Flux Energy
Feature · Wind Resource & Site Design
Compare candidate layouts against the wind measured at the site. When the project moves forward, the data and assumptions stay with it for operations and the bank case.
Before the first turbine, somebody stands on a ridge and listens. The listener goes up first. Two years. Every gust, every lull, measured. In most companies, two years of wind ends up in a drawer.
On Flux Energy, the ridge starts talking. Ten million measurements become a map of moving air. Satellites fill in the miles the mast can't hear. Then Flux Energy builds the farm. A thousand times.
Every layout tested against every hour the mast ever heard. Wakes, noise, roads, and cost, until the strongest design is the last one standing. Then steel replaces light. And the listening doesn't stop at groundbreak. It's handed on.
The mast's memory flows into operations and into the bank case that funds the next ridge. Flux Energy. The farm remembers its first wind.
The problem
How it works
Met towers and LiDAR campaigns are registered per site. Logger connectors pull hourly readings for speed, direction, temperature, and pressure, with ingestion health tracked so a silent gap in the record is caught the day it opens, not two years later.
Global Wind Atlas and NLR WIND Toolkit profiles import straight into a siting study, alongside the measured wind parameters, so the assessment covers the whole site, not just the mast's footprint.
A study holds as many candidate layouts as you want to try. Each one is run through the wake model, Weibull energy yield per turbine, availability and electrical losses, and checked against noise, flicker, and setback constraints, returning gross AEP, wake loss, and net P50 / P90 for the layout as a whole.
The winning layout's turbines and the met towers that justified them sit on the same GIS record operations will run from. The P50 / P90 that the lender sees is computed from that record, not retyped from a report.
What you get
Every AEP figure traces to its wind parameters, its wake settings, and its constraints. Re-run it next year and get the same answer, or a better one with more data.
Noise limits, shadow flicker, setbacks and exclusion polygons live in the study. A layout that violates a hard constraint says so before anyone stakes a road.
The mast's record doesn't stop at groundbreak. It becomes the baseline operations compares against and the resource case the bank underwrites.
Plain English
Before a wind farm is built, a mast spends a year or two on the site measuring the wind. That data is the whole basis for the project. At most companies, it ends up in a consultant's PDF nobody opens again.
In Flux Energy, the mast's readings load straight into the platform, and reference data fills the gaps. You lay out candidate turbine positions, and Flux Energy scores each one against the wind that was actually measured, including wake losses, noise limits, setbacks, energy yield. Pick the winner. The same wind data then follows the project into operations and into the financing model.
That's wind resource assessment with Flux Energy.
Where this connects
The P50 the lender pulls on runs back through this study to the mast that measured it.
The wake model that ranked the layout is the one fleet wake-steering optimizes against once it's built.
Expected production per parcel starts here; actual production settles against it every period.
Questions
A Jensen top-hat model with a per-study wake decay constant, applied sector by sector across the wind rose. Each turbine's deficit from every upwind turbine is aggregated before its energy yield is computed.
From a Weibull energy yield per turbine at the wake-reduced wind speed, summed for the layout, then reduced by the study's availability and electrical-loss assumptions. The P90 applies the study's uncertainty factor to that net figure. Every input is stored with the result.
Yes. A siting study holds any number of layouts, each with its own turbine positions and its own AEP run, so alternatives can be scored against the same wind parameters and the same constraints.
Its wind parameters can be entered or imported into the study and scored alongside the measured data. Flux Energy doesn't replace the assessment. It makes it re-runnable and keeps it attached to the project.
It stays on the site's record. Met towers remain on the GIS map next to the turbines, their readings stay queryable, and the resource case the bank underwrote is still the one operations compares actuals against.
Explore
Plan wind and storage together, account for battery wear, and carry dispatch into settlement.
Read moreHourly prices from every ISO, recurring constraint windows learned from your own history, bids and trades posted to one ledger.
Read moreBuild SAM-aligned P50/P90 models and trace key figures to the operating records behind them.
Read moreApply contract terms to production, review the calculation, and carry the result into payment.
Read moreSchedule the curtailment, capture the cost, and use the event in settlement and compliance.
Read moreYou’ll work directly with the people building Flux Energy. We’ll load your met data and walk through the wake model, constraints, and P50 / P90 for a candidate layout.
