23-10-2023, 07:49 PM
Ok, thanks for the info.
So, you are defining the blending shares at the vehicle technologies? That would make things somewhat complicated, assuming the vehicle technologies are vintaged, because FLO_SHAR is then vintage-dependent as well. Because of that, the input shares would remain constant over the lifetime of each vintage, and would be able to change only vintage-wise. Currently there is basically no other option for defining non-vintaged shares for vintaged technologies than by user constraints.
I would be inclined to suggest moving the blending to fuel technologies upstream of the vehicle technologies. That would make it easy for defining the share projections independently of the vehicle vintages. But of course, with user-constraints it would also be reasonably easy to model even with such vehicle-level blending.
So, you are defining the blending shares at the vehicle technologies? That would make things somewhat complicated, assuming the vehicle technologies are vintaged, because FLO_SHAR is then vintage-dependent as well. Because of that, the input shares would remain constant over the lifetime of each vintage, and would be able to change only vintage-wise. Currently there is basically no other option for defining non-vintaged shares for vintaged technologies than by user constraints.
I would be inclined to suggest moving the blending to fuel technologies upstream of the vehicle technologies. That would make it easy for defining the share projections independently of the vehicle vintages. But of course, with user-constraints it would also be reasonably easy to model even with such vehicle-level blending.