21-10-2021, 01:10 PM
Dear Antti,
thanks again for your answer and for the additional information.
Let me start from the second point you made. I think I understood what you mean and hence made a change to the file (attached).
Basically, the column previously named NCAP_BND I renamed to NCAP_BND~2025 and added another column named NCAP_BND~2050 with the same values.
Will this change make sure that the model can't invest in more than 50 MW (as in the example) of storage through out all of the year between the start year 2025 and the end year 2050? Or is there another way to do this?
Regarding your first remark. You mentioned "unless the activity / flow levels are bounded in some way or have some impact on the OBJ (e.g. via losses defined by STG_LOSS / STG_EFF)." In this case I did define STG_LOSS / STG_EFF for the "conventional" storage investment options.
Do you think this will not suffice? I mean can there be numerical problems with this particular formulation?
I will try to learn more about TIMES and play with some attributes (as you indicated "FLO_SHAR(r,y,p,com,'ACT','ANNUAL','UP') = 1, to have the output of com bounded by the activity (1×VAR_ACT) at the beginning of each timeslice") but only if I get more time in the project
For now, I would like to be more certain that the representations are good enough.
Thanks again for your answer in advance,
Dmytro
thanks again for your answer and for the additional information.
Let me start from the second point you made. I think I understood what you mean and hence made a change to the file (attached).
Basically, the column previously named NCAP_BND I renamed to NCAP_BND~2025 and added another column named NCAP_BND~2050 with the same values.
Will this change make sure that the model can't invest in more than 50 MW (as in the example) of storage through out all of the year between the start year 2025 and the end year 2050? Or is there another way to do this?
Regarding your first remark. You mentioned "unless the activity / flow levels are bounded in some way or have some impact on the OBJ (e.g. via losses defined by STG_LOSS / STG_EFF)." In this case I did define STG_LOSS / STG_EFF for the "conventional" storage investment options.
Do you think this will not suffice? I mean can there be numerical problems with this particular formulation?
I will try to learn more about TIMES and play with some attributes (as you indicated "FLO_SHAR(r,y,p,com,'ACT','ANNUAL','UP') = 1, to have the output of com bounded by the activity (1×VAR_ACT) at the beginning of each timeslice") but only if I get more time in the project
For now, I would like to be more certain that the representations are good enough.Thanks again for your answer in advance,
Dmytro