Incorrect Capacities for Gas Generators in status2023 Model

[khelfen]

Description

The capacities for "OCGT", "central_gas_CHP", and "industrial_gas_CHP" in the status2023 model are currently set to nearly 50 GW. However, according to the latest data available on Energy Charts, these capacities should be approximately 36 GW. This discrepancy may lead to inaccurate modeling and analysis outcomes.

Possible Relation to Previous Issues

This issue may be related to previous issue #221, which also addressed discrepancies in generator capacities. It's possible that the resolution of issue #221 did not fully correct the capacities for these specific gas generators.

Suggested Actions

1. @CarlosEpia or @ClaraBuettner could you check if this is also the case for your status2019 model? Or let me know if I miss anything important and the capacity is actually correct? :D
2. Find why capacities are too high and resolve the issue :D

You can use this SQL snippet to check the capacities:

SELECT SUM(p_nom) FROM grid.egon_etrago_link
WHERE scn_name = 'status2019'
AND carrier IN ('central_gas_CHP', 'OCGT', 'industrial_gas_CHP')
AND (
    bus0 in (
        SELECT bus_id FROM grid.egon_etrago_bus
        WHERE country = 'DE'
        AND carrier = 'AC'
        AND scn_name = 'status2019'
    )
    OR bus1 in (
        SELECT bus_id FROM grid.egon_etrago_bus
        WHERE country = 'DE'
        AND carrier = 'AC'
        AND scn_name = 'status2019'
    )
)

[ClaraBuettner]

Did you take into account that the installed capacity for OCGTs is the thermal capacity?

[khelfen]

Did you take into account that the installed capacity for OCGTs is the thermal capacity?

In this case, the capacity is only about 25 GW, which is too little :thinking: Have you checked this for the 2019 model? Furthermore, I used the filter AND carrier = 'AC'. Shouldn't "OCGT" be connected to none-"AC" buses in that case?

Also in eTraGo, when using import_gen_from_links "OCGT" plants are then connected to AC buses and therefore electric? Is this a bug in eTraGo?

[khelfen]

@ClaraBuettner My first guess is that the main problem (there may be more) is that in insert_chp_statusquo gas plants with a "ThermischeNutzleistung" of zero are dropped.

These plants should be part of the electric power plants, but are dropped in fill_etrago_generators. Could you confirm this? And could you suggest a fix for this as I'm not firm in questions regarding gas? Should we remove the filter in fill_etrago_generators and include these gas generators in grid.egon_etrago_generator?

Also, I'm still wondering about my question from earlier:

Shouldn't "OCGT" be connected to none-"AC" buses in that case?

[khelfen]

Okay, I finally understand it. It's because the efficiency has to be taken into account.

SELECT SUM(p_nom * efficiency) FROM grid.egon_etrago_link
WHERE scn_name = 'status2023'
AND carrier IN ('central_gas_CHP', 'OCGT', 'industrial_gas_CHP')
AND (
    bus0 in (
        SELECT bus_id FROM grid.egon_etrago_bus
        WHERE country = 'DE'
        AND carrier = 'AC'
        AND scn_name = 'status2023'
    )
    OR bus1 in (
        SELECT bus_id FROM grid.egon_etrago_bus
        WHERE country = 'DE'
        AND carrier = 'AC'
        AND scn_name = 'status2023'
    )
)

gives 35.1 GW, which is very close to the expected output. Therefore closing this Issue.