A press release from Polish NGO Instrat unexpectedly arrived this
morning. And on scanning thru the underlying report (Czyżak et
al 2021), I see PyPSA-PL was used to generate some of the
numerical results, including future HV transmission expansion
requirements. Earlier documents in the series apparently detail
the methodology. In any case, this is the final of three such
reports. Nice to see this kind of application. Well done TB and
with best Robbie
Berus, Patryk (8 December 2021). Failing to switch from coal
to wind and solar could cost every Polish family 500 PLN per
year by 2030, report — Press release. Warsaw, Poland:
Instrat Foundation. (500 PLN is circa €100).
Czyżak, Paweł, Adrianna Wrona, and Michał Borkowski (December 2021). The missing element: energy security considerations — Instrat Policy Paper 09/2021. Warsaw, Poland: Instrat Foundation. ISBN 978-83-962333-3-2.
-- Robbie Morrison Address: Schillerstrasse 85, 10627 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49.30.612-87617
Thank you Robbie!
Yes, that is correct – this is the last of three reports proposing a comprehensive plan for a coal phase-out in Poland. The trilogy goes as follows:
The optimization work was based on PyPSA and we are planning to release all the inputs and Python code, just need to clean it up and document.
And yes, as always huge thanks to Tom, Jonas, Lara, David, the PyPSA and GLAES teams.
Kierownik Programu Energia i Klimat, Członek Zarządu
Head of Energy & Climate, Board Member
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "openmod initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openmod-initiat...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/8b460721-3046-8f05-b373-f5b40fb9a163%40posteo.de.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/012e01d7ec1a%24ea043c90%24be0cb5b0%24%40gmail.com.
Hard to imagine a larger can of worms
than the contents of your posting! :-D
One example. The German EEG feed‑in‑tariff scheme survived unfair state aid claims because the supporting cashflow came from consumers and not taxes. More on wikipedia:
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/CAFWQV2rY4UtZQOoNLOO7gaMjc6G6KP0vw%3DxDUS7fsrg4C0FNDw%40mail.gmail.com.
Thanks Pamela, if I understand correctly, I think this is a broader discussion on state intervention, not necessarily just in this case. Because to me it doesn’t matter if it’s a tax on the energy tariff, or a state-aid mechanism like RES auctions funded from the state budget via e.g. income taxes, this is in both cases taxpayer money. And I don’t think the energy market (and frankly any market) is really a pure and clean free market as described by neoclassical economics in any countries, and in most energy is highly regulated. So I’d say some of the general macroeconomics and public finance questions apply here.
Whether subsidies are good or bad – the more modern economists would probably vote for a stronger role of the state than a few years back, something that was visible in the scale of COVID recovery funding. So if you read Bregman, Hickel, Ha-joon Chang, they show how even strongly liberal and capitalist governments have supported certain parts of their economy, especially industry in the past, often indirectly, but still to create a competitive advantage against other countries. And I think that is the same case regarding RES – it’s also about building the industry, creating jobs, lowering electricity prices to improve the competitiveness of businesses etc.
But going back to your question on the report – like with any subsidy, it’s hard to measure the exact impact, value added etc. And hard to prove the causality of more subsidies = more RES. Plus subsidies for RES e.g. in Poland are more a risk-management tool than actual profit-making mechanisms. So I don’t have a good answer, and I don’t know if perhaps The Netherlands have the RES financing handled in a way that is indirect and thus misrepresented in the data. It’s actually very difficult to compare the RES-subsidy component of energy tariffs in different countries, because they come in a huge variety of direct and indirect forms. I think that itself is great material for a research paper.
Not sure if this answers your question or is completely off-topic…
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/baaf1b43-8883-d25f-1966-3b1a006efee9%40posteo.de.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/021201d7ec5a%2470dbbe20%2452933a60%24%40gmail.com.
Just wanted to let you know that the PyPSA-PL model is now publicly available here: https://github.com/instrat-pl/pypsa-pl (MIT license). As mentioned earlier in this thread, the methodology and the reasoning behind creating PyPSA-PL is described in three Instrat Policy Papers, the most relevant probably being this one: https://instrat.pl/en/res-potential/.
To give you a brief summary:
Of course there are many elements that should be improved, but we are hoping that this project can start the discussion on open modelling in Poland – Poland is very far behind Western Europe in terms of data and modelling transparency…
All the best, Pawel
Hello Pawel, all
Many thanks for keeping the mailing list informed. I have been gradually adding these studies to wikipedia:
Very encouraging work too.
with best wishes, Robbie
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openmod-initiative/04c401d7f5d9%2476a8c7c0%2463fa5740%24%40gmail.com.