-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 133
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
Bidirectional transmission in the same time step #280
Comments
Could you attach an example input file please as I am not aware of this issue in the existing input files. Alternatively I would assume it is fine to modify res_transmission_input_by_capacity_rule() like this: |
I think the constraints mentioned above are not enough to limit possible bidirectional transmission. At least one of
|
I would even say: if your mathematically optimal solution has bidirectional flow, then the scenario is broken. There should always be another process/storage/demand avenue for some MWh to be consumed than it being "burned" in transmission losses because the energy has no other way to go. Even a near-zero (or even negative) revenue energy sell option would be a better. This is the counter-side of the "Slack" power plant process that used to be present in most vertices, to prevent mathematically impossible scenarios, but clearly indicating that not enough other options are present. I would therefore vote for allowing bidirectional flow, but possibly implement a warning that is emitted whenever it is present in an LP optimal solution - similar to the use of Slack power plants. |
The transmission constraints allow a bidirectional power flow at the same time, at the maximum capacity from region A to region B and at the maximum capacity from B to A. Therefore, a power flow two times the value of the actual transmission capacity is allowed. While this is not an optimal situation when the lines have losses, it can still happen when the lines are used as a curtailment by urbs.
My sugestion to eliminate this unwanted situation is to replace the two existing equations:
pi_in(from A to B) <= maximum capacity
and
pi_in(from B to A) <= maximum capacity
with the following equation:
pi_in(from A to B) + pi_in(from B to A) <= maximum capacity.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: