Model-related outcome differences in power system models with sector coupling—Quantification and drivers

Journal Article (2022)
Author(s)

Hans Christian Gils (Stuttgart Research Initiative on Integrated Systems Analysis for Energy (STRise), Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR))

Hedda Gardian (Stuttgart Research Initiative on Integrated Systems Analysis for Energy (STRise), Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR))

Martin Kittel (DIW Berlin)

Wolf Peter Schill (DIW Berlin)

Alexander Murmann (Research Center for Energy Economics (FfE))

Jann Launer (Reiner Lemoine Institut)

Felix Gaumnitz (RWTH Aachen University)

Jonas van Ouwerkerk (JARA-Energy, RWTH Aachen University)

Jennifer Mikurda (Universität Duisburg-Essen)

Laura Torralba-Díaz (Stuttgart Research Initiative on Integrated Systems Analysis for Energy (STRise), University of Stuttgart)

Affiliation
External organisation
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112177
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2022
Language
English
Affiliation
External organisation
Volume number
159
Article number
112177
Downloads counter
200

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a multi-model comparison to determine outcome deviations resulting from differences in power system models. We apply eight temporally and spatially resolved models to 16 stylized test cases. These test cases differ in their renewable energy supply share, technology scope, and optimization scope. We focus on technologies for balancing the variability of power generation, such as controllable power plants, energy storage, power transmission, and flexibility related to sector coupling. We use harmonized input data in all models to separate model-related from data-related outcome deviations. We find that our approach allows for isolating and quantifying model-related outcome deviations and robust effects concerning system operation and investment decisions. Furthermore, we can attribute these deviations to the identified model differences. Our results show that trends in the use of individual flexibility options are robust across most models. Moreover, our analysis reveals that differences in the general modeling approach and the modeling of specific technologies lead to comparatively small deviations. In contrast, a heterogeneous model scope can cause substantially larger deviations. Due to a large number of models and scenarios, our analysis can provide important information on which investment and operation decisions are robust to the model choice, and which modeling approaches have an exceptionally high impact on results. Our findings may guide both modelers and decision-makers in properly evaluating the results of similarly designed power system models.

No files available

Metadata only record. There are no files for this record.