22-07-2017, 09:30 AM
In a recently published journal paper "Modelling to generate alternatives: A technique to explore uncertainty in energy-environment-economy models", the MGA approach is introduced into TIMES model by set a slack for the optimal system cost. Did anyone have experiences in doing so? It seems that we have to modify the source GAMS codes related to the objective functions. Glad to hear any suggestions on how to conduct this research.
Thank you all~
Steps listed in the journal paper
1. The model is solved in standard formulation and a least cost energy system transition pathway obtained.
2. The total system cost of this pathway, scaled up by a small amount or slack (usually >1%), is entered into the model as a new constraint. In principle, the scope of possible formulations for the new objective function is large and does not necessarily have to be related to the maximization of difference across the model solutions. It could, for instance, maximise the amount of primary energy from wind or minimise the utilisation of certain end-use technologies, with both energy systems being only marginally more expensive than the optimal run. As our focus in this study is finding energy systems that are as diverse as possible and yet still nearly cost optimal, here we use an objective function formulation that searches for a set of transition pathways that are very nearly least cost but also maximally different from one another in terms of the fuel mix of their cumulative primary energy consumption
3. A new objective function is formulated with the specific aim of exploring the near optimal region defined by the constraint in step 2. This reformulation of the model is also subject to all constraints from the standard formulation in step 1.
Thank you all~
Steps listed in the journal paper
1. The model is solved in standard formulation and a least cost energy system transition pathway obtained.
2. The total system cost of this pathway, scaled up by a small amount or slack (usually >1%), is entered into the model as a new constraint. In principle, the scope of possible formulations for the new objective function is large and does not necessarily have to be related to the maximization of difference across the model solutions. It could, for instance, maximise the amount of primary energy from wind or minimise the utilisation of certain end-use technologies, with both energy systems being only marginally more expensive than the optimal run. As our focus in this study is finding energy systems that are as diverse as possible and yet still nearly cost optimal, here we use an objective function formulation that searches for a set of transition pathways that are very nearly least cost but also maximally different from one another in terms of the fuel mix of their cumulative primary energy consumption
3. A new objective function is formulated with the specific aim of exploring the near optimal region defined by the constraint in step 2. This reformulation of the model is also subject to all constraints from the standard formulation in step 1.