Finding a Portfolio of Near-Optimal Aggregated Solutions to Capacity Expansion Energy System Models

Abstract

Energy system models are frequently being influenced by simplifications, assumption errors, uncertainties, incompleteness, and soft constraints which are challenging to model in a good way. In capacity expansion modeling, also the long time horizon and the high shares of renewable energies feed into the uncertainties. Consequently, a single optimal solution might not provide enough information to stand alone. Contrarily, a portfolio of different solutions, all being within an acceptance span of the system costs, would create more valuable decision support tool. This idea is known from the literature where a near-optimal solution space typically is explored by introducing integer cuts that iteratively cut off solutions as they are found. Generalizing this idea, we suggest an approach that explores the near-optimal solution space by iteratively finding new solutions which are as different as possible from earlier solutions with respect to investment decisions. Our method deviates from the literature since it maximizes the difference of the found solutions rather than finding k similar solutions. An advantage of this approach is that the resulting portfolio holds high diversity which creates a better basis for good decision-making. Moreover, it overcomes a potential struggle of getting symmetric solutions and it strengthens the robustness arguments of the different investment decisions. Furthermore, we suggest to search for alternative solutions in an aggregated solution space whereas the original solution space typically has been used for the search in previous work. We hereby exploit the speedup achieved through aggregation to find more solutions, and we observe that these solutions might indicate must have investments of the non-aggregated problem. The suggested approach is tested on a case study for three different limitations on the system costs. Results show that our approach by far outperforms the approach known from the literature when the neighborhood size exceeds 0.7%. Furthermore, using our approach, a portfolio of eight solutions with

Decision support for the technician routing and scheduling problem

“…The next three constraint sets (3)- (5) say that a workday technician can leave home at most once, must leave any entered task and return to home at most once. The final three constraint sets ( 6)-( 8) satisfy time windows; constraints (6) keep track of start times at each visited task for each workday technician. Constraints (7) and (8) ensure that task start times are within both the time windows of the task and of the technician.…”

“…Future direction of research could also be to use the framework proposed in Buchholz et al [6] to find alternative near‐optimal investment choices. Given an initial solution to the investment decision problem, the investment decision problem is re‐optimized, where the objective function is replaced by finding a solution with the most different investment decisions (given some predefined measurement), and where a constraint is added to ensure CAPEX + OPEX is no more than $$$ \Delta $$$ higher than the initial investment decision solution value.…”

“…FIGURE6 Duration curve of change in the travel time for the ALNS before and after investment decisions, calculated as ALNS (before inv) − ALNS (after inv). A duration curve depicts the values in descending order of magnitude.…”

Fictional expectations in energy scenarios and implications for bottom-up planning models

“…Questions of public acceptance are already addressed in various studies using bottom-up planning models. Typically, these studies apply modeling for alternatives and quantify the additional cost arising if deployment of certain technologies is limited according to social preferences [14,69,77].…”