Download the latest version of VEDA-FE (45834) and VEDA-BE (492018)

Veda Application Installation guide


UC for Flex Fuel Processes
#1
I need to come up with an absolute UC for a flex fuel vehicles in order to estipulate a minimum amount of pkm to be produced by using ethanol and a minimum amount of pkm to be produced by using gasoline as input. I´ve tried the structure below, but it seems not to distingish the inputs, and one UC overwrite the other.

UC_N Pset_Set Pset_PN Pset_CI Pset_CO Cset_CN Attribute Year LimType UC_CAP UC_NCAP UC_ACT UC_RHSRTS UC_RHSRTS~0 UC_Desc
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2008 LO 1 3000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2009 LO 1 3000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2013 LO 1 9000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2018 LO 1 20000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2023 LO 1 40000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2028 LO 1 50000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2033 LO 1 60000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2038 LO 1 70000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2043 LO 1 70000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2048 LO 1 80000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_G VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* GASOLINE GASOLINE 2053 LO 1 90000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2008 LO     1 70000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2009 LO     1 70000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2013 LO     1 90000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2018 LO     1 10000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2023 LO     1 10000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2028 LO     1 2000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2033 LO     1 2000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2038 LO     1 2000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2043 LO     1 2000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2048 LO     1 2000000
UC_VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX_E   VEHICLE_ICE_FLEX* ETHANOL   ETHANOL   2053 LO     1 2000000

Would anyone know how to solve thos problem? Thank you very much!

Regards,
Reply
#2

Good question, but I am afraid that there may not be any satisfactory solution.

If I understand correctly, you would like to set a lower bound on the pkm produced by multi-fuel vehicles, separately for each input fuel used. However, as there is only one activity variable per timeslice and period (and per vintage, if vintaged), one cannot distinguish the pkm produced by different fuels by referring to the activity variable (VAR_ACT). For such technologies, usually the only way to refer to the pkm produced by different input fuels would be to multiply the flow of each fuel (VAR_FLO) first by the vehicle efficiency (e.g. vkm/GJ) and then by the passenger load efficiency (pkm/vkm).

Although doing it in that way might look feasible as such, there are several caveats:

1)     You would need to utilize the (possibly scenario-dependent) efficiency data in in order to define all the UC_FLO coefficients for the VAR_FLO variables for each individual flex-fuel technology.

2)     Because the technologies in general have different efficiencies, one would not be able to make much use of process filters.

3)     Even if the conditions 1) and 2) above might appear barely acceptable, you would still not be able define the efficiencies accurately for vintaged technologies, because the TIMES user constraints do not support any mechanism for referring to the flow variables by vintage, only to the sum of flows in all vintages by period.

In principle, think that it would be possible to implement in TIMES an option for automatically multiplying the VAR_FLO variables by certain efficiency parameters in user constraints. But at least currently there is no such option available.

Consequently, as far as I can see, the only way to model such user constraints is to multiply all the VAR_FLO variables manually by the efficiency coefficients mentioned above, bearing in mind that this approach works correctly only in the case of non-vintaged technologies.

Reply
#3
Hi,

thank you very much for your help. It helped to understand better the issue, athough i went for a simpler approach, even though it was not exactly what i was looking for: i defined minimum share constraints far the process bases in each input. It seems to do the trick up o now...


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)