Open mabijkerk opened 1 year ago
I would also say set the maximum to 75% for all datasets. I am, however, in doubt how we would 'defend' 75% if someone would ask how we got to this specific maximum potential.. should we use the current research or should we conduct some more research based on an EU source?
https://github.com/quintel/etsource/issues/2871 should be tackled first
This issue has had no activity for 60 days and will be closed in 7 days. Removing the "Stale" label or posting a comment will prevent it from being closed automatically. You can also add the "Pinned" label to ensure it isn't marked as stale in the future.
Background The min and max value of the insulation per house type are dataset dependent. See for example the insulation of apartments:
The result for the
nl2019
is however minimal. There only is a 2% difference between inputs:Issue For Northern Ireland we manually set the max value of all these inputs at 75%, because there are no interface elements on ETLocal for the min an max value of insulation that can be used to set the value automatically. This means that we have to be aware of this exception when exporting the ETLocal datasets to ETSource.
Solution To me it is not worth the trouble to add min and max insulation values. I would rather propose to remove the dataset-dependency of the min and max value of these inputs. I would propose to add a maximum of 75% to the insulation inputs. The minimum could then be set at some low value, like 10% or could be set equal to the starting value (which would mean that you can not decrease your insulation).
@marliekeverweij @Charlottevm what do you think of this proposal? Which value would you prefer for the minimum?