trade bound

[Antti-L]

Thanks for the reply.
The suggestion I made would mean that the power rate would be bounded to the same level regardless of the timeslice lengths.  But the value needed for it to be 150 would depend on the convention used; if it would be exactly what I described (i.e. the parameter value specified would be multiplied by G_YRFR(r,s)), then the parameter values should be the desired power rate multiplied by 8760 h, and so in your example 150 GW × 8760 h = 1314000 GWh, because the reference time for G_YRFR is one year.  However, the reference time for the new attribute could also be chosen to be (by design) an hour instead of a year.  Should we choose one hour to be the reference, then the parameter value would be 150 GWh in order to define a bound of 150 GW, regardless of the timeslice lengths.

Would you prefer one year, or one hour (or maybe one day) as the reference? That choice would be hard-coded in the implementation, but it would otherwise not affect the functionality, and so I think the choice is only a matter of what's considered most convenient.

[Kristina.Haaskjold]

Agree, It's mainly a matter of peoples preference. For me, I think it makes most sense to use an hour as reference as I typically consider power rate limitations on an hourly level. This is also how such constraints are commonly expressed for many technologies, such as storage systems, transmission operation limits, load caps etc.