Simple epidemiological model for Burnie, Tasmania   SIR: Susceptible to infection - Infected - Recovery, Government responses and Economic impacts           Government policy is activated when there are 10 or fewer reported cases of COVID-19. The more people tested, the fewer people became infected
Simple epidemiological model for Burnie, Tasmania
SIR: Susceptible to infection - Infected - Recovery, Government responses and Economic impacts  

Government policy is activated when there are 10 or fewer reported cases of COVID-19. The more people tested, the fewer people became infected. So the government's policy is to reduce infections by increasing the number of people tested and starting early. At the same time, it has slowed the economic growth (which, according to the model,  will stop for next 52 weeks).
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




A detailed description of all model input parameters is available  here . These are discussed further  here  and  here .  Update 29 June 2016 (v2.6): Added historical emplacement for wind and PV capacity. The maximum historical emplacement rates are then maintained from year 114/115 until the end of
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available here. These are discussed further here and here.

Update 29 June 2016 (v2.6): Added historical emplacement for wind and PV capacity. The maximum historical emplacement rates are then maintained from year 114/115 until the end of the model period. This acts as a base emplacement rate that is then augmented with the contribution made via the feedback control mechanism. Note that battery buffering commences only once the additional emplacement via the feedback controller kicks in. This means that there is a base capacity for both wind and PV for which no buffering is provided, slightly reducing the energy services required for wind and PV supplies, as well as associated costs. Contributions from biomass and nuclear have also been increased slightly, in line with the earlier intention that these should approximately double during the transition period. This leads to a modest reduction in the contributions required from wind and PV.

Added calculation of global mean conversion efficiency energy to services on primary energy basis. This involves making a compensation to the gross energy outputs for all thermal electricity generation sources. The reason for this is that standard EROI analysis methodology involves inclusion of energy inputs on a primary energy equivalent basis. In order to convert correctly between energy inputs and energy service inputs, the reference conversion efficiency must therefore be defined on a primary energy basis. Previously, this conversion was made on the basis of the mean conversion efficiency from final energy to energy services.

Update 14 December 2015 (v2.5): correction to net output basis LCOE calculation, to include actual self power demand for wind, PV and batteries in place of "2015 reference" values.

Update 20 November 2015 (v2.4): levelised O&M costs now added for wind & PV, so that complete (less transmission-related investments) LCOE for wind and PV is calculated, for both gross and net output.

Update 18 November 2015 (v2.3: development of capital cost estimates for wind, PV and battery buffering, adding levelised capital cost per unit net output, for comparison with levelised capital cost per unit gross output. Levelised capital cost estimate has been substantially refined, bringing this into line with standard practice for capital recovery calculation. Discount rate is user adjustable.

Default maximum autonomy periods reduced to 48 hours for wind and 72 hours for PV.

Update 22 October 2015 (v2.2): added ramped introduction of wind and PV buffering capacity. Wind and PV buffering ramps from zero to the maximum autonomy period as wind and PV generated electricity increases as a proportion of overall electricity supply. The threshold proportion for maximum autonomy period is user adjustable. Ramping uses interpolation based on an elliptical curve between zero and the threshold proportion, to avoid discontinuities that produce poor response shape in key variables.

Update 23 September 2015 (v2.1): added capital investment calculation and associated LCOE contribution for wind generation plant, PV generation plant and storage batteries.

**This version (v2.0) includes refined energy conversion efficiency estimates, increasing the global mean efficiency, but also reducing the aggressiveness of the self-demand learning curves for all sources. The basis for the conversion efficiencies, including all assumptions relating to specific types of work & heat used by the economy, is provided in this Excel spreadsheet.

Conversion of self power demand to energy services demand for each source is carried out via a reference global mean conversion efficiency, set as a user input using the global mean conversion efficiency calculated in the model at the time of transition commencement (taken to be the time for which all EROI parameter values are defined. A learning curve is applied to this value to account for future improvement in self power demand to services conversion efficiency.**

The original "standard run" version of the model is available here.
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




Overview This model is a working simulation of the competition between the mountain biking tourism industry versus the forestry logging within Derby Tasmania.    How the model works  The left side of the model highlights the mountain bike flow beginning with demand for the forest that leads to incre
Overview
This model is a working simulation of the competition between the mountain biking tourism industry versus the forestry logging within Derby Tasmania.

How the model works
The left side of the model highlights the mountain bike flow beginning with demand for the forest that leads to increased visitors using the forest of mountain biking. Accompanying variables effect the tourism income that flows from use of the bike trails.
On the right side, the forest flow begins with tree growth then a demand for timber leading to the logging production. The sales from the logging then lead to the forestry income.
The model works by identifying how the different variables interact with both mountain biking and logging. As illustrated there are variables that have a shared effect such as scenery and adventure and entertainment.

Variables
The variables are essential in understanding what drives the flow within the model. For example mountain biking demand is dependent on positive word mouth which in turn is dependent on scenery. This is an important factor as logging has a negative impact on how the scenery changes as logging deteriorates the landscape and therefore effects positive word of mouth.
By establishing variables and their relationships with each other, the model highlights exactly how mountain biking and forestry logging effect each other and the income it supports.

Interesting Insights
The model suggests that though there is some impact from logging, tourism still prospers in spite of negative impacts to the scenery with tourism increasing substantially over forestry income. There is also a point at which the visitor population increases exponentially at which most other variables including adventure and entertainment also increase in result. The model suggests that it may be possible for logging and mountain biking to happen simultaneously without negatively impacting on the tourism income.
 Overview 

 A model which simulates the competition between logging versus adventure
tourism (mountain bike ridding) in Derby Tasmania.  

  
How the model works: 

 Trees grow, and we cut them down because of the demand for Timber and
sell the logs. Mountain bikers and holiday visitors will come t

Overview

A model which simulates the competition between logging versus adventure tourism (mountain bike ridding) in Derby Tasmania. 


How the model works:

Trees grow, and we cut them down because of the demand for Timber and sell the logs. Mountain bikers and holiday visitors will come to the park and this depends on experience and recommendations.  Past experience and recommendations depend on the Scenery, number of trees compared to the visitor and Adventure number of trees and users.  Park capacity limits the number of users.  To utilize highest park capacity, they need to promote to the holiday visitor segment as well. Again, the visit depends on the scenery. So, both mountain biking and forestry (logging) businesses need to contribute a significant amount of revenue to CSR for faster regrowth of trees.


Interesting insights

It looks like a lot of logging doesn't stop people from mountain biking. 

Faster replantation of the tree will balance out the impact created by logging which will give the visitor a positive experience and the number of visitors is both improved. 

To keep the park's popularity in check, the price of wood needs to be high. 

Also, it looks like mountain biking only needs a narrow path.

CSR contribution to nature can be a crucial factor. 

A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




A detailed description of all model input parameters is available  here . These are discussed further  here  and  here .   Update 6 August 2018 (v2.8): Updated historical wind and PV deployment
 data for 2016-2017, adding projected PV deployment for 2018. Data via 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grow
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available here. These are discussed further here and here.

Update 6 August 2018 (v2.8): Updated historical wind and PV deployment data for 2016-2017, adding projected PV deployment for 2018. Data via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_by_country.

Update 26 October 2017 (v2.7): Updated historical wind and PV deployment data for 2015-2016, adding projected PV deployment for 2017. Data via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_by_country.

Update 18 December 2016 (v2.7): Added feature to calculate a global EROI index for all energy sources plus intermittency buffering (currently batteries only, but this could be diversified). The index is calculated specifically in terms of energy services in the form of work and heat. That is, it takes the aggregated energy services made available by all sources as the energy output term, and the energy services required to provided the buffered output as the energy input term.

Update 29 June 2016 (v2.6): Added historical emplacement for wind and PV capacity. The maximum historical emplacement rates are then maintained from year 114/115 until the end of the model period. This acts as a base emplacement rate that is then augmented with the contribution made via the feedback control mechanism. Note that battery buffering commences only once the additional emplacement via the feedback controller kicks in. This means that there is a base capacity for both wind and PV for which no buffering is provided, slightly reducing the energy services required for wind and PV supplies, as well as associated costs. Contributions from biomass and nuclear have also been increased slightly, in line with the earlier intention that these should approximately double during the transition period. This leads to a modest reduction in the contributions required from wind and PV.

Added calculation of global mean conversion efficiency energy to services on primary energy basis. This involves making an adjustment to the gross energy outputs for all thermal electricity generation sources. The reason for this is that standard EROI analysis methodology involves inclusion of energy inputs on a primary energy equivalent basis. In order to convert correctly between energy inputs and energy service inputs, the reference conversion efficiency must therefore be defined on a primary energy basis. Previously, this conversion was made on the basis of the mean conversion efficiency from final energy to energy services.

Update 14 December 2015 (v2.5): correction to net output basis LCOE calculation, to include actual self power demand for wind, PV and batteries in place of "2015 reference" values.

Update 20 November 2015 (v2.4): levelised O&M costs now added for wind & PV, so that complete (less transmission-related investments) LCOE for wind and PV is calculated, for both gross and net output.

Update 18 November 2015 (v2.3: development of capital cost estimates for wind, PV and battery buffering, adding levelised capital cost per unit net output, for comparison with levelised capital cost per unit gross output. Levelised capital cost estimate has been substantially refined, bringing this into line with standard practice for capital recovery calculation. Discount rate is user adjustable.

Default maximum autonomy periods reduced to 48 hours for wind and 72 hours for PV.

Update 22 October 2015 (v2.2): added ramped introduction of wind and PV buffering capacity. Wind and PV buffering ramps from zero to the maximum autonomy period as wind and PV generated electricity increases as a proportion of overall electricity supply. The threshold proportion for maximum autonomy period is user adjustable. Ramping uses interpolation based on an elliptical curve between zero and the threshold proportion, to avoid discontinuities that produce poor response shape in key variables.

