Good morning, I am a beginner user and I need help. I am modelling a scenario were I FIX the national targets (NDCs and LT-LEDS) of a specific countries (in term of installed capacities for REG2 and electricity production for REG1 and REG3) and then I compare the electricity mix provided to the one nationally planned. I am not sure if I am setting it in the right way, I attached in the first picture the FIXED targets of REG1 and REG3, for example REG1 aims to produce 30% of its electricity from renewables by 2030, and the rest (70%) from FF (Gas, Coal and Oil). and for REG2 in second figure has set target in term of installed capacities, by 2030 the RES installed capacities should be 52%.
Am I doing it right please ?
I had a quick look, and could not spot any issues in the first figure, but in the second figure the RHS constant seems to be missing, and the percentage coefficients look incorrect (first negative values, and then positive 100%?). In addition, imposing a fixed share for the RES capacity might cause problems, and would thus suggest using lower bound for the share of RES installed capacities.
A full 100% capacity share may obviously also cause problems due to the "inertia" in the capacity infrastructure.
Ahh, in Figure 1 the Year column also looks to be misplaced. I believe it should be to the left of the ~UC_T position, because it is not a value column.
Ok, thanks Amit, I had no idea about that VEDA 2 would even allow free mixing of index and data columns!
The VEDA online documentation only says that "Column position of FI_T/UC_T tags are not important anymore", which I have understood to mean literally that (and nothing else). You are apparently saying that the columns can now be also freely arranged into any order, and no longer into a contiguous spread of index columns and a subsequent spread of data/value columns. It is good to know that is so, although in my view not at all obvious from the documentation.
I have addressed the corrections you highlighted in the attached figures. Specifically, I set the RHS constant to 1, and removed the 2060 and 2065 values since our simulation only runs until 2050.
I modified the LimType to LO from FX and adjusted the years column on the left of UC_T.
However, I got IMPNRGZ dummies in term of the maximum capacities ( maximum technical potential) of wind and CSP technologies under all regions, as illustrated below. Please find through this link the group of scenarios I am currently running for your reference: https://we.tl/t-oHj1EPOabg
You are still defining negative capacity shares, and I cannot see the RHS constant (the figure does not show the full column heading for UC_RHSRT~, so I don't know what there is, but I would expect it to be ~0, which means the IE option). I think you would need UC_RHSRT = 0 for a share constraint.
