search

openego / eTraGo

Optimization of flexibility options for transmission grids based on PyPSA
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
33 stars 13 forks source link

Can ext. storages replace load shedding? #90

Open lukasoldi opened 6 years ago

lukasoldi commented 6 years ago

...they should in theory. But there are cases where this does not work and one receives infeasible results, esp. with the full model for DE.

@kimvk solved this for the extendable lines with this: https://github.com/openego/eTraGo/blob/c4e2cd2c273915b746e2ab02b7f3137e656e4e2c/etrago/appl.py#L111-L117

ulfmueller commented 6 years ago

I tried out a similiar approach for the ext. storages today. But it did not help...

lukasoldi commented 6 years ago

Could you share your preferences and what exactly you applied?

ulfmueller commented 6 years ago

I tried it out very quickly on the server and with my limited hardware right now I cannot access it. But I will try straight from my mind: Here I added two lines like this:

network.storage_units.s_nom_min = 0 network.storage_units.s_nom_max = float ("+inf")

and then I calculated I think from 2305 to 2328 with storage extendable on and load shedding off. No clustering.gurobi.gridversion 0.2.11. and probably a random noise.

ulfmueller commented 6 years ago

Again I forgot about one mechanism. A plausible reason would be that the time span is too short in order to be able to fill up the storage... The influence of the filling level is probably the reason.

lukasoldi commented 6 years ago

true...but lets keep the ticket open in order to keep that point up for validation.

wolfbunke commented 6 years ago

@BartelsJ did you add this to our validation list and can we close this issue? @ulfmueller