumathy (2000) have
concluded that wind energy can be utilized for pumping end-use to an extent of 4% of total
renewable energy demand in India. Merzouk (2000) has proved that it was interesting to set
up some wind systems for agricultural applications in Algeria.
Al Suleimani and Rao (2000) have investigated the pump's output at different wind
speeds and monthly water output against average wind velocity and compared the results
with the design output values provided by the system manufacturer. Problems encountered in
meeting the irrigation requirements during periods of low wind are discussed and solutions
are proposed. The paper concludes by assessing and analyzing the role of wind power
amongst other renewable energy sources, in the abstraction and desalination of groundwater
supplies. Amelio and Bova (2000) have developed a laboratory test rig has to analyze the
mutual interaction of the different components of a low power WEPS, in the presence of
arbitrarily chosen wind intensity both at the start and under steady-state conditions. The
system is composed by a horizontal axis, fixed-pitch wind turbine, a synchronous generator
and a centrifugal electric pump. A control strategy of the alternator field voltage has been
defined, implemented on an electronic board and tested.
Valdes and Raniriharinosy (2001) have described wind power devices to give
satisfaction in specific material conditions, notably those in Madagascar. By using low
technical methods and in respecting the environment, three different versions, corresponding
to domestic, agricultural and light equipment needs, are worked out using a rational method
of dimensioning. Agamawy (2001) tested the ESES 2002 wind pump, a 4.6 m rotor diameter
high-performance water pumping windmill at four different sites (Cairo, Giza, Wadi El
Natroun and El-Tor city on the Red Sea coast) from September 1997 to July 1999. These
machines, utilizing a 3:1 gearbox and a hydrodynamic sealing piston pump, were tested by
pumping from a motionless water depth of 3 m up to an 84 m deep well. A variety of pump
27
diameter sizes varying from 64 to 1400 mm were used. The water pumped was returned to
the well after flowing through a settling storage tank having a capacity of 3 m3. The
instrumentation provided a 16 channel data acquisition system to accurately measure the
machine performance, including rotor rpm, number of stroke, starting wind speed, flow rate,
tail furl angle and other variables.
El-Haroun (2001) has studied the performances of Egyptian water pumps driven by
wind energy. He has reported that for a pump with a 4 m diameter, 0.3 m width, 0.36 m
height of inlet ports, 8 inlet ports and 0.4 m diameter exit port, it starts to rotate at a wind
speed of 2.58 m/s with a system efficiency of 98 % and the flow rate of this pump, for
example at 7 m/s wind speed, is found to be 263 m3/h. It is also found that a small rise in
wind speed causes a considerable increase in flow rate. For example, at 12.6 m/s wind speed
the flow rate, increases 24 times of its value at wind speed 4.4 m/s. It is also found that the
start wind speed decreases with the rise in the manometric head and the diameter of the exit
port and increases with the enlargement in the pump diameter and width.
Mathew et al (2002) have studied the performance of roto-dynamic pumps coupled
mechanically to wind rotors in shallow lift water pumping applications. A regenerative pump
was designed with a very low specific speed, so that, for a particular flow and lift, the shaft
need not rotate so fast. Performance of the pump was evaluated under variable operating
conditions. Power-speed characteristics of the pump at different pumping heads were
established and superimposed on those of a suitable wind rotor, to identify the points of
operation of the integrated rotor-pump system. Operating speeds of the system at different
wind speeds were estimated and then translated into discharge rates and overall system
efficiency. Harries (2002) has informed that a local company in Kenya has manufactured and
installed over 300 Kijito wind pumps both in Kenya and abroad. Using case studies of wind
pump installation projects, the article outlines the challenges facing the dissemination of
wind pumps in Africa and the benefits of wind pumps to rural and remote areas. Policy
options that may improve the dissemination and use of wind pumps are proposed.
Anyanwu and Ogueke (2003) have studied the design considerations for sizing wind
energy conversion system (WECS), pump and motor sub-systems of wind powered water
28
pumping facility for use in some communities in Nigeria. The results revealed that for
aerogenerator hub heights of 50 and 100 m the rotor diameters in the range of 11-31 m and 928 m, respectively, are required for a pump power of 1.10 kW. a city, with an altitude of
1286 m gave the most practicable size of WECS rotor diameter followed by cities with
altitudes of 196 m and 39 m.
Badran (2003) has presented a survey of wind turbine water-pumping applications in
Jordan, either by direct pumping through mechanical means, or indirectly by generating
electric power to drive pumps. The study recommends using wind energy to meet the energy
requirements for remote villages, settlements, and farms of Jordan.
2.5
Recent Simulation Studies

Auer (1985) has considered an American multi-bladed wind-pump with a turbine
diameter of 3 m, a lift of 15 m and a cylinder diameter of 0. 1 m. The system behavior was

simulated by means of computer program FWISO 81 using hourly weather and consumption
data came from a coastal region in Tunisia and from the shores of Lake Victoria in Kenya.
The load was taken to be the drinking- and domestic-water requirement of a community of
500 inhabitants and, on the irrigation side, a requirement of 60 m**3/d/ha was assumed.
Vogstad (1997) studied wind power influence on energy losses in electrical grid
system. He analyzed the hourly based wind and power measurements made during 19951996 at Vikna (Norway) wind power plant in order to model the wind powers influence on
the total energy system, using Netbas. He simulated four different cases of wind power sites
showing various reductions in energy losses. He showed that the best site gives a power loss
reduction equal to 10 % of the installed wind energy. Larger wind sites had little or no effect
on the energy grid losses relative to the installed capacity of wind power.
Miranda et al (1999) have proposed an isolated variable speed variable frequency
wind electric pumping system. Induction machines are used both in the generation unit as
well as in the pumping unit and a static VAR compensator is used for providing the
magnetizing currents of both machines. An indirect induction generator stator flux control
29
strategy is adopted. System steady state and dynamic operation is studied basing on
simulation and experimental results.
Ackermann et al. (1999) described a methodology which integrates different
computerized tools for the assessment of distributed renewable energy generation and used it
in a case study to consider the power quality issues. Their methodology is based on an
economic optimization tool that helps in considering the effects on energy utilization and
power quality. The simulation results are used to find the proper size and site which can
significantly improve power quality. They compare the simulation results against the real
time operation.
Muljadi et al (2000) have analyzed a wind-turbine water-pumping system, which
consists of a wind turbine with a permanent magnet generator electrically coupled with a
water pump via a motor-generator configuration. They have discussed the cut-in and cut-off
process in the system and supported the analysis with the simulation results obtained by using
the RPM-Sim simulator which was developed at the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory's National Wind Technology Center.
Manolakos (2001) developed and applied a software tool for designing hybrid
renewable energy systems. This hybrid system consists of a wind generator and photovoltaic
modules which are the renewable technologies for energy production. They applied this
program for simulating a hybrid system in order to cove the electricity and water needs of the
Merssini village on Dnonussa island in the Aegean Sea of Greece. The simulation program
was used to optimize the design of the system and to manage the energy supply and storage.
The results of their system proved that this simulation program constitutes a valuable tool for
the determination not only of the optimum combination of technologies but also the optimum
energy management of complex hybrid systems.
Thiaw et al (2002) have presented a software with graphical user interfaces to analyze
wind energy potential from the wind speeds values, based on the model of Weibull with two
parameters. The study of Dakar for two years with hourly data shows that the average speed
of the wind is equal to 4.9 m/s, the Weibull model (c=5.53 m/s and k=3.60 respectively) is
30
appropriate to determine the probability density distribution of the wind speed, and the total
recoverable energy is 721kWh/m/year. The standard aero-generator, used for simulation
shows that an amount of energy of 2600 kWh/year can be produced with a maximum
production of 415 kWh during the month of April.
Bakos (2002) considered the operation of a hybrid wind/hydro power system aiming
at producing low cost electricity and analyzed a specific application on the island of Ikaria in
Greece. He presented typical results and compared them to the results obtained from a
simulation program. In the simulation program, the monthly wind speed distribution is used
as input data to simulate the stochastic behavior of the weather conditions.
Murakami, et al. (2003) studied the development of a numerical prediction model,
based on computational wind engineering, to predict wind energy distribution of a local area.
In this respect they designed a multi-step wind simulation with nesting method. Then they
evaluated and coded each sub-model. For the verification of the computational results, they
used experimental observation. Finally, they tested and examined the performance of the
entire simulation system by comparing its results with the experimental data. They developed
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models for meteorological phenomena and building
scale phenomena for large as well as small areas.
Iqbal (2003) described simulation results of 500 W wind duel cell hybrid energy
system and presented dynamic modeling of the various components of this system using
Simulink. Then, he analyzed the simulation results and discussed the limitations of a wind
fuel cell hybrid energy system.
Koch et al. (2003) considered the effect of large wind parks on the frequency of the
interconnected system on which they are operating. They expanded the features of the widely
used power system simulation package Power System Dynamics (PSD) to include the
simulation of all commonly used wind generators and their control structures and their
interaction. They also incorporated into the simulation, the landscape and atmospheric
31
condition at the location of the wind unit on the output power. Their results revealed that the
stochastic nature of the wind power output causes significant frequency fluctuation.
3
AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI ARABIA

This is a basic introduction to the past and current agricultural activities and water
resources in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This part starts with a brief summary of
traditional agriculture and pastoral nomadic movements, continues by discussing the
characteristics of the current situation and ends with a discussion on water resources in the
Kingdom.
3.1
Traditional Agriculture
In the past, the bulk of agricultural production was concentrated in a few limited areas
so that the produce was largely retained by the local communities and surplus was sold to the
cities. Nomads played a crucial role in this regard, shipping foods and other goods between
the widely dispersed agricultural areas. Livestock rearing was shared between the sedentary
communities and nomads, who also used it to supplement their precarious livelihoods.
Lack of water has always been the major constraint on agriculture and the major
factor on where cultivation occurred. The kingdom has no lakes or rivers. Rainfall is slight
and irregular over most of the country. Only in the southwest, in the mountains of Asir, close
to the Yemen border and accounting for 3 percent of the land area, was rainfall sufficient to
support regular crops. This region plus the southern Tihamah coastal plains sustained
subsistence farming. Cropping in the rest of the country was scattered and dependent on
irrigation. Along the western coast and in the western highlands, groundwater from wells and
springs provided adequate water for self supporting farms and, to some extent, for
commercial production. Moving east, in the central and northern parts of the interior, Najd
and An Nafud, some groundwater allowed limited farming. The Eastern Province supported
the most extensive plantation economy. The major oasis centered around Al Qatif, which
enjoyed high water tables, natural springs, and relatively good soils.
During the late 1970s and early 1980s, the government introduced a multifaceted
program to modernize and commercialize agriculture. Indirect support involved substantial
32
expenditures on infrastructure, which included electricity supply, irrigation, drainage,

secondary road systems, and other transportation facilities for distributing and marketing
produce. Land distribution was also an integral part of the program.
The Saudi government mobilized substantial financial resources to support the raising
of crops and livestock. For example, loans were given for well drilling and casing, for
agricultural projects, and for the purchase of farm machinery, pumps, and irrigation
equipment. The government also implemented procurement programs for purchasing locally
produced wheat and barley at guaranteed prices for domestic sales and exports. The
procurement price was always was substantially higher than international prices. By the late
1980s, the procurement price for wheat, for example, was three times the international price.
Later, procurement and import subsidies on certain crops have been shifted to encourage a
more diversified production program. Finally, agricultural and water authorities provided
massive subsidies in the form of low-cost desalinated water, and electric companies were
required to supply power at reduced charges.
Eventually, the programs prompted a huge response from the private sector, with
average annual growth rates well above those programmed. Private investments went mainly
into expanding the area planted for wheat. Between 1983 and 1990, a 35 percent increase in
yields per ton during this period further boosted wheat output; total production rose from 1.4
million tons per year in FY 1983 to 3.5 million tons in FY 1989. Other food grains also
benefited from private investment. For example, output growth rates for sorghum and barley
accelerated even faster than wheat during the 1980s, although the overall amount produced
was much smaller. During the 1980s, farmers also experimented with new varieties of
vegetables and fruits but with only modest success. More traditional crops, like onions and
dates, did not fare as well and their output declined or remained flat.
3.2
Current Situation in Agriculture

Abderrahman (2001) states that the land used for agriculture increased from 0.4
million ha in 1971 to 1.62 million ha in 1992 with a major increase in 1979. To put the size
of the current agriculture sector in perspective, only 0.8% of the whole surface area of Saudi
Arabia is farmed. This equates to about 9% of the farmed area of the UK. All agricultural
33
areas are intensively irrigated with a considerable climatic range, from tropical in the far
south, through extreme desert conditions in the central area, to hot summers and cold winters
of almost Mediterranean type in the north. The main agricultural regions are: Al-Ahsa in the
Eastern Region, Hail and Qaseem in the North Central Region, Tabuk and Al Jouf in the
North Western Region, Al Kharj in Riyadh Region, Wadi Dawasir and Asir in the Southern
Region.
Economists estimate that the total value of investment in the agricultural sector is
about US$28 billion. The sector employs about 5.5% of all manpower in the country. Total
area of farmed land is about 5 million hectares and the total suitable for farming is about 50
million hectares. According to Ministry of Agriculture statistics published in 2001 the open
areas producing grain and fodder is about 955,000 hectares, the area for vegetables is about
162,000 hectares, the area for fruits is about 146,000 hectares and the area for dates about
106,000 hectares.
The business structure of framing is quite stratified. The first group is the large
farming companies, which are huge operations by any standard; the largest NADEC
(National Agricultural Development Co) has 42,000 hectares with 700 center pivots and 500
wells. Below is a list of the largest farming companies in the country (both joint stock and
privately owned):
NADEC (National Agricultural Development Company); products include

fresh milk and dairy products and fruits and vegetables.
TADCO (Tabuk Agricultural Development Company) products include

fresh fruits and vegetables and honey.
HADCO (Hail Agricultural Development Company);products include

fresh fruits and vegetables and poultry.
ASTRA Agricultural Company Ltd.; products include fresh fruits &

vegetables, quail, flowers and honey , jams and frozen vegetables.
JADCO (Al-Jouf Agricultural Development Company); products include

fresh fruits & vegetables, olives, olive oil and grains
Al Safi Dairy; the largest integrated dairy farm in the world.
Al Marai Dairy; fresh milk and processed dairy products and juices.
34
Al Watania Farms; Poultry (live and slaughtered), eggs, fresh fruits and
vegetables and fish farms.
Al Othman Agricultural Produce & Processing Establishment (NADA), a

leading dairy farm with more than 14,000 cows, a leading producer of
juices and tomato paste.
The others are smaller but are in the size range of 10,000 to 20,000 hectares. The
second group is large private companies with 1,000 to 10,000 hectares. The final group
comprises the majority of farms that are owned by local Saudi businessmen and farmers
which are mainly in the size range from 50 to 500 hectares.
3.3
Water Needs and Resources

Abderrahman (2001) states that the land used for agriculture increased from 0.4
million ha in 1971 to 1.62 million ha in 1992 with a major increase in 1979. Consequently,
the total water demand for irrigation increased from 1,850 million m3 in 1980 to 16,406
million m3 in 1997 (see Table 3.1).
Table 3.1: Agricultural Water Demand in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (million m3)
1980
1990
1992
1997
2000
2010
1,850
25,589
29,826
16,406
11,200P
14,700P
projected
With no rivers and lakes and only 100 millimeters of annual rainfall, most of the
water demand, 95-97 %, is supplied from surface water, shallow and deep aquifers, and nonrenewable ground water (see Table 3.2).
Table 3.2: Available Water Capacity in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (million m3)
Year
1990
1992
1997
Surface Water and Shallow Aquifers
2,100
2,140
2,140
Non-renewable Groundwater
24,489
28,576
15,376
35
Mining groundwater refers to the withdrawal of water from underground at rates that
greatly exceed recharge rates. Ninety percent of the water Saudi Arabia uses comes from
underground reserves, virtually all of which were filled thousands of years ago and have
negligible annual recharge today. The Saudi government nonetheless encourages
groundwater mining by subsidizing large-scale domestic production of several crops, because
it places a higher priority on self-sufficiency in food production than on the sustainable use of
water.
In 1992, the government spent more than $2 billion in subsidies for the domestic
production of four million tons of wheat, which could have been purchased on the world
market for a fifth of that price. Estimates of the lifespan for Saudi fossil water reserves vary
widely, with one estimate suggesting they could run out early in the next century. The
country's population of 17.5 million is projected to climb past 40 million by 2025, by which
time groundwater mining may no longer be a realistic option.
The total number of drilled wells increased from 26,000 in 1982 to 85,000 in 1997.
As the demand for irrigation water increases the number of wells increases. Consequently,
the amount of the ground water decreases or the average depth of wells increases. Another
aspect of this phenomenon is the amount of energy needed to extract water. The depth of
wells ranges from less than 100 m to about 850 m. The average depth of water pumped from
wells ranges from 15 m to about 180 m, with an average of about 80 m inside the well.
The water is mostly pumped using mechanical energy produced by pumps driven by
electricity generated from diesel generators. The required energy for each pumped unit of
water ranges from 0.4 to 0.8 kWh/m3. The electrical energy used to pump 24,489 million m3
water in 1990 ranged from 9.79 to 1.58 million MWh. In 1997, the pumped groundwater was
reduced to 15,376 million m3 and the required energy was between 6.15 to 12.3 million
MWh.
36
RECENT STUDIES ON WIND AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI
ARABIA
Wind has been used as a traditional energy source for centuries and is still commonly
used in many developing countries. As a result of modern technological developments wind
turbines were improved considerably during the recent decades. The wind has become an
attractive energy source, especially in parts of the world where the transmission infrastructure
is not fully developed.
There have been a number of studies in Saudi Arabia on the issues of wind energy
potential, water demand, water resources and availability and underground water pumping.
Some of the most recent ones are discussed in the following.
Alawaji et al. (1995) studied water pumping and desalination plant for remote areas in
Saudi Arabia using PV-powered submersible pump systems. Due to high insolation
intensities in Saudi Arabia, this solar energy is found to be an attractive source of energy for
the water pumping application. Hussain and Al-Saati (1999) investigated the wastewater
quality and its reuse in agriculture in Saudi Arabia. The total amount of wastewater available
according to the references given is around 1.32 million m3/d. They showed that use of
wastewaters in Saudi Arabia as a supplemental irrigation has not only increased crop
production, water use and nitrogen use efficiencies but also served as a source of plant
nutrients. They also found that the use of wastewater can save up to 50% application of
inorganic nitrogen fertilizer.
Al-Sofi (2001) discussed the seawater desalination in Saudi Arabia. With the increase
of water demand and emphasis on desalination technology due to shortage of underground
resources in the kingdom, the government of Saudi Arabia established the Saline Water
Conversion Corporation (SWCC) in 1974. Since the SWCC has grown and become the
authority to look after all matters related to seawater desalination. At present SWCC has 27
plants producing 668MGD of desalinated water and 4115MW of electricity from existing
operating plants. Additional four plants with a total capacity of 218MGD of water and
999MW of electrical power are under construction.
37
Bremere et al. (2001)
discussed the effect of water scarcity on the growth of
desalination market. They concluded that the desalination capacity exceeds 210 times the
renewable groundwater resources in Qatar, Kuwait, Malta and Saudi Arabia, 1050% in
Libya and Barbados, and less than 0.5% in Jordan, Yemen and Singapore. In their study, a
population growth from 51116 million, 19952025, was assumed to be the driving force
determining the need for desalination in order to maintain the current urban municipal
domestic water consumption (an average of 0.265 m3/cap/d) in these countries. By 2000, a
total sea and brackish water desalination capacity of 7.3 million m3/d was installed for
municipal purposes in these countries. This indicated a growth in the desalination capacity of
1.9 million m3/d, 35%, between 1995 and 2000. By 2025, the growth in the municipal water
desalination market will need to reach 14.8 million m3/d, 200%, to maintain the current
urban municipal domestic water needs and to prevent any decline in renewable groundwater
resources in the 10 water scarce countries selected in their study. Haddadin (2002) discussed
the issue of challenges and opportunities of water in the Middle East. He stated that there are
shared water bodies in the form of trans-boundary groundwater aquifers, some of which are
renewable and others are non-renewable aquifers containing fossil water.
Al-Ajlan et al. (2005) studied developing sustainable energy policies for electrical
energy conservation in Saudi Arabia. They found that electrical energy consumption in Saudi
Arabia increased sharply during the last two decades due to rapid economic development and
the absence of energy conservation measures. Peak loads reached nearly 24 GW in 200125
times their 1975 leveland are expected to approach 60 GW by 2023. The total investment
needed to meet this demand may exceed $90 billion. Consequently, they suggested that there
is an urgent need to develop energy conservation policies for sustainable development.
Abu Rizaiza and Al-Osaimy (1996) studied the irrigation water usage in western
Saudi Arabia using a statistical approach. Their approach describes the variation in water
requirements as a function of regional climatic parameters, types of crop grown and irrigation
techniques used. They calculated the irrigation water requirements for comparison purposes,
taking leaching requirements and losses into consideration.
38
Barth (2001) analyzed the characteristics of the wind regime north of Jubail, Saudi
Arabia using high resolution wind data. Rehman et al. (2002) investigated wind power cost at
twenty locations in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia covering the eastern, central, and western
regions.
Al-Abbadi (2004) studied wind energy resource assessment for five locations in Saudi
Arabia namely, Dhulom, Arar, Yanbu, Gassim and Dhahran. The five sites represent different
geographically and climatologically conditions. The data collected in his study span over a
period between 1995 and 2002 with different collection periods for each site. He showed that
Dhulom and Arar sites have higher wind energy potential with annual wind speed average
of 5.7 and 5.4 m/s and speeds higher than 5 m/s for 60 and 47% of the time, respectively. The
two sites are considered to be candidates for remote area wind energy applications. He also
showed that the costal sites, i.e. Yanbu and Dhahran have lower annual wind speed averages
and wind blows at speed higher than 5 m/s during afternoon hours. He concluded that the two
sites are candidates for grid connected wind systems for electrical load peak shaving.
According to his investigation, the data of Gassim site showed that the site has the lowest
wind energy potential compared to the others.
Alnatheer (2005) investigated the potential contribution of renewable energy to
electricity supply in Saudia Arabia. He concluded that, when some of the non-market benefits
of renewable energy are also included in the assessment of their overall costs and benefits, a
supply expansion plan that includes wind and solar resources can provide energy services for
the Kingdom at a lower societal cost than a "Business-as-usual" plan utilizing only fossilfueled generating resources.
39
WATER PUMPING
5.1
Introduction
Water is a primary necessity of life for mankind. Some methods for water delivery
have been known for thousands of years. The simplest and most economical way is to divert
rain or river water by a gravity flow system to the desired location. This method is not
applicable in much of the world, at least not on a regular or demand basis. Where this is not
possible, manual pumping has been the most common method for many years. Their use is
essential for water supply, especially for human consumption, throughout the world.
Mechanical wind water pumping machines have been used to pump water from wells
for centuries. Mechanical wind-pumps are probably the best choice for using wind energy
when the annual average wind speed is less than 4 m/s. However, they suffer from several
important weaknesses. As a system they require regular maintenance, not so much for the
windmill itself, but for the seals on the pumps. In addition, the mechanical linkage to the
pump requires that the windmill be placed directly over the water source. In some situations
this is physically difficult and in others it means that the windmill can not be placed so as to
capture the most wind.
A wind electric pumping system overcomes some of the problems with the
mechanical wind water pump systems. This system generates electricity, which, in turn, runs
an electric pump. Wind electric pumping systems allow greater sitting flexibility, higher
efficiency of wind energy conversion, increased water output, increased versatility in use of
output power, and decreased maintenance and life-cycle costs.
Although manual pumping has been used widely, moving large volumes of water
and/or pumping from deep wells cannot be done effectively with hand pumps, but requires
the use of mechanical pumps powered by engines or electric motors. Engine-powered
systems are providing water to larger communities throughout the world. The infrastructure
of the large communities can provide the fuel and maintenance required by the engines.
There are also many thousands of solar-powered systems in the world today; powered by
40
wind generators or photovoltaic (PV) arrays (Thomas, 1996). Diesel, gasoline, and kerosene
pumps (including windmills) have traditionally been used to pump water. However, reliable
solar (photovoltaic [PV]) and wind turbine pumps are now emerging on the market and are
rapidly becoming more attractive than the traditional power sources (Argaw, 2003).
5.2
Water Demand
The designer of a water system needs to know the volume of water required per day
and how far the water is to be transported and, for wind-powered systems, the amount of
energy available from the wind. Three different needs should be considered to determine the
quantity of water to be pumped by a water system:
1
Water for drinking and cooking
Water for livestock
Water for crop irrigation.
Human and animal water needs can be estimated by multiplying the daily usage by the
population. Typical daily requirements for farm animals are shown in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Typical daily water consumption for farm animals (Argaw, 2003)
Type of Animal
Daily Water Consumption

(L/animal)
Dairy cows
Beef brood cows
Horses and mules
Calves
Sheep and goats
Chickens
Determining water needs for humans is somewhat more complicated because water
usage varies based on village size, location, and lifestyle. For planning the introduction of
mechanical pumping systems into a village currently using hand pumps, a daily usage of 40
41
liters/person/day is suggested. For a larger town, where indoor toilets and showers are more
common, a consumption figure of 100 liters/person/day is often used.
The capacity required of the pump in a house is determined by the number of
continuously flowing demands (showers, sprinkling, filling a tub or stock trough, etc.) which
are likely to be in use at the same time with consideration given to a minimum rate of flow
from each of these outlets which can be considered as satisfactory. Table 5.2 shows the
approximate water supply requirements for a house.
Table 5.2: Approximate water supply requirements (www.goulds.com).
Home Fixtures
Yard Fixtures
Filling Ordinary Lavatory
2 gal.
12" Hose with Nozzle
3 gpm
Filling avg. Bath Tub
30 gal.
34" Hose with Nozzle
5 gpm
Flushing Water Closet
6 gal.
Lawn Sprinkler
2 gpm
Each Shower Bath
Up to 60 gal.
Dishwashing Machine
15 gal./load
Automatic Laundry Machine
Up to 50 gal./load
Backwashing Domestic Water Up to 100 gal.

Softener
It is more complex to estimate the water requirements for an irrigation application.
Crop type, meteorological factors (temperature, humidity, wind speed, and cloud cover),
method of irrigation, and season of the year are the principal factors to be considered. Unlike
demands for domestic and livestock water supplies, water demand for crop irrigation is
seasonal. Because some crops require a maximum water supply for a relatively short growing
season, all irrigation systems need to be designed for peak water demands.
Generally, water demand for irrigation varies from crop to crop and changes with the
type of soil, soil preparation and irrigation methods, rainfall regimes, and other
meteorological factors (temperature, humidity, wind speed, and cloud cover). Estimating the
42
water demand for an irrigation application is complex and is beyond the scope of this report.
However, local practice and experience are probably the best guides to estimating water
requirements for a specific application. Table 5.3 shows the estimated daily water
requirements for various types of crop irrigation (Argaw, 2003).
Table 5.3: Estimated maximum daily water demand for various types of crop irrigation
(Argaw, 2003).
Crops
Daily Water Requirement

(m3/ha)
Rice
100
Rural village farms
60
Cereals
45
Sugar cane
65
Cotton
55
Water usage is the first requirement to be determined. If water usage varies over the
year, the mean daily water requirements for each month must be calculated. For drinking and
livestock watering, water needs will be about the same every month, but water needs for crop
irrigation vary over the growing season.
The size of the wind turbine required for water delivery depends on the average daily
volume of water required, the total pumping head, the average wind speed, and the system
efficiency. Seasonal water demand is also an important concern in agriculture. Figure 5.1
shows optimum water requirement for three types of fruit and nut trees analyzed for using
wind-electric drip irrigation systems. The demand is a maximum during the summer months
when the precipitation is usually low.
43
Figure 5.1: Optimum water required for three types of fruit and nut trees analyzed for
using wind-electric drip irrigation systems (Vick et al. 2000).
5.3
Water Production
The amount of water produced by the well, like the amount of water needed by a
village, is one of the most important factors in the design of a pumping system. The water in
the well does not always stay at the same level throughout the year. A correctly operating
pumping system should not exceed the wells production. For example, if a well can produce
only 0.5 liter/s, a pumping system capable of pumping twice that amount will only pump the
well dry. For that reason, and for future planning, it is important to know how much water a
well can produce. (In the illustrative example, the productivity of the well is presumed to be
known. If new wells are required, the hydrology of the site must be assessed.)
44
Total Dynamic Head (TDH) = A + B + C + Pipe Friction

Total Static Head (TSH) = A + B
Pipe
Storage Tank
Ground level
B
Well
Static water level
C
Drawdawn level
Pump
Figure 5.2: Definitions of total static and dynamic heads

5.4
Underground Water Resource

The source of underground water or a well is often referred to as shallow or deep. A
shallow well is one where the water is within 25 feet of the ground surface. A deep well is
where the static water level is more than 25 feet down. The standing water level in a well is
called the static level. This is the water level when the pump is not operating. When the pump
comes on and is running there often is a change in the water level. This is referred to as
drawdown. The drawdown occurs and the water level reaches what is referred to as the
pumping level. This is the operating level of the pump. The lowest level to which the water
will drop is the level from which it must be pumped.
5.4.1
Water Capacity of a Well
45
The amount of water that can be produced by the well is one of the most important
factors in the design of a pumping system. A correctly operating pumping system should not
exceed the wells production. For that reason it is important to know how much water a well
can produce.
There are techniques commonly used to determine the amount of water a well can
produce. The method presented here will work with both shallow, hand-dug wells and deeptube wells. To perform this test, a portable pump is needed that is capable of pumping at a
rate at least as high as the peak required rate. A means is needed for measuring the water
level in the well either a measuring rule or a line with knots tied every half-meter, for
example. First, the depth-to-water in the well (the static water level) is measured. The pump
is installed and let it pump water until the water level stabilizes. Now, with the pump still
operating, the depth-to-water is measured again. To ensure that the level has stabilized, it is
checked at several time intervals. Now, the water flow rate is measured by filling a container
of known volume and measuring the time required to do so.
5.5
Static and Dynamic Heads

Static head is the distance from the static water level in the well to the top of the tank
where the water is stored or the highest point to which it will be pumped. In a potable water
system, the water is usually stored in a tank high enough for gravity to feed the water at
pressure to the users (Figure 5.2). If a pressure tank is used instead of gravity feed tank, 1
kg/cm2 of positive pressure in the tank is equal to 10 m of static head. In an irrigation or
livestock-watering system, a surface level tank or reservoir is frequently used.
When the well is pumped, the water level drops (drawdown), and the water being
pumped through the pipe causes frictional losses. These additional factors make up the total
dynamic head (TDH). TDH is the sum of the static head, the drawdown distance, and the
distance equivalent of the friction of the water in the pipe. Since drawdown and friction
losses are both dependent on the pumping rate, TDH should always be specified at a
particular flow rate. The higher the flow rate is, the larger the TDH.
46
Pipe frictional losses are based on the inside diameter of the pipe (the larger the pipe,
the lower the friction loss), the pipe length, the number and kinds of bends in the pipe, and
the flow rate. In a wind powered system, it is important to keep friction as low as possible.
Typical frictional head losses for 1.5-inch diameter pipe of different material and flow rate
are given in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4: Frictional head losses of 1.5-inch pipes
Flow Rate
(gal/min)/(1/sec)
./
./
./
./
./
. /
. /
./
./
./
./
./
./
./
./
5.6
Friction Losses in Head (ft) per 100 ft of

1.5-inch Pipe
Steel
Copper
Plastic
0.57
0.36
0.31
0.96
0.61
0.52
1.45
0.92
0.79
2.04
1,29
1.10
2.95
1.86
1.59
5.24
3.31
2.83
7.90
5.00
4.26
11.1
7.00
6.00
18.9
12.0
10.2
28.5
14.9
15.4
40.0
25.3
21.6
53.2
33.9
28.7
68.1
43.1
36.8
84.7
53.6
45.7
103
65.1
56.6
Selection of Pumping Equipment

The best type of equipment for a particular pumping application depends on daily
water requirement; pumping head, suction lift, and water source (e.g., tube well or open
well). Generally, positive displacement pumps are best for low flows (under 15 m3/day) and
high heads (30-500 m). Submersible centrifugal pumps are best for high flow rates (25-100
m3/day) and medium heads (10-30 m). Self-priming pumps should be investigated for high
flow rates and low heads (less than 5 m). Figure 5.3 presents the most suitable pump types for
the different ranges of head and flow when using wind power.
47
Figure 5.3: Suitable pumping equipment versus pumping requirement (M.G. Thomas,
1996)
Hand pumps are well suited to needs for small volumetric flow rates at low-to
moderate head (less than 100 m4 per day). For large volumetric flow rates and high head (>
1,000 m4 per day), engines are required (Figure 5.4).
48
Figure 5.4: Selection of pumps for different pumping loads (Smulder, 1996)
5.7
Water Storage
Water storage is an important consideration, regardless of the intended use for the
water. Storage is necessary for good water management. Water storage design is different for
village water supplies, livestock watering, and irrigation. Storage for livestock water is
generally designed so animals can drink directly from the tank which is usually an open steel
or concrete structure. The size of storage area depends on the number of livestock. Generally,
35 days storage is recommended.
Designing water storage for domestic water supply requires an understanding of end
users, the geographical location, the power resource, and the availability of other water
sources. If the end users are economically disadvantaged, water consumption will generally
be very low. But if the climate is hot and humid, water consumption can be high. The
available power resource must be considered when determining storage size. The size of
water tanks for conventional systems depends only on the peak and average daily water
demand. However, for PV and wind pumps, local weather conditions are also important
considerations.
Pumps without batteries will not produce any water when the wind speed is low. This
is least troublesome in those places where the water is for irrigation. Several days water
49
storage in a tank or reservoir is recommended. Three days is a typical storage size, but local
weather conditions and water use should determine the optimum size to meet the needs.
5.8
Batteries
A pump powered by wind generator supplies water during windy hours only, unless
storage batteries are included. Introducing batteries into the wind-powered pumping system
may decrease its reliability and increase its maintenance requirements. The inclusion of
batteries is justified when the maximum yield of the well during windy hours is insufficient
to meet the daily water requirement; alternatively, a new well could be dug.
5.9
Water Distribution
To distribute water fairly to the rural community, pumping it first to the tank and then
distributing it from the tank by using gravity is recommended. This way, enough pressure can
be built up at the water tank to distribute water by gravity. In addition, water will
continuously flow in the tank, which helps to reduce the growth of bacteria. Finally, this
helps maintain any leakage with little water loss and few interruptions to other distribution
areas. However, distribution pipes must be sized carefully because smaller pipes create more
friction than bigger pipes. Because oversized distribution pipes will raise the investment costs
of the system, there are tradeoffs.
50
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER PUMPS

Commercially available pumps can be classified into two basic types:
1. Positive displacement (volumetric) pumps
2. Rotodynamic pumps
Selection of a pump for a particular pumping application depends on the daily water
requirement, pumping head, suction head (for surface mounted pump-sets), and the water
source. In general, positive displacement pumps are used for low flow rates (less than 15
m3/d) and submersible rotodynamic (centrifugal) pumps are used for high flow rates (25100
m3/d).
6.1
Positive Displacement (volumetric) Pumps

In these pumps a sealed quantity of water is mechanically advanced by using several
mechanisms such as pistons, cylinders, and elastic diaphragms. Positive displacement pumps
can be classified into two types:
1. submersible (diaphragm)
2. non-submersible (jack, piston, and rotary vane).
Among these pumps, the most common one is the jack pump. All positive displacement
pumps have seals or mating surfaces that can wear. Therefore they require regular
maintenance to replace or repair worn parts.
6.1.1
Submersible (diaphragm) pumps

Submersible positive displacement (diaphragm) pumps are often used for small
pumping applications, such as pumping small quantities of water from deeper wells or water
tanks. These pumps generally use DC motors.
6.1.2
Jack pumps
Jack pumps operate much like windmills except that they are powered by electric
motors. In this type of pumps, the reciprocating jack is connected by a long sucker rod to a
cylinder. These pumps are generally used for medium applications at medium depth.
51
6.1.3
Piston pumps
Piston pumps are generally connected to a surface-mounted motor and used to pump
water from shallow wells, surface water sources, and pressurized storage tanks, or through
long pipes. The suction head in this type of pumps is limited to 6 meters.
6.1.4
Rotary vane pumps

Rotary vane (helical rotor) pumps operate according to a displacement principle for
lifting or moving water by using a rotating form of dispenser. They are mostly surfacemounted because of suction head limitations. The suction head is limited to 6 meters.
Positive displacement (volumetric) pumps are not a good match to the output of PV
and wind (electric) systems because of their operational characteristics. The electric motor
driving a volumetric pump requires a constant current for a given head. However, the current
produced in a wind turbine varies almost linearly wind speed.
6.2
Rotodynamic Pumps
Rotodynamic pumps operate by using a spinning impeller or rotor to propel water.
These pumps are good for pumping large volumes of water at low to medium heads. They are
fairly tolerant of dirty water because they do not have seals or mating surfaces to wear and
therefore require relatively low maintenance.
Depending on the design of impellers, Rotodynamic pumps can be classified as
axial flow (propeller) pumps,
radial flow (centrifugal) pumps, and
mixed flow (vertical turbine) pumps.
6.2.1
Axial flow pumps

Axial flow (propeller) pumps are most suitable for irrigation purposes. They are
generally designed for large flows at low heads.
52
6.2.2
Radial flow pumps

Radial flow (centrifugal) pumps are available with either AC or DC motors.
Depending on the requirement they can be

surface-mounted,
floated, or
submersible.
The surface-mounted centrifugal pump and the motor are mounted above the water
source with an intake suction pipe. The suction head for the surface-mounted pumps is at
most 6 meters. The pumps and motors of submersible centrifugal pumps are submerged in the
well.
The operational characteristics of radial flow (centrifugal) pumps are suitable with PV
and wind systems. They can be directly coupled by carefully choosing the motor speed,
voltage, coupling ratio, and pump characteristics. They can be used for lifting medium to
large volumes of water (up to about 200 m3/d) from shallow to deep wells (up to 200 meters).
6.2.3
Mixed flow pumps

Mixed flow (vertical turbine) pumps are made of submerged stacked impellers
powered by a long drive shaft from a surface-mounted motor. These pumps are not suitable
for use with surface water sources. They are best used in wells of shallow to moderate depth.
6.3
MotorPump Subsystems
The motorpump subsystem consists of the motor, the pump, and the couplings. The
most common commercially available configurations of motorpump subsystems are

Positive displacement (volumetric) pump.
Surface mounted motorpump unit.
Floating motorpump.
Submerged centrifugal pump with surface mounted motor.
Submerged motorpump (submersible centrifugal motorpump) unit.
53
Selection of pumps and motors used for water pumping application depends on the
daily water requirement, the pumping head, the suction head (for surface mounted units), and
the water resource.
The optimum efficiency for an electrical motor is about 85%; for the pump about
70%; and for the suction and delivery pipe about 80%. Therefore, the efficiency of a motor
pump subsystem generally varies between 40% and 60% depending on the motor, pump, and
power transmission.
54
WIND TURBINEPUMP SYSTEMS
7.1
Main Components
The main components of a wind energy pumping system are as follows:
Windmill
The main component of a wind energy conversion system is the windmill. A system
of blades mounted on a tower is turned by the wind to either produce mechanical work
directly, usually in the form of a water pump, or to use a generator to transform that
mechanical work into electrical energy.
Towers
To access the best wind resource, windmills and wind turbines are usually placed on
high towers.
Pump/Motor
The selection of the pump is based on the pumping head and flow requirement, wind
turbine electrical output, and site conditions. Submersible pumps are most commonly used
for drilled wells. At low heads and for surface water sources, horizontal- axis centrifugal
pumps can also be used.
Storage
The most common storage device for electrical energy is the lead-acid battery. There
is also need to arrange for storage of the pumped water.
Energy Converters
An electronic component to convert direct current (DC) electricity to alternating
current (AC) and vice versa is necessary to convert the power from the turbine into energy
that is useful for industrial and/or household appliances.
55
Auxiliary components
The rest of the system components include monitoring equipment, a device to shed
excess energy produced by the system, and the wiring and the hardware needed to complete
the system.
Wind energy can be harvested with either mechanical machines (windmills) or
electrical machines (turbines).
7.2
Mechanical Wind Pumps

Mechanical wind pump systems use a direct drive mechanism rather than a geared
transmission. The required starting rotor torque in a mechanical wind pump is small because
of the counterbalance attached to the actuating pump beam. Such a wind pump can start
pumping at 50% lower rotor torque (or 30% less wind speed) relative to a system with no
counterbalance. These types of wind pumps are economical because they do not require
gearboxes for power transmission from the rotor to the shaft.
A reciprocating or piston pump, or positive displacement pump is used in mechanical
wind pump systems. In order to start pumping in these pumps, enough force is needed to lift
the weight of the pump rods, the piston and the water in the piston, and overcome the friction.
The diameter of the pump and the wind speed determine the amount of water delivered by the
pump for a given pumping head. The bigger the pump diameter, the larger the amount of
water delivered.
In general, mechanical wind pumps are suitable for low wind speeds because of their
high solidity rotors. The piston pump speed is limited to 4050 strokes per minute. The
overall conversion efficiency of mechanical pumps is in the range 7%27%.
A mechanical wind pump must be located directly over the borehole so the pump rod
is directly connected with the rising main and the pump. This is one of the main
disadvantages of a mechanical wind pump. A better alternative for water pumping is to use
an induction generator to produce electricity, coupled with an induction motor and a pump.
56
7.3
Electrical Wind Pumps

Modern wind generators can produce AC or DC electrical output and can pump water
directly by connecting to AC or DC motors. Thus, electrical wind turbine pumps offer a more
promising technology. Centrifugal pumps are used in electrical wind pump systems because
they are designed for low-solidity rotors.
Potential advantages of electrical wind turbines over mechanical wind turbines are as
follows:
They are versatile; the surplus electrical power can be stored in batteries and
used for lighting or other purposes.
Matching of wind turbines with water pumps is simpler because the load can
be varied electrically instead of mechanically.
The wind turbine does not have to be located directly over the borehole or
near the site where the power is needed. It can be located at a windier location
and the power generated from the turbine can be wired to the pumping site.
Electrical wind turbines perform better at high wind speeds and require higher starting
wind speeds. They are cost competitive relative to diesel systems, PV systems, and traditional
windmills. Maintenance cost is low as compared with traditional windmills since they have
fewer moving parts.
In a wind turbine, the theoretical maximum conversion efficiency of kinetic energy is
59.3% (Betz limit). However, in practice, optimally designed rotors can reach an efficiency
of slightly above 40%. Transmission efficiency is about 90%, generator efficiency is about
90%, and power conditioning, yawing, and gusts efficiency are about 90%. Therefore, an
electrical wind turbine may capture only 12%30% of the energy in the wind.
However, small electric wind turbines usually convert 25%30% of the power in the
wind at places with average wind speeds below 5.5 m/s and less than 20% at windier sites. At
high wind sites, medium and high-sized wind turbines perform better than small turbines.
57
Deciding weather mechanical or electrical wind pumps are good for pumping water
depends on the wind regime of a particular site and the flow rate of water required. Electrical
wind turbines generally require high wind speeds. A small wind turbine of about 1.5 kW
rated output, for example, requires an average wind speed of 45 m/s to start pumping,
compared to mechanical wind pumps, which can start pumping at about 2.5 to 3.5 m/s.
Larger wind turbines require higher wind speeds to start the rotor. They become competitive
for water pumping applications above average wind speeds of 56 m/s.
7.4
Size of Wind Pump System

The size of a wind electric pumping system is determined according to the months of
highest water demand and total pumping head. These two factors are the main criteria for
sizing any water pumping system. The daily water demand and the peak hour demand are
estimated from the livestock or the size of the population. The water demand for irrigation is
estimated based on the land area to be irrigated and the amount of water required for the crop
to be planted. The per capita water consumption for domestic water supply is 101,000 LCD
(liters per capita per day), depending on affordability, climate, and the habits of the
population.
The total pumping head is the total head required to pump water from the water
source to the reservoir; that is, the sum of the pumping head, the friction, and the discharge
head. The discharge head is the height from the surface of the ground to the reservoir pipe
outlet. The pumping head, in case of groundwater from boreholes, is the static water level
plus the drawdown. The friction head is the energy loss in pipes and fittings.
A water pumping system must be sized carefully and realistically. An undersized
system will frustrate its users; an oversized system is a waste of financial resources. Sizing a
system for the worst seasonal variation of the energy resource (solar and wind) is
recommended to ensure that users have enough water. Figure 7.1 shows the water flow rate
of a typical 10 kW water pumping system from a well with total head of 40 m. In this system
58
a 15 stage 3.8 kW pump is used. Typical size of wind turbine rotor diameters for various
applications is given in Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.1: Flow rate of Bergey Excel (10 kW) for a 40m head and a 15-stage
3.8 kW pump (Vick et al. 2000).
59
Figure 7.2: Rough indication of water depths, required daily volume of water and
typical size of the rotor for various applications (Smulders, 1996).
60
WIND ENERGY POTENTIAL

The kinetic energy of air in wind may be expressed as
1
mV 2
2
E=
(1)
where m is the total mass of the air which moves through an area A within a period of time
t and V is the wind speed. Since m = AVt then,
1
AV 3 t
2
E=
(2)
in equation (2) is the air density. The power of the wind therefore is
P=
E 1
= AV 3
t 2
(3)
and the wind power density becomes

Pd =
P 1
= V 3
A 2
(4)
The mean power density on the other hand is usually calculated by:
< Pd >=
1
< >< V 3 >
2
(5)
where < > and < V 3 > are the mean air density and the mean of the wind speed cubed for
a given period of time.
For the statistical analysis of wind data, Weibull probability density distribution function
appears to be a suitable choice. The Weibull probability density distribution function of the
wind speed is:
k V
p (V )W =
c c
k 1
V k
exp
c
(6)
where k is a dimensionless shape factor and

c=
<V >
1
1 +
k
(7)
is the scale factor in which is the gamma function. The Weibull distribution reduces to the
Rayleigh distribution for k = 2 which is obtained as:
61

V 2
V
p (V ) R =
exp
2
4 < V > 2
2 <V >
(8)
In approximating a given experimental wind data as Weibull probability distribution, the

parameters that appear in the equation (6) are determined in the following manner (Keoppl,
1982).
Measured wind speed values are divided into intervals: 0 V1 , V1 V2 , , Vn 1 Vn .
Percent of time occurrences are calculated for each interval that are the frequencies: f1 , f 2 ,
, f n .
Then the cumulative frequencies are obtained as p1 = f1 , p 2 = p1 + f 2 , ,
p n = pn 1 + f n . Using the transformation equations

xi = ln Vi
yi = ln[ ln(1 pi )]
(9)
i = 1,2,L, n
(10)
The linear approximation of the data is obtained using the least squares method, in the form
y = mx + b
(11)
Thus the Weibull parameters are obtained as

k = m and
(12)
b
c = exp
(13)
In can be shown (Keoppl, 1982) that the mean of the wind speed cubed that is the third
moment of the distribution for the Weibull probability model is
(1 + 3 / k )
3
< V 3 >W = 3
<V >
(
1
1
/
)
+
k
(14)
Equations (14) and (5) can be used for determining the mean power density. For k = 2 ,
equation (13) reduces to
6
< V 3 > R = < V >3

(15)
that gives the mean of the wind speed cubed for the Rayleigh approximation.
62
POWER GENERION FROM A WIND TURBINE
Power output approximation of a wind energy conversion system involves a quadratic

modeling that approximates the output between cut-in and rated wind speed (see Figure 9.1)
as
P(V ) = A + BV + CV 2
(16)
where A, B, and C are constants. These are evaluated by solving the following set of
equations.
A + BVo + CVo2 = 0
(17)
A + BVr + CVr2 = Pr
(18)
V
A + BVx + CV = x
Vr
2
x
Pr
(19)
where V x = (Vo + Vr ) / 2 and Vo , Vr and Pr are cut-in speed, rated speed and rated power,
respectively.
P(V)
Pr
V
Vo
Vr
Vc
Figure 9.1: Sketch of a typical output of a wind energy conversion system.
The mean power output, < P > , for the wind energy conversion system may be calculated
using
Vc
< P >= P(V ) f (V )dV
(20)
Vo
where f (V ) is the wind speed probability distribution and Vc is the cut-out speed.
63
10
WIND DATA COLLECTION
Knowing the importance of accurate and up to date data, we have searched for
possible sources of wind data collected around the Kingdom. So far, most of the researchers
have used the data collected by MEPA until 1986 and Wind Atlas for Saudi Arabia prepared
through a KACST project (Al-Ansari et al, 1986). A few researchers have used recent data
that were also collected at MEPA stations. First of all, MEPA stations are around the airports
which are usually located in the areas where there are suitable weather conditions. Thus, the
data around the airports may not represent the average weather conditions overall the city.
Additionally these data might contain some errors because of the following reasons:
1. The data is basically collected to determine the weather conditions for the airport
with the air travel purposes and forecasting. Thus, the parameters necessary for
potential energy calculations are usually ignored.
2. The measuring devices are not well maintained. By time, dusts start to accumulate
and sensors get degraded.
3. The locations for the sensors are not chosen carefully. They might be at the top of a
building or around the buildings. Thus, the data might not represent what will happen
when a wind turbine is installed in a farm on the country.
4. The heights of the sensors collecting data are not standard and vary from location to
another location. As the wind characteristics changes with height, the calculated
amount of wind energy might not represent what the actual amount that could be
obtained by the proposed WEC system at certain location.
Considering these factors, KACTS has started a very important project to obtain much
more reliable and accurate data from eight selected sites around the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia. The wind speed are measured and recorded at heights of 20, 30 and 40 meters,
respectively, for a period of several months at Arar, Dhahran, Qassim, Yanbu, Dalmi, Jouf,
Riyadh and Madina Munevvera. The frequency of measurements is 30 minutes at all the sites
64
except Riyadh where wind speed data is recorded every 10 minutes. For the first five cities
the data collection has been accomplished with the duration varying between 2 and 3 years.
As shown in Al-Abbadi (2003), the initial analysis indicates that there is significant
difference from the previously collected MEPA data. For the remaining last three cities data
collection continues: Riyadh (collection stared at 1994), Jouf (for the last 2 years), Madina
Munevvera (started last year).
Keeping in mind the importance of accurate data to produce meaningful and accurate
conclusions and results, we made several attempts to acquire these data and finally we
obtained them through Dr. Abdurrahman Al-AbdulAlly. Additionally, we have found out that
KACST possesses another valuable source of weather data including wind characteristics
collected from 65 stations overall Kingdom. This data is obtained from a US center as part of
the work in Saudi US joint Solar Assessment project. Although most of this data are not
formatted and not verified, we made also inquires to obtain these data as soon as they are
prepared.
The Arab League Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO),
Tunis had formed a permanent committee for renewable Energy in the Arab World since
1980s. The Wind Energy Atlas for the Arab World, for nearly all Arab States covering
latitude from 35 N to 0 (Tropic) and longitude from nearly 20 W to 59 E, with height up
to 2500 m above sea level, is among the many distinguished activities of this committee
(Alnaser 2002). This Atlas contains useful statistical and climatological data on wind speed,
wind direction, wind durations and frequency throughout the day, month and the year. The
Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP) developed by Riso National
Laboratory of Denmark has been used to produce maps, tables and supplementary
information. We will try to get this Atlas for comparative study.
65
11
UTILIZING WIND DATA
The wind energy potential must be determined before wind machines are considered
as potential power sources. Wind data can be taken from meteorological records, direct site
measurements, or local knowledge. However, local knowledge alone is not enough to reliably
design wind machines. The more quantitative approach could be to take on-site
measurements for a limited period of time to determine the relationship with the nearest
meteorological station, and correlate the nearest long-term data to the site. From these data,
the frequency of occurrence of consecutive calm days and maximum wind speed should be
noted. This will help to determine the necessary battery storage capacity and the type of wind
machine that can stand the maximum gust.
11.1
Wind Power Density (WPD)
Wind power density is defined as the wind power available per unit area swept by the
turbine blades. It is an actual indicator of wind energy potential of a given site. Wind power
density is a function of the air density which is calculated using the surface air temperature
and the surface station pressure
P
R T
(kg/m3)
where P is the air pressure (Pa or N/m), R is the specific gas constant for air (287 J/kg K);
and T is the air temperature in degrees Kelvin (C+273).
Wind power density is calculated using the following equation:
WPD =
1 n
Vi 3
2n i =1
where n is the number of records of wind speed measurement, is the air density (kg/m),
and Vi 3 is the cube of the ith wind speed (m/s) value.
66
11.2
Wind Energy Generation
The power that can be generated from a wind machine was obtained using the wind
power characteristics of the wind machines and the wind duration data. Seven different sizes
of wind machines were selected to calculate the wind power. The technical data of the wind
machines used for the calculation of energy are summarized in Table 11.1.
Table 11.1: Technical data of Wind Machines from Nordex.
Type
Nordex
N80/2500
Nordex
N60/1300
Nordex
N54/1000
Nordex
N50/800
Nordex
N43/600
Nordex
N29/250
Nordex
N27/150
Cut-in
speed
(m/s)
Cut-out
speed
(m/s)
Rated
speed
(m/s)
Surviva
l speed
(m/s)
Rated
output
(kW)
Hub
height
(m)
Rotor
diamete
r (m)
Expected
life
(years)
3-4
3-4
15.5
50
29.7
3-4
50
The wind power curves of the seven machines of sizes 2500, 1300, 1000, 800, 600,
250, and 150 kW are shown in Table 11.2 and Figure 11.1. The power curve is based on: Air
density: 1.225 kg/m3, Air temperature: 15 degree Celsius. Since the hub heights of the wind
machines are 50 and 60 meters, so the half-hourly mean wind speed values were calculated at
these heights using 1/7th power law.
67
Table 11.2: Power generation of seven different sizes of wind machines at various wind
speeds
Wind
speed
(m/s)
Power generation (kW)

N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600 N29/250 N27/150
0
14
51
105
179
297
427
548
697
794
885
999
1082
1090
1086
1033
1025
1021
1011
1000
990
980
970
68
2
12
24
35
58
95
128
161
190
213
225
234
245
254
261
265
271
267
263
259
253
248
245
0
8
19
31
55
83
110
136
160
170
176
180
175
172
164
155
150
145
145
140
135
130
130
Power Generation (kW)
3000
N80/2500
2500
N60/1300
2000
N54/1000
N50/800
1500
N43/600
1000
N29/250
N27/150
500
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 11.1: Power generation of seven different sizes of wind machines at various wind
speeds
11.3
Water Pumping Capacity
The power required for pumping water from underground
Phyd (W) can be
determined by the expression

Phyd = gHQ
(W)
where is the density of water (kg/m3), g is the gravitational acceleration (m/s2), H is the
total head (m) and Q is the volumetric flow rate of water (m3/s).
Assuming that the density and the gravitational acceleration do not vary significantly
the product HQ is found to be directly proportional to the pumping power requirement. HQ
may be considered as the pumping capacity rate. Thus the equation can be re-written as
HQ =
Phyd
9.8 10
(m4/s)
to determine the pumping capacity rate HQ in m4/s for any given available power Phyd (W).
Once the total head H (m) is available the volumetric flow rate of water that can be pumped
69
from underground Q (m3/s) can be calculated. This expression indicates that a hydraulic
power of Phyd = 1 W is equivalent to a pumping capacity rate of 8.8 m4/day.
For determination of the total pumping capacity for a given period of time, this
equation can be written as
HQt =
Phyd t
9.8 103
(m4)
where t is time (s). Accordingly, a hydraulic energy ( Phyd t ) of 1 kWh (i.e. 3600 kJ) is
equivalent to a pumping capacity (HQt) of 367 m4.
11.4
Determination of Pump Size
The required pump size can be determined from

P=
gHQ
Where
P
power of pump motor (W)
Density (kg/m3)
gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
total dynamic head (m)
volumetric flow rate (m3/s)
Pump efficiency
Eight models of water pumps at different size from Goulds Pump Company were
selected for the present work. Table 11.3 shows the specifications of the water pumps. The
nominal capacity of pumps range from 45 to 550 GPM and their motor size range from 7 to
50 HP.
70
Table 11.3: Technical specifications of pumps from Goulds Pump Company

motor
size
(HP)
45J07
Pump
Capacit
y
(GPM)
45
70J10
70
10
90L10 (7stages)
90
10
150H15
150
15
225H20
225
20
5THC025
240
25
275H30 (6 stages)
275
30
7TLC050
550
50
Goulds
Model number
71
12
ECONOMICS AND PERFORMANCE OF WIND PUMP SYSTEMS
12.1
Cost of Wind Power
A pumping system should be reliable and fulfill the water demand. However, in many
cases, the water resource determines the best type of pumping system. If the well yield is too
low, hand pumps may be the only option. When the water resource is not a problem, the other
main factor for selecting a wind pumping system is the availability of wind.
The frequency and ease of operation and maintenance, and the availability and cost of
spare parts are also important considerations. Another important factor is the borehole cost.
Drilling is generally expensive in remote locations, and it is advisable to use a higher
capacity pump for a single borehole with a higher yield. In such cases more water can be
pumped from the same borehole and the unit water cost can be reduced instead of using a
small pump in the same borehole.
The cost of utility-scale wind power has been steadily declining throughout the last
decade. Today, in good wind regimes, wind power can be the least-cost resource. Due to the
positive economic trends and the fact that wind power does not produce any emissions, wind
power has been the fastest growing energy source in the world for the past few years.
The annual energy cost to pump water can be calculated from the following equation:
C = 4.5
DR
HP UP
GPM
Where:
C = annual energy cost, SR
DR = daily water requirement, Gal
GPM = flow rate, GPM
HP = pump size, HP
UP = unit price of energy, SR/kWh
72
12.2
Piping
Common materials used in piping are galvanized steel, copper, and plastic. Plastic
pipe is made in flexible, semi-rigid, and rigid form. Flexible plastic pipe is commonly used
in outdoor underground installations because of its ease and economy of installation. Also,
for small diameters, flexible plastic pipe is the least expensive option.
The most important consideration in designing a piping system is proper pipe sizing.
In general, the right pipe size is a trade-off between a diameter that is small enough to
minimize pipe cost and large enough to not result in excessive friction losses, which will
increase the pumping energy and therefore pumping costs. In other words, selecting a larger
pipe size will result in greater pipe cost, but may allow for a smaller, and perhaps less
expensive pump and will reduce the annual energy consumption.
To select a pipe size, the following information is needed:
distance that the water will travel,
flow rate required,
vertical distance between the water source and the outlet of the stock tank, and
required pressure at the outlet.
The minimum pipe size can be determined by assuring that the velocity of water in the
pipe does not exceed 5 fps. The appropriate equation is:
D = 0.082 Q
where:
D = diameter, in
Q = flow rate, gal/min
73
12.3
System Performance
Most wind turbine pump systems have excellent low wind speed performance. They
are able to begin pumping at wind speeds as low as 2.5 m/s (for low lifts) and they reach their
peak efficiency in the range of 4-7 m/s.
Figure 12.1: Typical chart for pump performance characteristics (www.goulds.com ).
The simplest way to measure a wind pumps performance is to take daily readings of
the wind speed, the daily volume of water pumped, and the static head of the borehole. This
allows the hydraulic energy to be calculated, then, the system efficiency can be estimated at
different wind speed levels. Each component of the pumping system has intrinsic
characteristics that affect the overall operating conditions. Figure 12.1 shows a typical chart
for a water pump characteristics. The chart provides the capacity (volumetric flow rate) as
function of the total dynamic head. The efficiency of the pump varies with the capacity and is
also shown in the figure. The nominal capacity of the pump is the capacity at maximum
efficiency condition.
74
13
PROMOTING WIND ENERGY USAGE
This phase of the project was initially designed to study non-financial attributes of
implementing WEC systems, such as local/national environmental and socio-economic
impacts. Although overall public support is strong for wind power all over the world, some of
the concrete large projects suffered from the Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) syndrome.
Thus, national and institutional factors, and regional public-sector initiatives must be studied
on wind energy and selecting proper locations. In this phase, we have concentrated to identify
the incentives created in leading countries to promote the wind energy usage.
13.1
Incentives in Leading Countries
With the oil crises in the beginning of the 1970s, the interest in wind power
generation has returned. As a result, financial supports for research and development have
been provided by governments and related organizations. Furthermore, other support
schemes have been created to increase the utilization of the wind energy. The single most
important scheme was the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PUPRA) passed by the US
Congress in November 1978 aimed at an increase of domestic energy conservation and
efficiency. The PURPA combined with special tax credits led the first wind energy boom in
history of US. In 1996, nearly 16,000 wind generators were spinning, providing for the
electrical needs of roughly one million residents in California, where just sixteen years ago,
in 1980, the state had been without wind generators. To explain this remarkable growth, the
works such as Righter (1996) have identified four central factors: political climate, tax
incentives, the PURPA Act, and the attitude of the public utility commission.
Later interest in the wind energy picked up in Europe and India. In the 90s, the
European support scheme was mainly based on fix feed-in tariffs and in India based on tax
deduction for WEC investments (see Ackermann and Soder, 2002). Now, Germany, with the
largest installed capacity, has favorable federal regulation of the supply tariffs for renewable
electricity to the grids. Fixed feed-in tariffs are defined by the governments as the price per
kWh that the local distribution company has to pay for local renewable power generation fed
into the local distribution grid. These tariffs reduce the risk of changing electricity prices and
75
therefore provide a long term secure income to investors. Feed-in tariffs exist in Germany
and Spain.
Some other countries such as England, Scotland, and Ireland utilize bidding process
to invite potential developers to submit offers for new energy projects. They bid under
different brands for a feed-in tariff or for the amount of financial incentives to be paid for
each kWh fed into the grid. The best bidder is awarded for a predefined period. There are
other schemes as well. Netherlands introduced an approach based on fixed quotas combined
with green certificate trading. The government determines fixed quotas for utilizing the
amount of renewable energy per year that they have to sell via their network. Meanwhile, the
producers receive a certificate for a certain amount of energy fed into the grid. The utilities
have to buy these certificates to show that they have fulfilled their obligation.
13.2
Situation in Saudi Arabia
Currently, there is no income/revenue tax system imposed on the farms and or

farmers. Additionally, state owned companies generate and distribute electricity in the
Kingdom. Thus, the above discussed schemes and incentives can not be directly applied in
Saudi Arabia. However, in the past the Saudi government had introduced several programs to
promote the agriculture in the Kingdom. The 1968 Public Lands Distribution Ordinance
allocated 5 to 100 hectares of fallow land to individuals at no cost, up to 400 hectares to
companies and organizations, and a limit of 4,000 hectares for special projects. The
beneficiaries were required to develop a minimum of 25 percent of the land within a set
period of time (usually two to five years); thereafter, full ownership was transferred. In FY
1989, the total area distributed stood at more than 1.5 million hectares. Of this total area
7,273 special agricultural projects accounted for just less than 860,000 hectares, or 56.5
percent; 67,686 individuals received just less than 400,000 hectares or 26.3 percent; 17
agricultural companies received slightly over 260,000 hectares, or 17.2 percent. Judging from
these statistics, the average fallow land plot given to individuals was 5.9 hectares, 118
hectares to projects, and 15,375 hectares to companies, the latter being well over the limit of
400 hectares specified in the original plans.
76
The government also mobilized substantial financial resources through the Ministry
of Agriculture and Water, the Saudi Arabian Agricultural Bank (SAAB) and the Grain Silos
and Flour Mills Organization (GSFMO). SAAB provided interest-free loans to farmers and
subsidies for buying other capital inputs. GSFMO implemented the official procurement
program, purchasing locally produced wheat and barley at guaranteed prices for domestic
sales and exports. Finally, agricultural and water authorities provided massive subsidies in
the form of low-cost desalinated water, and electric companies were required to supply power
at reduced charges. These programs prompted a huge response from the private sector, with
average annual growth rates well above those programmed.
This study started to investigate possible institutional factors to promote the
implementation of wind energy in Saudi Arabia. We have identified two large companies that
are heavily involved in agricultural sector. They are Al-Khorayef Group of Companies and
A. Abunayyan Trading Corp. We have made some personal contacts to introduce our project
and its objectives. Through professionally conducted interviews we expect to determine the
possible incentives for exporting, distributing and promoting of reliable WECs and the
possibility of local production of small scale wind machines. Initially, a pilot study was
conducted in Al-Kharj area with a limited survey. Below there is a discussion on the initial
findings of this visit.
13.3
Findings of the Trip to Al-Kharj Area
This trip was planned to find out actual practice in Al-Kharj area which is a main
agricultural area around Riyadh. This was a one day trip consisted of visits to
a local workshop, Hajaj Lathe well known for producing and repairing
agricultural pumps in the area,

a local store, Samnan for selling and maintaining agricultural pumps and
other equipments, and

a large farm, Nowara Farm and Nurseries.
77
The discussion in the Hajaj Lathe workshop revealed that farms use various sizes 70400 HP and various capacities 150-1500 gallon/minute electrical pumps to extract water from
various depths 80-450 meters. Although most of the farms use directly electrical pumps to
extract water, some farms still use diesel operated systems to generate electricity and then use
it to extract water with appropriately coupled pumps.
Samnan Equipments store provided us figures related to the efficiency and operating
characteristics of STA-RITE pumps. Since they are not really needed in this report we omit
them for the time being.
Nowara Farm and Nurseries consists of 1.25 million m2 areas in Al-Kharj area. They
extract water from deep wells by using electrical pumps and produce vegetables, grains,
fruits and flowers. Average cost for water irrigation is estimated as 12.79 SR per hour. This
includes the operating costs of electrical pumps extracting water from wells, storing in water
tanks and irrigating through pivot systems. The initial costs of pumps, pipes, tanks and pivot
irrigating systems are not included. For example, a 125 HP electrical pump costs 140,000 SR.
There are 3 tanks in the farm used to store the water extracted from 5 wells. The
dimensions of the tanks (in terms of meter) are as follows. Tank 1: 30x20x2, Tank 2 and 3:
15x10x1.7. The characteristics of electrical pumps and their actual average operating costs
are given in Table 13.1.
Table 13.1: Characteristics of the wells in Nowara Farm and Nurseries
Depth of
Power of
Extracting
Electric
Well
Water
Pump
Water
Cost
Number
(meter)
(HP)
(Gallon/min.)
(SR/m3)
350
400
1500
8.29
310
265
800
11.04
150
70
150
8.56
200
125
600
9.12
200
125
600
10.06
78
The farm extracted around 37 million gallons of water during May 2003. In detail, the
first pump with 1500 gallon/min capacity worked for 330 hours, the second pump with 800
gallon/min capacity worked for 70 hours, the third pump with 150 gallon/min capacity
worked for 447 hours, the fourth pump with 600 gallon/min capacity worked in trial basis for
only 2 hours and the fifth well was not operated at all. Table 13.2 presents operating hours of
all wells until end of April 2004. Notice that the fifth well was dug lately and was started to
operate only in February 2004.
In conclusion, the study needs more input from the farms around the Kingdom to
obtain benchmark operating cost figures for the electrical pumps. It appears that most of the
farms employ electrical driven pumps very conveniently. These pumps are very small and
handy and do not require special electrical systems to be operated. They are also very easily
coupled with the motor producing the mechanical power. Some of them require 230 V and
some 380 V which are easily obtainable from the main electrical network.
Table 13.2: Operating hours of each pump during one month period
Period
Well No. 1 Well No. 2 Well No. 3 Well No. 4 Well No. 5
May 2003
330
70
447
June 2003
282
109
405
45
July 2003
263
90
410
38
August 2003
322
114
430
63
September 2003
299
126
392
98
October 2003
255
105
356
231
November 2003
133
54
211
217
December 2003
89
56
208
198
January 2004
98
130
209
146
February 2004
141
118
232
304
23
March 2004
181
89
343
332
60
April 2004
176
83
310
308
62
79
13.4
Trip To Saihat-Qatif-Dammam Area
A trip has been made to visit agricultural farms in the area of Dammam-Qatif-Saihat
area. There are a number of small to medium size farms in this area producing mostly
vegetables such as tomato, potato, squash, lettuce, onion, cauliflower, broccoli, green pepper
etc. Some farms grow animals and produce diary products. Most of these farms have limited
capabilities and therefore lack advanced technological methods such as labs and quality
control facilities. Water needed for irrigation is extracted from underground reserves by
using either diesel or electrical operated motor and pump systems.
Qatif-Saihat-Dammam areas have a great advantage from the perspective of
underground water reserves. The static water level in these areas is generally within 10-50
meters. Thus small size pump systems are in general sufficient for irrigation purposes.
A list of agricultural firms obtained from the Dammam Chamber of Commerce and
Industry is given in the following Table 13.3. All of these companies have been contacted by
phone. Valuable discussions were made with representatives of some of the firms.
13.5
Visit of Al-Khaldi Farm
A visit was made to Al-Khaldi Farm in order to see the actual practice in extraction
and using the underground water in the farm. The farm is located in Saihat area 30 km
outside the city of Dammam. It occupies approximately 104 m2 area. The irrigated area
consists of 40-50 hectare. Water needed for irrigation is obtained from two wells both of
which have a depth of 150 m. In one of the wells a diesel motor-pump system is used to
extract water, while in the other well an electrical motor-pump system is used. Static water
level in the farm is 12 m. Pump systems in both wells are operated continuously in the
summer when the water need is a peak. However, during the cooler seasons the pumps are
operated during a part of the day to provide as much water as needed. Static water level
remained nearly the same throughout the year. The sizes of pumps in the two wells are 28
and 30 HP and the water output rates are approximately 300 and 400 GPM, respectively. The
following Table 13.4 summarizes the findings of the two wells.
80
Table 13.3: List of farms in Dammam-Qatif-Saihat Area.

NAME OF FIRM
Saleh I. Sane'A & Bros. Co.
Ash-Sharqiyah Agricultural Development Co.
Al-Moaibed Group Co.Ltd.
Dammam Modern Poultry Co.
Al-Nakheel For General Service Co.
Al Howail Trading & Contracting Est.
adel ali a.al-hezam trading est.
SAYBOLT SAUDI ARABAI LTD.
ZIYAAB F.AL-KHALDI CROOP
Agricultural Projects & Development Co. Ltd.
Ali Abdullah Al-Shaikh Trading Est.
Abdulrahman Abdallah Al-Snaid TRADING Est.
Abdul Ali Al-Saif Farm.
Mohammed Mohammed Al-Aseeri Farm
AL- ASSEF FARM
Saad A.Al-Abdul Karim Farm
Abdul Latif A.Al-Fozan Farm
Al-Moajil Farm For Fresh Products
Bin Farhan Farm
EMAD HAIF ALSALEEM FARM
FAHAD ALI AL- THORA FARME .
MOHAMMED O.AL-MUALIM FARM
CITY
KHOBAR
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
SAFWA
JUBAIL
SEEHAT
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
TAROUT
DAMMAM
QATIF
DAMMAM
KHOBAR
DAMMAM
KHOBAR
DAMMAM
DAMMAM
QATIF
Table 13.4: Al-Khaldi Farm well data.
Type of motor
Size of motor
Well depth
Static water level
Motor position
Fuel consumption
Water flow rate
13.6
Well No. 1
Diesel
28 HP
150 m
12 m
42 m
2 liters per hour
300 GPM
Well No. 2
Electric
30 HP
150 m
12 m
42 m
25 kW
400 GPM
Visit of Al-Wabel Trading and Maintenance Company
81
ZIP CODE
31952
31462
31412
31452
31451
31432
31921
31961
31972
31442
31441
31411
31911
31443
31911
31516
31952
31453
31952
31451
31481
31911
Head office and showroom of Al-Wabel Trading and Maintenance Company was
visited. Al-Wabel Company is the Agent for Goulds pumps, Gulf pumps, Grundfos, Kasuga
and World pumps. A discussion with the sales coordinator of the company revealed that most
of the pumps sold in the eastern region are small size pumps having capacity in the range of
20-150 GPM. However, pumps as large as 500 GPM capacity are demanded.
Number of wells dug by the company during the year 2003 in various locations in
Saudi Arabia (including Riyadh, Buraydah, Hail, Wadi,Tabuk and Jouf) are shown in Figure
13.1. The depths of majority of wells are found to be 500 to 600 ft.
80
Number of wells
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
Depth of well (ft)
Figure 13.1: Number of wells at various depths dug during the year 2003.
82
800
14
CASE STUDY 1: DHAHRAN
14.1
Wind Energy Potential for Dhahran
Al-Abbadi (2003a) analyzed the data collected at Dhahran during the period from
October 04, 1995 to Nov 30, 2000 to assess the wind power potential at Dhahran and to
estimate the wind energy that can be produced using Wind Electric Conversion Systems
(WECs). A total of 90,433 half-hourly records were used in the data analysis. The statistical
analysis included annual, monthly, diurnal, and overall variation of wind speed and wind
power densities.
The wind speed data was collected at three heights, i.e. 20, 30 and 40 meters above
the ground. At each height, two wind speed sensors were installed opposite to each other on
the mast. The recorded data was tagged as V1 & V2 at 20 meters, V3 & V4 at 30 meters, and
V5 & V6 at 40 meters.
14.1.1. Diurnal Characteristics
The diurnal variation of wind speed was studied to see the availability of wind during
different times of the day (Figure 14.1). The half-hourly diurnal mean wind speed values
were calculated using the entire data (1995-2000). The analysis shows that the higher wind
speed values occurred during late afternoon hours. The peak is reached around 4:00 p.m. in
the afternoon at about 7 m/s. All the six readings indicate nearly the same behavior. During
the night from 10 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. a lower and nearly constant wind speed is observed. The
wind speed measurements at different altitudes show little variation especially during the day
time hours.
The wind power densities at all heights follow the same diurnal trend as that of the
wind speeds (Figure 14.2). The range of wind power density is found to be 50 250 W/m2.
83
HALF HOURLY VELOCITY VARIATION

7.5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s
7
6.5
6
5.5
5
4.5
4
3.5
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Figure 14.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at
Dhahran
84
HALF HOURLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION
AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m
300
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
250
200
150
100
50
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Figure 14.2: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities
(WPD) (W/m2) at Dhahran
85
14.1.2. Daily Characteristics
The average daily variation of wind speeds are given in Figure 14.3. In general, the
daily average occurs in the range of 4 to 7 m/s. Winter and Spring months indicate higher
wind speeds. The average daily wind speeds in Summer months are relatively low. The
corresponding daily average variation for the wind power density is given in Figure 14.4.
There is a considerable variation and fluctuation in the wind power density as a result of daily
wind speed variations.
DAILY VELOCITY VARIATION

9
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
AVERAGE WIND VELOCIYT, m/s
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
Figure 14.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran
86
DAILY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION
500
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
(W/m2) at Dhahran
14.1.3. Monthly Characteristics
The analysis of the overall monthly data for the years 1995-2000, as can be seen from
Figure 14.5, shows that the maximum mean value of 5.9 m/s occurred at 40 m corresponding
to V6 & V5 in the month of March and April, while minimum mean value of 4.2 m/s
occurred at 20 m (for V1 & V2) in the month of October. Mean wind speed was maximum in
the month of March and minimum in the month of October during the period of the years
1995-2000.
Monthly variation of the mean WPD follows the trend of the wind speed (Figure
14.6). The maximum mean WPD of 203 W/m2 occurred during the month of April & June
while the minimum mean of 65 W/m2 occurred during the month of October.
87
MONTHLY VELOCITY VARIATION

6
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 14.5: Average monthly variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at
Dhahran
88
MONTHLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION
220
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 14.6: Average monthly variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities
(W/m2) at Dhahran
14.1.4. Annual Characteristics
The annual variation of mean wind speed (see Figure 14.7) shows that the mean wind
speed varies from 4.5 m/s in 1998 to 5.7 m/s in 1999. The mean wind speeds were lower
during 1996 and 1998 as compared with those for the other three years. (Since there is not
enough data, the mean for V5 at 40 meter at 2000 is not reliable.) Annual wind speed
averages at higher altitude are consistently higher.
The calculated mean wind power density (WPD) at Dhahran varies between 95 W/m2
(at 20 m) to 185 W/m2 (at 40 m) (see Figure 14.8).
The overall average of wind speeds over the 5 year period is shown in Figure 14.9 at
different locations. The averages vary from 4.7 m/s (at 20 m) to 5.3 m/s (at 40 m). An
average of 5.3 m/s wind speed is obtained at 40 m altitude. The trend of the figure indicates
that even higher average wind speeds can be obtained at higher altitudes. The corresponding
average wind power density variation is also given in Figure 14.10. An average wind power
89
density of 150 W/m2 is observed at 40 m. Even at 20 m elevation the overall average wind
power density was more that 110 W/m2.
YEARLY VELOCITY VARIATION

6
5.8
5.6
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
4.4
1996
1997
1998
YEARS
1999
2000
Figure 14.7: Average annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at
Dhahran
90
YEARLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION
AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq. m
190
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
1996
1997
1998
YEARS
1999
2000
Figure 14.8: Average annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities
(W/m2) at Dhahran
91
5 YEARS OVERALL VELOCITY VARIATION

5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 14.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhahran
92
5 YEARS OVERALL WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION
155
150
145
140
135
130
125
120
115
110
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 14.10: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind power densities (WPD) (W/m2)
at Dhahran
14.1.5. Directional Wind Characteristics
The directional wind characteristics at Dhahran at heights of 30 m and 40 m are given

in Table 14.1 and Table 14.2, respectively. The corresponding wind rose diagrams are also
given in Figure 14.11 and Figure 14.12. The prevailing wind direction for Dhahran is from
North to North-West. 15% of the time wind direction is from North. The calm hours
constitute only a small fraction (0.4%) of the data. This indicates that the site is windy most
of the time during the year. The wind speeds were mostly in the range of 5.7-8.8 m/s.
93
Table 14.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Dhahran at a height of 30 m.

Station ID: DHAHRAN
Year: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000;
Date Range: Jan 1 - Dec 31; Time Range: 00:00-23:00 Reference Location: 30 m
Frequency Distribution (Count)

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
155
212
236
260
257
147
146
135
139
149
145
155
117
121
95
149
2618
2.1 - 3.6
404
832
721
564
527
342
260
226
350
417
397
394
289
275
284
388
6670
3.6 - 5.7
1611
1697
662
321
299
242
273
351
588
684
854
969
606
506
819
1466
11948
5.7 - 8.8
1449
669
138
38
51
56
117
297
511
335
474
1030
499
643
1077
1209
8593
8.8 - 11.1
154
42
19
5
5
13
11
69
102
36
34
65
68
238
646
328
1835
>= 11.1
27
14
1
0
2
4
0
11
15
8
1
1
11
92
402
155
744
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
3800
3466
1777
1188
1141
804
807
1089
1705
1629
1905
2614
1590
1875
3323
3695
32408
130
150
32688
Frequency Distribution (Normalized)

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.004764
0.006515
0.007253
0.007991
0.007898
0.004518
0.004487
0.004149
0.004272
0.004579
0.004456
0.004764
0.003596
0.003719
0.002920
0.004579
0.080460
2.1 - 3.6
0.012416
0.025570
0.022159
0.017334
0.016196
0.010511
0.007991
0.006946
0.010757
0.012816
0.012201
0.012109
0.008882
0.008452
0.008728
0.011925
0.204991
3.6 - 5.7
0.049511
0.052154
0.020345
0.009865
0.009189
0.007437
0.008390
0.010787
0.018071
0.021022
0.026246
0.029781
0.018624
0.015551
0.025171
0.045055
0.367201
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
94
5.7 - 8.8
0.044533
0.020561
0.004241
0.001168
0.001567
0.001721
0.003596
0.009128
0.015705
0.010296
0.014568
0.031655
0.015336
0.019762
0.033100
0.037157
0.264091
8.8 - 11.1
0.004733
0.001291
0.000584
0.000154
0.000154
0.000400
0.000338
0.002121
0.003135
0.001106
0.001045
0.001998
0.002090
0.007315
0.019854
0.010081
0.056396
>= 11.1
0.000830
0.000430
0.000031
0.000000
0.000061
0.000123
0.000000
0.000338
0.000461
0.000246
0.000031
0.000031
0.000338
0.002827
0.012355
0.004764
0.022866
Total
0.116787
0.106522
0.054613
0.036511
0.035067
0.024710
0.024802
0.033469
0.052400
0.050065
0.058547
0.080337
0.048866
0.057625
0.102127
0.113560
0.991434
0.003977
0.004589
1.000000
NORTH
15%
12%
9%
6%
3%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: DHAHRAN
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
2.1 - 3.6
Total Number of Hours Used: 32688
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.40%
Average Wind Speed: 5.10 m/s

Calm Hours: 130
Data availability: 99.54 %
Reference Height: 30 m
Figure 14.11: Wind rose diagram for Dhahran at a height of 30 m.
95
Table 14.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Dhahran at a height of 40 m.

Station ID: DHAHRAN
Year: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000;
Date Range: Jan 1 - Dec 31; Time Range: 00:00-23:00
Reference Location: 40 m

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
189
219
243
281
272
144
144
119
128
115
121
128
110
92
99
133
2537
2.1 - 3.6
437
688
656
528
468
286
274
192
323
393
359
351
231
221
227
264
5898
3.6 - 5.7
1765
1382
556
302
301
242
255
316
562
663
844
1005
575
484
728
1011
10991
5.7 - 8.8
1947
766
194
56
69
61
96
289
532
329
499
1081
496
658
1189
1387
9649
8.8 - 11.1
200
45
13
4
9
15
6
102
114
41
46
72
70
236
726
339
2038
>= 11.1
36
18
3
1
2
5
0
13
20
11
3
2
13
93
496
155
871
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
4574
3118
1665
1172
1121
753
775
1031
1679
1552
1872
2639
1495
1784
3465
3289
31984
129
575
32688

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.005885
0.006820
0.007567
0.008750
0.008470
0.004484
0.004484
0.003706
0.003986
0.003581
0.003768
0.003986
0.003425
0.002865
0.003083
0.004142
0.079002
2.1 - 3.6
0.013608
0.021424
0.020428
0.016442
0.014574
0.008906
0.008532
0.005979
0.010058
0.012238
0.011179
0.010930
0.007193
0.006882
0.007069
0.008221
0.183664
3.6 - 5.7
0.054962
0.043036
0.017314
0.009404
0.009373
0.007536
0.007941
0.009840
0.017501
0.020646
0.026282
0.031296
0.017906
0.015072
0.022670
0.031483
0.342260
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
96
5.7 - 8.8
0.060630
0.023853
0.006041
0.001744
0.002149
0.001900
0.002989
0.008999
0.016566
0.010245
0.015539
0.033662
0.015445
0.020490
0.037026
0.043191
0.300470
8.8 - 11.1
0.006228
0.001401
0.000405
0.000125
0.000280
0.000467
0.000187
0.003176
0.003550
0.001277
0.001432
0.002242
0.002180
0.007349
0.022608
0.010556
0.063463
>= 11.1
0.001121
0.000561
0.000093
0.000031
0.000062
0.000156
0.000000
0.000405
0.000623
0.000343
0.000093
0.000062
0.000405
0.002896
0.015445
0.004827
0.027123
Total
0.142435
0.097095
0.051848
0.036496
0.034908
0.023448
0.024134
0.032105
0.052284
0.048329
0.058294
0.082179
0.046554
0.055554
0.107900
0.102420
0.978463
0.003946
0.017591
1.000000
NORTH
15%
12%
9%
6%
3%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: DHAHRAN
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.40%

Calm Hours: 129
Figure 14.12: Wind rose diagram for Dhahran at a height of 40 m.
97
14.2
Annual Power Generation
14.2.1. Annual Probability Analysis
In order to obtain the number of average annual hours for each wind speed bins, the
number of total half-hourly values in each bins were divided by the product of number of
years of data collected and 2. The annual average values of hours in each wind speed bins, for
two hub heights were determined. Accordingly, the wind speed remained above 3.0 m/s for
6726 hours of the year (8760 hours) at 50 meters above the ground. This indicates that the
wind machines can produce power for almost 77% of the time during the year. At 60 meters
hub height the wind is found to be available for 78% of times above 3.0 m/s. Percent of times
for various wind speeds at 50 and 60 m heights were calculated. These were used to obtain
the probability density functions for the hub heights of 50 and 60 meters which are shown in
Figure 14.13.
0.18
Probability
0.16
0.14
Height = 50 m
0.12
Height = 60 m
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 14.13: Wind probability density functions for Dhahran at hub heights of 50 and
60 meters
Annual average power generation at Dhahran for the seven different sizes of wind
machines at different wind speeds is plotted in Figure 14.14. The calculations indicated that
the approximate energy that can be generated annually by wind machines, at respective hub
98
heights, of sizes 2500, 1300, 1000, 800, 600, 250, and 150 kW are 3071, 1700, 1313, 1078,
833, 390, and 330 MWh, respectively.
Yearly Power Generation (kWh)
500000
450000
N80/2500
400000
N60/1300
350000
N54/1000
300000
N50/800
250000
N43/600
200000
N29/250
150000
N27/150
100000
50000
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 14.14: Power generation at Dhahran using seven different sizes of wind machines
14.2.2. Average Daily Water Pumping Capacity
Average daily water pumping capacities of seven different sizes of wind machines for
Dhahran are shown in Figure 14.15. This figures shows that the pumping capacity is not
linearly proportional to the size of wind machine. Smaller size of wind machines provides
relatively higher pumping capacity as compared with their rated power. Selection of wind
machine at particular location depends on several factors such as the demand of water, the
water reserves available, the depth of water reserves, the installation and maintenance cost,
and etc.
99
Pumping capacity, m4 per day
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 14.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Dhahran
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump system at
Dhahran is given in Figure 14.16 for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50 percent
conversion efficiency.
Average Daily Flow Rate (m3/day)
35000
TDH=50 m
30000
TDH=100 m
25000
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 14.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Dhahran with
50 percent conversion efficiency and different dynamic heads.
100
14.2.3. Required Pump and Motor Size
Each of the wind turbine models considered is capable of driving a number of water
pumps. The number of pumps that can be operated depends on the size of the pumps. In this
study eight pump models at different size are considered. The technical details are given in
Section 11. Figure 14.17 shows the number of pumps that can be operated by various wind
turbine and water pump combinations using a fixed total dynamic head of 100 m. The
number of pumps that can be operated by a single wind turbine ranges from 1 to 63
depending on the wind turbine and water pump model selected.
70
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
60
50
N29/250
N27/150
40
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
Wind Turbine N43/600
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
Figure 14.17: Number of pumps as function of wind turbine type and water pump
capacity at Dhahran.
101
14.3.
Seasonal Power Generation
Seasonal variation of pumping capacity is also important for agricultural purposes.

This can be done by analyzing the average monthly characteristics of wind speeds. First
average monthly percent occurrences of wind speed for each month are to be determined.
Thus the probability density functions for each month are obtained. Then average monthly
wind power generations with different wind machines are calculated. Based on the wind
power generation information, the monthly variation of pumping capacity can be analyzed.
14.3.1. Month of January (Winter)
Figure 14.18 shows the average daily pumping capacity of various wind turbine
models at Dhahran site during the month of January.
Pumping Capacity, m4 per day
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 14.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Dhahran.
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump systems at
Dhahran for the month of January is given in Figure 14.19, for three cases of total dynamic
heads and 50 percent conversion efficiency.
102
30000
TDH=50 m
25000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 14.19: Average daily flow-rate capacity for different wind turbines for the month
of January in Dhahran.
Figure 14.20 shows the number of pumps that can be operated by various wind
number of pumps that can be operated by a single wind turbine for the month of January
ranges from 1 to 51 depending on the wind turbine and water pump model selected.
103
60
N80/2500
N60/1300
50
N54/1000
N50/800
40
N43/600
N29/250
30
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
Figure 14.20: Number of pumps that can be operated with different wind turbines for
the month of January in Dhahran.
14.3.2. Month of April (Spring)
models at Dhahran site during the month of April.
104
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 14.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Dhahran
Dhahran for the month of April is given in Figure 14.22, for three cases of total dynamic
35000
TDH=50 m
30000
TDH=100 m
25000
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of April in Dhahran.
105
number of pumps that can be operated by a single wind turbine for the month of April ranges
from 1 to 65 depending on the wind turbine and water pump model selected.
70
N80/2500
60
N60/1300
N54/1000
50
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
40
N27/150
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of April in Dhahran.
14.3.3. Month of July (Summer)
models at Dhahran site during the month of July.
106
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 14.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Dhahran
Dhahran for the month of July is given in Figure 14.25, for three cases of total dynamic heads
and 50 percent conversion efficiency.
35000
TDH=50 m
30000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of July in Dhahran.
107
number of pumps that can be operated by a single wind turbine for the month of July ranges
60
N80/2500
N60/1300
50
N54/1000
N50/800
40
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of July in Dhahran.
14.3.4. Month of October (Autumn)
models at Dhahran site during the month of October.
108
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 14.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Dhahran
Dhahran for the month of October is given in Figure 14.28, for three cases of total dynamic
18000
TDH=50 m
16000
TDH=100 m
14000
TDH=200 m
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of October in Dhahran.
109
number of pumps that can be operated by a single wind turbine for the month of October
N80/2500
35
N60/1300
N54/1000
30
N50/800
N43/600
25
N29/250
N27/150
20
15
Number of
Pumps
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of October in Dhahran.
110
15
CASE STUDY 2: GASSIM
15.1.
Wind Energy Potential for Gassim
Al-Abbadi (2003b) analyzed the data collected by the KACST at Gassim during the
period from December 05, 1995 to October 24, 1998 to assess the wind power potential at
Gassim and to estimate the wind energy that can be produced using Wind Electric
Conversion Systems (WECs). A total of 50,556 half-hourly records were used in the data
analysis. The statistical analysis included annual, monthly, diurnal, and overall variation of
wind speed and wind power densities.
speed values occurred during midnight hours. The peak is reached around 12:00 a.m.
midnight at about 4.9 m/s. All the six readings indicate nearly the same behavior. During the
night from 8 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. a considerable variation in the wind speed measurements was
observed at different heights. However, the variation was small the day time hours.
111
4.5
3.5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
2.5
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Gassim
112
110
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
(WPD) (W/m2) at Gassim.
daily average occurs in the range of 3 to 6 m/s. Winter months indicate higher wind speeds.
The average daily wind speeds in Summer months are relatively low. The corresponding
daily average variation for the wind power density is given in Figure 15.4. There is a
considerable variation and fluctuation in the wind power density as a result of daily wind
speed variations.
113

8
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
Figure 15.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Gassim
114
300
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
250
200
150
100
50
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
(W/m2) at Gassim
The analysis of the overall monthly data, as can be seen from Figure 15.5, shows that the
maximum mean value of 4.9 m/s occurred at 40 m corresponding to V5 in the month of April,
while minimum mean value of 3.3 m/s occurred at 20 m (for V1 & V2) in the month of
September. Mean wind speed was during the Spring months and relatively low during the
Summer months.
15.6). The maximum mean WPD of 130 W/m2 occurred during the month of April while the
minimum mean of 35 W/m2 occurred during the month of September.
115

5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 15.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Gassim.
116
130
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Gassim.
during 1998 as compared with those for the other years. Annual wind speed averages at
higher altitude are consistently higher.
The calculated mean wind power density (WPD) at Gassim varies between 51 W/m2
average of 4.3 m/s wind speed is obtained at 40 m altitude. The corresponding average wind
117
power density variation is also given in Figure 15.10. An average wind power density of 85
W/m2 is observed at 40 m. The minimum wind power density was 55 W/m2 at 20 m height.

4.8
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
4.6
4.4
4.2
3.8
3.6
3.4
1996
1997
YEARS
1998
Figure 15.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Gassim
118
95
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
1996
1997
YEARS
1998
Figure 15.8: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind power densities (W/m2) at
Gassim
119

4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
4
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.6
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 15.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Gassim
120
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
at Gassim
The directional wind characteristics at Gassim at heights of 30 m and 40 m are given

given in Figure 15.11 and Figure 15.12. The prevailing wind direction for Gassim is from
North to North-East. The calm hours were less that one percent. Wind speeds were mostly
within the range of 3.6 to 5.7 m/s.
121
Table 15.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Gassim at a height of 30 m.

Station ID: GASSIM
Year: 1996 1997 1998;
Date Range: Jan 1 - Dec 31; Time Range: 00:00 - 23:00

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
273
327
356
296
292
290
208
194
186
149
183
131
158
156
200
311
3710
2.1 - 3.6
708
708
757
550
603
537
462
326
260
280
242
201
203
248
317
520
6922
3.6 - 5.7
1125
1205
1063
608
547
625
607
337
341
292
298
245
193
217
358
759
8820
5.7 - 8.8
533
430
284
189
198
227
344
176
237
176
182
136
99
117
268
415
4011
8.8 - 11.1
57
34
11
12
15
16
50
37
56
27
32
25
16
14
46
51
499
>= 11.1
7
5
4
1
0
1
2
7
9
2
5
0
6
5
10
19
83
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
2703
2709
2475
1656
1655
1696
1673
1077
1089
926
942
738
675
757
1199
2075
24045
143
437
24625

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.011287
0.013519
0.014718
0.012237
0.012072
0.011989
0.008599
0.008021
0.007690
0.006160
0.007566
0.005416
0.006532
0.006449
0.008269
0.012858
0.153382
2.1 - 3.6
0.029271
0.029271
0.031297
0.022739
0.024930
0.022201
0.019100
0.013478
0.010749
0.011576
0.010005
0.008310
0.008393
0.010253
0.013106
0.021498
0.286175
3.6 - 5.7
0.046511
0.049818
0.043947
0.025136
0.022615
0.025839
0.025095
0.013933
0.014098
0.012072
0.012320
0.010129
0.007979
0.008971
0.014801
0.031379
0.364644
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
122
5.7 - 8.8
0.022036
0.017777
0.011741
0.007814
0.008186
0.009385
0.014222
0.007276
0.009798
0.007276
0.007524
0.005623
0.004093
0.004837
0.011080
0.017157
0.165826
8.8 - 11.1
0.002357
0.001406
0.000455
0.000496
0.000620
0.000661
0.002067
0.001530
0.002315
0.001116
0.001323
0.001034
0.000661
0.000579
0.001902
0.002108
0.020630
>= 11.1
0.000289
0.000207
0.000165
0.000041
0.000000
0.000041
0.000083
0.000289
0.000372
0.000083
0.000207
0.000000
0.000248
0.000207
0.000413
0.000786
0.003431
Total
0.111750
0.111998
0.102323
0.068464
0.068422
0.070117
0.069167
0.044526
0.045022
0.038283
0.038945
0.030511
0.027906
0.031297
0.049570
0.085786
0.976447
0.005807
0.017746
1.000000
NORTH
15%
12%
9%
6%
3%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: GASSIM
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.59%

Calm Hours: 143
Figure 15.11: Wind rose diagram for Gassim at a height of 30 m.
123
Table 15.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Gassim at a height of 40 m.

Station ID: GASSIM
Year: 1996 1997 1998;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
157
209
231
237
195
191
206
163
161
97
99
109
78
121
137
160
2551
2.1 - 3.6
302
470
560
490
430
404
437
288
236
173
161
131
123
132
205
265
4807
3.6 - 5.7
483
793
883
783
531
501
581
442
314
234
240
193
146
156
226
403
6909
5.7 - 8.8
308
460
416
289
175
221
258
295
236
199
217
170
143
79
154
271
3891
8.8 - 11.1
39
59
24
10
6
12
17
44
38
39
30
32
24
22
23
46
465
>= 11.1
15
5
6
4
1
1
3
1
3
13
8
7
1
4
6
7
85
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
1304
1996
2120
1813
1338
1330
1502
1233
988
755
755
642
515
514
751
1152
18708
100
949
19757

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.008348
0.011112
0.012282
0.012601
0.010368
0.010155
0.010953
0.008667
0.008560
0.005157
0.005264
0.005795
0.004147
0.006433
0.007284
0.008507
0.135634
2.1 - 3.6
0.016057
0.024989
0.029775
0.026053
0.022863
0.021480
0.023235
0.015313
0.012548
0.009198
0.008560
0.006965
0.006540
0.007018
0.010900
0.014090
0.255583
3.6 - 5.7
0.025681
0.042163
0.046948
0.041631
0.028233
0.026638
0.030891
0.023501
0.016695
0.012442
0.012761
0.010262
0.007763
0.008294
0.012016
0.021427
0.367344
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
124
5.7 - 8.8
0.016376
0.024458
0.022118
0.015366
0.009305
0.011750
0.013718
0.015685
0.012548
0.010581
0.011538
0.009039
0.007603
0.004200
0.008188
0.014409
0.206880
8.8 - 11.1
0.002074
0.003137
0.001276
0.000532
0.000319
0.000638
0.000904
0.002339
0.002020
0.002074
0.001595
0.001701
0.001276
0.001170
0.001223
0.002446
0.024724
>= 11.1
0.000798
0.000266
0.000319
0.000213
0.000053
0.000053
0.000160
0.000053
0.000160
0.000691
0.000425
0.000372
0.000053
0.000213
0.000319
0.000372
0.004519
Total
0.069332
0.106125
0.112718
0.096395
0.071140
0.070715
0.079860
0.065557
0.052531
0.040142
0.040142
0.034134
0.027382
0.027329
0.039930
0.061251
0.946905
0.005061
0.048034
1.000000
NORTH
15%
12%
9%
6%
3%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: GASSIM
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.53%

Calm Hours: 100
Figure 15.12: Wind rose diagram for Gassim at a height of 40 m.
125
15.2.
two hub heights were determined. The probability density functions for the hub heights of 50
and 60 meters are shown in Figure 15.13.
Probabilit
0.20
0.18
Height = 50 m
0.16
0.14
Height = 60 m
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 15.13: Wind probability density functions for Gassim at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters
Annual average power generation at Gassim for the seven different sizes of wind
heights, of sizes 2500, 1300, 1000, 800, 600, 250, and 150 kW are 1595, 916, 693, 587, 454,
225, and 189 MWh, respectively.
126
Yearly Power Generation (k
350000
N80/2500
300000
N60/1300
250000
N54/1000
200000
N50/800
N43/600
150000
N29/250
N27/150
100000
50000
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 15.14: Power generation at Gassim using seven different sizes of wind machines
Gassim are shown in Figure 15.15.
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 15.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Gassim
127
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump system at Gassim
is given in Figure 15.16, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50 percent conversion
Average Daily Flow Rate (m3/day
efficiency.
18000
16000
TDH=50 m
14000
TDH=100 m
12000
TDH=200 m
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600
N29/250 N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 15.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Gassim with
128
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
35
30
25
20
Number of
Pumps
15
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
capacity.
15.3.
Seasonal variation of pumping capacity is important for agricultural purposes. This

can be done by analyzing the average monthly characteristics of wind speeds. First average
monthly percent occurrences of wind speed for each month are to be determined. Thus the
probability density functions for each month are obtained. Then average monthly wind power
generations with different wind machines are calculated. Based on the wind power generation
information, the monthly variation of pumping capacity can be analyzed.
models at Gassim site during the month of January.
129
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 15.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Gassim.
Gassim for the month of January is given in Figure 15.19, for three cases of total dynamic
14000
TDH=50 m
12000
TDH=100 m
10000
TDH=200 m
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of January in Gassim.
130
25
N80/2500
20
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
15
N43/600
N29/250
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of January in Gassim.
models at Gassim site during the month of April.
131
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 15.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Gassim
Gassim for the month of April is given in Figure 15.22, for three cases of total dynamic heads
25000
TDH=50 m
20000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of April in Gassim.
132
40
35
N80/2500
N60/1300
30
N54/1000
N50/800
25
N43/600
N29/250
20
N27/150
Number of
Pumps
15
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of April in Gassim.
models at Gassim site during the month of July.
133
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 15.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Gassim
Gassim for the month of July is given in Figure 15.25, for three cases of total dynamic heads
12000
TDH=50 m
10000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of July in Gassim.
134
25
N80/2500
20
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
15
N43/600
N29/250
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of July in Gassim.
models at Gassim site during the month of October.
135
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 15.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Gassim
Gassim for the month of October is given in Figure 15.28, for three cases of total dynamic
12000
TDH=50 m
10000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of October in Gassim.
136
25
N80/2500
20
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
15
N43/600
N29/250
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of October in Gassim.
137
16
CASE STUDY 3: YANBU
16.1.
Wind Energy Potential for Yanbu
Al-Abbadi (2003c) analyzed the data collected by the KACST at Yanbu during the
period from September 17, 1996 to October 21, 1999 to assess the wind power potential at
Yanbu and to estimate the wind energy that can be produced using Wind Electric Conversion
Systems (WECs). The statistical analysis included annual, monthly, diurnal, and overall
variation of wind speed and wind power densities.
speed values occurred during late afternoon hours. The peak is reached around 4:00 p.m. in
the afternoon at about 7.5 m/s. All the six readings indicate nearly the same behavior. During
the night from 11 p.m. to 4:00 a.m. a lower and nearly constant wind speed is observed. The
wind speed measurements at different altitudes show little variation especially during the day
time hours. The qualitative variation of wind speeds at Yanbu site show close similarity to
those of Dhahran site.
138

8
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Figure 16.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu
139
400
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
(WPD) (W/m2) at Yanbu.
daily average occurs in the range of 3 to 6 m/s. Spring and Summer months indicate higher
wind speeds. The average daily wind speeds in Winter months are relatively low, however,
the difference is not much. The corresponding daily average variation for the wind power
density is given in Figure 16.4. There is a considerable variation and fluctuation in the wind
power density as a result of daily wind speed variations.
140

9
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
Figure 16.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu
141
600
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
500
400
300
200
100
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
(W/m2) at Yanbu
maximum mean value of 5.4 m/s occurred at 40 m corresponding to V6 in the month of
March, while minimum mean value of 3.5 m/s occurred at 20 m (for V1) in the month of
December. Mean wind speed was high during the Spring and Summer months while it was
low during the Fall months.
16.6). The maximum mean WPD of 203 W/m2 occurred during the month of March while the
minimum mean of 45 W/m2 occurred during the month of December.
142

5.4
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 16.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Yanbu.
143
220
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Yanbu.
higher altitude are generally higher.
The calculated mean wind power density (WPD) at Yanbu varies between 112 W/m2
W/m2 is observed at 40 m. Even at 20 m elevation the overall average wind power density
was more that 120 W/m2.
144

4.85
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
4.8
4.75
4.7
4.65
4.6
4.55
4.5
4.45
4.4
4.35
1997
1998
YEARS
1999
Figure 16.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Yanbu.
145
160
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
155
150
145
140
135
130
125
120
115
110
1997
1998
YEARS
1999
Yanbu.
146

4.85
4.8
4.75
4.7
4.65
4.6
4.55
4.5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 16.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Yanbu
147
150
145
140
135
130
125
120
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
at Yanbu
The directional wind characteristics at Yanbu at heights of 30 m and 40 m are given

given in Figure 16.11 and Figure 16.12. The prevailing wind direction for Yanbu is from East
to South-East. The calm hours were less that one percent. Wind speeds were mostly within
the range of 5.7 to 8.8 m/s.
148
Table 16.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Yanbu at a height of 30 m.

Station ID: YANBU
Year: 1997 1998 1999;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
94
116
135
93
117
150
208
271
345
238
231
251
235
206
198
150
3038
2.1 - 3.6
145
158
180
225
175
200
311
354
298
195
169
136
252
276
246
184
3504
3.6 - 5.7
112
168
293
511
493
319
465
294
142
117
106
75
122
261
273
148
3899
5.7 - 8.8
57
80
187
492
1172
729
446
99
52
67
104
11
21
85
81
35
3718
8.8 - 11.1
9
4
23
97
328
504
162
8
2
16
41
2
0
2
6
4
1208
>= 11.1
0
0
0
16
33
247
41
0
0
1
16
0
0
0
1
3
358
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
417
526
818
1434
2318
2149
1633
1026
839
634
667
475
630
830
805
524
15725
93
574
16392

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.005943
0.007333
0.008535
0.005879
0.007397
0.009483
0.013150
0.017132
0.021811
0.015046
0.014604
0.015868
0.014856
0.013023
0.012517
0.009483
0.192060
2.1 - 3.6
0.009167
0.009989
0.011379
0.014224
0.011063
0.012644
0.019661
0.022380
0.018839
0.012328
0.010684
0.008598
0.015931
0.017448
0.015552
0.011632
0.221520
3.6 - 5.7
0.007081
0.010621
0.018523
0.032305
0.031167
0.020167
0.029397
0.018586
0.008977
0.007397
0.006701
0.004741
0.007713
0.016500
0.017259
0.009356
0.246491
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
149
5.7 - 8.8
0.003603
0.005058
0.011822
0.031104
0.074093
0.046087
0.028196
0.006259
0.003287
0.004236
0.006575
0.000695
0.001328
0.005374
0.005121
0.002213
0.235049
8.8 - 11.1
0.000569
0.000253
0.001454
0.006132
0.020736
0.031862
0.010241
0.000506
0.000126
0.001012
0.002592
0.000126
0.000000
0.000126
0.000379
0.000253
0.076369
>= 11.1
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.001012
0.002086
0.015615
0.002592
0.000000
0.000000
0.000063
0.001012
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000063
0.000190
0.022632
Total
0.026362
0.033253
0.051713
0.090656
0.146542
0.135858
0.103237
0.064863
0.053041
0.040081
0.042167
0.030029
0.039828
0.052472
0.050891
0.033127
0.959309
0.005673
0.035017
1.000000
NORTH
20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: YANBU
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1997 1998 1999
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.59%

Calm Hours: 93
Figure 16.11: Wind rose diagram for Yanbu at a height of 30 m.
150
Table 16.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Yanbu at a height of 40 m.

Station ID: YANBU
Year: 1997 1998 1999;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
105
116
120
92
108
134
151
183
313
203
221
255
284
269
219
164
2937
2.1 - 3.6
138
156
157
245
155
165
234
279
349
210
146
145
205
296
280
171
3331
3.6 - 5.7
126
159
231
509
591
315
428
342
221
141
110
84
80
257
311
124
4029
5.7 - 8.8
61
65
104
343
1275
749
591
147
48
81
192
19
15
78
96
20
3884
8.8 - 11.1
11
4
1
21
271
536
213
11
1
10
94
2
0
3
4
1
1183
>= 11.1
0
0
0
0
34
269
71
2
0
1
28
0
0
0
1
1
407
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
441
500
613
1210
2434
2168
1688
964
932
646
791
505
584
903
911
481
15771
124
1313
17208

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.006606
0.007298
0.007550
0.005788
0.006795
0.008430
0.009500
0.011513
0.019692
0.012771
0.013904
0.016043
0.017867
0.016924
0.013778
0.010318
0.184775
2.1 - 3.6
0.008682
0.009814
0.009877
0.015414
0.009751
0.010381
0.014722
0.017553
0.021957
0.013212
0.009185
0.009122
0.012897
0.018622
0.017616
0.010758
0.209563
3.6 - 5.7
0.007927
0.010003
0.014533
0.032023
0.037182
0.019818
0.026927
0.021516
0.013904
0.008871
0.006920
0.005285
0.005033
0.016169
0.019566
0.007801
0.253476
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
151
5.7 - 8.8
0.003838
0.004089
0.006543
0.021579
0.080214
0.047122
0.037182
0.009248
0.003020
0.005096
0.012079
0.001195
0.000944
0.004907
0.006040
0.001258
0.244354
8.8 - 11.1
0.000692
0.000252
0.000063
0.001321
0.017049
0.033721
0.013400
0.000692
0.000063
0.000629
0.005914
0.000126
0.000000
0.000189
0.000252
0.000063
0.074426
>= 11.1
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.002139
0.016924
0.004467
0.000126
0.000000
0.000063
0.001762
0.000000
0.000000
0.000000
0.000063
0.000063
0.025606
Total
0.027745
0.031456
0.038566
0.076125
0.153130
0.136395
0.106197
0.060648
0.058635
0.040642
0.049764
0.031771
0.036741
0.056810
0.057314
0.030261
0.916492
0.007206
0.076302
1.000000
NORTH
20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: YANBU
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1997 1998 1999
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.78%

Calm Hours: 148
Figure 16.12: Wind rose diagram for Yanbu at a height of 40 m.
152
16.2.
0.16
0.14
Height = 50 m
Probabilit
0.12
Height = 60 m
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 16.13: Wind probability density functions for Yanbu at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters
Annual average power generation at Yanbu for the seven different sizes of wind
153
400000
N80/2500
350000
N60/1300
300000
N54/1000
250000
N50/800
200000
N43/600
150000
N29/250
100000
N27/150
50000
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 16.14: Power generation at Yanbu using seven different sizes of wind machines
Yanbu are shown in Figure 16.15.
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 16.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Yanbu
154
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump system at Yanbu
is given in Figure 16.16, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50 percent conversion
efficiency.
30000
TDH=50 m
25000
TDH=100 m
20000
TDH=200 m
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600 N29/250 N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 16.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Yanbu with 50
percent conversion efficiency and different dynamic heads.
155
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
60
50
40
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
capacity.
16.3.

models at Yanbu site during the month of January.
156
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 16.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Yanbu.
Yanbu for the month of January is given in Figure 16.19, for three cases of total dynamic
25000
TDH=50 m
20000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of January in Yanbu.
157
45
N80/2500
40
N60/1300
35
N54/1000
N50/800
30
N43/600
N29/250
25 Number of
Pumps
20
N27/150
15
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of January in Yanbu.
models at Yanbu site during the month of April.
158
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 16.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Yanbu
Yanbu for the month of April is given in Figure 16.22, for three cases of total dynamic heads
35000
TDH=50 m
30000
TDH=100 m
25000
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of April in Yanbu.
159
70
N80/2500
60
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
50
N43/600
N29/250
40
N27/150
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of April in Yanbu.
models at Yanbu site during the month of July.
160
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 16.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Yanbu
Yanbu for the month of July is given in Figure 16.25, for three cases of total dynamic heads
30000
TDH=50 m
25000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of July in Yanbu.
161
60
N80/2500
50
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
40
N43/600
N29/250
30
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of July in Yanbu.
models at Yanbu site during the month of October.
162
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 16.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Yanbu
Yanbu for the month of October is given in Figure 16.28, for three cases of total dynamic
18000
16000
TDH=50 m
14000
TDH=100 m
12000
TDH=200 m
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of October in Yanbu.
163
35
N80/2500
30
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
25
N43/600
N29/250
20
N27/150
15
Number of
Pumps
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of October in Yanbu.
164
17
CASE STUDY 4: ARAR
17.1.
Wind Energy Potential for Arar
Al-Abbadi (2003d) analyzed the data collected by the KACST at Arar during the
period from June 17, 1995 to December 31, 1998 to assess the wind power potential at Arar
and to estimate the wind energy that can be produced using Wind Electric Conversion
Systems (WECs). The statistical analysis included annual, monthly, diurnal, and overall
variation of wind speed and wind power densities.
speed values occurred during night hours. The peak is reached around 12:00 midnight at
about 6.3 m/s at height of 40 m (V6). A considerable variation of wind speed measurements
were observed at different heights. During the day hours from 10 a.m. in the morning to 4:00
p.m in the afternoon, the mean wind speeds were relatively low.
165

6.4
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
6.2
6
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Figure 17.1: Average diurnal variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar.
166
240
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
(WPD) (W/m2) at Arar.
wind speeds. The average daily wind speeds in Fall and Winter months are relatively low.
The corresponding daily average variation for the wind power density is given in Figure 17.4.
wind speed variations. A distinguished peak of wind speed at end of March is observed
where the wind power density is calculated to be about 1100 W/m2.
167

11
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
Figure 17.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar
168
1200
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
1000
800
600
400
200
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
(W/m2) at Arar
169
March and July, while minimum mean value of 4.2 m/s occurred at 20 m (for V1 & V2) in
the month of November. Spring and Summer months were usually windy months. Fall
months were relatively less windy.
17.6). The maximum mean WPD of 290 W/m2 occurred during the month of March & July
while the minimum mean of 75 W/m2 occurred during the month of November.

7
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
6.5
5.5
4.5
4
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 17.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Arar.
170
300
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
250
200
150
100
50
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Arar.
speed varies from 4.8 m/s in 1998 to 5.9 m/s in 1997. The mean wind speeds were higher
higher altitude are generally higher.
The calculated mean wind power density (WPD) at Arar varies between 105 W/m2 (at
20 m) to 205 W/m2 (at 40 m) (see Figure 17.8).
171

6.2
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
1996
1997
YEARS
1998
Figure 17.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Arar.
172
220
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
200
180
160
140
120
100
1996
1997
YEARS
1998
Arar.
173

5.7
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 17.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Arar
174
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
at Arar
The directional wind characteristics at Arar at heights of 30 m and 40 m are given in

Table 17.1 and Table 17.2, respectively. The corresponding wind rose diagrams are also
given in Figure 17.11 and Figure 17.12. The prevailing wind direction for Arar is from West
to North-West. The calm hours were less that one percent. Wind speeds were mostly within
the range of 5.7 to 8.8 m/s.
175
Table 17.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Arar at a height of 30 m.

Station ID: ARAR
Year: 1996 1997 1998

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
110
120
109
101
108
113
112
105
151
99
94
98
92
92
135
204
1843
2.1 - 3.6
196
274
240
206
233
209
242
231
213
186
208
198
241
247
319
424
3867
3.6 - 5.7
383
373
369
329
372
356
280
242
271
305
309
307
487
665
731
722
6501
5.7 - 8.8
377
294
262
379
397
323
212
180
204
279
308
393
860
1135
1114
680
7397
8.8 - 11.1
35
43
37
65
51
61
43
37
57
69
66
121
222
340
231
80
1558
>= 11.1
8
19
11
26
16
5
22
22
26
26
7
45
81
80
53
10
457

Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.005067
0.005527
0.005020
0.004652
0.004974
0.005205
0.005159
0.004836
0.006955
0.004560
0.004330
0.004514
0.004237
0.004237
0.006218
0.009396
0.084888
2.1 - 3.6
0.009028
0.012620
0.011054
0.009488
0.010732
0.009626
0.011146
0.010640
0.009811
0.008567
0.009580
0.009120
0.011100
0.011377
0.014693
0.019529
0.178112
3.6 - 5.7
0.017641
0.017180
0.016996
0.015154
0.017134
0.016397
0.012897
0.011146
0.012482
0.014048
0.014232
0.014140
0.022431
0.030630
0.033670
0.033255
0.299433
176
5.7 - 8.8
0.017364
0.013542
0.012068
0.017457
0.018286
0.014877
0.009765
0.008291
0.009396
0.012851
0.014186
0.018101
0.039611
0.052278
0.051310
0.031321
0.340703
8.8 - 11.1
0.001612
0.001981
0.001704
0.002994
0.002349
0.002810
0.001981
0.001704
0.002625
0.003178
0.003040
0.005573
0.010225
0.015660
0.010640
0.003685
0.071761
>= 11.1
0.000368
0.000875
0.000507
0.001198
0.000737
0.000230
0.001013
0.001013
0.001198
0.001198
0.000322
0.002073
0.003731
0.003685
0.002441
0.000461
0.021049
Total
1109
1123
1028
1106
1177
1067
911
817
922
964
992
1162
1983
2559
2583
2120
21623
88
345
22056
Total
0.051080
0.051725
0.047349
0.050942
0.054212
0.049146
0.041960
0.037631
0.042467
0.044401
0.045691
0.053521
0.091336
0.117867
0.118972
0.097646
0.980368
0.003990
0.015642
1.000000
NORTH
15%
12%
9%
6%
3%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: ARAR
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.41%

Calm Hours: 88
Figure 17.11: Wind rose diagram for Arar at a height of 30 m.
177
Table 17.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Arar at a height of 40 m.

Station ID: ARAR
Year: 1996 1997 1998;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
100
99
98
97
93
119
135
131
126
131
112
82
78
102
107
118
1728
2.1 - 3.6
135
185
182
158
136
203
212
217
196
221
156
128
150
207
275
215
2976
3.6 - 5.7
237
279
279
261
279
273
355
337
266
292
197
183
227
452
685
377
4979
5.7 - 8.8
247
266
277
298
324
408
481
344
247
221
208
187
403
824
1262
468
6465
8.8 - 11.1
51
40
42
62
66
76
115
96
52
38
37
46
183
243
391
128
1666
>= 11.1
22
17
14
19
17
30
26
33
13
11
9
19
58
62
120
7
477
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
792
886
892
895
915
1109
1324
1158
900
914
719
645
1099
1890
2840
1313
18291
54
471
18816

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.005451
0.005397
0.005342
0.005288
0.005070
0.006487
0.007359
0.007141
0.006868
0.007141
0.006105
0.004470
0.004252
0.005560
0.005833
0.006432
0.094195
2.1 - 3.6
0.007359
0.010084
0.009921
0.008613
0.007413
0.011066
0.011556
0.011829
0.010684
0.012047
0.008504
0.006977
0.008177
0.011284
0.014990
0.011720
0.162224
3.6 - 5.7
0.012919
0.015209
0.015209
0.014227
0.015209
0.014881
0.019351
0.018370
0.014500
0.015917
0.010739
0.009975
0.012374
0.024639
0.037340
0.020551
0.271409
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
178
5.7 - 8.8
0.013464
0.014500
0.015099
0.016244
0.017661
0.022240
0.026220
0.018752
0.013464
0.012047
0.011338
0.010194
0.021968
0.044917
0.068793
0.025511
0.352412
8.8 - 11.1
0.002780
0.002180
0.002289
0.003380
0.003598
0.004143
0.006269
0.005233
0.002835
0.002071
0.002017
0.002507
0.009975
0.013246
0.021314
0.006977
0.090815
>= 11.1
0.001199
0.000927
0.000763
0.001036
0.000927
0.001635
0.001417
0.001799
0.000709
0.000600
0.000491
0.001036
0.003162
0.003380
0.006541
0.000382
0.026002
Total
0.043173
0.048297
0.048624
0.048787
0.049877
0.060452
0.072172
0.063123
0.049060
0.049823
0.039193
0.035159
0.059907
0.103025
0.154811
0.071573
0.972098
0.002870
0.025032
1.000000
NORTH
20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: ARAR
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1996 1997 1998
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.29%

Calm Hours: 54
Figure 17.12: Wind rose diagram for Arar at a height of 40 m.
179
17.2.
0.18
Probabilit
0.16
0.14
Height = 50 m
0.12
Height = 60 m
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 17.13: Wind probability density functions for Arar at hub heights of 50 and 60
meters.
Annual average power generation at Arar for the seven different sizes of wind
180
500000
450000
N80/2500
400000
N60/1300
350000
N54/1000
300000
N50/800
250000
N43/600
200000
N29/250
150000
N27/150
100000
50000
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 17.14: Power generation at Arar using seven different sizes of wind machines
Arar are shown in Figure 17.15.
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 17.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Arar
181
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump system at Arar is
given in Figure 17.16, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50 percent conversion
efficiency.
35000
TDH=50 m
30000
TDH=100 m
25000
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600
N29/250 N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 17.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Arar with 50
percent conversion efficiency and different dynamic heads.
182
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
70
60
50
40
Number of
Pumps
30
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
capacity.
17.3.

models at Arar site during the month of January.
183
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 17.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Arar.
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump systems at Arar
for the month of January is given in Figure 17.19, for three cases of total dynamic heads and
50 percent conversion efficiency.
30000
TDH=50 m
25000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of January in Arar.
184
60
N80/2500
50
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
40
N43/600
N29/250
30
Number of
Pumps
N27/150
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of January in Arar.
models at Arar site during the month of April.
185
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 17.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Arar
for the month of April is given in Figure 17.22, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50
percent conversion efficiency.
40000
35000
TDH=50 m
TDH=100 m
30000
TDH=200 m
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of April in Arar.
186
80
70
N80/2500
N60/1300
60
N54/1000
N50/800
50
N43/600
N29/250
40
N27/150
Number of
Pumps
30
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of April in Arar.
models at Arar site during the month of July.
187
5000000
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 17.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Arar
for the month of July is given in Figure 17.25, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50
percent conversion efficiency.
50000
45000
TDH=50 m
40000
TDH=100 m
35000
TDH=200 m
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of July in Arar.
188
100
N80/2500
90
N60/1300
80
N54/1000
N50/800
70
60
N43/600
N29/250
50
N27/150
Number of
Pumps
40
30
20
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
10
0
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of July in Arar.
models at Arar site during the month of October.
189
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 17.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Arar
for the month of October is given in Figure 17.28, for three cases of total dynamic heads and
50 percent conversion efficiency.
25000
TDH=50 m
20000
TDH=100 m
TDH=200 m
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of October in Arar.
190
50
N80/2500
45
N60/1300
40
N54/1000
N50/800
35
30
N43/600
N29/250
25
N27/150
Number of
Pumps
20
15
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
5
0
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of October in Arar.
191
18
CASE STUDY 5: DHULOM
18.1.
Wind Energy Potential for Dhulom
Al-Abbadi (2003e) analyzed the data collected by the KACST at Dhulom during the
period from November 01, 1998 to October 12, 2002 to assess the wind power potential at
Dhulom and to estimate the wind energy that can be produced using Wind Electric
Conversion Systems (WECs). The statistical analysis included annual, monthly, diurnal, and
overall variation of wind speed and wind power densities.
speed values occurred during night hours with a secondary peak around 11 a.m. in the
morning. The peak is reached around 4:00 p.m. in the afternoon at about 7 m/s. The wind
speed is in general low around 4:00 a.m. in the morning and 4:00 p.m. in the afternoon. There
is a considerable variation between the measurements of wind speeds at different altitudes.
192

7
6.5
5.5
5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
4.5
3.5
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
Dhulom.
193
400
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
12
16
20
24
28
HALF HOURS
32
36
40
44
48
(WPD) (W/m2) at Dhulom.
wind speeds. The average daily wind speeds in Fall months are relatively low. The
corresponding daily average variation for the wind power density is given in Figure 18.4.
wind speed variations.
194

10
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
Figure 18.3: Average daily variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhulom
195
1000
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
25
50
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
DAYS
(W/m2) at Dhulom
March, while minimum mean value of 3.8 m/s occurred at 20 m (for V2) in the month of
October. Mean wind speed was higher during the Winder and Summer months. Spring and
Fall months were relatively less windy.
18.6). The maximum mean WPD of 320 W/m2 occurred during the month of March while the
minimum mean of 60 W/m2 occurred during the month of October.
196

7
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
6.5
5.5
4.5
3.5
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 18.5: Monthly variation of Half-hourly mean wind speeds (m/s) at Dhulom.
197
350
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
300
250
200
150
100
50
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
MONTHS
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Dhulom.
speed varies from 4.6 m/s in 2002 to 6 m/s in 2001. The mean wind speeds were lower during
1999 and 2002 as compared with those for the other years. Annual wind speed averages at
higher altitude are consistently higher.
The calculated mean wind power density (WPD) at Dhulom varies between 120 W/m2
198

6.4
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
6.2
6
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
1999
2000
2001
2002
YEARS
Figure 18.7: Annual variation of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Dhulom.
199
240
WPD1
WPD2
WPD3
WPD4
WPD5
WPD6
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
1999
2000
2001
2002
YEARS
Dhulom.
200
5.5
4.5
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
Figure 18.9: Overall average of half-hourly mean wind speeds (V) (m/s) at Dhulom
201
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
VELOCITY
at Dhulom
The directional wind characteristics at Dhulom at heights of 30 m and 40 m are given

given in Figure 18.11 and Figure 18.12. The prevailing wind direction for Dhulom is from
South-East. The calm hours were less that one percent. Wind speeds were mostly within the
range of 5.7 to 8.8 m/s.
202
Table 18.1: Directional characteristics of wind at Dholum at a height of 30 m.

Station ID: DHOLUM
Year: 1999 2000 2001 2002;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
117
128
120
150
214
272
233
229
206
186
165
125
83
81
103
110
2522
2.1 - 3.6
151
200
210
305
366
659
580
402
311
252
263
264
238
212
174
177
4764
3.6 - 5.7
231
349
487
499
731
1260
1219
687
357
303
312
495
539
383
338
267
8457
5.7 - 8.8
189
353
693
497
471
822
1486
759
224
91
154
579
872
611
375
231
8407
8.8 - 11.1
14
50
189
68
73
133
636
197
12
2
13
162
254
119
33
33
1988
>= 11.1
9
8
57
13
7
37
325
58
7
2
11
77
112
22
4
7
756
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
711
1088
1756
1532
1862
3183
4479
2332
1117
836
918
1702
2098
1428
1027
825
26894
129
315
27338

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.004330
0.004737
0.004441
0.005551
0.007919
0.010065
0.008622
0.008474
0.007623
0.006883
0.006106
0.004626
0.003071
0.002997
0.003812
0.004071
0.093328
2.1 - 3.6
0.005588
0.007401
0.007771
0.011287
0.013544
0.024387
0.021463
0.014876
0.011509
0.009325
0.009732
0.009769
0.008807
0.007845
0.006439
0.006550
0.176294
3.6 - 5.7
0.008548
0.012915
0.018022
0.018466
0.027051
0.046627
0.045110
0.025423
0.013211
0.011213
0.011546
0.018318
0.019946
0.014173
0.012508
0.009880
0.312956
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
203
5.7 - 8.8
0.006994
0.013063
0.025645
0.018392
0.017430
0.030419
0.054990
0.028087
0.008289
0.003368
0.005699
0.021426
0.032269
0.022610
0.013877
0.008548
0.311105
8.8 - 11.1
0.000518
0.001850
0.006994
0.002516
0.002701
0.004922
0.023536
0.007290
0.000444
0.000074
0.000481
0.005995
0.009399
0.004404
0.001221
0.001221
0.073567
>= 11.1
0.000333
0.000296
0.002109
0.000481
0.000259
0.001369
0.012027
0.002146
0.000259
0.000074
0.000407
0.002849
0.004145
0.000814
0.000148
0.000259
0.027976
Total
0.026311
0.040262
0.064982
0.056692
0.068904
0.117789
0.165748
0.086297
0.041335
0.030937
0.033971
0.062983
0.077638
0.052844
0.038005
0.030530
0.983759
0.004719
0.011522
1.000000
NORTH
20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: DHOLUM
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1999 2000 2001 2002
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.48%

Calm Hours: 129
Figure 18.11: Wind rose diagram for Dhulom at a height of 30 m.
204
Table18.2: Directional characteristics of wind at Dholum at a height of 40 m.

Station ID: DHOLUM
Year: 1999 2000 2001 2002;

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 - 123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
70
75
87
78
98
150
176
135
150
130
114
108
72
67
82
59
1651
2.1 - 3.6
102
127
144
155
178
315
430
373
281
204
212
217
164
154
166
134
3356
3.6 - 5.7
145
229
249
334
362
786
1264
862
438
263
219
349
403
317
297
223
6740
5.7 - 8.8
131
256
349
531
494
635
1441
1247
419
152
135
341
675
565
455
281
8107
8.8 - 11.1
18
45
141
193
111
96
436
585
95
15
13
61
392
198
106
46
2551
>= 11.1
2
7
35
47
14
15
167
314
25
4
7
35
187
57
17
10
943
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
Total
468
739
1005
1338
1257
1997
3914
3516
1408
768
700
1111
1893
1358
1123
753
23348
95
223
23666

Wind
Direction
348.75 - 11.25
11.25 - 33.75
33.75 - 56.25
56.25 - 78.75
78.75 - 101.25
101.25 -123.75
123.75 - 146.25
146.25 - 168.75
168.75 - 191.25
191.25 - 213.75
213.75 - 236.25
236.25 - 258.75
258.75 - 281.25
281.25 - 303.75
303.75 - 326.25
326.25 - 348.75
Sub Total
Speed (m/s)
0.5 - 2.1
0.002986
0.003199
0.003711
0.003327
0.004180
0.006398
0.007508
0.005759
0.006398
0.005545
0.004863
0.004607
0.003071
0.002858
0.003498
0.002517
0.070426
2.1 - 3.6
0.004351
0.005417
0.006143
0.006612
0.007593
0.013437
0.018342
0.015911
0.011987
0.008702
0.009043
0.009256
0.006996
0.006569
0.007081
0.005716
0.143156
3.6 - 5.7
0.006185
0.009768
0.010622
0.014247
0.015442
0.033528
0.053918
0.036770
0.018684
0.011219
0.009342
0.014887
0.017191
0.013522
0.012669
0.009512
0.287506
Calms
Missing Hours
Grand Total
205
5.7 - 8.8
0.005588
0.010920
0.014887
0.022651
0.021072
0.027087
0.061468
0.053193
0.017873
0.006484
0.005759
0.014546
0.028793
0.024101
0.019409
0.011987
0.345818
8.8 - 11.1
0.000768
0.001920
0.006015
0.008233
0.004735
0.004095
0.018598
0.024954
0.004052
0.000640
0.000555
0.002602
0.016721
0.008446
0.004522
0.001962
0.108817
>= 11.1
0.000085
0.000299
0.001493
0.002005
0.000597
0.000640
0.007124
0.013394
0.001066
0.000171
0.000299
0.001493
0.007977
0.002431
0.000725
0.000427
0.040225
Total
0.019963
0.031523
0.042870
0.057075
0.053619
0.085185
0.166958
0.149981
0.060061
0.032760
0.029860
0.047392
0.080749
0.057928
0.047903
0.032120
0.986563
0.004014
0.009423
1.000000
NORTH
20%
16%
12%
8%
4%
WEST
EAST
WIND SPEED
(m/s)
>= 11.1
8.8 - 11.1
Location: DHOLUM
SOUTH
5.7 - 8.8
3.6 - 5.7
YEARS: 1999 2000 2001 2002
2.1 - 3.6
0.5 - 2.1
Calms: 0.41%

Calm Hours: 95
Figure 18.12: Wind rose diagram for Dhulom at a height of 40 m.
206
18.2.
0.16
0.14
Height = 50 m
Probabilit
0.12
Height = 60 m
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 18.13: Wind probability density functions for Dhulom at hub heights of 50 and
60 meters.
Annual average power generation at Dhulom for the seven different sizes of wind
207
700000
N80/2500
600000
N60/1300
500000
N54/1000
400000
N50/800
N43/600
300000
N29/250
N27/150
200000
100000
0
0
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Wind Speed (m/s)
Figure 18.14: Power generation at Dhulom using seven different sizes of wind machines
Dhulom are shown in Figure 18.15.
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 18.15: Daily water pumping capacities of seven wind machines at Dhulom
208
The average daily yield of water flow rate of the wind turbine-pump system at
Dhulom is given in Figure 18.16, for three cases of total dynamic heads and 50 percent
conversion efficiency.
45000
40000
TDH=50 m
35000
TDH=100 m
30000
TDH=200 m
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600
N29/250 N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
Figure 18.16: Average daily yield of water flow-rate of wind machines at Dhulom with
209
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
90
80
70
60
50
40
Number of
Pumps
30
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
capacity.
18.3.

models at Dhulom site during the month of January.
210
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 18.18: Daily pumping capacity for the month of January in Dhulom.
Dhulom for the month of January is given in Figure 18.19, for three cases of total dynamic
40000
35000
TDH=50 m
TDH=100 m
30000
TDH=200 m
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of January in Dhulom.
211
80
70
N80/2500
N60/1300
60
N54/1000
N50/800
50
N43/600
N29/250
40
N27/150
Number of
Pumps
30
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of January in Dhulom.
models at Dhulom site during the month of April.
212
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 18.21: Daily pumping capacity for the month of April in Dhulom
Dhulom for the month of April is given in Figure 18.22, for three cases of total dynamic
40000
35000
TDH=50 m
TDH=100 m
30000
TDH=200 m
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of April in Dhulom.
213
70
N80/2500
60
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
50
N43/600
N29/250
40
N27/150
30
Number of
Pumps
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of April in Dhulom.
models at Dhulom site during the month of July.
214
5000000
4500000
4000000
3500000
3000000
2500000
2000000
1500000
1000000
500000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 18.24: Daily pumping capacity for the month of July in Dhulom
Dhulom for the month of July is given in Figure 18.25, for three cases of total dynamic heads
50000
45000
TDH=50 m
40000
TDH=100 m
35000
TDH=200 m
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of July in Dhulom.
215
90
N80/2500
80
N60/1300
70
N54/1000
N50/800
60
N43/600
N29/250
50 Number of
Pumps
40
N27/150
30
20
10
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of July in Dhulom.
models at Dhulom site during the month of October.
216
1800000
1600000
1400000
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine
Figure 18.27: Daily pumping capacity for the month of October in Dhulom
Dhulom for the month of October is given in Figure 18.28, for three cases of total dynamic
18000
16000
TDH=50 m
14000
TDH=100 m
12000
TDH=200 m
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
Wind Turbine Type
of October in Dhulom.
217
35
N80/2500
30
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
25
N43/600
N29/250
20
N27/150
15
Number of
Pumps
10
5
N80/2500
N60/1300
N54/1000
N50/800
N43/600
Wind Turbine
N29/250
Type
N27/150
550
275
240
225
150
90
70
45
Pump Capacity
(GPM)
the month of October in Dhulom.
218
19
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF WIND POWER
The economic analysis of a wind power system over a long period of time for a given
location is needed for the completion of the assessment of wind power feasibility. Previously,
for the five selected locations, we have estimated annual energy that can be generated by
wind machines, at respective hub heights, of sizes 2500, 1300, 1000, 800, 600, 250, and 150
kW (see Table 19.1).
Table 19.1: Total annual energy (MWh) generated by different sizes of wind machines
at various locations in Saudi Arabia
Wind Project Type

Location N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600 N29/250 N27/150
Dhahran
3071
1700
1313
1078
833
390
330
Gassim
1595
916
693
587
454
225
189
Yanbu
2509
1390
1074
886
685
321
271
Arar
3071
1698
1313
1077
833
399
330
Dhulom
4011
2201
1714
1394
1077
496
420
The economical feasibility of a project depends mainly on the alternative of this

project. The most economical and convenient energy source utilized by farms in Saudi
Arabia is electric energy produced and distributed by the Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)
over the national network. The cost of electric energy is not constant: for different
consumption interval, the rate is different. Below, we present the price of electric energy for
agricultural sector in Saudi Arabia.
Table 19.2: Price of one Kwh electric energy in Saudi Arabia
Amount Used
(Kwh)
1
to
2000
2001
to
5000
More
than
5000
0.05
0.1
0.12
Cost (SAR)
Per Kwh
219
Accordingly, we have estimated the net equivalent value of the annual wind energy
generated by various machines at various locations. For example, at Dhahran, we can
generate 3071 Mwh annually (255,916 Kwh monthly) energy by one N80/250 wind turbine.
If the management of a farm has decided to buy 255,916 Kwh energy every month from the
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) network, they have to pay 30,510.92 SAR (400 SAR for
the first 5,000 kwh and 30,109.92 SAR for the remaining 250,916 kwh from the price of
0.12 SAR per Kwh). Thus, 366,120 SAR worth of wind energy (0.119 SAR per kwh) can be
generated by the N80/2500 at Dhahran. Notice the energy cost in agricultural sector is
highly subsidized. If the same amount of electricity was utilized in domestic sector, the
annual bill would be more than double. To be more specific, the regular cost of annual
consumption of 3071 Mwh electric energy would be 783460 SAR, resulting 0.255 SAR per
kwh energy. Similarly, a farm at Gassim would pay 20,280 SAR to SEC for an equal
amount of wind energy that can be annually generated by the N27/150, resulting 0.107 SAR
per kwh energy. Below table summarizes the equivalent worth of wind energy (in terms of
subsidized agricultural sector rates) generated at different locations.
Table 19.3: Worth (SAR) of annual energy generated by different sizes of wind
machines and at various locations in Saudi Arabia
Location
Wind Project Type

N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600 N29/250 N27/150
Dhahran
366120
201600
155160
126960
97560
44400
37200
Gassim
189000
107520
80760
68040
52080
24600
20280
Yanbu
298680
164400
126480
103920
79800
36120
30120
Arar
366120
201360
155160
126840
97560
45480
37200
Dhulom
478920
261720
203280
164880
126840
57120
48000
Now, we will estimate the cost of such wind energy generating system. Although a
through economical analysis requires to consider several cost elements such as Process
Capital including costs of turbines, towers, foundations, assembly & checkouts, electrical
infrastructure, sub-station, overseas shipping, legal fees & permitting; General Capital
Facilities including costs of roads & grading, control systems, control buildings, central
building; Engineering & Overhead; Project Contingency; Initial Costs and Annual Expenses
220
including variable O & M, Fixed O & M and land Lease. It is obvious that these costs vary
from one brand to another even for the same technical configurations. It is also obvious that
the exact values of these costs are difficult to obtain. Although list prices of the turbines and
towers could be obtained, the exact values would be subject to quantities to be ordered and
negotiations.
In this study, we have utilized the figures suggested by Rehman et al (2003) in which
only Nordex N60/2500, N60/1300 and N43/600 are considered. As Table 19.4 indicates, for
Nordex N60/1300 and N43/600 machines initial investment costs and annual operating and
maintenance costs are estimated in Saudi Arabian Riyals (SAR). The conversion rate is
taken as 1 USD is equivalent to 3.75 SAR.
Table 19.4: Financial data (all in Saudi Arabian Riyal SAR) of Wind Machines from
Nordex.
Type
Nordex
N60/1300
Nordex
N43/600
Investment
Cost
Tower
Foundation
Cost
Control
Room
Cost
Civil
Work
Cost
Annual
Operating
and
Maintenance
Cost
2895000
69375
28125
97500
1250
20
6061427
1481250
46875
28125
5000
1250
20
4609701
Expected
Life
Time
(years)
Present
Value of
Total
Project
Cost
Investment costs include the WEC costs, extras, foundation, grid connection,
planning and licensing. The operation and maintenance costs include the repair, insurance,
monitoring and management. To be consistent with the literature, the economical life times
of the projects are taken as 30 years. At the end of the life span the project would be
scrapped. We assume that its scrap value would be 5 % of its initial investment costs from
the value of the time of investment. Here we differ from the work of Rehman et al (2003)
where they assumed 10 % of the escalated value of the initial costs with an inflation rate of 6
%. We utilize the same inflation rate but assuming that the inflation affects only the annual
O & M costs. Although the public utility prices are fairly stable in Saudi Arabia, we assume
221
that the price of one kwh electric energy would be subject to inflation effect on the long run.
Thus, we also assume that cost of electric energy would be escalated with 6 % inflation rate.
Similarly, we assume 8 % discount rate for calculating the net present value of the
cash flows. We assume that the initial investment costs will be paid at time zero (beginning
of the project) and the annual operating and maintenance costs will be paid at the end of
every year. The scrap value of the WEC system will be received at the end of the project,
i.e., at the end of 30 year. The net present value of the project will be negative because all of
the elements are paid, negative cash flows, except the scrap value, which is positive cash
flow. Since the initial investment cost is done at time zero, it will enter the formula of
Present Value of Total Project Cost (PVTPC) directly. In other words, total of columns 2-5,
total of investment, tower foundation, control room and civil work costs, denoted by IIC will
enter directly without being discounted. The salvage value of the project (SV) will be first
calculated as 5 % of the second column, investment cost (IC). Then discounted back to 30
years with a discount rate of 8 % and entered to the formula by a negative sign. Finally,
annual Operating and Maintenance cost (OM) will be first escalated at a rate of 6 % and
then discounted back to time zero at a discount rate, i, of 8 %. In fact, the effective discount
rate, edr, will be equal 1.8867925 %. Now we can present the formula for PVTPC:
(1 + edr ) n 1
n
(0.05 * IC )(1 + )
PVTPC = IIC + OM
n
edr (1 + edr )
The first discounting factor in the formula, called uniform series present worth factor, is
equal to 22.74903974 and the second factor, called single payment present worth factor, is
equal to 0. 099377. By using these factors in the above formula we obtained the last column
of Table 19.4.
Similarly, we can determine the net present value of total revenue generated by wind
machines at different locations of Saudi Arabia. By assuming that the inflation rate will be
effective on the long run at a uniform rate of 6 % annually and the nominal discount rate
will be 8 %, we can use the same uniform series present worth factor that is 22.74903974.
Thus, we prepared Table 19.5 presenting the net present value of total revenue.
222
Table 19.5: Net present value of total revenue (SAR) generated by different sizes of
wind machines at various locations in Saudi Arabia
Wind Project Type

Location N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800 N43/600 N29/250
Dhahran
8328878 4586206 3529741 2888218 2219396 1010057
Gassim
4299569 2445977 1837212 1547845 1184770 559626,4
Yanbu
6794683 3739942 2877299 2364080 1815373 821695,3
Arar
8328878 4580747 3529741 2885488 2219396 1034626
Dhulom
10894970 5953879 4624425 3750862 2885488 1299425
N27/150
846264,3
461350,5
685201,1
846264,3
1091954
Obviously, if the net present values of total costs and total revenues of a project are
equal, the investor will be in different for choosing the project of investing on the wind
energy system or for continuing in using the current way, i.e., electric energy for pumping
water. Thus, for the two systems that we considered above, i.e., N60/130 and N43/600, we
determined the net present value of the difference between total revenue and total cost, and
presented in Table 19.6.
We can see that neither N60/1300 nor N43/600 is economically profitable
investment in any one of the five locations. However, the difference is around 100,000 SAR
in Dhulom. We have to point out the fact that the list prices of the wind machines are
considered here are based on the 2003 values. It is reported by the manufacturers that the
prices of these machines are decreased substantially since then. However, the real cost of
buying such a machine can not be determined unless a tender process is started and the price
is negotiated with the manufacturer officially. Never the less, the analysis can be easily
modified easily as the figures are updated. Interestingly, the bigger WEC system costs less
in all locations except in Gassim.
223
Table 19.6: Net present value of a Wind Project (SAR) over 30 years of operation
Wind Project Type

N60/1300
N43/600
Location
Dhahran
Gassim
Yanbu
Arar
Dhulom
-1475221
-2390305
-3615450
-3424931
-2321485
-2794328
-1480680
-2390305
-107548
-1724213
Considering the fact that the wind energy has several side benefits, how much one
should be willing to pay for these benefits? The negative values in the Table present the
subsidies to be paid in order to obtain these benefits. For example, let us consider the
highest net loss, i.e., instead of generating 916 Mwh of annual electric energy in Gassim for
the next 30 years by other sources, one should be willing to pay 3615450 SAR total just
once if he chooses to generate this amount of energy by wind power for the next 30 years.
This means that the extra amount to pay over the electric bill is just 0.173 per KWh in
Gassim area for the type of N60/1300 WEC system. Meanwhile, in the same area, by the
N43/600, one would pay extra 0.332 SAR for each KWh of energy generated by wind over
the cost of electric energy. Meanwhile, the extra cost of one KWh wind power energy cost
would be just 0.002 SAR in Dhulom area by N60/1300 WEC system. All the other results
are summarized in Table 19.7.
Table 19.7: Net gain or compensation (SAR) for utilizing wind energy instead of
utilizing one kwh electric energy.
Location
Dhahran
Gassim
Yanbu
Arar
Dhulom
Wind Project Type

N60/1300
N43/600
-0.038
-0.126
-0.173
-0.332
-0.073
-0.179
-0.038
-0.126
-0.002
-0.070
Finally, we have performed a sensitivity analysis by assuming that the Saudi

Electricity Company (SEC) will not increase the price of the electric energy for the next 30
years. Thus, the revenue to be generated by the wind energy system will be constant over the
224
next 30 years. Meanwhile, the O&M costs will be subject to the escalation due to inflation
with a rate of 6 %. We also assume that the O&M cost will be same for all types of Nordex
WEC machines. Finally, we assume that the resale value of the WEC system will be zero at
the end of 30 years. Thus, we have determined the initial cost of the system that an investor
will be indifferent between choosing wind energy and electric energy, i.e., break even cost
for purchasing, transporting, installing and all other setup costs to be paid at time zero, and
presented these in Table 19.8.
Table 19.8: The break even analysis for initial cost (SAR) of wind machines
Location
Dhahran
Gassim
Yanbu
Arar
Dhulom
Wind Project Type

N80/2500 N60/1300 N54/1000 N50/800
N43/600
N29/250
N27/150
1135889
-716242
-1239053
-1556523
-1887502
-2485965
-2567021
-858090
-1775374
-2076632
-2219831
-2399506
-2708870
-2757503
376664
-1135031
-1561927
-1815902
-2087440
-2579180
-2646727
1135889
-718944
-1239053
-1557874
-1887502
-2473807
-2567021
2405767
-39424
-697329
-1129628
-1557874
-2342766
-2445437
In this table, the present net cost for operating and maintaining WEC system over the
next 30 years is determined as 2,985,811 SAR. Thus, for example, if the initial cost of
N80/2500 is 2,405,767 SAR (total cost until the system starts producing energy), then an
investor is indifferent in going for wind project in Dhulom or utilizing electric energy.
Obviously, this is very conservative approach because it did not consider the possibility of
price hike in electric energy or the possibility of SEC applying the current regular price for
agricultural sector and also the scrape value of the WEC system. If we recall the initial setup
costs figures given by Rehman et al (2003), i.e., 3,090,000 for N60/1300 and 1,631,250 for
N43/600 systems, we can see the likelihood of the viability of the utilizing wind energy in
Saudi Arabia. In other words, even under this conservative scheme, N80/2500 may become
economically a better alternative over the electric energy in Dhahran, Arar and Dhulom
areas.
225
20
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
The possibility of using wind energy for pumping underground water in the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia has been studied. Although, the Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) supplies
electrical energy to consumers at low prices in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, extending the
service to the remote areas of the country may be costly. Therefore, in this project, the
feasibility of constructing stand-alone wind turbine stations for water pumping purposes has
been investigated. Wind and weather data from five representative sites have been used for
the study. These were Dhahran, Gasim, Yanbu, Arar and Dhulom.
Seven different sizes of horizontal axis wind turbines have been considered for the
study. The wind turbines are of nominal power of 150, 250, 600, 800, 1000, 1300, and 2500
kW. Eight different size of water pumps have been considered for water pumping purposes
that are operated by the wind turbines. The sizes of the pumps considered were 45, 70, 90,
150, 225, 240, 275 and 550 GPM. A conversion efficiency of 50 percent has been assumed in
the calculations. The depth of static water level varied from 50 to 200 m. The number of
pumps that can be operated by the wind turbines as well as the daily water pumping
capacities at the sites have been analyzed.
Based on the statistical analysis of the data available in these sites, the following
conclusions are obtained:
Average diurnal variation of wind speed at Dhahran site is within 4 to 7 m/s with a
peak at around 4 p.m. The corresponding power density varies between 50-250 W/m2. As far
as the monthly averages are concerned, maximum monthly average wind speed occurred in
March as 5.9 m/s and the minimum monthly average occurred in October as 4.2 m/s. The
monthly average wind power density varied from 65 W/m2 in October and 203 W/m2 in
April. The overall average of wind speed at 40 m height is obtained as 5.3 m/s while the
overall average wind power density at the same height was 150 W/m2. The prevailing wind
direction at Dhahran site is N-NW direction. The annual electrical energy generation through
the wind turbines has been calculated and found to vary between 330 to 3071 MWh
depending on the size of the wind turbine. The results showed that, it was possible to operate
226
up to 70 small water pumps on the average with a 2500 kW wind turbine. The daily water
pumping capacity from a depth of 100 m was estimated to be 2000-15000 m3/day depending
on the size of the wind turbine.
The diurnal variation of wind speed at Gassim site occurred between 3 to 4.9 m/s
where the peak wind speed occurred at 12 midnight. The diurnal variation of wind power
density varied between 30 and 110 W/m2. The maximum monthly average wind speed was
obtained in April with 4.9 m/s and the minimum wind speed was in September as 3.3 m/s.
Monthly average wind power density varied between 35 W/m2 in September and 130 W/m2
in April. The annual average wind speed at a 40 m height was calculated to be 4.3 m/s and
the corresponding wind power density was 85 W/m2. The prevailing wind direction at
Gassim site was N-NE. It has been predicted that the annual electrical power generation of
189 to 1595 MWh is possible. The number of pumps that can be operated in this site was
estimated to be up to 35 with a wind turbine of size 2500 kW. The daily water pumping
capacity from a depth of 100 m was predicted to be 1000-8000 m3/day.
At Yanbu site, the diurnal wind speed varied from 3 to 7.5 m/s where the peak
reached at around 4 p.m. The variation of the wind power density at this site was between 40
and 350 W/m2. Monthly statistics indicated that the maximum monthly average wind speed
was 5.4 m/s in March and the minimum was 3.5 m/s in the month of December. The monthly
average wind power density varied from 45 W/m2 in December to 203 W/m2 in March. The
annual average wind speed at Yanbu site at 40 m height was found to be 4.8 m/s and the
corresponding wind power density was 145 W/m2. The prevailing wind direction at Yanbu is
E-SE. It is estimated that 271 to 2509 MWh of electrical energy could be generated annually
depending on the size of the wind turbine. Up to 55 small size water pumps could be operated
by the wind turbines and the daily average water pumping capacity from a depth of 100 m
was obtained as 2000-13000 m3/day.
The diurnal wind speed variation at Arar site occurred between 4.8 and 6.3 m/s and
the peek is found at around 12 midnight. The wind power density varied from 90 to 230
W/m2. Monthly average wind speed varied from 4.2 in November to 6.5 m/s in March. The
227
corresponding monthly average wind power density occurred as 75 W/m2 in November and
290 W/m2 in March. The annual average wind speed at 40 meter height was calculated to be
5.6 m/s and the corresponding wind power density was 175 W/m2. The prevailing direction
of wind in Arar was W-NW. The annual electrical energy generation has been predicted to be
in the range of 330 to 3071 MWh. As many as 65 small size water pumps could be operated
and the average daily water pumping capacity at Arar is estimated to be in the range of 2000
to 15000 m3/day.
Dhulom was one of the promising sites where the diurnal variation of wind speed was
obtained to be between 4 and 7 m/s. The wind power density range was 50-350 W/m2. The
maximum monthly average wind speed at Dhulom was 6.7 m/s in March and the minimum
monthly average wind speed was 3.8 m/s in October. The wind power density varied between
60 W/m2 in October and 320 W/m2 in March. The annual average wind speed at a height of
40 m was obtained to be 5.8 m/s and the wind power density was 210 W/m2. The prevailing
wind speed at Dhulom was SE. The overall annual electrical energy generation was
calculated to be in the range of 420 to 4012 MWh. As many as 85 small size water pumps
could be operated with wind power in Dhulom and an average daily water pumping capacity
of 2500-20000 m3/day is predicted from a depth of 100 m.
From the analysis carried out, it is found that there is a considerable wind power in all
the sites for pumping underground water for irrigation purposes. Among the sites considered,
Dhulom, Dhahran and Arar exhibited the highest water pumping potential, respectively. This
indicated that many remote areas in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are suitable for the
harnessing of wind energy by using small to mid-size wind energy conversions systems.
Currently, the most economical and convenient energy source utilized by farms in
Saudi Arabia is electric energy produced and distributed by the Saudi Electricity Company
(SEC) over the national network. Therefore, we have estimated the net equivalent value of
the annual wind energy (in terms of Saudi Riyals) generated by various machines at various
locations. Then, we have determined the estimated cost of purchasing and operating such
wind energy generating systems. Specifically, we have considered Nordex N60/1300 and
228
N43/600. For these machines, the initial investment costs including the WEC costs, extras,
foundation, grid connection, planning and licensing, and annual operating and maintenance
costs including the repair, insurance, monitoring and management costs are obtained from
literature. The life span of the project is taken as 30 years and the scrap value of the WEC
machine is assumed to be 5 % of its initial investment costs. Finally, we have assumed 6 %
inflation rate and 8 % discount rate.
We have determined the net present value of total revenue generated by wind
machines at different locations of Saudi Arabia and realized that neither N60/1300 nor
N43/600 is an economically profitable investment in any one of the five locations with the
list price of the WEC system reported in 2003. Considering the fact that the wind energy has
several side benefits, we have determined the extra money that an investor should be willing
to pay for these benefits. By willing to pay as little as 0.002 SAR per KWh with N60/1300
in Dhulom area, one will be indifferent in using WEC system or electric energy from SEC.
However this amount may go up to 0.332 SAR per Kwh with N43/600 in Gassim area.
Finally, we have performed a sensitivity analysis to determine break-even initial cost
of the seven different WEC systems that an investor will be indifferent between choosing
wind energy and electric energy. Obviously, the most preferable place and WEC type is the
Dhulom area and N80/2500 such that an investor will be willing to spend upto 2,405,767
SAR for initial cost of the WEC system. The least preferable combination is the Gassim area
with N27/150 machine such that an investor should be compensated up to 2.757,503 SAR to
convince him to invest for such WEC system.
229
APPENDIX A: MATLAB PROGRAM FOR STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF RAW

WIND DATA
The main application of the program is to accurately find the average velocity and average
wind power density of wind for any location. These outputs are obtained in both figure
format and in numerical formats. The program takes care of the erroneous data which can be
represented by negative values with the range of values as discussed below. Additional
outputs given by the program include the statistics of the mean values like number of data
points considered for statistics (For example, in half-hourly average 48 data points are
considered when calculating daily average), minimum, maximum, mean, median, range and
standard deviation. The program also writes the numerical values into a separate excel sheet
named NUMERICAL VALUES in the current directory of working. One more routine
incorporated in the program is the sorting of half hour data into hour data which will be used
further in plotting wind rose separately.
1. The program is capable of handling half hourly data of 1 to 6 years. Incomplete year
data is not allowed. An error message is flagged if the data is not on complete yearly
basis.
2. The program cannot handle the data of leap years. The length of data in each year is
8760 and 17520 rows depending upon weather one is considering hourly or half
hourly data. The remedy for this is to delete the data of February 29th. An error of 0.2
% occurs by doing so.
3. The program considers that the data has 6 velocities and two directions at one
particular hour or half hour. If less velocities are involved then the program can be
modified by commenting the lines where the velocities W5 and W5 occur.
4. The programs number averages are exported to excel sheet only when MATLAB
version 7.0 or later is used.
5. Erroneous data is meant when the following data is present at some point.
Velocity less than zero or more than 90 m/sec.
Temperature is less than zero or more than 90 o C.
230
A.1. Loading Data and constraint of Variable names:
As MATLAB programs only understand the .mat format of data for calculation
purpose, the raw data has to be converted to this data type. As the general raw data obtained
is in text format, this is converted into the .mat form in two steps.
Step 1: Convert text data to excel work book. If the length of the data is more
than 65000 data points (approximately 6 years data on hourly basis and 3
years data on half hourly data) then the data should be split into two excel
sheets in a work book, or two separate excel work books. This can be done in
the following way. Open a new Excel Workbook Keep only one sheet by
deleting the sheets 2 and 3 (sheets menu is found at bottom left corner of
workbook) In the menu bar go to Data and choose Import External Data
Follow the commands shown on the screen to finish the process of importing
data to excel check that the number of rows of data is a multiple of 8760
(after deleting February 29th data if leap year is available in the range of years
considered) If only one sheet of raw data is available then rename the
variable names (data headers or first row in the imported data) as YR for year,
MN for month, HR for hour, W1 to W6 for velocities, DR1 and DR2 for
directions and TM for temperature. Save (In current directory or a subfolder which has the actual program) and exit. If more than 52560 data
points (17520 half hours * 3 years or 8760 hours * 6) are available repeat the
step 1 but in the last step the variable names in this second sheet should be YY
for year, MM for month, HH for hour, VV1 to VV6 for velocities, DD1 and
DD2 for directions and TT for temperature.
Word of caution make sure that the text file has rows and columns evenly distributed. This
can be accomplished by un-checking the word wrap option on format menu. This will avoid
double work.
231
Step 2: Open MATLAB and clear all variables by typing clear all at the
command prompt SET PATH of current working directory Open file

menu and choose Import data make sure that in the import wizard second
option is chosen (Create vectors from each column using column names)
save the work space as .mat without spaces in between (Example: use
Dhahran_1.mat and not Dhahran 1.mat) If more than one excel sheet is
available follow the second step from beginning and save with other file name
(Example: Dhahran_2.mat).
Word of caution if the second option in import wizard is not highlighted or flashes an error
message it means that there is some missing column or row or data point or there is a
punctuation mark or some space in the excel sheet. this has to be verified manually.
A.2. Running the program
The program in a general sense is interactive prompting for the yearly data or half hourly
data, name of the data file to be loaded. The plots are directly plotted and the numeric values
are exported to a excel file named NUMERIC VALUES in the current working directory.
after executing the program this file name is to be changed to specific location name as if the
program is run for next case it will rewrite the existing file.
A.3. Common error messages
The list of common error messages encountered while executing the program and the solution
to them.
1) Error using load function data file loaded may not be in the same working
directory which has the main program
2) Cannot find variable name check the work space. it should have exactly same
variables names that were chosen in step 1 of the loading data step. This means that
consider only data that we imported if some other data variables appear leave it
unchanged. If there are two data files loaded (Example: 5 years data will be 3 years
232
data in first file and 2 years in second file) additional variables may appear. Leave
them unchanged as they are generated by the program. MATLAB variables are case
sensitive. W1 is not same as w1. in our case all the data is imported in capitals.
3) Caution while importing data: As this is the most likely cause of error in program
execution, proper care is taken in this step.
Final Word: In a general sense the program works well with all the data in the range as
stated above but in some exceptional cases there may be some discrepancies that are
specific for a particular case or so. In such cases the said discrepancies are noted in
output and hence such cases are to be dealt with case by case basis.
233
A.4. Listing of the matlab program
clear all
close all
clc
W1=[]; VV1=[];
a=input('Enter number of data files (1 or 2): ');
if (a==2)
data_1= input('Enter the location: ','s')
load(data_1)
load(data_2)
elseif (a==1)
load(data_1)
else
error('DATAFILE CAN BE 1 OR 2');
end
hd=input('Enter datatype (24 for Hourly data and 48 for Half Hour): ');
if (hd==24)
yd = 8760;
elseif (hd==48)
yd=17520;
else
error('DATA VARIATION CAN BE EITHER HALF HOURLY OR HOURLY. CHOOSE
48 IF DATA IS HALF-HOURLY DATA OR 24 IF THE DATA IS HOURLY')
break;
end
z1=length(W1)/yd;
z2=length(VV1)/yd;
z=z1+z2;
R=mod(z*yd, 17520);
if (R ~= 0)
error('ERROR IN LENGTH OF DATA.')
error('CHECK YOUR RAW DATA FOR EXCESS OR MISSING DATA')
else
if z<4
W1(find(W1<0|W1>90))=-1; W2(find(W2<0|W2>90))=-1;
234
W3(find(W3<0|W3>90))=-1; W4(find(W4<0|W4>90))=-1;
W5(find(W5<0|W5>90))=-1; W6(find(W6<0|W6>90))=-1;
% DENSITY CALCULATION FOR INDIVIDUAL HOURS
dnsty1=101325./(287*(TM+273));dnsty1(find(TM<=0|TM>90|W1<0|W1>90))=0;
else
V1=[W1; VV1]; V2=[W2; VV2]; V3=[W3; VV3]; V4=[W4; VV4];
V5=[W5; VV5]; V6=[W6; VV6]; D1=[DR1;DD1]; D2=[DR2;DD2];
Y=[YR; YY]; T=[TM; TT]; M=[MN; MM]; H=[HR; HH];
V1(find(V1<0|V1>90))=-1; V2(find(V2<0|V2>90))=-1;
V3(find(V3<0|V3>90))=-1; V4(find(V4<0|V4>90))=-1;
V5(find(V5<0|V5>90))=-1; V6(find(V6<0|V6>90))=-1;
% DENSITY CALCULATION FOR INDIVIDUAL HOURS
dnsty1=101325./(287*(T+273));dnsty1(find(T<=0|T>90|V1<0|V1>90))=0;
end
if z<4
if z==1
% HALF HOURLY AVERAGE VELOCITY AND WIND POWER DENSITY
CALCULATION AND PLOT
k=1:hd:length(W1);
for i=1:1:hd
k1=find(W1(k)==-1); k2=find(W2(k)==-1); k3=find(W3(k)==-1);
d1=find(dnsty1(k)==0); d2=find(dnsty2(k)==0); d3=find(dnsty3(k)==0);
235

hfhrlyv1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+length(k1))/(length(k)-length(k1));
hfhrlywpd1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
k=k+ones(size(k)); warning off;
end
% DAILY AVERAGE VELOCITY AND WIND POWER DENSITY
for i=1:1:length(W1)/hd
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd;
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+length(k1))/(length(k)-length(k1));
if
(dailyvel1(i)==0|dailyvel2(i)==0|dailyvel3(i)==0|dailyvel4(i)==0|dailyvel5(i)==0|dailyvel6(i)
==0)
dailyvel1(i) = (dailyvel1(i) + dailyvel1(i-1))/2;
236

end
dailywpd1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
if
(dailywpd1(i)==0|dailywpd2(i)==0|dailywpd3(i)==0|dailywpd4(i)==0|dailywpd5(i)==0|daily
wpd6(i)==0)
dailywpd1(i) = (dailywpd1(i) + dailywpd1(i-1))/2;
end
warning off;
end
% MONTHLY AVERAGE VELOCITY AND WIND POWER DENSITY
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
k=32:1:59;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==3
k=60:1:90;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==4
k=91:1:120;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==5
k=121:1:151;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==6
k=152:1:181;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==7
k=182:1:212;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==8
k=213:1:243;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==9
237
k=244:1:273;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==10
k=274:1:304;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;;
elseif i==11
k=305:1:334;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;;
else
k=335:1:365;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;;
end
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+length(k1))/(length(k)-length(k1));
mothlywpd1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
warning off;
end
% YEARLY AVERAGE VELOCITY AND WIND POWER DENSITY
nn=length(W1);
i=1;
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
yrlyvelv1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+length(k1))/(nn-length(k1));
238
wpdyrlyv1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
elseif z==2
k=1:hd:length(V1);
for i=1:1:hd
end
239
nn=length(W1)/z*hd;
for i=1:1:nn
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd; j=hd*(nn+i-1)+1:(nn+i)*hd;
j1=find(W1(j)==-1); j2=find(W2(j)==-1); j3=find(W3(j)==-1);
kd1=find(dnsty1(k)==0); kd2=find(dnsty2(k)==0); kd3=find(dnsty3(k)==0);
jd1=find(dnsty1(j)==0); jd2=find(dnsty2(j)==0); jd3=find(dnsty3(j)==0);
t1=length(k1)+length(j1); t2=length(k2)+length(j2);
td1=length(kd1)+length(jd1); td2=length(kd2)+length(jd2);
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+sum(W1(j))+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
if
==0)
end
dailywpd1(i)=((dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*W1(j).^3))*(z*(2*length(k)td1))^-1;
240
if
wpd6(i)==0)
end
end
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=366:1:396;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
k=32:1:59;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=397:1:424;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==3
k=60:1:90;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=425:1:455;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==4
k=91:1:120;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=456:1:hd5;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==5
k=121:1:151;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=hd6:1:516;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==6
k=152:1:181;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=517:1:546;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==7
241
k=182:1:212;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=547:1:577;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==8
k=213:1:243;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=578:1:608;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==9
k=244:1:273;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=609:1:638;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==10
k=274:1:304;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=639:1:669;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==11
k=305:1:334;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=670:1:699;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
else
k=335:1:365;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=700:1:730;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
end
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+sum(W1(j))+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
mothlywpd1(i)=((dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*W1(j).^3))*(2*(z*length(k)td1))^-1;
242
warning off;
end
nn=length(W1)/z;
for i=1:1:z
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
end
elseif z==3
243

k=1:hd:length(W1);
for i=1:1:hd
end
nn=length(W1)/(z*hd);
for i=1:1:nn
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd; j=hd*(nn+i-1)+1:(nn+i)*hd; m=hd*(2*nn+i-1)+1:(2*nn+i)*hd;
m1=find(W1(m)==-1); m2=find(W2(m)==-1); m3=find(W3(m)==-1);
t1=length(k1)+length(j1)+length(m1); t2=length(k2)+length(j2)+length(m2);
244
md1=find(dnsty1(m)==0); md2=find(dnsty2(m)==0); md3=find(dnsty3(m)==0);
td1=length(kd1)+length(jd1)+length(md1);
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+sum(W1(j))+sum(W1(m))+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
if
==0)
end
dailywpd1(i)=((dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*W1(j).^3)+(dnsty1(m).'*W1(m).^3))*(2*(
z*length(k)-td1))^-1;
245
if
wpd6(i)==0)
end
end
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=366:1:396;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=731:1:761;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
k=32:1:59;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=397:1:424;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=762:1:789;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==3
k=60:1:90;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=425:1:455;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=790:1:820;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==4
k=91:1:120;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=456:1:485;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=821:1:850;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==5
k=121:1:151;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=486:1:516;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=851:1:881;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
246
elseif i==6
k=152:1:181;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=517:1:546;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=882:1:911;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==7
k=182:1:212;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=547:1:577;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=912:1:942;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==8
k=213:1:243;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=578:1:608;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=943:1:973;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==9
k=244:1:273;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=609:1:638;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=974:1:1003;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==10
k=274:1:304;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=639:1:669;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=1004:1:1034;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
elseif i==11
k=305:1:334;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=670:1:699;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=1035:1:1065;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
else
k=335:1:365;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=700:1:730;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=1066:1:1095;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
end
247
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(W1(k))+sum(W1(j))+sum(W1(m))+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
mothlywpd1(i)=((dnsty1(k).'*W1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*W1(j).^3)+(dnsty1(m).'*W1(m).^3))*(2
*(z*length(k)-td1))^-1;
warning off;
end
nn=length(W1)/z;
for i=1:1:z
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
248

end
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
CORNER=['HF HR';'DAY ';'MONTH';'YEAR ']; ZZZ= cellstr(CORNER);
HEADER=['VEL 1';'VEL 2';'VEL 3';'VEL 4';'VEL 5';'VEL 6';' ';'WPD 1';'WPD
2';'WPD 3';'WPD 4';'WPD 5';'WPD 6'];
YYY=cellstr(HEADER);
MONT_NAME=['JAN';'FEB';'MAR';'APR';'MAY';'JUN';'JUL';'AUG';'SEP';'OCT';'NOV';'DE
C']; NNN= cellstr(MONT_NAME);
STAT=['NUM ';'MAX ';'MIN ';'MEAN ';'MEDIAN';'RANGE ']; XXX=
cellstr(STAT);
% HALF HOURLY AVERAGE DATA PROCESSING
halfhr=1:1:hd;
249
HFHRLY_AVG_VEL=[halfhr', hfhrlyv1', hfhrlyv2', hfhrlyv3', hfhrlyv4', hfhrlyv5',

hfhrlyv6'];
HFHRLY_AVG_WPD=[hfhrlywpd1', hfhrlywpd2', hfhrlywpd3', hfhrlywpd4',
hfhrlywpd5', hfhrlywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(1), 'HLFHR AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'HLFHR AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHRLY_AVG_VEL, 'HLFHR AVG', 'A3:G50');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHRLY_AVG_WPD, 'HLFHR AVG', 'I3:N50');
[hrwds1, hrwds2]= datastats(hfhrlyv1', hfhrlyv2'); [hrwpdds1, hrwpdds2]=
datastats(hfhrlywpd1', hfhrlywpd2');
hrlywds=[hrwds1, hrwds2, hrwds3, hrwds4, hrwds5, hrwds6];
hrlywpdds=[hrwpdds1, hrwpdds2, hrwpdds3, hrwpdds4, hrwpdds5, hrwpdds6];
HFHR_STAT_VEL=[hrlywds.num; hrlywds.max; hrlywds.min; hrlywds.mean;
hrlywds.median; hrlywds.range];
HFHR_STAT_WPD=[hrlywpdds.num; hrlywpdds.max; hrlywpdds.min;
hrlywpdds.mean; hrlywpdds.median; hrlywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'HLFHR AVG', 'A52:A57');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHR_STAT_VEL , 'HLFHR AVG', 'B52:G57');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHR_STAT_WPD , 'HLFHR AVG', 'I52:N57');
figure;
plot(hfhrlyv1,'r'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv2,'b'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv3,'g'); hold on;
plot(hfhrlyv4,'k'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv5,'c'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv6,'m'); grid on;
xlabel('HALF HOURS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s'); set(gca,
'XTick', 0:4:hd);
title('HALF HOURLY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('HALF HOURS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s');
figure;
plot(hfhrlywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd2,'b'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd3,'g'); hold
on;
plot(hfhrlywpd4,'k'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd6,'m'); grid
on;
'XTick', 0:4:hd);
title('HALF HOURLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
legend('WPD1','WPD2','WPD3','WPD4','WPD5','WPD6');
xlabel('HALF HOURS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
250
% DAILY AVERAGE DATA PROCESSING

days=1:1:365;
uint8(days);
DLY_AVG_VEL=[days', dailyvel1', dailyvel2', dailyvel3', dailyvel4', dailyvel5',
dailyvel6'];
DLY_AVG_WPD=[dailywpd1', dailywpd2', dailywpd3', dailywpd4', dailywpd5',
dailywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(2), 'DLY AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'DLY AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_AVG_VEL, 'DLY AVG', 'A3:G367');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_AVG_WPD, 'DLY AVG', 'I3:N367');
[dlwds1, dlwds2]= datastats(dailyvel1', dailyvel2'); [dlwpdds1, dlwpdds2]=
datastats(dailywpd1', dailywpd2');
dailywds=[dlwds1, dlwds2, dlwds3, dlwds4, dlwds5, dlwds6];
dailywpdds=[dlwpdds1, dlwpdds2, dlwpdds3, dlwpdds4, dlwpdds5, dlwpdds6];
DLY_STAT_VEL=[dailywds.num; dailywds.max; dailywds.min; dailywds.mean;
dailywds.median; dailywds.range];
DLY_STAT_WPD=[dailywpdds.num; dailywpdds.max; dailywpdds.min;
dailywpdds.mean; dailywpdds.median; dailywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'DLY AVG', 'A369:A374');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_STAT_VEL , 'DLY AVG', 'B369:G374');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_STAT_WPD , 'DLY AVG', 'I369:N374');
figure;
plot(dailyvel1,'r'); hold on; plot(dailyvel2,'b'); hold on; plot(dailyvel3,'g'); hold on;
plot(dailyvel4,'k'); hold on; plot(dailyvel5,'c'); hold on; plot(dailyvel6,'m'); grid on;
set(gca, 'XTick', 0:25:375); set(gca, 'XTickLabel', 0:25:375); set(gca, 'XLim', [0 375]);
title('DAILY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('DAYS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WIND VELOCIYT, m/s');
figure;
plot(dailywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(dailywpd2,'b'); hold on; plot(dailywpd3,'g'); hold on;
plot(dailywpd4,'k'); hold on; plot(dailywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(dailywpd6,'m'); grid on;
title('DAILY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('DAYS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
251
% MONTHLY AVERAGE DATA PROCESSING

Month=[729056, 729085, 729116, 729146, 729177, 729207, 729238, 729269, 729299,
729330, 729360, 729391];
MNT_AVG_VEL=[mothlyvel1', mothlyvel2', mothlyvel3', mothlyvel4', mothlyvel5',
mothlyvel6'];
MNT_AVG_WPD=[mothlywpd1', mothlywpd2', mothlywpd3', mothlywpd4',
mothlywpd5', mothlywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', NNN,'MNT AVG', 'A3:A14');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(3), 'MNT AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'MNT AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_AVG_VEL, 'MNT AVG', 'B3:G14');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_AVG_WPD, 'MNT AVG', 'I3:N14');
[mnwds1, mnwds2]= datastats(mothlyvel1', mothlyvel2'); [mnwpdds1, mnwpdds2]=
datastats(mothlywpd1', mothlywpd2');
mothlywds=[mnwds1, mnwds2, mnwds3, mnwds4, mnwds5, mnwds6];
mothlywpdds=[mnwpdds1, mnwpdds2, mnwpdds3, mnwpdds4, mnwpdds5,
mnwpdds6];
MNT_STAT_VEL=[mothlywds.num; mothlywds.max; mothlywds.min;
mothlywds.mean; mothlywds.median; mothlywds.range];
MNT_STAT_WPD=[mothlywpdds.num; mothlywpdds.max; mothlywpdds.min;
mothlywpdds.mean; mothlywpdds.median; mothlywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'MNT AVG', 'A16:A21');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_STAT_VEL , 'MNT AVG', 'B16:G21');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_STAT_WPD , 'MNT AVG', 'I16:N21');
figure;
plot(Month, mothlyvel1,'r'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel2,'b'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlyvel3,'g'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel4,'k'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlyvel5,'c'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel6,'m'); grid on;
set(gca,'XTick',729056:30.45:729391); set(gca,'XLim',[729056 729391]);
set(gca,'XTickLabel',{'Jan','Feb','Mar','Apr','May','Jun','Jul','Aug','Sep','Oct','Nov','Dec'});
title('MONTHLY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('MONTHS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCIYT, m/s');
figure;
plot(Month, mothlywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd2,'b'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlywpd3,'g'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd4,'k'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd6,'m'); grid on;
252

title('MONTHLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('MONTHS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
if z==1
year=YR(2); i=1:1:6;
AYW1=[yrlyvelv1]; AYW2=[yrlyvelv2]; AYW3=[yrlyvelv3];
AYWPD1=[wpdyrlyv1]; AYWPD2=[wpdyrlyv2]; AYWPD3=[wpdyrlyv3];
[yrwds1, yrwds2]= datastats(yrlyvelv1', yrlyvelv2'); [yrwpdds1, yrwpdds2]=
datastats(wpdyrlyv1', wpdyrlyv2');
yrlywds=[yrwds1, yrwds2, yrwds3, yrwds4, yrwds5, yrwds6];
yrlywpdds=[yrwpdds1, yrwpdds2, yrwpdds3, yrwpdds4, yrwpdds5, yrwpdds6];
figure;
plot(year, AYW1, '-r*'); hold on; plot(year, AYW2, '-b*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYW3, '-g*');hold on; plot(year, AYW4, '-k*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYW5, '-c*'); plot(year, AYW6, '-m*'); grid on;
title('YEARLY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('YEARS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s');
set(gca,'XTick',year);
figure;
plot(year, AYWPD1, '-r*'); hold on; plot(year, AYWPD2, '-b*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYWPD3, '-g*'); hold on; plot(year, AYWPD4, '-k*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYWPD5, '-c*'); plot(year, AYWPD6, '-m*'); grid on;
title('YEARLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('YEARS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq. m');
else
for i=1:1:z;
year(i)=YR((i-1)*nn+1):yd:YR((i)*nn);
end
i=1:1:6;
253

