Skip to main content Skip to journal navigation menu Skip to site footer
contact@ukscip.com
Article

Climate Aware Reliability Analysis of Renewable Energy Systems Using Nonstationary Stochastic Hazard Models

Janardan Behera ORCID
    Received: 2 August 2026; Revised: 10 October 2026; Accepted: 19 October 2026; Published: 3 November 2026

    Abstract

    Renewable energy assets are certified against hazard functions that classical reliability theory treats as fixed in time, yet the climate driving heat stress, humidity, wind extremes, and flooding is shifting in ways that make stationarity untenable for long‑lived infrastructure. This article develops a hazard model in which asset failure intensity combines a Weibull baseline for intrinsic wear with a climate‑driven component following an affine jump diffusion, joining mean‑reverting drift from gradual thermal and humidity loading with discrete jumps from cyclones and floods. A closed‑form reliability function is derived through a Riccati equation, transferring machinery from interest rate, credit risk, and stochastic mortality modeling to infrastructure reliability, and is extended to trending climate means and extreme event frequencies through a time‑inhomogeneous quadrature formula. The model yields a Climate Resilience Index and agrees with forty thousand path Monte Carlo simulations within one third of one percent over sixty years. Calibrated applications to solar photovoltaic arrays, wind turbines, battery storage units, and coastal transmission towers, grounded in published Indian degradation and cyclone fragility data, show that climate‑driven hazard erodes mean time to failure most severely for cyclone‑exposed transmission towers, whose lifetime resilience index in coastal Odisha falls from 0.44 under a stationary climate to 0.36 under severe warming, and least severely for enclosed battery systems.

    Keywords

    References

    1. 1.IPCC. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Lee, H., Romero, J., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647
    2. 2.Garland, J.; Baker, K.; Livneh, B. The climate energy nexus: a critical review of power grid components, extreme weather, and adaptation measures. Environ. Res. Infrastruct. Sustain. 2024, 4, 032002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/ad79dd
    3. 3.Raj, S.V.; Kumar, M.; Bhatia, U. Fragility curves for power transmission towers in Odisha, India, based on observed damage during 2019 Cyclone Fani. arXiv preprint 2021, arXiv:2107.06072. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06072
    4. 4.Tiwari, G.; Kumar, P.; Tiwari, P. The appraisal of tropical cyclones in the North Indian Ocean: an overview of different approaches and the involvement of Earth's components. Front. Earth Sci. 2022, 10, 823090. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.823090
    5. 5.Li, Y.; Dong, Y. Probabilistic risk assessment of coastal infrastructure systems under climate change. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering (ICASP14), Dublin, Ireland, 9--13 July 2023.
    6. 6.Hainaut, D. A calendar year mortality model in continuous time. ASTIN Bull. 2023, 53, 351--376.
    7. 7.Barlow, R.E.; Proschan, F. Statistical Theory of Reliability and Life Testing: Probability Models; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA, 1975.
    8. 8.Meeker, W.Q.; Escobar, L.A. Statistical Methods for Reliability Data; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1998.
    9. 9.Cox, D.R. Regression models and life tables. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 1972, 34, 187--220.
    10. 10.Cox, D.R. Some statistical methods connected with series of events. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 1955, 17, 129--164.
    11. 11.Cox, D.R.; Isham, V. Point Processes; Chapman and Hall: London, UK, 1980.
    12. 12.Aalen, O.O.; Borgan, Ø.; Gjessing, H.K. Survival and Event History Analysis: A Process Point of View; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2008.
    13. 13.Gumbel, E.J. Statistics of Extremes; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1958.
    14. 14.Coles, S. An Introduction to Statistical Modeling of Extreme Values; Springer: London, UK, 2001.
    15. 15.Zhao, Y.; Tao, Y.; Chen, Y.; et al. Increasing extreme winds challenge offshore wind energy resilience. Nat. Commun. 2025, 16, 9529.
    16. 16.Pryor, S.C.; Barthelmie, R.J. A global assessment of extreme wind speeds for wind energy applications. Nat. Energy 2021, 6, 268--276.
    17. 17.Lipari, S.; Balaguru, K.; Rice, J.; et al. Amplified threat of tropical cyclones to US offshore wind energy in a changing climate. Commun. Earth Environ. 2024, 5, 755.
    18. 18.Panteli, M.; Pickering, C.; Wilkinson, S.; et al. Power system resilience to extreme weather: fragility modeling, probabilistic impact assessment, and adaptation measures. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2017, 32, 3747--3757.
    19. 19.Schumann, Z.D.; Chini, C.M. Component assessment of the electric transmission grid to hurricanes. Earths Future 2023, 11, e2023EF003525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2023EF003525
    20. 20.Karagiannakis, G.; Panteli, M.; Argyroudis, S. Fragility modeling of power grid infrastructure for addressing climate change risks and adaptation. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2025, 16, e930.
    21. 21.Singh, R.; Sharma, M.; Yadav, K. Degradation and reliability analysis of photovoltaic modules after operating for 12 years: a case study with comparisons. Renew. Energy 2022, 196, 1170--1186.
    22. 22.Kettle, J.; Aghaei, M.; Ahmad, S.; et al. Review of technology specific degradation in crystalline silicon, cadmium telluride, copper indium gallium selenide, dye sensitised, organic and perovskite solar cells in photovoltaic modules: Understanding how reliability improvements in mature technologies can enhance emerging technologies. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 2022, 30, 1365--1392.
    23. 23.Herceg, S.; Kaaya, I.; Ascencio-Vásquez, J.; et al. The influence of different degradation characteristics on the greenhouse gas emissions of silicon photovoltaics: a threefold analysis. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5843. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105843
    24. 24.Wu, H.; Chen, J.; Vaishnav, P.; et al. Technological improvements in EV batteries offset climate induced durability challenges. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2026, 16, 460--467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-026-02579-z
    25. 25.Cox, J.C.; Ingersoll, J.E.; Ross, S.A. A theory of the term structure of interest rates. Econometrica 1985, 53, 385--407.
    26. 26.Lando, D. On Cox processes and credit risky securities. Rev. Deriv. Res. 1998, 2, 99--120.
    27. 27.Duffie, D.; Pan, J.; Singleton, K. Transform analysis and asset pricing for affine jump diffusions. Econometrica 2000, 68, 1343--1376.
    28. 28.Biffis, E. Affine processes for dynamic mortality and actuarial valuations. Insur. Math. Econ. 2005, 37, 443--468.
    29. 29.Mohanty, S.K.; Chatterjee, R.; Shaw, R. Building resilience of critical infrastructure: a case of impacts of cyclones on the power sector in Odisha. Climate 2020, 8, 73.
    ×