[pypsa-eur-sec] CO2 Sequestration wildcard

32 views
Skip to first unread message

Paul Reggentin

unread,
Aug 3, 2022, 8:50:23 AM8/3/22
to pypsa
Hi all,

I just noticed that the sector_opts wildcard for changing the CO2 sequestration limit seems to not be working. 

I have found the reason, which is that the e_nom_opt of the co2 sequestration store is set to np.inf(), so multiplying it by any factor obviously does nothing.

    n.madd("Store",
        spatial.co2.nodes,
        e_nom_extendable=True,
        e_nom_max=np.inf,
        capital_cost=options['co2_sequestration_cost'],
        carrier="co2 stored",
        bus=spatial.co2.nodes
    )

The actual limit is applied in the script solve_network.py, in the function  add_co2_sequestration_limit(), but it expects the wildcard to be formatted as seq2000000 or seq2e8 (for example) instead of co2 stored+e2
However, one line in solve_network is incorrect. It is now:
    opts = snakemake.wildcards.opts.split('-')
But should be
    opts = snakemake.wildcards.sector_opts.split('-')


I'm just writing this message 1) in case anyone else has this problem, and 2) to make sure the developers are aware that the these issues exist. I can write a pull request to make the change in solve_network.py, but I'm not sure if there are different plans to handle sequestration.

Also, I'm wondering if there's a specific justification for 200Mt as the default sequestration potential value. I was copied on an email from Dr. Brown a few months ago that said it was in order to compensate for process emissions, but it seems like 150Mt is the usual amount.

Best,
Paul

Thanks,
Paul

Fabian Neumann

unread,
Aug 3, 2022, 11:16:08 AM8/3/22
to py...@googlegroups.com
Hi Paul,

thanks for the bug report, which I just fixed on the master. We have
recently changed the e_nom_max of the co2 store(s) and implementing the
sequestration limit as extra_functionality instead in preparation of
spatially resolving the CO2 carrier.

Yes, the default 200 Mt/a is chosen a little bit higher than the process
emissions. There is no specific justification. Just that it allows for
some limited amounts of BECCS additionally. The 200 Mt/a is low in
comparison to other studies. EU Commission scenarios easily go as high
as 1000 Mt/a.

Best wishes,

Fabian N
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "pypsa" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to pypsa+un...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:pypsa+un...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pypsa/322c62eb-eb43-4c18-a491-fa0284d732b9n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pypsa/322c62eb-eb43-4c18-a491-fa0284d732b9n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

--
Dr.-Ing.
Fabian Neumann (he/him)
Postdoctoral Researcher

Department of Digital Transformation in Energy Systems
Institute of Energy Technology
Technische Universität Berlin

Group website: https://tub-ensys.github.io
Personal website: https://neumann.fyi
Schedule Meeting: https://calendly.com/fneum

Einsteinufer 25 (TA 8)
10587 Berlin

My working hours may not be your working hours. Do not feel pressure to
reply to this email outside your working hours.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages