Need for review of hv electricity losses share modeling & calculations

[kaskranenburgQ]

Context

For the Dataset of Lingewaard on the stable server, the present year losses of the hv network are the following (link can be found here):

This is value is calculated by taking the total electricity demand of the scenario and mutliplying this with the share of losses of the nl2019 dataset.

A very big share of the electricity is produced on the mv network in the present year situation in Lingewaard. This is due to a biogas CHP.

Since these losses are only attributed to the HV network and not on the MV network, the share of the losses becomes very substantial on the HV network.

In principle this is a logical modelling choice/outcome.

In the future year in a blank Lingewaard scenario we see that the losses are in absolute values the same, but relatively become a lot lower. This is because the biogas chp has stopped producing and almost all electricity is now imported in this scenario. This is due to the merit order calculations.

However in this scenario for Lingewaard we see that the share of losses becomes 44.9%

This does not seem to follow the same logic as we saw with an empty scenario.
This begs the question: How are these losses calculated in future years? They do not seem to hold the same absolute value, nor do they hold the same share of the present year. Is there something we are missing here?

Some directions to investigate:

• Excess electricity node
• Imbalance of energy_hv_network_electricity node on annual level.

Notifying @mabijkerk

[mabijkerk]

This older issue concerns the same problem: quintel/etengine#1330. SInce it is slightly more relevant for ETSource than for ETEngine, I'm closing the older issue and leaving this one open.