problem with kre storage

[frangb99]

Very good, I was able to run the model, and I obtained exactly the same OBJ value as in your listing file (to the finest decimal).

But there were no such results reported, which you showed! 
More precisely, there were no negative VAR_Fout values for the GRDSTOHSTNOKREXTRMN0_PO process in any year.  So, it is a puzzling issue. One possibility is that perhaps VO could have some problem in the results processing.  Other possibility is that in your case Cplex somehow arrived at a different (degenerate) solution.  But because that process GRDSTOHSTNOKREXTRMN0_PO is actually a normal process (it is not a storage process), I cannot imagine how the output flow could ever become negative, because the only output is KRE and it is the PCG, and the variable is by definition non-negative. Therefore, I would consider some kind of a VO issue more likely...

I have also thought that, because now for example i am using this excel, because I have been able to model correctly the auxiliary input:

  SubRES_STO_Techs.xlsx (Size: 956.47 KB / Downloads: 1)
And now in this results: 
   
you can see that in the charging of the CO2 storage (_PI) there is not CO2 entering just electricity, and is so weird because all the other storages are modelled the same way. 
Is so weird, im sending you also the 2 documents you told me for this new run. But is so weird this thing:

  model_results_Case-master_thesis_simple_run_Solver-BA120-7 (3).zip (Size: 75.22 KB / Downloads: 1)

[AKanudia]

Francisco, as a free academic user of VO you need to use public repos and make public models. Can you please make your repo public?

[frangb99]

Francisco, as a free academic user of VO you need to use public repos and make public models. Can you please make your repo public?

I changed it to public time ago, so it is public right now. I dont know how to make the repositories public, I have been trying to look where to do it in GitiHub but i do not find anything, but the models are public

[kanbee]

Francisco, as a free academic user of VO you need to use public repos and make public models. Can you please make your repo public?

I changed it to public time ago, so it is public right now. I dont know how to make the repositories public, I have been trying to look where to do it in GitiHub but i do not find anything, but the models are public

To change your repository's visibility from private to public follow these instructions:

1. Go to the repository's settings page.
   
2. Click on the collaborators option from the list of options on the left.
   
3. In the Collaborators panel click on "Manage".
   
4. It should take you to the Danger zone, where you can change repository visibility.
   
5. Accept a couple of confirmations and your repository visibility will be set.
   

[frangb99]

Francisco, as a free academic user of VO you need to use public repos and make public models. Can you please make your repo public?

I changed it to public time ago, so it is public right now. I dont know how to make the repositories public, I have been trying to look where to do it in GitiHub but i do not find anything, but the models are public

To change your repository's visibility from private to public follow these instructions:

1. Go to the repository's settings page.

2. Click on the collaborators option from the list of options on the left.

3. In the Collaborators panel click on "Manage".

4. It should take you to the Danger zone, where you can change repository visibility.

5. Accepting a couple of confirmations and your repository visibility will be set.

oKAY I DID IT

[Antti-L]

I looked at the GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI process now, over which you had some confusion.  I can see it is a normal process (i.e. not a storage process).

You have defined the PCG of the process as GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI_NRGO, and the only output of this process is the energy commodity ("GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN"), and so that is the PCG. The inputs are CO2 and ELC, of which ELC is an auxiliary flow. I wonder how this process converts CO2 to energy, with the assumed efficiency 0.95?

Moreover, the efficiency parameter EFF defines ACT_EFF(r,y,p,'ACT',ts) = 0.95, which assumes that there is a shadow group of the same type as the PCG, or if none, another default type. For your process, the PCG type is NRG, and the shadow type will be NRG because of ELC. But there is no valid shadow group for ACT_EFF that would contain any NRG commodities, because ELC is an auxiliary flow.  Therefore, the process transformation you have defined, from CO2 to energy with a 95% efficiency, does not work at all.  To make that work, you should define the shadow group explicitly for ACT_EFF.  Apparently, the group should be ENV.

Anyway, thanks for this problem case, because it made me identify one minor special case issue to improve in TIMES. 

[Antti-L]

@Amit:  Can you explain why under VO the process GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI, with a single NRG output, gets PCG defined as GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI_NRGO?  Shouldn't it be the single NRG commodity itself? (The user did not specify the PCG explicitly.)

[frangb99]

I looked at the GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI process now, over which you had some confusion.  I can see it is a normal process (i.e. not a storage process).

You have defined the PCG of the process as GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_PI_NRGO, and the only output of this process is the energy commodity ("GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN"), and so that is the PCG. The inputs are CO2 and ELC, of which ELC is an auxiliary flow. I wonder how this process converts CO2 to energy, with the assumed efficiency 0.95?

Moreover, the efficiency parameter EFF defines ACT_EFF(r,y,p,'ACT',ts) = 0.95, which assumes that there is a shadow group of the same type as the PCG, or if none, another default type. For your process, the PCG type is NRG, and the shadow type will be NRG because of ELC. But there is no valid shadow group for ACT_EFF that would contain any NRG commodities, because ELC is an auxiliary flow.  Therefore, the process transformation you have defined, from CO2 to energy with a 95% efficiency, does not work at all.  To make that work, you should define the shadow group explicitly for ACT_EFF.  Apparently, the group should be ENV.

Anyway, thanks for this problem case, because it made me identify one minor special case issue to improve in TIMES. 

so i just have to change the commodities of that storage in particular to ENV???. I did not understand so well

[Antti-L]

First of all, it is NOT a storage process.  CO2 is an ENV commodity, and therefore, if you want to define 95% efficiency from CO2 to GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN, where GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN is of type NRG, you need to define ACT_EFF(r,y,p,'ENV',ts)=0.95 instead of EFF=0.95.

[frangb99]

First of all, it is NOT a storage process.  CO2 is an ENV commodity, and therefore, if you want to define 95% efficiency from CO2 to GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN, where GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN is of type NRG, you need to define ACT_EFF(r,y,p,'ENV',ts)=0.95 instead of EFF=0.95.

Okay i think i get it. But if i set the GRDSTOHSTNOCO2XTRMN0_IN to a NRG type commodity,, would not that be enough? Or i would need to use ACT_EFF anyways?