Skip to content

Redesign solar thermal collectors in buildings #4477

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
claudiavalkenier opened this issue Apr 28, 2025 · 4 comments · May be fixed by quintel/etsource#3263 or #4489
Open

Redesign solar thermal collectors in buildings #4477

claudiavalkenier opened this issue Apr 28, 2025 · 4 comments · May be fixed by quintel/etsource#3263 or #4489
Assignees

Comments

@claudiavalkenier
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed something in a blank scenario for Cyprus with the slider for Solar thermal collectors in space heating for buildings (buildings_space_heater_solar_thermal_share). The default setting is 8.8%, and it shows a final solar thermal demand of 0.46 PJ. But when I change the slider to either 8.7% or 8.9%, the final demand drops to 0.06 PJ, which seems a bit odd. Should this be looked into?

@kaskranenburgQ kaskranenburgQ self-assigned this May 9, 2025
@kaskranenburgQ kaskranenburgQ changed the title Fix solar thermal collectors? Redesign solar thermal collectors in buildings May 9, 2025
@kaskranenburgQ
Copy link
Contributor

kaskranenburgQ commented May 9, 2025

The slider for solar thermal collectors calls for a re-evaluation.

The label indicates that the user can set a certain amount of the potential roof surface to be build with solar thermal collectors:

Image

The labeling indicates that this energy will be used for the hot water demand in buildings. While the buildings sector in the ETM has no hot water demand.

Then what does this slider do?

The underlying input tells us that this slider partly fills the space heating demand of buildings. Setting this slider to 100% will let the solar thermal heaters produce 13% of the building space heating demand.

    EACH(
      UPDATE(EDGE(buildings_space_heater_solar_thermal, buildings_useful_demand_for_space_heating_buildings_present), share, (USER_INPUT()*0.13)/100.0),
      UPDATE(EDGE(buildings_space_heater_solar_thermal, buildings_useful_demand_for_space_heating_buildings_future), share, (USER_INPUT()*0.13)/100.0)
      )

The hardcoded value in this sliders i not documented.

The issue that @claudiavalkenier describes above comes from a difference in the defined start value and input statement of the slider:

The start value has no cap on the 13 % of the space heating demand:

- start_value_gql = present:V(buildings_space_heater_solar_thermal,share_of_buildings_useful_demand_for_space_heating_buildings_present) * 100

This means that if I were to set the slider to the same amount as the start value it would multiply with 0.13, while the start value does not take this into account.

I propose the following changes:

  1. Change labeling in front-end to reflect that this technology is used for space heating.
  2. Change the hardcoded slider value
  3. Change the maximum slider value of the slider.
  4. Change the start value of the slider.

@mabijkerk
Copy link
Member

Three considerations @kaskranenburgQ:

  1. If we do this, do we need a migration?
  2. What would be the new hardcoded slider value? What would be the maximum value? If the maximum is set to 100% and a user sets that value, does that work or will the model break?
  3. Why/how would you change the start value of the slider?

@kaskranenburgQ
Copy link
Contributor

kaskranenburgQ commented May 9, 2025

  1. If we do this, do we need a migration?
  2. What would be the new hardcoded slider value? What would be the maximum value? If the maximum is set to 100% and a user sets that value, does that work or will the model break?
  3. Why/how would you change the start value of the slider?
  1. Depends on the implementation, but I think yes.
  2. I just tested this, setting the maximum slider to 100% does not break the model in a nl2019 scenario locally.
  3. This is indeed only necessary when our implementation demands it.

My proposal:
Let the user set the value to 100%, but keep the solar thermal collectors in a separate share group in comparison to the other household heating sliders.

@kndehaan
Copy link
Contributor

Double check costs since the other technologies will be installed but not deployed(?)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants