Secondary energy totals and internationally traded energy

[Renato-Rodrigues]

Description

It is not clear if secondary energy variables should include or not net imports in their totals in the current variables definition.

e.g. Should Secondary Energy|Electricity include Trade|Secondary Energy|Electricity|Volume values?

Proposal

As total primary energy variables are measured in consumption terms, and consequently include net imports, I would propose to follow the same principle and include net imports to the secondary energy totals.

As consequence:

Secondary Energy|Electricity = sum(tech, Secondary Energy|Electricity|tech) + Net Imports = Net Electricity Demand

Actions required

• adjust secondary energy variables descriptions to clarify this
• and either:
  • keep using the current variables: net imports = - Trade|Secondary Energy|Electricity|Volume
  • or change the trade reporting variable to be under the secondary energy tree, e.g. add the variable Secondary Energy|Electricity|Net Imports

Do you have any thoughts about this? @robertpietzcker @danielhuppmann

[danielhuppmann]

I checked several repositories and it seems that "Secondary Energy|Electricity" (and secondary-energy-variables in general) is consistently defined as the production/generation of that energy carrier, not the amount used. Hence, net imports should not be included in that total.

This is indeed inconsistent with primary- and final-energy variables, but I do not see a strong reason to change it just from that inconsistency alone.

I think that the logic should be as follows:

• Secondary Energy|Electricity = sum(tech, Secondary Energy|Electricity|<tech>) but these variables do not exist in this repo or any other variable list, right?
• Secondary Energy|Electricity = sum(source, Secondary Energy|Electricity|<source>)
• Final Energy|Electricity = ( Secondary Energy|Electricity
  • Trade|Secondary Energy|Electricity|Volume
  • Secondary Energy|Electricity|Transmission Losses ) but Final Energy|Electricity seems to be missing here, and having losses as a sub-category of secondary-energy also seems less-than-ideal, to be discussed in https://github.com/IAMconsortium/common-definitions/issues/21

About your specific proposal of renaming Trade|Secondary Energy|Electricity|Volume to Secondary Energy|Electricity|Net Imports, I'm ambivalent - the "Volume" suffix to distinguish from "Value" (monetary perspective) is also not great, but pushing yet more sub-categories into this tree would further complicate aggregation.