Skip to content

External coupling co2 emissions - #3487

Open
jort-wolda wants to merge 5 commits into
masterfrom
emissions-external-coupling
Open

External coupling co2 emissions#3487
jort-wolda wants to merge 5 commits into
masterfrom
emissions-external-coupling

Conversation

@jort-wolda

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Context

Implemented changes

External coupling co2 emissions:

  • Steel
  • Fertilizers transformations
  • Refineries transformations
  • Chemicals other transformations

Related

Goes with pull requests:

Checklist

  • I have tested these changes
  • I have updated documentation as needed
  • I have tagged the relevant people for review

- Steel
- Fertilizers transformations
- Refineries transformations
- Chemicals other transformations
Based on PR review Claude
@kndehaan
kndehaan removed the request for review from robindesmit-quintel September 7, 2026 14:00
Comment thread graphs/molecules/nodes/industry/industry_steel_external_coupling_node_co2.ad Outdated
@kndehaan

kndehaan commented Sep 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

General discussion points:

  • Unit of new inputs is in kton, all other absolute emission-related external coupling inputs (except new ones for static emissions) are in Mton. Should we apply Mton as well?
  • Emission sliders added to the respective sector sections in the model, not to Greenhouse gas emissions section
  • Emissions from the external coupling nodes are reported under Industry sector, whereas the node name indicated energy sector
  • industry_steel_external_coupling_node_co2 already existed, but it now works differently where CO2 is set via external coupling input. I therefore think we need a migration to preserve the "demand" on the node for existing scenarios.

@kndehaan kndehaan changed the title External coupling co2 emissions: External coupling co2 emissions Sep 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you move the four input files to the folders of the sub sector they belong to? From a quick glance, it seems that the sub folders also represent the sub sector that is in coupling_groups. So then it seems more logic that the emissions input files are also put into the folder that represents their coupling group.

@kndehaan

kndehaan commented Sep 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

From the general discussion points, I'll discuss the kton or Mton decision with the client. The scenario migration will be picked up. The other two points don't need any action.

- Changed 'min_value' from 0 to 0.0
- Changed use for steel to energetic
- Deleted scaling_exempt and explanation about scaling_exempt. Tested it and was indeed fine
- Added a space in 'external_coupling_emissions_energy_chemical_other_transformation_co2.ad' for readability
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.

2 participants