Different solution in TIMES versions
#3
Thanks for providing the model input files.

I was able to reproduce the difference, which was a rather delicate issue:

In the older version, while interpolating the cost attributes, TIMES added the vintage year 2016 for the following technologies: EBIG20, EWOD20, EHCO_SCPC20. This addition was done just to have one preceding data point for the time-series. Because the cost attributes NCAP_FOM / ACT_COST had an interpolation option 5, the costs were therefore set to zero in 2016. The resulting densely interpolated/extrapolated costs thus increased from zero to the 2020 value between the years 2016 and 2020.

In the newer version, while interpolating the cost attributes, TIMES only added the year 2016 for those technologies into a temporary vintage set (for the same purpose as above), and only while interpolating flow-related attributes. Therefore the costs were not set to zero in 2016, because the technologies had START=2020. The resulting densely interpolated/extrapolated costs were thus extrapolated backwards from the 2020 value, and so the 2020 value was set between the years 2016 and 2020.

The issue was thus caused by the interpolation option 5 being used for some cost attributes of vintaged technologies that also had START=2020. I believe the new version can be considered correct, and, and more importantly, I think your model did not work correctly with the earlier version, due to those strange interpolation options.  Can you explain why you had specified those interpolation options for the NCAP_FOM of EBIG20 and EWOD20, and for the ACT_COST of EHCO_SCPC20?  What was the intended purpose of them?  

By default, all cost attributes are fully interpolate/extrapolated, which should be in most cases appropriate.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Different solution in TIMES versions - by Antti-L - 04-07-2019, 05:54 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)