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

Update of Hydrogen Modeling: Flexibility Tax and Electrolysis Tax #1612

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Mar 14, 2024

Conversation

fschreyer
Copy link
Contributor

@fschreyer fschreyer commented Mar 14, 2024

Purpose of this PR

This PR mainly updates our green hydrogen modeling. It extends and reparameterizes the flexibility tax for electrolysis and adds a SE electricity tax on electricity used by electrolysis. The electrolysis technology elh2 is therefore to be seen as grid electrolysis, which is now noted in the technology description.

It addresses several issues relevant to the ongoing validation:

Note: A quick review would be great as this is supposed to feature the next release version and @LaviniaBaumstark wants to start validation runs as soon as possible.

Details:

1.) flexibility tax update

  • Flexibility tax (i.e. reduction of electricity price for electrolysis) now depends not only on VRE share but also on the share of electrolysis in total electricity demand. This captures the effect observed in power system models that with increasing green hydrogen production in the power system less hours in the year with low electricity prices will be available.
  • Flexibility tax is (re)parameterized based on data from the Enertile model of the German Langfristszenarien.

2.) SE electrolysis tax

  • an SE electrolysis tax was added to tax electricity used by (grid) electrolysis. The tax rate is the sum of the FE industry electricity tax and the levelized grid cost (from the tdels technology) to capture that electrolysis also needs to pay for grid maintenance / expansion. However, as in the real world it may make sense to (partially) free electrolysis from taxes at low levels of production since, for example, electrolysis provides balancing services to the grid of a high-VRE power system, the tax is low at low shares and only increases at higher shares. The relationsship is assumed to be a logistic curve with its inflection point at 10% electrolysis share in electricity demand, that is, taxes for electrolysis will get quite high once this threshold is crossed.

3.) Other Changes

  • Gas-to-Liquids (gasftrec, gasftcrec) technologies were activated again. This was done in the context of this issue to avoid the model to produce blue hydrogen and use it for synfuels as in reality this would correspond to a GtL process.
  • Improve documentation of flexibility tax implementation.

Type of change

(Make sure to delete from the Type-of-change list the items not relevant to your PR)

  • New feature

Checklist:

  • My code follows the coding etiquette
  • I performed a self-review of my own code
  • I explained my changes within the PR, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I checked that the in-code documentation is up-to-date
  • I adjusted the reporting in remind2 where it was needed

See this remind2 PR

Further information (optional):

  • Test runs are here:
  • Comparison of results (what changes by this PR?):

Before and after H2 Update (different ramp-up rates for SE tax):

/p/tmp/schreyer/Modeling/remind/Current/compScen-H2Update_vs_original-2024-03-05_09.26.34-H12.pdf

Npi runs at different stages of the incoming changes:

/p/tmp/schreyer/Modeling/remind/Current/compScen-Npi_H2Update-2024-03-01_12.05.50-H12.pdf

Felix Schreyer added 9 commits October 9, 2023 11:22
… tax benefit depend, additionally, on the share of electrolysis in total electricity demand based data from the German Langfristszenarien with detailed power system modeling
…used for electrolysis, tax levels are ramped up by a logistic function with increasing share of electrolysis in total electricity demand, vm_shDemSeel, based on the assumption that electrolyzers will not be charged taxes at low levels of deployment due to their balancing benefits for the power system
Copy link
Contributor

@aodenweller aodenweller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, Felix! As we all discussed, let's go ahead with this.

Copy link

@FalkoUeckerdt FalkoUeckerdt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Based on the discussions and plots on mattermost, I approve this. Thanks Felix!

@fschreyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

fschreyer commented Mar 14, 2024

My test runs on this branch did not converge (for instance /p/tmp/schreyer/Modeling/remind/remind_330/output/default_2024-03-13_15.56.02). However, this is most likely due to issues of the current trunk version and not related to this PR. I checked that the taxes I added converge well. Otherwise, there were no infeasibilities and the reporting update worked well. As agreed with @LaviniaBaumstark, I will proceed to merge this to be included in the upcoming validation runs. Recalibration of the CES parameters is recommended after this merge.

@fschreyer fschreyer merged commit 45b7ce2 into remindmodel:develop Mar 14, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants