# Mdp1 _sciences_
## 5 Conclusions and Outlook to Future Work  
The present work represents the first practical demonstration of a novel method for mitigating negative ramps in wind turbine power, previously introduced by one of the authors. This method, termed Forecast-Based Curtailment (FBC), relies on the accurate forecast of wind speed or power changes one and two steps into the future; wind speed forecasting was used in the present work. FBC only uses the self-regulating capacity of wind turbines and does not require external storage devices, such as Battery Energy Storage (BES) systems, although a combination with BES systems is possible. The FBC focuses on the detection of _incompliance_ events, where the wind speed or power change (or tolerable slope) is more negative than a preset value; this value will typically depend on the requirements of the system operator of the electric grid.  
It was shown in this paper that about 40% of all incompliance events can be mitigated, at an energy cost of only about 0.1%. This mitigation efficiency increases somewhat towards large tolerable slopes (where avoiding incompliance is more critical), but the increase is small. While a mitigation efficiency for incompliance events of about 40% as demonstrated in this work, at a negligible energy cost, can be considered a substantial improvement over traditional curtailment schemes, it will depend on the specific case if these mitigation figures are enough or not. An obvious extension of the method is the combination with an energy storage system, such as a BESS, which can be downsized compared to the base case with no ramp mitigation method, leading to a more competitive economic proposal. As an alternative, the BESS could be left at its original capacity, but now being allowed to  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Method** & **Advantages** & **Disadvantages** \\ \hline FBC (this work) & Very low energy penalty & Requires upstream measurements \\ Flat curtailment & No instrumentation/investment required & High energy penalty \\ Positive ramp limit & No instrumentation/investment required & Moderate to high energy penalty \\ BESS & Low to moderate energy penalty & High upfront investment \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Comparison of the FBC method vs. other strategies for short-term ramp control.  
provide additional services and increase its value stack. Such options will be explored in follow-up work.  
A further improvement of the FBC method may be possible even without building FBC-BESS hybrid systems, by assimilating additional upstream data. In the current work, exogenous data were limited to one upstream tower located at a distance of about 11 km, which is equivalent to a naive (i.e., ballistic time-of-flight) lead time of about 10 min (i.e., one time step) for a wind speed of 8 m/s and two time steps for 4 m/s. This somewhat limits the capability of predicting two time steps ahead. Furthermore, upstream measurements were available only for the (predominant) southern lobe of the wind rose, not for the (minor) northern part. Future improvements of the method will explore forecasting approaches that fully exploit the predictive power of upstream measurements in more generalized wind direction distributions.  
Conceptualization, O.P.; methodology, O.P. and L.I.M.; software, O.P. and L.I.M.; validation, O.P.; formal analysis, O.P. and L.I.M.; investigation, O.P. and L.I.M.; resources, O.P.; data curation, O.P.; writing--original draft preparation, O.P. and L.I.M.; writing--review and editing, O.P.; visualization, O.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
The authors acknowledge the support from the Energy & Climate Change and the Mechatronics research groups, as well as the open access publishing fund at the School of Engineering and Sciences at Tecnologico de Monterrey.  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.