YR_AVG_VEL=[yrlyvelv1', yrlyvelv2', yrlyvelv3', yrlyvelv4', yrlyvelv5', yrlyvelv6'];
YR_AVG_WPD=[wpdyrlyv1', wpdyrlyv2', wpdyrlyv3', wpdyrlyv4', wpdyrlyv5',
wpdyrlyv6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', year','YR AVG', 'A3');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(4),'YR AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'YR AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_AVG_VEL, 'YR AVG', 'B3');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_AVG_WPD, 'YR AVG', 'I3');
YR_STAT_VEL=[yrlywds.num; yrlywds.max; yrlywds.min; yrlywds.mean;
yrlywds.median; yrlywds.range];
YR_STAT_WPD=[yrlywpdds.num; yrlywpdds.max; yrlywpdds.min;
yrlywpdds.mean; yrlywpdds.median; yrlywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'YR AVG', 'A12');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_STAT_VEL , 'YR AVG', 'B12:G17');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_STAT_WPD , 'YR AVG', 'I12:N17');
figure;
plot(year, AYW1, '-r*'); hold on; plot(year, AYW2, '-b*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYW3, '-g*');hold on; plot(year, AYW4, '-k*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYW5, '-c*'); plot(year, AYW6, '-m*'); grid on;
xlabel('YEARS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s');
figure;
254
OYW1=sum(AYW1)/z; OYW2=sum(AYW2)/z; OYW3=sum(AYW3)/z;

OYW4=sum(AYW4)/z; OYW5=sum(AYW5)/z; OYW6=sum(AYW6)/z;
OWPD1=sum(AYWPD1)/z; OWPD2=sum(AYWPD2)/z;
OWPD3=sum(AYWPD3)/z;
OWPD4=sum(AYWPD4)/z; OWPD5=sum(AYWPD5)/z;
OWPD6=sum(AYWPD6)/z;
OW=[OYW1 OYW2 OYW3 OYW4 OYW5 OYW6];
OWPD=[OWPD1 OWPD2 OWPD3 OWPD4 OWPD5 OWPD6];
if z==2
figure;
plot(i, OW, 'r:*'); set(gca,'XTick',i); set(gca,'XLim',[1 6]);
set(gca,'XTickLabel',{'V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6'}); grid on;
title('2 YEARS OVERALL VELOCITY VARIATION');
xlabel('VELOCITY'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s');
figure;
plot(i, OWPD, 'r:*'); set(gca,'XTick',i); set(gca,'XLim',[1 6]);
title('2 YEARS OVERALL WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('VELOCITY'); ylabel('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq. m');
else
figure;
plot(i, OW, 'r:*'); set(gca,'XTick',i); set(gca,'XLim',[1 6]);
figure;
end
end
else
if z==4
k=1:hd:length(V1);
255
for i=1:1:hd
k1=find(V1(k)==-1); k2=find(V2(k)==-1); k3=find(V3(k)==-1);
hfhrlyv1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+length(k1))/(length(k)-length(k1));
hfhrlywpd1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*V1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
end
nn=length(V1)/(z*hd);
for i=1:1:nn
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd;
j=hd*(nn+i-1)+1:(nn+i)*hd; m=hd*(2*nn+i-1)+1:(2*nn+i)*hd;
n=hd*(3*nn+i-1)+1:(3*nn+i)*hd;
j1=find(V1(j)==-1); j2=find(V2(j)==-1); j3=find(V3(j)==-1);
m1=find(V1(m)==-1); m2=find(V2(m)==-1); m3=find(V3(m)==-1);
n1=find(V1(n)==-1); n2=find(V2(n)==-1); n3=find(V3(n)==-1);
t1=length(k1)+length(j1)+length(m1)+length(n1);
256
nd1=find(dnsty1(n)==0); nd2=find(dnsty2(n)==0); nd3=find(dnsty3(n)==0);
td1=length(kd1)+length(jd1)+length(md1)+length(nd1);
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+t1)/(z*length(k)t1);
if
==0)
end
257
a1=(dnsty1(k).'*V1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*V1(j).^3);
b1=(dnsty1(n).'*V1(n).^3)+(dnsty1(m).'*V1(m).^3);
dailywpd1(i)=(a1+b1)*(2*(z*length(k)-td1))^-1;
if
wpd6(i)==0)
end
end
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd; j=366:1:396;j=(j(1)1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
m=731:1:761;m=(m(1)-1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd; n=1096:1:1126;n=(n(1)1)*hd+1:n(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
258
elseif i==3
elseif i==4
elseif i==5
elseif i==6
elseif i==7
elseif i==8
elseif i==9
elseif i==10
elseif i==11
259
else
end
k1=find(V1(k)==-1); k2=find(V2(k)==-1); k3=find(V3(k)==-1); k4=find(V4(k)==1); k5=find(V5(k)==-1); k6=find(V6(k)==-1);
j1=find(V1(j)==-1); j2=find(V2(j)==-1); j3=find(V3(j)==-1); j4=find(V4(j)==-1);
j5=find(V5(j)==-1); j6=find(V6(j)==-1);
n1=find(V1(n)==-1); n2=find(V2(n)==-1); n3=find(V3(n)==-1); n4=find(V4(n)==1); n5=find(V5(n)==-1); n6=find(V6(n)==-1);
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
260
mothlywpd1(i)=(a1+b1)*(2*(z*length(k)-td1))^-1;
warning off;
end
nn=length(V1)/z; mm=length(V1)/nn;
for i=1:1:mm
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
yrlyvelv1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+length(k1))/(nn-length(k1));
261
wpdyrlyv1(i)=(dnsty1(k).'*V1(k).^3)*(2*(length(k)-length(d1)))^-1;
end
elseif z==5
k=1:hd:length(V1);
for i=1:1:hd
end
262

for i=1:1:nn
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd;
j=hd*(nn+i-1)+1:(nn+i)*hd; m=hd*(2*nn+i-1)+1:(2*nn+i)*hd;
n=hd*(3*nn+i-1)+1:(3*nn+i)*hd; p=hd*(4*nn+i-1)+1:(4*nn+i)*hd;
p1=find(V1(p)==-1); p2=find(V2(p)==-1); p3=find(V3(p)==-1);
t1=length(k1)+length(j1)+length(m1)+length(n1)+length(p1);
pd1=find(dnsty1(p)==0); pd2=find(dnsty2(p)==0); pd3=find(dnsty3(p)==0);
td1=length(kd1)+length(jd1)+length(md1)+length(nd1)+length(pd1);
263
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+sum(V1(p))+t1)/(z*length(
k)-t1);
k)-t2);
k)-t3);
k)-t4);
k)-t5);
k)-t6);
if
==0)
end
a1=(dnsty1(k).'*V1(k).^3)+(dnsty1(j).'*V1(j).^3)+(dnsty1(m).'*V1(m).^3);
b1=(dnsty1(n).'*V1(n).^3)+(dnsty1(p).'*V1(p).^3);
264
if
wpd6(i)==0)
end
end
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=366:1:396;j=(j(1)-1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd; m=731:1:761;m=(m(1)1)*hd+1:m(end)*hd;
n=1096:1:1126;n=(n(1)-1)*hd+1:n(end)*hd; p=1461:1:1491;p=(p(1)1)*hd+1:p(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
k=32:1:59;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==3
k=60:1:90;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==4
k=91:1:120;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
265
elseif i==5
k=121:1:151;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==6
k=152:1:181;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==7
k=182:1:212;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==8
k=213:1:243;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==9
k=244:1:273;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==10
k=274:1:304;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
elseif i==11
k=305:1:334;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
else
k=335:1:365;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
266
end
j5=find(V5(j)==-1); j6=find(V6(j)==-1);
p1=find(V1(p)==-1); p2=find(V2(p)==-1); p3=find(V3(p)==-1); p4=find(V4(p)==1); p5=find(V5(p)==-1); p6=find(V6(p)==-1);
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+sum(V1(p))+t1)/(z*lengt
h(k)-t1);
267
h(k)-t2);
h(k)-t3);
h(k)-t4);
h(k)-t5);
h(k)-t6);
warning off;
end
for i=1:1:mm
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
268

end
year=[1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000];
AYV1=[yrlyvelv1(4) yrlyvelv1(1) yrlyvelv1(2) yrlyvelv1(3) yrlyvelv1(5)];
AYWPD1=[wpdyrlyv1(4) wpdyrlyv1(1) wpdyrlyv1(2) wpdyrlyv1(3)
wpdyrlyv1(5)];
wpdyrlyv2(5)];
wpdyrlyv3(5)];
wpdyrlyv4(5)];
wpdyrlyv5(5)];
wpdyrlyv6(5)];
else
269

k=1:hd:length(V1);
for i=1:1:hd
end
for i=1:1:nn
k=hd*(i-1)+1:i*hd; j=hd*(nn+i-1)+1:(nn+i)*hd; m=hd*(2*nn+i-1)+1:(2*nn+i)*hd;
n=hd*(3*nn+i-1)+1:(3*nn+i)*hd; p=hd*(4*nn+i-1)+1:(4*nn+i)*hd;
q=hd*(5*nn+i-1)+1:(5*nn+i)*hd;
270

q1=find(V1(q)==-1); q2=find(V2(q)==-1); q3=find(V3(q)==-1);
q4=find(V4(q)==-1); q5=find(V5(q)==-1); q6=find(V6(q)==-1);
t1=length(k1)+length(j1)+length(m1)+length(n1)+length(p1)+length(q1);
qd1=find(dnsty1(q)==0); qd2=find(dnsty2(q)==0); qd3=find(dnsty3(q)==0);
td1=length(kd1)+length(jd1)+length(md1)+length(nd1)+length(pd1)+length(qd1);
dailyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+sum(V1(p))+sum(V1(q))+
t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
271
if
==0)
end
b1=(dnsty1(n).'*V1(n).^3)+(dnsty1(p).'*V1(p).^3)+(dnsty1(q).'*V1(q).^3);
if
wpd6(i)==0)
272

end
end
for i=1:1:12
if i==1
k=1:1:31;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd;
j=366:1:396;j=(j(1)1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
p=1461:1:1491;p=(p(1)-1)*hd+1:p(end)*hd; q=1826:1:1856;q=(q(1)1)*hd+1:q(end)*hd;
elseif i==2
elseif i==3
elseif i==4
k=91:1:120;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd; j=456:1:hd5;j=(j(1)1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==5
k=121:1:151;k=(k(1)-1)*hd+1:k(end)*hd; j=hd6:1:516;j=(j(1)1)*hd+1:j(end)*hd;
elseif i==6
273
elseif i==7
elseif i==8
elseif i==9
elseif i==10
elseif i==11
else
274
end
j5=find(V5(j)==-1); j6=find(V6(j)==-1);
p1=find(V1(p)==-1); p2=find(V2(p)==-1); p3=find(V3(p)==-1); p4=find(V4(p)==1); p5=find(V5(p)==-1); p6=find(V6(p)==-1);
q1=find(V1(q)==-1); q2=find(V2(q)==-1); q3=find(V3(q)==-1); q4=find(V4(q)==1); q5=find(V5(q)==-1); q6=find(V6(q)==-1);
275
mothlyvel1(i)=(sum(V1(k))+sum(V1(j))+sum(V1(m))+sum(V1(n))+sum(V1(p))+sum(V1(p))
+t1)/(z*length(k)-t1);
mothlyvel2(i)=(sum(V2(k))+sum(V2(j))+sum(V2(m))+sum(V2(n))+sum(V2(p))+sum(V2(q))
warning off;
end
276
for i=1:1:mm
k=nn*(i-1)+1:nn*i;
end
% year=[1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002];
% AYV1=[yrlyvelv1(4) yrlyvelv1(1) yrlyvelv1(2) yrlyvelv1(3) yrlyvelv1(5)];
%
% AYWPD1=[wpdyrlyv1(4) wpdyrlyv1(1) wpdyrlyv1(2) wpdyrlyv1(3)
wpdyrlyv1(5)];
wpdyrlyv2(5)];
wpdyrlyv3(5)];
wpdyrlyv4(5)];
277

wpdyrlyv5(5)];
wpdyrlyv6(5)];
end
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
CORNER=['HF HR';'DAY ';'MONTH';'YEAR ']; ZZZ= cellstr(CORNER);
HEADER=['VEL 1';'VEL 2';'VEL 3';'VEL 4';'VEL 5';'VEL 6';' ';'WPD 1';'WPD
2';'WPD 3';'WPD 4';'WPD 5';'WPD 6'];
YYY=cellstr(HEADER);
MONT_NAME=['JAN';'FEB';'MAR';'APR';'MAY';'JUN';'JUL';'AUG';'SEP';'OCT';'NOV';'DE
C']; NNN= cellstr(MONT_NAME);
STAT=['NUM ';'MAX ';'MIN ';'MEAN ';'MEDIAN';'RANGE ']; XXX=
cellstr(STAT);
% HALF HOURLY AVERAGE DATA PROCESSING
halfhr=1:1:hd;
HFHRLY_AVG_VEL=[halfhr', hfhrlyv1', hfhrlyv2', hfhrlyv3', hfhrlyv4', hfhrlyv5',
hfhrlyv6'];
HFHRLY_AVG_WPD=[hfhrlywpd1', hfhrlywpd2', hfhrlywpd3', hfhrlywpd4',
hfhrlywpd5', hfhrlywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(1), 'HLFHR AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'HLFHR AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHRLY_AVG_VEL, 'HLFHR AVG', 'A3:G50');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHRLY_AVG_WPD, 'HLFHR AVG', 'I3:N50');
hrlywds=[hrwds1, hrwds2, hrwds3, hrwds4, hrwds5, hrwds6];
hrlywpdds=[hrwpdds1, hrwpdds2, hrwpdds3, hrwpdds4, hrwpdds5, hrwpdds6];
HFHR_STAT_VEL=[hrlywds.num; hrlywds.max; hrlywds.min; hrlywds.mean;
hrlywds.median; hrlywds.range];
HFHR_STAT_WPD=[hrlywpdds.num; hrlywpdds.max; hrlywpdds.min;
hrlywpdds.mean; hrlywpdds.median; hrlywpdds.range];
278
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'HLFHR AVG', 'A52:A57');

xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHR_STAT_VEL , 'HLFHR AVG', 'B52:G57');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', HFHR_STAT_WPD , 'HLFHR AVG', 'I52:N57');
figure;
plot(hfhrlyv1,'r'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv2,'b'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv3,'g'); hold on;
plot(hfhrlyv4,'k'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv5,'c'); hold on; plot(hfhrlyv6,'m'); grid on;
'XTick', 0:4:hd);
title('HALF HOURLY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
figure;
plot(hfhrlywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd2,'b'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd3,'g'); hold
on;
plot(hfhrlywpd4,'k'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(hfhrlywpd6,'m'); grid
on;
'XTick', 0:4:hd);
title('HALF HOURLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('HALF HOURS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
% DAILY AVERAGE DATA PROCESSING
days=1:1:365; uint8(days);
DLY_AVG_VEL=[days', dailyvel1', dailyvel2', dailyvel3', dailyvel4', dailyvel5',
dailyvel6'];
DLY_AVG_WPD=[dailywpd1', dailywpd2', dailywpd3', dailywpd4', dailywpd5',
dailywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(2), 'DLY AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'DLY AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_AVG_VEL, 'DLY AVG', 'A3:G367');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_AVG_WPD, 'DLY AVG', 'I3:N367');
dailywds=[dlwds1, dlwds2, dlwds3, dlwds4, dlwds5, dlwds6];
dailywpdds=[dlwpdds1, dlwpdds2, dlwpdds3, dlwpdds4, dlwpdds5, dlwpdds6];
DLY_STAT_VEL=[dailywds.num; dailywds.max; dailywds.min; dailywds.mean;
dailywds.median; dailywds.range];
279
DLY_STAT_WPD=[dailywpdds.num; dailywpdds.max; dailywpdds.min;

dailywpdds.mean; dailywpdds.median; dailywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'DLY AVG', 'A369:A374');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_STAT_VEL , 'DLY AVG', 'B369:G374');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', DLY_STAT_WPD , 'DLY AVG', 'I369:N374');
figure;
plot(dailyvel1,'r'); hold on; plot(dailyvel2,'b'); hold on; plot(dailyvel3,'g'); hold on;
plot(dailyvel4,'k'); hold on; plot(dailyvel5,'c'); hold on; plot(dailyvel6,'m'); grid on;
title('DAILY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('DAYS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WIND VELOCIYT, m/s');
figure;
plot(dailywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(dailywpd2,'b'); hold on; plot(dailywpd3,'g'); hold on;
plot(dailywpd4,'k'); hold on; plot(dailywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(dailywpd6,'m'); grid on;
title('DAILY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('DAYS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
% MONTHLY DATA PROCESSING
Month=[729056, 729085, 729116, 729146, 729177, 729207, 729238, 729269, 729299,
729330, 729360, 729391];
MNT_AVG_VEL=[mothlyvel1', mothlyvel2', mothlyvel3', mothlyvel4', mothlyvel5',
mothlyvel6'];
MNT_AVG_WPD=[mothlywpd1', mothlywpd2', mothlywpd3', mothlywpd4',
mothlywpd5', mothlywpd6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', NNN,'MNT AVG', 'A3:A14');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(3),'MNT AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'MNT AVG', 'B2:N2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_AVG_VEL, 'MNT AVG', 'B3:G14');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_AVG_WPD, 'MNT AVG', 'I3:N14');
mothlywds=[mnwds1, mnwds2, mnwds3, mnwds4, mnwds5, mnwds6];
mothlywpdds=[mnwpdds1, mnwpdds2, mnwpdds3, mnwpdds4, mnwpdds5,
mnwpdds6];
280
MNT_STAT_VEL=[mothlywds.num; mothlywds.max; mothlywds.min;

mothlywds.mean; mothlywds.median; mothlywds.range];
MNT_STAT_WPD=[mothlywpdds.num; mothlywpdds.max; mothlywpdds.min;
mothlywpdds.mean; mothlywpdds.median; mothlywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'MNT AVG', 'A16:A21');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_STAT_VEL , 'MNT AVG', 'B16:G21');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', MNT_STAT_WPD , 'MNT AVG', 'I16:N21');
figure;
plot(Month, mothlyvel1,'r'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel2,'b'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlyvel3,'g'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel4,'k'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlyvel5,'c'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlyvel6,'m'); grid on;
title('MONTHLY VELOCITY VARIATION'); legend('V1','V2','V3','V4','V5','V6');
xlabel('MONTHS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCIYT, m/s');
figure;
plot(Month, mothlywpd1,'r'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd2,'b'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlywpd3,'g'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd4,'k'); hold on;
plot(Month, mothlywpd5,'c'); hold on; plot(Month, mothlywpd6,'m'); grid on;
title('MONTHLY WINDPOWER DENSITY VARIATION');
xlabel('MONTHS');ylabel ('AVERAGE WINDPOWER DENSITY, W/Sq.m');
% YEARLY DATA PROCESSING
for i=1:1:z;
year(i)=Y((i-1)*nn+1):yd:Y((i)*nn);
end
i=1:1:6;
AYV1=[yrlyvelv1]; AYV2=[yrlyvelv2]; AYV3=[yrlyvelv3];
AYV4=[yrlyvelv4]; AYV5=[yrlyvelv5]; AYV6=[yrlyvelv6];
YR_AVG_VEL=[yrlyvelv1', yrlyvelv2', yrlyvelv3', yrlyvelv4', yrlyvelv5', yrlyvelv6'];
YR_AVG_WPD=[wpdyrlyv1', wpdyrlyv2', wpdyrlyv3', wpdyrlyv4', wpdyrlyv5',
wpdyrlyv6'];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', year','YR AVG', 'A3');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', ZZZ(4),'YR AVG', 'A2:A2');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YYY', 'YR AVG', 'B2:N2');
281
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_AVG_VEL, 'YR AVG', 'B3');

xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_AVG_WPD, 'YR AVG', 'I3');
YR_STAT_VEL=[yrlywds.num; yrlywds.max; yrlywds.min; yrlywds.mean;
yrlywds.median; yrlywds.range];
YR_STAT_WPD=[yrlywpdds.num; yrlywpdds.max; yrlywpdds.min; yrlywpdds.mean;
yrlywpdds.median; yrlywpdds.range];
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', XXX,'YR AVG', 'A12');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_STAT_VEL , 'YR AVG', 'B12:G17');
xlswrite('NUMERIC VALUES', YR_STAT_WPD , 'YR AVG', 'I12:N17');
figure;
plot(year, AYV1, '-r*'); hold on; plot(year, AYV2, '-b*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYV3, '-g*');hold on; plot(year, AYV4, '-k*'); hold on;
plot(year, AYV5, '-c*'); plot(year, AYV6, '-m*'); grid on;
xlabel('YEARS'); ylabel('AVERAGE WIND VELOCITY, m/s'); set(gca,'XTick',year);
figure;
OYV1=sum(AYV1)/z; OYV2=sum(AYV2)/z; OYV3=sum(AYV3)/z;
OYV4=sum(AYV4)/z; OYV5=sum(AYV5)/z; OYV6=sum(AYV6)/z;
OWPD1=sum(AYWPD1)/z; OWPD2=sum(AYWPD2)/z; OWPD3=sum(AYWPD3)/z;
OWPD4=sum(AYWPD4)/z; OWPD5=sum(AYWPD5)/z; OWPD6=sum(AYWPD6)/z;
OV=[OYV1 OYV2 OYV3 OYV4 OYV5 OYV6];
OWPD=[OWPD1 OWPD2 OWPD3 OWPD4 OWPD5 OWPD6];
if z==4
figure;
plot(i, OV, 'r:*'); set(gca,'XTick',i); set(gca,'XLim',[1 6]);
282

figure;
elseif z==5
figure;
figure;
else
figure;
figure;
end
end
end
283
REFERENCES
1.
Abdel-Magid, Y. L. and El-Amin, I. M., (1987), Dynamic stability of wind-turbine

generators under widely varying loading conditions, Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, v. 9, n. 3, pp. 180-188.
2.
Abderrahman, W. A., (2001), Energy and water in arid developing countries: Saudi
Arabia, a case study, Water Resources Development, v. 17, n. 2, pp. 247-255.
3.
Abed, K.A. (1997), Performance of a wind-turbine-driven compressor for lifting

water, Energy (Oxford), v. 22, n. 1, pp. 21-26.
4.
Abramowski, J., Posorski, R., Simonis, P. and Mueller, H., (1999), Wind energy
projects in Morocco and Namibia, Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, v. 10, n.
4, pp. 121-127.
5.
Abu Rizaiza, O.S. and Al-Osaimy, M.H., (1996), A statistical approach for
estimating irrigation water usage in western Saudi Arabia, Agricultural Water
Management, Volume 29, Issue 2, Pages 175-185
6.
Ackermann, T. and Soder, L., (2000), Wind energy technology and current status:
a review, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v. 4, n. 4, pp. 315-374.
7.
Ackermann, T. and Soder, L., (2002), An overview of wind energy-status 2002,

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, v. 6, pp. 67-128.
8.
Agamawy, H.E. (2001), Safety systems for the ESES 2002 wind pump, Renewable
Energy, v. 23, n. 3-4, pp. 585-593.
9.
Al-Abbadi N. M., (2003a), Final report Dhahran wind monitoring station, Wind
Resource Assessment Project, Energy Research institute, KACST.
10.
Al-Abbadi N. M., (2003b), Final report Gassim wind monitoring station, Wind
11.
Al-Abbadi N. M., (2003c), Final report Yanbu wind monitoring station, Wind
12.
Al-Abbadi N. M., (2003d), Final report Arar wind monitoring station, Wind
13.
Al-Abbadi N. M., (2003e), Final report Dhulom wind monitoring station, Wind
284
14.
Al-Abbadi, N.M., (2004), Wind energy resource assessment for five locations in
Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 21
December 2004,
15.
Al-Ansari, J. M., Bakhsh, H. and Madni, K. I., (1986), Wind energy atlas for the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, KACST report.
16.
Alawaji, S. H., (1996), Wind energy resource assessment in Saudi Arabia - I.

