Forecast lead time and the timing of crew deployment for weather-driven power outages using AI weather models
Organizations: Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA · Department of Civil Engineering, The Grainger College of Engineering, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61821, USA
Abstract
Utilities request mutual aid crews to restore power after severe storms, and requesting early secures more crews but relies on less accurate forecasts. We examined how forecast lead time affects the value of outage predictions for crew deployment, using operational forecasts from two AI weather models, GraphCast and FourCastNet, to predict outage occurrence for counties across the contiguous United States 24 to 120 hours ahead. Forecasts were evaluated by the share of outage burden captured by the counties where crews would be staged. Captured burden declined with lead time: the loss between three and five days was significant in all analyses, whereas the loss within three days was significant only for outages that had not yet started. Early deployment with all requested crews outperformed late deployment with fewer, and we report the availability ratio at which the two break even. Antecedent land surface predictors computed at forecast valid time include weather from the forecast period, which inflates their skill by 42 to 53% and reverses their apparent advantage over forecast meteorology at long lead times. Computed correctly, they improved occurrence skill by 17.5% at 24 hours but did not significantly change captured burden, a gap that attribution analysis linked to their static component. Prediction intervals covered only 0.476 of tropical cyclone events against a nominal 0.90. Calibration by hazard class corrected most of this shortfall at an 11% cost in interval width, as a diagnostic only, because hazard class is known only after the event.
Figures & tables
| Symbol | Description |
|---|---|
| County index, with | |
| Valid time of a 6-hourly window | |
| Forecast lead time, h | |
| Customers without power in county at time | |
| Housing units in county | |
| Outage severity, |
| Source | Variable | Resolution | Period | Role |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EAGLE-I | Customers without power | County, 15 min | 2022–2024 | Target |
| NOAA/CIRA AIWP | GraphCast, FourCastNet v2-small | 0.25°, 6 h | 2022–2024 | Meteorological predictors |
| ERA5-Land | Soil moisture, leaf area index, precipitation, snow | 0.1°, 6 h | 2022–2024 | Land-surface predictors |
| NLCD | Tree canopy cover | 30 m, annual | 2022–2024 | Land-surface predictors |
| NOAA Storm Events | Hazard class | County or forecast zone, event | 2022–2024 | Hazard attribution |
| ACS 5-year | Housing units | County | 2018–2022 | Severity denominator |
| Storm | County | Duration (h) | Peak severity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Beryl | Harris, TX | 204 | 0.90 |
| Beryl | Fort Bend, TX | 150 | 0.84 |
| Helene | Greenville, SC | 252 | 1.18 |
| Helene | Buncombe, NC | 420 | 1.72 |
| Milton | Hillsborough, FL | 174 | 0.86 |
| Milton | Pinellas, FL | 150 | 0.87 |
| Wind source | Features | AUC-PR |
|---|---|---|
| AIWP forecast, full | 17 | 0.0513 |
| AIWP forecast, matched | 3 | 0.0463 |
| ERA5 analysis, matched | 3 | 0.0530 |
| ERA5 analysis + gust | 4 | 0.0712 |
| AIWP forecast + gust | 18 | 0.0685 |
| Lead (h) | 100% crews | 80% | 60% | 40% | Climatology | Oracle |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 0.356 [0.264, 0.454] | 0.308 | 0.258 | 0.204 | 0.192 | 0.893 |
| 48 | 0.327 [0.254, 0.414] | 0.285 | 0.240 | 0.187 | 0.192 | 0.893 |
| 72 | 0.316 [0.260, 0.384] | 0.279 | 0.241 | 0.176 | 0.190 | 0.894 |
| 120 | 0.238 [0.167, 0.312] | 0.198 | 0.158 | 0.116 | 0.194 | 0.893 |
| Comparison | Difference | 95% interval | Excludes zero |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 h vs 48 h | +0.029 | [+0.004, +0.065] | yes |
| 48 h vs 72 h | +0.012 | [−0.021, +0.054] | no |
| 24 h vs 72 h | +0.040 | [−0.006, +0.102] | no |
| 72 h vs 120 h | +0.079 | [+0.036, +0.120] | yes |
| 24 h vs 120 h | +0.120 | [+0.067, +0.187] | yes |
| Lead (h) | Within 0 h | Within 24 h | Within 48 h |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 0.497 [0.442, 0.558] | 0.506 [0.437, 0.582] | 0.460 [0.410, 0.530] |
| 48 | 0.453 [0.396, 0.519] | 0.465 [0.398, 0.538] | 0.426 [0.374, 0.492] |
| 72 | 0.419 [0.359, 0.488] | 0.431 [0.366, 0.502] | 0.392 [0.340, 0.445] |
| 120 | 0.331 [0.282, 0.389] | 0.347 [0.292, 0.409] | 0.309 [0.264, 0.359] |
| Feature | 24 h | 48 h | 72 h | 120 h | Variation ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antecedent precipitation (72 h) | 0.782 | 0.449 | 0.171 | 0.053 | 0.597 |
| Soil moisture (layer 2) | 0.984 | 0.968 | 0.953 | 0.926 | 0.325 |
| Snow load | 0.998 | 0.993 | 0.988 | 0.976 | 0.078 |
| Leaf area index (high vegetation) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.999 | 0.998 | 0.005 |
| Canopy cover | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | 0.007 |
| Hazard | Pool size | Event Windows | Base rate | AUC-PR | Lift | Normalised |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Winter | 7120 | 698 | 0.098 | 0.493 | 5.03 | 0.438 |
| Wind | 10241 | 974 | 0.095 | 0.445 | 4.67 | 0.387 |
| Convective | 38292 | 3162 | 0.083 | 0.321 | 3.89 | 0.260 |
| Flood | 11292 | 1557 | 0.138 | 0.378 | 2.74 | 0.278 |
| Tropical | 10488 | 1783 | 0.170 | 0.461 | 2.71 | 0.351 |
| Rule | Cells | Unobserved | Zero | Sub-threshold | At or above threshold |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mask | 13,199,576 | 7,068,665 | 558,876 | 5,439,116 | 132,919 |
| Set to zero | 13,199,576 | 0 | 7,627,541 | 5,439,116 | 132,919 |
| Carry forward | 13,199,576 | 0 | 4,373,065 | 8,644,198 | 182,313 |
| Threshold | Events | Counties with 1 event | Median duration (h) | Median peak severity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.005 | 32,985 | 2,439 | 30 | 0.061 |
| 0.01 | 18,926 | 2,361 | 30 | 0.097 |
| 0.02 | 10,758 | 2,189 | 30 | 0.150 |
| 0.05 | 5,004 | 1,776 | 30 | 0.266 |
| 0.1 | 2,679 | 1,360 | 36 | 0.388 |
| Model | Features | AUC-PR | Brier score | Severity R 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gradient boosting (reference) | 66 | 0.1233 | 0.02108 | 0.031 |
| Gradient boosting + lagged | 77 | 0.1299 | 0.02097 | 0.033 |
| Gradient boosting + adjacent | 71 | 0.1251 | 0.02107 | 0.032 |
| Gradient boosting + both | 82 | 0.1274 | 0.02100 | 0.032 |
| Regularised linear | 66 | 0.1124 | 0.02128 | 0.022 |
| Multilayer perceptron | 66 | 0.1017 | 0.02146 | −0.072 |
Disaster Response
Disaster response uses data, models, and planning tools to assess hazards and coordinate evacuation, relief, and recovery.
See all 59 papers