Worldwide Multi-Model Intercomparison of Clear-Sky Solar Irradiance Predictions

Accurate modeling of solar radiation in the absence of clouds is highly important because solar power production peaks during cloud-free situations. The conventional validation approach of clear-sky solar radiation models relies on the comparison between model predictions and ground observations. Therefore, this approach is limited to locations with availability of high-quality ground observations, which are scarce worldwide. As a consequence, many areas of interest for, e. g., solar energy development, still remain sub-validated. Here, a worldwide inter-comparison of the global horizontal irradiance (GHI) and direct normal irradiance (DNI) calculated by a number of appropriate clear-sky solar radiation models is proposed, without direct intervention of any weather or solar radiation ground-based observations. The model inputs are all gathered from atmospheric reanalyses covering the globe. The model predictions are compared to each other and only their relative disagreements are quantified. The largest differences between model predictions are found over central and northern Africa, the Middle East, and all over Asia. This coincides with areas of high aerosol optical depth and highly varying aerosol distribution size. Overall, the differences in modeled DNI are found about twice larger than for GHI. It is argued that the prevailing weather regimes (most importantly, aerosol conditions) over regions exhibiting substantial divergences are not adequately parameterized by all models. Further validation and scrutiny using conventional methods based on ground observations should be pursued in priority over those specific regions to correctly evaluate the performance of clear-sky models, and select those that can be recommended for solar concentrating applications in particular.