Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    you might mail me directly
    or lblabr on github
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    Hi, sorry I forgot it was set to private. I have changed it to public
    Thanks
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    hi @lblabr. could you explain better what you mean with "a minimal power restriction in timesteps of use?"
    3 replies

    i still playing around with operate mode, does have energy_cap_max at transmission technology any impact an the results ? i does not look like that ...

    energy_cap_max is not really suited for operate mode, as it limits the maximum capacity the optimization procedure can allocate to a given technology in a given location.

    and the "operate" mode does not perform any optimization on the installed capacities, only the "plan" mode

    1 reply
    hi @FinChrisite, does the html output of your model indicate any unmet hydrogen demand?
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    if it shows the unmet hydrogen demand, it likely means that the model cannot make the hydrogen reach its consumption point(s) (since the cost for unmet demand is usually huge)
    after your reply I might take a deeper look into your repo :-)
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    Hi Rodrigo, yes the html output does show the unmet hydrogen demand. I will send in some screenshots.
    image.png
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    image.png
    image.png
    image.png
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    So, from my experience that usually means that something (usually not money) is blocking the hydrogen from reaching its consumption point(s).
    Just to confirm, the public repo you shared here is the one I should look at, right?
    lblabr
    @lblabr

    image.png

    wich scenario is relevant ? in your model you have two transmission techs for region1-2,region2:

    lblabr
    @lblabr
    moving the electrolysis to the location with OSW and removing transmission for hydrogen results in that picture
    image.png
    in the way around shouldn't be the hydrogen demand in region1-2: ??
    image.png
    moving the hydrogen demand
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    Hi, the link that was causing the problem was the hydrogen pipes between region1-2 and region 2. After looking over it with my supervisor we found the efficiency per distance constraint was effectively making the pipe useless (because of thr long distance). We removed the constraint and it now works as hoped. Thabk you so much for taking a look at the model!
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    @FinChrisite, great! keep up the good work :-)
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    I also think i have found a bug in the software, I am not sure if you are aware but the "one_way" transmission constraint doesn't seem to work
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    I've used it before and it does work (at least in version 0.65). what I found out and has already been identified by the main developers, is that one-way is not compatible with transmission costs
    Fin Christie
    @FinChristie
    Ahh interesting!
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    @lblabr, what's happening here is that your confusing installed capacity with operation power (as both are in Watt).
    energy_cap_max/min/equals only address how many kW are installed for a given technology in a given location. that's where my previous comment came from.
    in your case, you have a 11 kW battery (rated capacity, fixed value), which can only operate at power levels >= 2.4 kW (power operation, which varies in time) and <= its rated capacity.
    This is a pertinent question, which I have yet to address in my projects.
    I looked at the per-tech constraints and couldn't find what you're looking for (which does not mean it is not there)
    lblabr
    @lblabr

    in your case, you have a 11 kW battery (rated capacity, fixed value), which can only operate at power levels >= 2.4 kW (power operation, which varies in time) and <= its rated capacity.

    what do you mean with rated capacity, the capacity of the battery is 13,1kWh

    so charging may operate at a power level 2.4kW ... 11kW, charging duration the 13,1kWh depends an Charging level
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    you're right, I meant "rated power".
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    okay, understud the contraints have a mor or less universal meaning depending on tec
    tech ?
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    so energy_cap_max/min/equal refers to allowed rated power, not operation power
    28 replies
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    okay
    should we open a thread ?
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    also, for clarification, installed capacity can refer to the rated power of a generator (which I understand that for batteries is confusing)
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    could we discuss in theread ? pls look to your message with replies
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    ok. just to conclude the "naming" topic, for calliope nomenclature you have:
    • energy_cap: in kW (the battery rated power)
    • storage_cap: in kWh (the battery capacity)
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    you are right
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    image.png
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    @lblabr, if you have fixed your issue could you write a short text here explaining again your problem and how you fixed it?
    lblabr
    @lblabr
    this way is already descibed at github and also a way with a group contraint is mentioned
    Rodrigo Amaro e Silva
    @ramaroesilva
    @lblabr could you add that information to your github issues and close them (if both are already addressed)? thanks!