Femkemilene
commented
3 months ago @pv-camecon mentioned an possible way to do this in the community meeting:
- The mandate determines the size of two FTT markets. Within the mandate space, only green technologies compete. Within the rest of the market, all technologies compete.
Mandates are usually in terms of sales/cap additions, not market shares, so it's an open question, for me at least, what the exact size would be of mandate space. For instance: if at least 20% of sales in a year need to be EV, is the mandate space 20% or should it be something else? J-F wondered if we're double counting in the "normal space".
The various policies around exogenous sales are different across the models. I propose we split this variable up in two, and make it near-consistent in the various models.
a) Pure exogenous sales: Sometimes we want to use this variable in a way to input partial data. For instance, IRENA is faster than IEA, so we can input the exogenous capacity for renewables but not for the other techs. We may also want to use it as pure exogenous data if you have some exogenous scenario you want to compare to. A phase-out policy could also work in this way.
b) Minimum sales: which is for instance a minimum of 20% sales are EVs. Regions can have higher endogenous sales. I found this surprisingly hard to implement, but I think it makes sense to have this as a proper policy possibility, given that it is a standard policy in transport and freight.
The current use of the TWSA variable in transport is different again: exogenous additional sales, which can represent initial procurement. Given that procurement usually happens as a policy at very low market shares, I wonder if either of the minimum values or pure exogenous sales are a good enough policy here.