Skip to content

split pm_fedem into industry and buildings#2329

Draft
fbenke-pik wants to merge 1 commit intoremindmodel:developfrom
fbenke-pik:buildings
Draft

split pm_fedem into industry and buildings#2329
fbenke-pik wants to merge 1 commit intoremindmodel:developfrom
fbenke-pik:buildings

Conversation

@fbenke-pik
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Purpose of this PR

Please explain your PR here.

Type of change

Indicate the items relevant for your PR by replacing ◻️ with ☑️.
Do not delete any lines. This makes it easier to understand which areas are affected by your changes and which are not.

Parts concerned

  • ◻️ GAMS Code
  • ◻️ R-scripts
  • ◻️ Documentation (GAMS incode documentation, comments, tutorials)
  • ◻️ Input data / CES parameters
  • ◻️ Tests, CI/CD (continuous integration/deployment)
  • ◻️ Configuration (switches in main.gms, default.cfg, and scenario_config*.csv files)
  • ◻️ Other (please give a description)

Impact

  • ◻️ Bug fix
  • ◻️ Refactoring
  • ◻️ New feature
  • ◻️ Change of parameter values or input data (including CES parameters)
  • ◻️ Minor change (default scenarios show only small differences)
  • ◻️ Fundamental change of results of default scenarios

Checklist

Do not delete any line. Leave unfinished elements unchecked so others know how far along you are.
In the end all checkboxes must be ticked before you can merge
.

  • I executed the automated model tests (make test) after my final commit and all tests pass (FAIL 0)
  • I adjusted the reporting in remind2 if and where it was needed
  • I adjusted the madrat packages (mrremind and other packages involved) for input data generation if and where it was needed
  • My code follows the coding etiquette
  • 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 forbiddenColumnNames in readCheckScenarioConfig.R in case the PR leads to deprecated switches
  • I updated the CHANGELOG.md correctly (added, changed, fixed, removed, input data/calibration)

Further information (optional)

  • Runs with these changes are here:
  • Comparison of results (what changes by this PR?):

loop((entyFe,ppfUePrc),
p37_demFeTarget(ttot,regi,entyFe,ppfUePrc) = sum(tePrc2ue(tePrc,opmoPrc,ppfUePrc), pm_outflowPrcHist(ttot,regi,tePrc,opmoPrc) * p37_specFeDemTarget(entyFe,tePrc,opmoPrc));
p37_demFeActual(ttot,regi,entyFe,ppfUePrc) = sum((fe2ppfen_no_ces_use(entyFe,all_in),ue2ppfenPrc(ppfUePrc,all_in)), pm_fedemand(ttot,regi,all_in) * sm_EJ_2_TWa);
p37_demFeActual(ttot,regi,entyFe,ppfUePrc) = sum((fe2ppfen_no_ces_use(entyFe,all_in),ue2ppfenPrc(ppfUePrc,all_in)), pm_fedemand_ind(ttot,regi,all_in) * sm_EJ_2_TWa);
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this really only need industry demands?


*** CES calibration tarjectories industry and buildings
pm_fedemand(tall,all_regi,all_in) "read-in parameter for final energy and production trajectories used for the CES parameter calibration in industry and buildings [TWa]"
pm_fedemand_ind(tall,all_regi,all_in) "read-in parameter for final energy and production trajectories used for the CES parameter calibration in industry [TWa]"
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@fbenke-pik fbenke-pik Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should it be all_in still after the split? define sets for fedem build and ind?

pm_fedemand(t,regi,cal_ppf_buildings_dyn36) = f_fedemand_build(t,regi,"%cm_demScen%","%cm_rcp_scen_build%",cal_ppf_buildings_dyn36);
$endif.cm_rcp_scen_build
*** use cm_demScen for Industry and Buildings
pm_fedemand_ind(tall,all_regi,in) = f_fedemand_ind(tall,all_regi,"%cm_demScen%",in);
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what should be the indexing here?

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.

1 participant