Currently, the two optimization models use different balancing boundaries and cost assumptions for neighborhood electricity sharing. This discrepancy leads to inconsistent optimization goals between the capacity design and operational phases.
Current State
opti_central: Electricity consumed within a single building incurs no cost. If electricity leaves the building, it is rewarded with the grid feed-in tariff. Electricity drawn from the grid is charged at the standard grid price. The Energy Hub (EH) and the buildings are treated as strictly separate entities under these rules.opti_dimensioning_central_devices: Household base electricity demand (excluding heating) is aggregated for the entire neighborhood. The model assumes the EH can supply this aggregated demand without any energy-sharing costs or fees, or it can be purchased directly from the grid.
Issue
The dimensioning model assumes free energy sharing across the neighborhood while the operational model strictly separates the entities, the models do not utilize the same balancing borders. This results in the EH being sized for an idealized scenario that cannot be executed in the operational model. Additionaly the operation of decentral devices e.g. battery, heat pump, thermal storage is not considered.
Proposed Steps
- Update
opti_central: Allow energy sharing within the neighborhood subject to a defined energy-sharing fee. This establishes a realistic "neighborhood electricity price" and aligns the operational model closer to a shared-community concept.
- Evaluate the goal of
opti_dimensioning_central_devices: Adjusting the design optimization to perfectly mirror the operational boundaries is complex as this would need to integrate a operation optimization as well.
Currently, the two optimization models use different balancing boundaries and cost assumptions for neighborhood electricity sharing. This discrepancy leads to inconsistent optimization goals between the capacity design and operational phases.
Current State
opti_central: Electricity consumed within a single building incurs no cost. If electricity leaves the building, it is rewarded with the grid feed-in tariff. Electricity drawn from the grid is charged at the standard grid price. The Energy Hub (EH) and the buildings are treated as strictly separate entities under these rules.opti_dimensioning_central_devices: Household base electricity demand (excluding heating) is aggregated for the entire neighborhood. The model assumes the EH can supply this aggregated demand without any energy-sharing costs or fees, or it can be purchased directly from the grid.Issue
The dimensioning model assumes free energy sharing across the neighborhood while the operational model strictly separates the entities, the models do not utilize the same balancing borders. This results in the EH being sized for an idealized scenario that cannot be executed in the operational model. Additionaly the operation of decentral devices e.g. battery, heat pump, thermal storage is not considered.
Proposed Steps
opti_central: Allow energy sharing within the neighborhood subject to a defined energy-sharing fee. This establishes a realistic "neighborhood electricity price" and aligns the operational model closer to a shared-community concept.opti_dimensioning_central_devices: Adjusting the design optimization to perfectly mirror the operational boundaries is complex as this would need to integrate a operation optimization as well.