Floating LiDAR systems (FLSs) may replace conventional offshore met masts, and they have been developed well in Europe. However, before using them in Japan, we must determine whether they demonstrate the same performance under the unique East-Asian meteorological and oceanographic conditions. Therefore, herein, we investigate the performance of FLSs by focusing on the differences among models. Four independent wind datasets from three FLSs were simultaneously verified against a reference met mast and vertical LiDAR at a Japanese site. The data availability was confirmed to vary from 62.7 to 98.0% over the period at 63 m. This was strongly affected by the system availability of the buoy and LiDAR, suggesting that buoy system robustness is key to better campaigns with higher data availability. The 10 min averaged wind speed and direction largely satisfied the Carbon Trust’s key performance indicators, with a low sensitivity to wave conditions depending on the buoy shape. The standard deviation of the wind speed and turbulence intensity had poorer accuracy than that of the 10 min averaged statistics because of the wave-induced buoy motion, especially for small buoys. In short, this paper provides an overview of a measurement by FLS in Japan. Also, the unique verification with multiple units suggests the need for a low-motion buoy or motion compensation to improve the measurement accuracy of the turbulence component.

We propose an empirical motion compensation algorithm for a better turbulence intensity (TI) measurement by Floating LiDAR systems (FLSs) with a newly introduced motion parameter, the significant tilt angle ${\theta }_{\alpha ,1/3}$, using four datasets from three different FLSs in Japan. The parameter was compared to other environmental parameters; it was confirmed to well represent various types of buoy motion. A sensitivity assessment was conducted for the error of the FLS’s standard deviation of wind speed to the buoy motion. The strong correlation obtained by the assessment suggests that the error of the FLS TI is dominated by the motion and that it is possible to offset the error by applying the relationship back to the measurement. The corrected TI shows good agreement with that of a reference fixed vertical LiDAR (VL). Moreover, the similarity of the relationships for the same type of VL mounted on different buoys implies that the correction may be VL-specific rather than FLS-specific, and, therefore, universal regardless of the FLS type. The successful validation suggests that the correction based on ${\theta }_{\alpha ,1/3}$ can be applied not only to the future campaign but also to those performed in the past to revitalize numerous existing FLS datasets.