Operational Reserves mis-identifies any generators with p_max_pu as renewable according to old implementation.
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
bug
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 148
- Forks
- 55
- Avg merge
- 2d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 18
Description
Checklist
- I am running on an up-to-date
pypsa-usaenvironment. Update viaconda env update -f envs/environment.yaml
Issue exisits on what branch
Develop
The Issue
The old implementation of operational reserves mis-identifies any generators with p_max_pu as a renewable. In connection to #316, I need to find a better way to designate which resources can commit to reserves.
Steps To Reproduce
No response
Expected Behavior
No response
Error Message
No response
Anything else?
No response
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with workflow/scripts/solve_network.py around lines 760-772 and review the context of issue #316. Trace how generators with p_max_pu are classified for operational reserves, then define and validate a resource designation that does not treat every such generator as renewable.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100