Do we need different names for "resources" (like wind and solar) vs resources that are being passed between technologies?

[johnjasa]

Should we consider the resource generation as a technology, i.e. a technology with only outputs, or should we consider resources separately from technology types?

Should we have a different name for resource (as it's passed between technologies) and the word we use to describe resources available (wind, solar, etc)

[jaredthomas68]

At this point I think resources should all be handled in the same way because we need to be able to start a system with any resource. We could have a system that starts with hydrogen and electricity and ore (and etc) and makes steel, or we could have a system that starts with wind and makes hydrogen in the end. If we differentiate resource types I think it will decrease the flexibility of the system to model whatever systems we need to model in the future.

Our validator will then need to check that the resources available match the needs of the technology. I think we need to be able to provide a pre-defined h2 profile in the same way we provide a pre-defined wind profile if necessary.

[kbrunik]

I think we should distinguish resources from technology types.