Network design and description, Renewable Energy, v. 7, n. 4, pp. 319-328.
17.
Al-Ajlan, S.A., Al-Ibrahim, A.M., Abdulkhaleq, M. and Alghamdi, F., (2005),

Developing sustainable energy policies for electrical energy conservation in Saudi
Arabia, Energy Policy, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 12 January 2005.
18.
Al-Ansari, J. M., Bakhsh, H. and Madni, K. I., (1986), Wind energy atlas for the
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, KACST report.
19.
Alawaji, S. H., Eugenio, N. N. and Elani, U. A., (1996), Wind energy resource
assessment in Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, pp. 818-821.
20.
Alawaji, S., Smiai, M.S., Rafique, S. and Stafford, B. (1995), PV-powered water
pumping and desalination plant for remote areas in Saudi Arabia, Applied Energy,
Volume 52, Issues 2-3, Pages 283-289
21.
Al-Garni, A.Z., Sahin, A.Z., and Al-Farayedhi, A., (1999), Modeling of Weather
Characteristics and Wind Power in the Eastern Part of Saudi Arabia, International
Journal of Energy Research, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 805-812.
22.
Alnaser, W.E. (1993), Feasibility of estimating the wind speed in a location by the
knowledge of the distance and the azimuth angle from a reference point,
Renewable Energy, v. 3, n. 2-3, pp. 211-216.
23.
Alnaser, W. E., (1999), Mobile solar and wind-powered generator (MSWPG),

Applied Energy, v. 64, n. 1, pp. 97-105.
24.
Alnaser, W.E., El-Maalej, M., Elsayed, H.M., Eliagoubi, B. and Al-Kalak, A.,
(2002), First wind energy atlas for the Arab states, Proceedings of the World
Renewable Energy Congress VII, Cologne, Germany.
25.
Alnatheer, O., (2005), The potential contribution of renewable energy to electricity

supply in Saudi Arabia, Energy Policy, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online
2 March 2005,
285
26.
Al-Shehri, A. M. (1987), Modelling of a wind energy system with an inherent

energy storage medium, Wind Engineering, v. 11, n. 6, pp. 351-361.
27.
Al-Shehri, A.M., Elhadidy, M., El-Amin, I.M. and Said, S.A. (2001), A hybrid
electric energy System for a remote settlement in Saudi Arabia: A feasibility study,
Proceedings of the Sharjah Solar energy Conference, Sharjah, U.A.E.
28.
Al-Sofi, M.A., (2001), Seawater desalination SWCC experience and vision,

Desalination, Volume 135, Issues 1-3, Pages 121-139
29.
Al-Sulaiman, F.A. and Jamjoum, F.A. (1992), Applications of wind power on the
east coast of Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 47-55.
30.
Al-Suleimani, Z. and Rao, N.R., (2000), Wind-powered electric water-pumping

system installed in a remote location, Applied Energy v 65 no. 1, pp. 339-347.
31.
Amelio, M. and Bova, S., (2000), Exploitation of moderate wind resources by

autonomous wind electric pumping systems, Renewable Energy, v. 21, n. 2, pp.
255-269.
32.
Amin, M.I. and Elsamanoudy, M.A., (1985), Feasibility study of wind energy
utilization in Saudi Arabia, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 153-163.
33.
Andersen, P. D. and Jensen, P. H., (2000), Wind energy today and in the 21st
century, International Journal of Global Energy Issues, v. 13, n. 1, pp. 145-158.
34.
Anyanwu, E.E. and Ogueke, N.V., (2003), Design considerations for wind energy
powered water pumping facility for sites in Nigeria, Environment Protection
Engineering, v. 29, n. 2, pp. 65-77.
35.
Argaw, N., (2003), Renewable Energy for Water Pumping Applications in Rural
Villages, NREL/SR-500-30361.
36.
Argaw, N., Foster, R., and Ellis, A., (July 2003), Renewable Energy for Water
Pumping Applications in Rural Villages, US Department of Energy, NREL/SR500-30361.
37.
Auer, F., (1985), Wind powered water pumping comments on system design
illustrated by examples from Africa, Commission of the European Communities,
(Report) EUR, pp. 724-729.
286
38.
Ayyash, S., Al-Tukhaim, K., Al-Ammar, J. and Al-Jazzaf, M. (1985),

Characteristics of wind speed in Kuwait, Commission of the European
Communities, (Report) EUR, pp. 76-80.
39.
Badran, O., (2003), Wind turbine utilization for water pumping in Jordan, Journal
of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v. 91, n. 10, pp. 1203-1214.
40.
Bailey, G. and Boardman, B., (1999), Generation of electricity from UK offshore

wind power, Wind Engineering, v. 22, n. 5, pp. 243-249.
41.
Bakos, G. C., (2002), A systematic techno-economic assessment of a WEC system

installation for low-cost electrification of a habitable dwelling, Applied Energy, v.
72, pp. 609-619.
42.
Barth, H. J., (2001), Characteristics of the wind regime north of Jubail, Saudi
Arabia, based on high resolution wind data, Journal of Arid Environments, v. 47,
pp. 387402.
43.
Barthelmie, R. J., (1998), Brief review of offshore wind energy activity in the
1990's, Wind Engineering, v. 22, n. 6, pp. 265-273.
44.
Batchelor, S. J. and Dunn, P. D., (1985), Wind/water pumping using hydraulic

transmission for flexibility in site installation, Proceedings of the BWEA Wind
Energy Conference (British Wind Energy Association), pp. 161-168.
45.
Bechrakis, D.A., Deane J.P. and McKeogh E.J., (2004), Wind resource assessment
of an area using short term data correlated to a long term data set, to appear at
Solar Energy.
46.
Belessiotis, V. and Delyannis, E., (2000), History of renewable energies for water
desalination, Desalination, v. 128, n. 2, pp. 147-159.
47.
Betts, K. S., (2000), Wind at the end of the tunnel, Environmental Science and
Technology, v. 34, n. 13, pp. 306A, 308A-312A.
48.
Bindner, H. and Lundsager P., (1996) Increasing the technical and economic
performance of wind diesel systems by including fresh water production,
Renewable Energy v. 9, n. 1-4, pp. 887-890.
49.
Bin-Yatim, B., Othman, M. Y. H. and Dalimin, M. N. (1989), Long-term

performance of a 1.2 kW peak PV water pumping system, Solar & Wind
Technology, v. 6, n. 6, pp. 699-704.
287
50.
Bodamer, D., (1999), Catch the wind, Civil Engineering (New York), v. 69, n. 7,
pp. 50-53.
51.
Bolat, A. and Yigit F., 2001, A feasibility study of wind-pump systems in Saudi
Arabia, manuscript under preparation, KSU, Riyadh, KSA.
52.
Bourillon, C., (1999), Wind energy - clean power for generations, Renewable
Energy, v. 16, n. 1-4, pt. 2, pp. 948-953.
53.
Bremere, I., Kennedy, M., Stikker, A. and Schippers J., (2001), How water scarcity
will effect the growth in the desalination market in the coming 25 years,
Desalination, Volume 138, Issues 1-3, Pages 7-15
54.
Celik, A.N., (2002), Optimization and techno-economic analysis of autonomous

photovoltaicwind hybrid energy systems in comparison to single photovoltaic and
wind systems, Energy Conversion and Management, v. 43, pp. 24532468.
55.
Clark, R. N., (1985), Wind energy for pumping irrigation water, Commission of
the European Communities, (Report) EUR, pp. 755-760.
56.
Clark, R.N., Pinkerton, W. E. and McCarty, J.W., (1988), Independent wind

electric water pumping, Eighth ASME Wind Energy Symposium, Houston, TX,
USA.
57.
Clark, R. N. and Vick, B., (1995), Determining the proper motor size for two wind
turbines used in water pumping, Wind Energy 1995 American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Solar Energy Division (Publication) SED n. 16, pp. 65-72.
58.
Cordeiro, M., Valente, A. and Leitao, S., (2000), Wind energy potential of the
region of Tras-os-Montes and Alto Douro, Portugal, Renewable Energy, v. 19, n.
1-2, pp. 185-191.
59.
El Dam G. and Nagwa A., (1994), Financial-economic analysis of wind and diesel
driven water pumping systems in Sudan, Renewable Energy, v. 5, n. 1-4 pt 1, pp.
653-657.
60.
Elhadidy, M. A. and Shaahid, S. M., (1999), Feasibility of hybrid (wind plus solar)
power systems for Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n. 1-4, pt. 2,
pp. 970-976.
61.
Elhadidy, M.A. and Shaahid, S.M., (1999), Optimal sizing of battery storage for
hybrid (wind plus diesel) power systems, Renewable Energy, v. 18, n. 1, pp. 77-86.
288
62.
Elhadidy, M. A. and Shaahid, S. M., (2000), Parametric study of hybrid (wind plus
solar plus diesel) power generating systems, Renewable Energy, v. 21, n. 2, pp.
129-139.
63.
Elhadidy, M.A. (2002), Performance evaluation of hybrid (wind/solar/diesel)

power systems, Renewable Energy, v. 26, n. 3, pp. 401-413.
64.
Elhadidy, M. A. and Shaahid, S.M., (2003), Promoting applications of hybrid

(wind + photovoltaic + diesel + battery) power systems in hot regions, Renewable
Energy, v. 29, pp. 517528.
65.
Elhadidy, M.A. and Shaahid, S.M. (2004a), Role of hybrid (wind + diesel) power
systems in meeting commercial loads, Renewable Energy, v. 29, n. 1, pp. 109-118.
66.
Elhadidy, M.A. and Shaahid, S.M. (2004b), Promoting applications of hybrid

(wind + photovoltaic + diesel + battery) power systems in hot regions, Renewable
Energy, v. 29, n. 4, pp. 517-528.
67.
El-Haroun, A.A., (2001), The performance study of wind driven simple Egyptian
water pumps, Proceedings of the Sharjah Solar energy Conference, Sharjah, U.A.E,
pp. 19-22.
68.
El-Osta, W., Belhag, M., Klat, M., Fallah, I., Kalifa, Y., Fuad A., and Kazmerski,
L., (1995), Wind farm pilot project in Libya, Renewable energy, v. 6, n. 5-6, pp.
639-642.
69.
El-Shobokshy, M.S. and El-Zayat, R.E. (1991), Assessment of electricity

generation by wind power in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Int. J. Ambient
Energy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 39-50.
70.
Fazlur-Rahman, Md., (1996), Prospects of wind energy in Bangladesh, Renewable

Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, pp. 806-809.
71.
Feretic, D., Tomsic, Z. and Cavlina, N., (1999), Feasibility analysis of wind-energy
utilization in Croatia, Energy (Oxford), v. 24, n. 3, pp. 239-246.
72.
Fraenkel, P.L., Crick, F.J. and Cowley, P.D., (1999), Wind power for pumping: the
development of the ITP windpump, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n. 1-4 pt 2, pp. 916921.
73.
Garbacea, A., (1996), Wind energy development in West of Romania, Renewable

Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, pp. 815-817.
289
74.
Gaudiosi, G., (1999), Offshore wind energy prospects, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n.
1-4, pt. 2, pp. 828-834.
75.
Habali, S. M. and Saleh, I. A., (1994), Design of stand-alone brackish water

desalination wind energy system for Jordan, Solar Energy, v. 52, n. 6, pp. 525-532.
76.
Habali, S. M., Amr, M., Saleh, I. And Ta'ani, R., (2001), Wind as an alternative
source of energy in Jordan, Energy Conversion and Management, v. 42, n. 3, pp.
339-357.
77.
Habib, M. A., Said, S. A. M., El-Hadidy, M. A. and Al-Zaharna, I., (1999),

Optimization procedure of a hybrid photovoltaic wind energy system, Energy
(Oxford), v. 24, n. 11, pp. 919-929.
78.
Hammad, M., (1995), Photovoltaic, wind and diesel: a cost comparative study of
water pumping options in Jordan, Energy policy, v. 23, n. 8, pp. 723-726.
79.
Harries, M., (2002), Disseminating wind pumps in rural Kenya - meeting rural
water needs using locally manufactured wind pumps, Energy Policy, v. 30, n. 1112, pp. 1087-1094.
80.
Hughes, L. and Scott S., (1992), The potential for wind energy in Atlantic Canada,
Second World Renewable Energy Congress, Reading, UK.
81.
Hussain, G. and Al-Saati, A.J., (1999), Wastewater quality and its reuse in
agriculture in Saudi Arabia, Desalination, Volume 123, Issues 2-3, 10 October
1999, Pages 241-251
82.
Iniyan, S. and Sumathy K., (2000), Optimal renewable energy model for various
end-uses, Energy (Oxford), v. 25, n. 6, pp. 563-575.
83.
Iqbal, M. T., (2003), Simulation of a small wind fuel cell hybrid energy system,
Renewable Energy, v. 28, pp. 511-522.
84.
Islam, Md. Q., Islam, S. M. N., Islam, A. K. M. S. and Razzaque, M. M., (1995),
Application of wind energy for irrigation in Bangladesh, AMA, Agricultural
Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, v. 26, n. 2, pp. 24-28.
85.
Jagadeesh, A., (2000), Wind energy development in Tamil Nadu and Andhra
Pradesh, India Institutional dynamics and barriers - a case study, Energy Policy, v.
28, n. 3, pp. 157-168.
290
86.
Jamil, M., Parsa, S., Majidi, M., Fuad, A. and Kazmerski, L., (1995), Wind power
statistics and an evaluation of wind energy density, Renewable energy, v. 6, n. 56, pp. 623-628.
87.
KACST, (June 2003), Wind Data Analysis for Dhahran, Final Report.
88.
Kainkwa, R. R., (1999), Wind energy as an alternative source to alleviate the

shortage of electricity that prevails during the dry season: A case study of
Tanzania, Renewable Energy, v. 18, n. 2, pp. 167-174.
89.
Kaldellis, J. K. and Gavras, T. J., (2000), Economic viability of commercial wind

plants in Greece. A complete sensitivity analysis, Energy Policy, v. 28, n. 8, pp.
509-517.
90.
Kaltschmitt, M. and Wiese, A., (1994), Potential and costs of renewable sources of
energy in the Federal Republic of Germany, Energy Sources, v. 16, n. 2, pp. 185193.
91.
Kamand, F.Z. and Clark, R.N., (1988), Variable stroke mechanism for mechanical
water pumping windmills, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Solar
Energy Division (Publication) SED, v. 7, pp. 161.
92.
Kelton, W., Sadowski, R. and Sadowski, D., (2002), Simulation with Arena,
McGraw-Hill.
93.
Keoppl, G.W., (1982), Putnams Power from the Wind, Van Nostrand Reinhold
Co., New York.
94.
Khogali, A., Al-Bar, O.F., and Yousif, B., (1991), Wind and solar energy potential
in Makkah (S.A.), Comparison with Red Sea coastal sites, Renewable Energy, vol.
1, pp. 435-440.
95.
Koch, F., Erlich, H. I., Shewarega, F. and Bachmann, U., (2003), Simulation of the
dynamic interaction of large offshore wind farms with the electric power system,
http://www.uni-duisburg.de/FB9/EAN/doku/koch/Naples_OWEMES_Full-Paper_2003.pdf
96.
Kose, R., Ozgur M. A., Erbas O. and Tugcu A., (2004), The analysis of wind data
and wind energy potential in Kutahya, Turkey, Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, v. 8, pp. 277288.
97.
Kummert, C., (1995), Power purchase prices for wind power IPPs in Western
Europe, Modern power systems, v. 15, n. 8, pp. 23-26.
291
98.
Layi, F. R. and Karayiannis, T. G., (1994), On the wind energy resource of

Nigeria, International journal of energy research, v. 18, n. 5, pp. 493-508.
99.
Lew, D. J., (2000), Alternatives to coal and candles: wind power in China, Energy
Policy, v. 28, n. 4, p. 271-286.
100.
Li, G., (2000), Feasibility of large scale offshore wind power for Hong Kong a
preliminary study, Renewable Energy, v. 21, n. 3, pp. 387-402.
101.
Makra, L., Tar, K. and Horvath, S., (2000), Some statistical characteristics of the
wind energy over the Great Hungarian Plain, International Journal of Ambient
Energy, v. 21, n. 2, p. 85-96.
102.
Manolakos, D., Papadakis, G., Papantonis, D. and Kyritsis, S., (2001), A

simulation-optimisation programme for designing hybrid energy systems for
supplying electricity and fresh water through desalination to remote areas. Case
study: the Merssini village, Donoussa island, Aegean Sea, Greece, Energy v. 26,
pp. 679-704.
103.
Marafia, A and Ashour H. A., (2003), Economics of off-shore/on-shore wind

energy systems in Qatar, Renewable Energy, v. 28, pp. 1953-1963.
104.
Marini, M., Capello, M., Goffi, M. and Romei, G., (1998), Technical and
economical considerations about wind energy exploitation in the Ligurian area,
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v. 74-76, pp. 433-441.
105.
Marsh, L., (2001), Pumping Water from Remote Locations for Livestock Watering,
Biological Systems Engineering Publication 442-755, Virginia Cooperative
Extension.
106.
Martin, P. (1985), Some wind characteristics and applications of wind power on

the east coast of the Arabian Peninsula, Solar Energy, v. 34, n. 1, pp. 21-33.
107.
Mathew, S., Pandey, K.P. and Burton, J.D. (2002), The wind-driven regenerative
water-pump, Wind Engineering, v. 26, n. 5, pp. 301-313.
108.
Meibom, P. and Sorensen, B., (1999), Trading wind power at the Nordic power
pool Bent, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n. 1-4, pt. 2, p. 878-881.
109.
Merzouk, N. K., (2000), Wind energy potential of Algeria, Renewable Energy, v.

21, n. 3, p. 553-562.
292
110.
Miranda, M. S., Lyra, R. O.C. and Silva, S. R. (1999), Alternative isolated wind
electric pumping system using induction machines, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion, v. 14, n. 4, pp. 1611-1616.
111.
Mohandes, M. A., Rehman, S. and Halawani, T. O. (1998), Neural networks

approach for wind speed prediction, Renewable Energy, v. 13, n. 3, pp. 345-354.
112.
Mohsen, M. S. and Akash, B. A., (1998), Potentials of wind energy development

for water pumping in Jordan, Renewable Energy, v. 14, n. 1-4, p. 441-446.
113.
Mueller, A. M. and Jansen, W. A. M. (1986), Wind power for water pumping,

Sunworld, v. 10, n. 3, pp. 83-85.
114.
Muljadi, E., Flowers, L., Green, J. and Bergey, M. (1995), Electric design of windelectric water pumping systems, Wind Energy, American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, Solar Energy Division (Publication) SED n. 16, pp. 35-43.
115.
Muljadi, E., Flowers, L., Green, J., and Bergey, M., (1996), Electric design of
wind-electric water pumping systems, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering,
Transactions of the ASME v. 118 n. 4, pp. 246-252.
116.
Muljadi, E., Nix, G. and Bialasiewicz, J.T., (2000), Analysis of the dynamics of a
wind-turbine water-pumping system, Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering
Society Transmission and Distribution Conference, v. 4, pp. 2506-2519.
117.
Munther J. Haddadin, M.J., (2002), Water issues in the Middle East challenges and
opportunities, Water Policy, Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages 205-222
118.
Murakami, S., Mochida A. and Kato S., (2003), Development of local area wind
prediction system for selecting suitable site for windmill, Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v. 91, pp. 17591776.
119.
Nahas, M. N., Mohamad, A. S., Akyurt, M. and El-Kalay, A. K. (1987), Wind

energy: an engineering survey, Energy Sources, v. 9, n. 3, pp. 137-148.
120.
Nahas, M. N., Mohamad, A. S., Akyurt, M. and El-Kalay, A. (1988a), Windmill

with cam-articulated blades, Energy (Oxford), v. 13, n. 3, pp. 275-280.
121.
Nahas, M. N., Mohamad, A. S., Akyurt, M. and El-Kalay, A. (1988b), Windmills

with articulated blades, Energy (Oxford), v. 13, n. 6, pp. 499-508.
293
122.
Nasser, A.E.M. (1981) Utilization of wind/solar energy in generating electricity in

Saudi Arabia, Proc. 16th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference,
Technologies for the transition, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, vol. 2, pp. 2060-2063.
123.
Nfaoui, H., Buret, J., Sayigh, A. A. M. and Dunn, P. D., (1994), Modeling of a
wind/diesel system with battery storage for Tangiers, Morocco, Renewable
Energy, v. 4, n. 2, p. 155-167.
124.
Omer, A. M., (2000), Wind energy in Sudan, Renewable Energy, v. 19, n. 3, p.

399-411.
125.
Oztopal, A., Sahin, A. D., Akgun, N. and Sen, Z., (2000), On the regional wind
energy potential of Turkey, Energy (Oxford), v. 25, n. 2, p. 189-200.
126.
Palz, W., (1996), Development concepts of wind technology in the European

union, International Journal of Solar Energy, v. 18, n. 2, p. 65-71.
127.
Panda, R. K. and Clark, R. N., (1999), Stochastic study of wind pumps with
reservoir in Southern High Plains, Journal of Energy Engineering, v. 125, n. 3, p.
79-93.
128.
Persaud, S., Flynn, D. and Fox, B., (1999), Potential for wind generation on the
Guyana coastlands, Renewable Energy, v. 18, n. 2, p. 175-189.
129.
Plantikow, U., (1999), Wind-powered MVC seawater desalination - operational

results, Desalination, v. 122, n. 2, p. 291-299.
130.
Poulsen , E. V., (1995), Operating experience, economics and wind plant

optimization, Wind Energy, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Solar
Energy Division (Publication) SED, n. 16, p. 117.
131.
Raja, I. A. and Abro, R. S., (1994), Solar and wind energy potential and utilization
in Pakistan, Renewable Energy, v. 5, n. 1-4, pt. 1, p. 583-586.
132.
Rajsekhar, B., Van Hulle, F. and Jansen, J. C., (1999), Indian wind energy
program: Performance and future directions, Energy Policy, v. 27, n. 11, p. 669678.
133.
Ramirez, A. M., Sebastian, P.J., Gamboa, S. A., Rivera, M. A., Cuevas, O. and
Campos, J., (2000), Documented analysis of renewable energy related research and
development in Mexico, Int. Journal of Hydrogen Energy, v. 25, n. 3, p 267-271.
294
134.
Rehman, S., Halawani, T.O., and Husain, T., (1994), Weibull parameters for wind
speed distribution in Saudi Arabia, Solar Energy, v. 53, pp. 473-479.
135.
Rehman, S. and Halawani, T.O., (1994), Statistical characteristics of wind in Saudi

Arabia, Renewable Energy, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 949-956.
136.
Rehman, S., Halawani, T.O., and Mohandes, M., (2003), Wind power cost
assessment at twenty locations in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Renewable
Energy, v. 28, n. 4, pp. 573-583.
137.
Righter, R. W., (1996), Pioneering in wind energy: the California experience,

Renewable Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, p. 781-784.
138.
Robinson, D. W., (January 2002), Construction and Operating Costs of

Groundwater Pumps for Irrigation in the Riverine Plain, CSIRO Technical Report
20/02.
139.
Rosen, K., Van Buskirk, R. and Garbesi, K., (1999), Wind energy potential of
coastal Eritrea: An analysis of sparse wind data, Solar Energy, v. 66, n. 3, p. 201213.
140.
Rubab, S. and Kandpal, T.C. (1998), Financial evaluation of renewable energy

technologies for water pumping in rural areas, International Journal of Ambient
Energy, v. 19, n. 4, pp. 211-220.
141.
Sahin, A.Z., (1994), "Determination of Wind Energy Potential for Saudi Arabia",
Proceedings of the World Renewable Energy Congress-III, Reading, UK, Sept. 1116.
142.
Sahin, A.Z., and Yilbas, B.S., (1994), "Study into Determination of Wind Power
Energy Potential for the Eastern Province in Saudi Arabia", Proceedings of the
Second Saudi Symposium on Energy, Utilization and Conservation, pp. 28-29,
Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Nov. 27-30.
143.
Sahin, A.Z., (1995), "Estimation of Potential Power Output from Wind Energy
Conversion Systems in Saudi Arabia", Proceedings of the Fourth Saudi
Engineering Conference: Development of Technical and Industrial Base in Saudi
Arabia, vol. IV, pp. 341-345, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Nov. 5-8.
144.
Sahin, A. Z. and Aksakal, A., (1998), Wind power energy potential at the
northeastern region of Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, v. 14, n. 1-4, p. 435-440.
295
145.
Sahin, A. Z. and Aksakal, A., (1999), Statistical analysis of wind energy potential
at the eastern region of Saudi Arabia, International Journal of Energy Research, v.
23, n. 10, p. 909-917.
146.
Sahin, A.Z., (2000), Applicability of Wind-Solar Thermal Hybrid Power Systems

in the Northeastern Part of Arabian Peninsula, Energy Sources, Journal of
Extraction, Conversion, and the Environment, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 845-850.
147.
Saleh, L., (1994), National programs for wind energy utilization in Egypt,
Renewable Energy, v. 5, n. 1-4, pt. 1, p. 580-582.
148.
Saluja, G.S. and Douglas, N.G., (1996), Verification of wind resource study of a
Scottish region, Renewable Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, p. 798-801.
149.
Sanz, M., Sanz, J. F., Botero, D., Navarro, M., Val, F. J., Melero, J. J., Sallan, J.,
and Llombart, A. (2002), Optimal integration of renewable energies in a pumping
station for irrigation, IECON Proceedings (Industrial Electronics Conference), v. 4,
pp. 3332-3337.
150.
Seguro, J. V. and Lambert, T. W., (2000), Modern estimation of the parameters of

the Weibull wind speed distribution for wind energy analysis, Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v. 85, n. 1, p. 75-84.
151.
Sen, Z., (2000), Stochastic wind energy calculation formulation, Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, v. 84, n. 2, p. 227-234.
152.
Shaahid, S.M. and Elhadidy, M.A., (1994), Wind and solar energy at Dhahran,
Saudi Arabia, Renewable Energy, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 441-445.
153.
Shabbaneh, R. and Hasan, A., (1997),Wind energy potential in Palestine,

Renewable energy, v. 11, n. 4, p. 479-483.
154.
Sinha, C. S. and Kandpal, T. C. (1991), Windmill-irrigation in India, Energy

(Oxford), v. 16, n. 5, pp. 867-874.
155.
Smulders, P.T., (1996) Wind water pumping: the forgotten option, Energy for
Sustainable Development, Volume II, No. 5, pp. 8-13.
156.
Smulders, P. T. and de Jongh, J., (1994), Wind water pumping: Status, prospects
and barriers, Renewable Energy, v. 5, n. 1-4 pt 1, pp. 587-594.
157.
Soerensen, H. C., Larsen, J. H, Olsen, F. A., Svenson, J. and Hansen, S. R., (2000),
Middlegrunden 40 MW offshore wind farm, a pre-study for the Danish offshore
296
750 MW wind program, Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar

Engineering Conference, v. 1, pp. 484-491.
158.
Spera, D.A., (1994), Wind Turbine Technology, Fundamental Concepts of Wind

Turbine Engineering, ASME Press, New York.
159.
Surugiu, L. and Paraschivoiu, I., (2000), Environmental, social and economic

aspects of wind energy, Proceedings of the Intersociety Energy Conversion
Engineering IEEE Conference, v. 2, p. 1167-1174.
160.
Swisher, R., (1998), Wind power: a US perspective, Wind Engineering, v. 22, n. 4,

p. 185-188.
161.
Thiaw, L., Sow, G., Ndiaye, P., Sissoko, G., Fall, S. and Tall, K., (2002), Modeling
and evaluation of wind energy potential: a methodology for data processing,
Proceedings of the World Renewable Energy Congress VII, Cologne, Germany.
162.
Thomas, M.G., (1996), Water pumping, the solar alternative, National Sandia
Laboratories, SAND87-0804.
163.
Tiwari, K.N., Das, D.K. and Goel, P.K. (1989), Wind energy utilization in
irrigation: A case study, Irrigation and Power, v. 46, n. 1, pp. 39-49.
164.
Tremmel, G., (1995), Six megawatt wind plant on the Golan Heights, Australian,
Asian and Pacific Electrical World, v. 60, n. 5, p. 3.
165.
Ushiyama, I. and Pruwadi, T., (1992), Development of a simplified wind-powered

water pumping system in Indonesia, Wind Engineering, v. 16, n. 1, pp. 1-9.
166.
Ushiyama, I., (1999), Wind energy activities in Japan, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n.
1-4, pt. 2, p. 811-816.
167.
Ushiyama, I., (2000), Wind energy technology: From the past to the future, Nihon
Enerugi Gakkaishi/Journal of the Japan Institute of Energy, v. 79, n. 1, p. 35-46.
168.
Valdes, L. C. and Raniriharinosy, K., (2001), Low technical wind pumping of high
efficiency, Renewable Energy, v. 24, n. 2, pp. 275-301.
169.
Van der Linde, H. A. and Sayigh, A. A. M., (1999), Economics of wind energy in
South Africa, Renewable Energy, v. 16, n. 1-4, pt. 2, p. 869-871.
170.
Van, N. C., (1996), Study of the potential of renewable energy sources and its
application in Vietnam, Renewable Energy, v. 9, n. 1-4, p. 1161-1164.
297
171.
Vick, B. D. and Clark, R. N., (1997), Performance and economic comparison of a

mechanical windmill to a wind-electric water pumping system, Proceedings of the
1997 ASAE Annual International Meeting, Part 3 (of 3), Minneapolis, MN, USA.
172.
Vick, B.D., Clark, R.N. and Evett, S.R., (2000), Wind-powered drip irrigation
systems for fruit trees, 2000 ASAE Annual International Meeting, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, July 9-12, 2000.
173.
Vick, B. D., Clark, R. N., Ling, J. and Ling, S., (2003), Remote solar, wind, and
hybrid solar/wind energy systems for purifying water, Journal of Solar Energy
Engineering, Transactions of the ASME, v. 125, n. 1, pp. 107-111.
174.
Villar A. and Jorge A., (1998), Wind and solar systems for rural electrification in
state of Rio Grande Do Sul, Brazil, Solar Engineering, International Solar Energy
Conference, p. 259-263.
175.
Vliet, G. C., Hunn, B. D. and Kapileshwari, R., (1996), Texas Renewable Energy
Evaluation Software (TREES): A screening tool for economic assessment of
renewable energy options, International Solar Energy Conference, p. 143-158.
176.
Vogstad, K. O., (1997), Energy resource planning; Integrating wind power,

Diploma thesis, SMU, NTNU.
177.
Wolsink, M., (2000), Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and
the limited significance of public support, Renewable Energy, v. 21, n. 1, p. 49-64.
298

Arp 22 48

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Arp 22 48

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

King Abdulaziz City For

STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF WIND ENERGY FOR

KING SAUD UNIVERSITY

12.3 System Performance ................................................................................................. 74

Average daily water

Wind Energy for Electric Power Generation

Hybrid Usage of Wind Energy

Wind Energy in Saudi Arabia

Wind Energy used for Water Pumping

Others are considered to be

Recent Simulation Studies

diameter of 3 m, a lift of 15 m and a cylinder diameter of 0. 1 m. The system behavior was

AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI ARABIA

expenditures on infrastructure, which included electricity supply, irrigation, drainage,

Current Situation in Agriculture

NADEC (National Agricultural Development Company); products include

TADCO (Tabuk Agricultural Development Company) products include

HADCO (Hail Agricultural Development Company);products include

ASTRA Agricultural Company Ltd.; products include fresh fruits &

JADCO (Al-Jouf Agricultural Development Company); products include

Al Safi Dairy; the largest integrated dairy farm in the world.

Al Othman Agricultural Produce & Processing Establishment (NADA), a

Water Needs and Resources

Surface Water and Shallow Aquifers

RECENT STUDIES ON WIND AND WATER RESOURCES IN SAUDI

Bremere et al. (2001)

discussed the effect of water scarcity on the growth of

Water for drinking and cooking

Water for livestock

Water for crop irrigation.

Daily Water Consumption

Beef brood cows

Horses and mules

Sheep and goats

Filling Ordinary Lavatory

12" Hose with Nozzle

Filling avg. Bath Tub

34" Hose with Nozzle

Flushing Water Closet

Each Shower Bath

Automatic Laundry Machine

Backwashing Domestic Water Up to 100 gal.

Daily Water Requirement

Rural village farms

Total Dynamic Head (TDH) = A + B + C + Pipe Friction

Figure 5.2: Definitions of total static and dynamic heads

Underground Water Resource

Water Capacity of a Well

Static and Dynamic Heads

Friction Losses in Head (ft) per 100 ft of

Selection of Pumping Equipment

CLASSIFICATION OF WATER PUMPS

Positive Displacement (volumetric) Pumps

Submersible (diaphragm) pumps

Rotary vane pumps

Axial flow pumps

generally designed for large flows at low heads.

Radial flow pumps

Depending on the requirement they can be

Mixed flow pumps

most common commercially available configurations of motorpump subsystems are

WIND TURBINEPUMP SYSTEMS