For day 285, I have load shedding between hours 8 and 11 (see Figure 4 here). This is almost definitely because of storage, and the cyclic constraint on the state of charge. To be confirmed by running the same model without this constraint.
The "edge effects" that Efthymios noticed were likely due to storage being fully discharged at the end of the day, at which point it could not be used by him to contribute to operational security (see #10, to be confirmed by Efthymios).
If I start with a state of charge of 0, load shedding occurs entirely in the morning. Can't find proof for this right now, other than I wrote this in an email to Efthymios (on the 27th of May, copied below), but intuitively if the first point is true then this point is too (probably).
I'm quite convinced that if I removed storage then this would be an absolutely terrible system i.e. lots of load shedding and curtailment. This is because Andreas Belderbos conceived it using a planning model in which the line capacities were fixed, so essentially the only balancing option his planning model had was storage (either batteries or power to gas), hence the impressive (101 GWh!!!) capacity of storage in the system. So this is not really an option.
This is just to highlight the sensitivity of the system to how storage is assumed to operate. I'm going to keep things as they are, i.e. state of charge is 0.5 at the start of the day and there's a cyclic constraint.
This isn't really a bug but an observation:
This is just to highlight the sensitivity of the system to how storage is assumed to operate. I'm going to keep things as they are, i.e. state of charge is 0.5 at the start of the day and there's a cyclic constraint.
Email I sent to Efthymios: