Skip to content

Heat pump revisions for nl2023 - #3472

Draft
mabijkerk wants to merge 4 commits into
masterfrom
heat-pump-analysis
Draft

Heat pump revisions for nl2023#3472
mabijkerk wants to merge 4 commits into
masterfrom
heat-pump-analysis

Conversation

@mabijkerk

@mabijkerk mabijkerk commented Aug 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Context

t.b.d.

Implemented changes

  • Node source analysis heat pumps
    The following node source analysis have been updated. Most importantly the COPs and COP per degree. But other
    values such costs are updated as well:

    • households_space_heater_heatpump_air_water_electricity.converter
    • households_water_heater_heatpump_air_water_electricity.converter
    • households_space_heater_hybrid_heatpump_air_water_electricity.converter
    • households_water_heater_hybrid_heatpump_air_water_electricity.converter
  • Residence source analysis nl2023: updated the number of HHP, ...

  • Residence analysis: the hardcoded HHP specs for space heating are updated, for hot water the input of network gas is set to 1.0 to match the COP cutoff of 6.0.

Related

Closes: https://github.com/quintel/etdataset/issues/1073
Partly addresses: https://github.com/quintel/etdataset/issues/900

Goes with: https://github.com/quintel/etdataset/pull/1104

To do

  • Add updated node specs
  • Review rake task or drop/cherry-pick to a different branch if not in scope

@mabijkerk
mabijkerk requested a review from kndehaan August 19, 2026 12:06
@mabijkerk
mabijkerk requested a review from louispt1 August 19, 2026 13:05
- electricity_output_capacity = 0.0
- free_co2_factor = 0.0
- heat_output_capacity = 0.0049
- heat_output_capacity = 0.198

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jort-wolda this seems rather high? 198 kW?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And didn't we want to align it with the space heater?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see what went wrong. It accidentally uses 0.22 as a capacity for the boiler instead of 0.022
fever.capacity.network_gas is also changed from 0.022 to 0.22 for this one

And you're right, we did discuss to align with the space heater. I'll fix that

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this increase might be related to the increase of fever.capacity.network_gas, I'm not sure which parameter "goes first" and determines the other.

- fever.technology_curve_type = tech_constant
- storage.cost_per_mwh = 154736.8
- fever.type = producer
- storage.cost_per_mwh = 0.0

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it correct that this value has been set to zero?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Old node source analysis did not include storage cost, nor did the other heat pump node source analysis. The storage volume is also set to 0 so it should not matter.

Comment on lines +2 to +3
- input.electricity = 0.226111
- input.network_gas = 0.20861

@kndehaan kndehaan Aug 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note that below the input.ambient_heat, electricity and network_gas parameters are also defined with ~, retrieving from (full) datasets and ingraph_methods with sparse graph queries, retrieving from derived datasets. What is the intended data route: fixed efficiencies of dataset-dependent efficiencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the intended route is the dataset-dependent efficiencies, meaning that these hard-coded values should be removed.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If these values are processed somewhere in the dataset, note that these shares currently sum to 1.0. It might be that this should be corrected somewhere.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right, these values should not be here.
image

This was somewhat of a mistake to put them here but we wanted to keep te calculations. They should not have been included in the rake

- fever.capacity.network_gas = 0.022
- fever.base_cop = 2.1044
- fever.capacity.electricity = 0.001704
- fever.capacity.network_gas = 0.22

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the factor 10 increase of fever.capacity.network_gas compared to the old value correct?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No it is not, see my comment on the heat_output_capacity comment from Matthijs. I've changed it in the NSA file on etdataset and manually changed it here.

- storage.cost_per_mwh = 0.0
- storage.decay = 0.0
- storage.volume = 0.005
- storage.volume = 0.0

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it correct that this value has been set to zero?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On second thought. It might not be. In the other three NSAs there's no storage volume but it does make sense to have hot water storage for a full-electric heat pump. While it might not be necessary for space heating or for a hybrid heat pump, as it uses the gas boiler for hot water, it should be included here.

We might need to think about the storage costs as well then. I am not sure if it makes sense to include storage costs separately though. Since the investment costs cover the total cost for the heat pump already.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants