TFM_UPD table

[AkramS]

AkramS>  Now I want in the MIG table of the later scenario file to change the invcost from 2050. Could this be a problem (that in the earlier scenario file there is not an "invcost" for the technology in 2050)?

Hmm… can you elaborate what this would exactly mean?  You want to change Invcost "from 2050", but without any Invcost value for the technology in 2050?  For which year(s) you would like to define the new values, and how would you derive them "from 2050", without having any original value for 2050?

AkramS> I see (when I Browse the scenario file after Syncronization) that the values have been changed in the year I specified in the table (e.g, 2030 in your table above) and not onwards. Is this OK and it means that the table has extrapolated the change by the model time horizon?

TIMES automatically extrapolates the last value defined onwards to the end of the model horizon.  Here, "extrapolation" means that the rest of the model time horizon will also have that last changed value you have defined in your TFM_MIG table. If you are happy with that, then it is OK, meaning that those changed values will indeed be extrapolated to the end of the horizon. But if you would like to have some different trajectory for the extrapolation, you would just need to add some additional year(s) into your TFM_MIG table, with multipliers corresponding to your tailored extrapolation trajectory.

OK. Thanks!

About the first question: The table in the former scenario is enclosed. I thought the model would extrapolate the values for NCAP_COST in 2012 onwards, meaning that the model knows that NCAP_COST in 2050 and 2012 are equal. With this, in the MIG table of the next scenario I could change the value by  using a multiplier. Wrong?

[Antti-L]

AkramS> I thought the model would extrapolate the values for NCAP_COST in 2012 onwards, meaning that the model knows that NCAP_COST in 2050 and 2012 are equal.

Well yes, the "model" (actually TIMES) would extrapolate the values for NCAP_COST in 2012 onwards.  This happens when the TIMES code is executed.  The TIMES code is executed under GAMS, when any model instance is solved.  You are right, TIMES then knows that NCAP_COST in 2050 has the extrapolated value.

AkramS> With this, in the MIG table of the next scenario I could change the value by  using a multiplier. Wrong?

Yes, wrong.  VEDA is not executing the TIMES code, but GAMS. VEDA does not actually know which value NCAP_COST will have in 2050. In principle, VEDA perhaps could also extrapolate the values e.g. during TFM_MIG processing, but as far as I know, such is currently not possible. Instead, you can do it yourself, by specifying source years in the TFM_MIG table, an example below for process EXAMSTD2:
   

In the example above, the MIG table takes the original values defined for 2010 or 2012 as such (they remain unchanged).  And then, for defining the changed NCAP_COST value for 2050 using the values defined in MyScenario:

  ● if the last value defined is for 2010 or 2012, that value is multiplied by 1.5 to get a changed value for 2050,
  ● if the last value defined is for 2020, that value is multiplied by 1.4 to get a changed value for 2050,
  ● if the last value defined is for 2030, that value is multiplied by 1.3 to get a changed value for 2050,
  ● if the last value defined is for 2040, that value is multiplied by 1.2 to get a changed value for 2050.

I tested this, and it seemed to work well, as described above. Again, I am not a VEDA expert, but maybe @Amit could confirm that it is always the last value generated from the MIG table for 2050 that will survive.

[AKanudia]

I confirm that the last value declared will survive. This is true for any INS/UPD/MIG table.

[AkramS]

I confirm that the last value declared will survive. This is true for any INS/UPD/MIG table.

I tested and it worked perfectly! 

Thanks a lot for your time and consideration of my questions!

Br,
Akram