Fix grouping logic again #1091
Merged
Fix grouping logic again #1091
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
lisazeyen
reviewed
Jun 10, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#967 takes the point of view, that the capacities added by the model in 2025 correspond to the time interval [2025,2030]. The logic of the grouping years for existing capacities was different and solar-2020 would correspond to capacities installed in [2015,2020]. #967 aligned the way the grouping years work, s.t. solar-2015 would correspond to the interval [2015,2020].
However, as pointed out in PyPSA/pypsa-ariadne#101 the interpretation that solar-2025 corresponds to [2025,2030] might be flawed. In pypsa-ariadne we impose capacities and co2 limits corresponding to actual laws. These limits apply to the year 2025, thus any capacities extensions of the solar-2025 generator required to achieve these limit have to be built before 2025. Hence the more correct point of view is that the capacities expanded by the model in 2025 correspond to the time interval [2020,2025]. This is how the grouping years of existing capacities worked before #967, and thus this PR mostly reverts #967.
Open issues:
grouping years for heating may not extend 2020. Otherwise infeasibilities occur. I have no idea why, but i would prefer if this would be handled in the code and not in the config
The renewable capacity added in the base year is neglected because of the land use constraint in solve_network. it would be desirable to have separate Generators for extendable and existing renewable capacities.