Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

enable EQ constraint on locations #1163

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

enable EQ constraint on locations #1163

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

martacki
Copy link
Member

Closes # (if applicable).

Changes proposed in this Pull Request

enable the EQ constraint to operate on locations, particularly useful for sector coupled models

Checklist

  • I tested my contribution locally and it seems to work fine.
  • Code and workflow changes are sufficiently documented.
  • Changed dependencies are added to envs/environment.yaml.
  • Changes in configuration options are added in all of config.default.yaml.
  • Changes in configuration options are also documented in doc/configtables/*.csv.
  • A release note doc/release_notes.rst is added.

@tgi-climact
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @martacki , I am also interested by this feature. If you intend to make it work for sector-coupled models, it seems to me that we should also add links related to power supply into the constraint. Am I missing something ?

@martacki
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @tgi-climact thanks for your interest in the feature and remark! You're absolutely right. Needs some filtering though, I think, so that we always take the right pX stream (i.e. p1, p2, ...), if applicable. Need to have a close look into the generators, too.

I didn't have any generating units in my network that were attached by links, so I'll need to find a new test-case for this

@koen-vg
Copy link
Contributor

koen-vg commented Aug 19, 2024

Related to #659? Unfortunately I believe implementing the EQ constraint for sector-coupled networks can be a bit complicated (see the docstring of the rewritten EQ constraint function in the aforementioned PR).

(P.S. I do hope to find the time to revisit #659 and see if I can finally get it merged. Looking back at it now it does seem like maybe it's more complicated than it needs to be so I'll be on the look-out for simplifications.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants