# IEA-ETSAP Forum

Full Version: Commodity price for final sectors
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Hello, I'd like to inquire about determining or computing the cost of a commodity, such as electricity, for the final sector. Initially, I assumed that it should align with the value of EQ_CombalM, but I may be mistaken. As an example, I've included the EQ_CombalM for the commodity ELCHIGG, which serves as the sole input for the TRAELCT00 process, which transforms it (EFF = 1) into the commodity TRAELCT. The EQ_CombalM for TRAELCT is lower than that of ELCHIGG, and I'm seeking clarification on this. Am I correct in understanding that EQ_CombalM reflects the cost increase in the objective function when producing one additional unit of the commodity? If so, should the EQ_CombalM value for TRAELCT be greater than or equal to that of ELCHIGG, considering the application of Flo_cost in the TRAELCT00 process? Alternatively, should I sum all the EQ_CombalMs to determine the marginal price of the final commodity? Regarding the calculation of the full fuel cost for the final sector, I believe that for commodities not transformed in the model (e.g., natural gas), it should be the sum of IRE_PRICE, FLO_COST, FLO_DELIV, FLO_TAX, and FLO_SUB across all processes between import and final consumption. Could you confirm if this interpretation is accurate? Additionally, I'm uncertain about the best approach for cases involving the transformation from primary sources to secondary sources, such as electricity or gasoline. I appreciate your assistance. Thank you, Lukas
The ELCHIGG marginals in your table happen to be 15 times the TRAELCT marginal minus 0.9 (0.9 = the flow cost at TRAELCT00). That makes me wonder where that 15 comes from (it is exactly 15 for strikingly many instances). How many regions do you have in the model?
(30-11-2023, 11:16 PM)Antti-L Wrote: [ -> ]The ELCHIGG marginals in your table happen to be 15 times the TRAELCT marginal minus 0.9 (0.9 = the flow cost at TRAELCT00). That makes me wonder where that 15 comes from (it is exactly 15 for strikingly many instances). How many regions do you have in the model?
Thank you,  Antti, you have found my mistake. I do have 15 regions in the model. Does it mean that to calculate the full fuel cost of a given final commodity, TRAELC in this case, I should multiply EQ_CombalM and VAR_FOut of TRAELC?  Thank you very much.
For the full TRAELC expenditure, yes, multiply EQ_CombalM and Var_FOut for TRAELC.
(04-12-2023, 03:32 PM)Antti-L Wrote: [ -> ]For the full TRAELC expenditure, yes, multiply EQ_CombalM and Var_FOut for TRAELC.
Thank you!