Retirement profile for new technology: SHAPE & NCAP_CPX attributes

[vahid.aryanpur]

Dear All,
 
To improve the representation of retirement profile for future technologies (in Sub RES) I have used NCAP_CPX and SHAPE (please see the attachment).
 
The results show the diffusion of Battery Electric Vehicles from 2045. Based on the profile I have defined; I expected the same value for the total installed capacity and new installed in the year of installation. 5% reduction should be happened after five years. However, as shown in the attached file, the results are something else.
 
I would be grateful if anyone could help me on this issue. 
 
Kind regards,
Vahid

[Antti-L]

May I ask why you expected the same value for the total installed capacity (VAR_Cap) and for the new capacity installed in the year of installation (Cap_New(INSTCAP))?

It seems the length of the model periods is 5 years. The technology thus reaches the age of 5 years already within the period 2045. The technology apparently has age=1 in 2043, age=2 in 2044, age=3 in 2045, age=4 in 2046, and age=5 in 2047. The impact of the shape is computed as a levelized average over the ages the technology has within the period. Therefore, the average shape value in the period 2045 will be the levelized average of the corresponding SHAPE values 1, 1, 1, 1 and 0.95. The resulting average shape is 0.99058 for the period 2045.  As the installed capacity is 696.4, the average capacity remaining in period 2045 is 696.4×0.99058 = 689.8.

I think the results only show it is working exactly as expected.  Do you see any viable argument for it to work in some different way?

[Antti-L]

@Vahid: I would be grateful if you could spare a few minutes of your valuable time helping me on this issue.

Question: Do you have viable arguments for the NCAP_CPX shaping to work in some way different than it does, and if so, how should it be changed?

As it is now in TIMES, the shaping of capacity transfer was proposed by Dr. Maurizio Gargiulo in 2018.

[vahid.aryanpur]

@Vahid: I would be grateful if you could spare a few minutes of your valuable time helping me on this issue.

Question: Do you have viable arguments for the NCAP_CPX shaping to work in some way different than it does, and if so, how should it be changed?

As it is now in TIMES, the shaping of capacity transfer was proposed by Dr. Maurizio Gargiulo in 2018.

Thanks for the clear explanations.

It makes sense know, however, we will discuss your feedback in our team and share the results with you.