Update 23 September 2015 (v2.1): added capital investment calculation and associated LCOE contribution for wind generation plant, PV generation plant and storage batteries.

**This version (v2.0) includes refined energy conversion efficiency estimates, increasing the global mean efficiency, but also reducing the aggressiveness of the self-demand learning curves for all sources. The basis for the conversion efficiencies, including all assumptions relating to specific types of work & heat used by the economy, is provided in this Excel spreadsheet.

Conversion of self power demand to energy services demand for each source is carried out via a reference global mean conversion efficiency, set as a user input using the global mean conversion efficiency calculated in the model at the time of transition commencement (taken to be the time for which all EROI parameter values are defined. A learning curve is applied to this value to account for future improvement in self power demand to services conversion efficiency.**

The original "standard run" version of the model is available here.
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




Overview This model is a working simulation of the competition between the mountain biking tourism industry versus the forestry logging within Derby Tasmania.    How the model works  The left side of the model highlights the mountain bike flow beginning with demand for the forest that leads to incre
Overview
This model is a working simulation of the competition between the mountain biking tourism industry versus the forestry logging within Derby Tasmania.

How the model works
The left side of the model highlights the mountain bike flow beginning with demand for the forest that leads to increased visitors using the forest of mountain biking. Accompanying variables effect the tourism income that flows from use of the bike trails.
On the right side, the forest flow begins with tree growth then a demand for timber leading to the logging production. The sales from the logging then lead to the forestry income.
The model works by identifying how the different variables interact with both mountain biking and logging. As illustrated there are variables that have a shared effect such as scenery and adventure and entertainment.

Variables
The variables are essential in understanding what drives the flow within the model. For example mountain biking demand is dependent on positive word mouth which in turn is dependent on scenery. This is an important factor as logging has a negative impact on how the scenery changes as logging deteriorates the landscape and therefore effects positive word of mouth.
By establishing variables and their relationships with each other, the model highlights exactly how mountain biking and forestry logging effect each other and the income it supports.

Interesting Insights
The model suggests that though there is some impact from logging, tourism still prospers in spite of negative impacts to the scenery with tourism increasing substantially over forestry income. There is also a point at which the visitor population increases exponentially at which most other variables including adventure and entertainment also increase in result. The model suggests that it may be possible for logging and mountain biking to happen simultaneously without negatively impacting on the tourism income.
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available  here . These are discussed further  here  and  here .  Update 26 October 2017 (v2.7): Updated historical wind and PV deployment data for 2015-2016, adding projected PV deployment for 2017. Data via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growt
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available here. These are discussed further here and here.

Update 26 October 2017 (v2.7): Updated historical wind and PV deployment data for 2015-2016, adding projected PV deployment for 2017. Data via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_by_country.

Update 18 December 2016 (v2.7): Added feature to calculate a global EROI index for all energy sources plus intermittency buffering (currently batteries only, but this could be diversified). The index is calculated specifically in terms of energy services in the form of work and heat. That is, it takes the aggregated energy services made available by all sources as the energy output term, and the energy services required to provided the buffered output as the energy input term.

Update 29 June 2016 (v2.6): Added historical emplacement for wind and PV capacity. The maximum historical emplacement rates are then maintained from year 114/115 until the end of the model period. This acts as a base emplacement rate that is then augmented with the contribution made via the feedback control mechanism. Note that battery buffering commences only once the additional emplacement via the feedback controller kicks in. This means that there is a base capacity for both wind and PV for which no buffering is provided, slightly reducing the energy services required for wind and PV supplies, as well as associated costs. Contributions from biomass and nuclear have also been increased slightly, in line with the earlier intention that these should approximately double during the transition period. This leads to a modest reduction in the contributions required from wind and PV.

Added calculation of global mean conversion efficiency energy to services on primary energy basis. This involves making an adjustment to the gross energy outputs for all thermal electricity generation sources. The reason for this is that standard EROI analysis methodology involves inclusion of energy inputs on a primary energy equivalent basis. In order to convert correctly between energy inputs and energy service inputs, the reference conversion efficiency must therefore be defined on a primary energy basis. Previously, this conversion was made on the basis of the mean conversion efficiency from final energy to energy services.

Update 14 December 2015 (v2.5): correction to net output basis LCOE calculation, to include actual self power demand for wind, PV and batteries in place of "2015 reference" values.

Update 20 November 2015 (v2.4): levelised O&M costs now added for wind & PV, so that complete (less transmission-related investments) LCOE for wind and PV is calculated, for both gross and net output.

Update 18 November 2015 (v2.3: development of capital cost estimates for wind, PV and battery buffering, adding levelised capital cost per unit net output, for comparison with levelised capital cost per unit gross output. Levelised capital cost estimate has been substantially refined, bringing this into line with standard practice for capital recovery calculation. Discount rate is user adjustable.

Default maximum autonomy periods reduced to 48 hours for wind and 72 hours for PV.

Update 22 October 2015 (v2.2): added ramped introduction of wind and PV buffering capacity. Wind and PV buffering ramps from zero to the maximum autonomy period as wind and PV generated electricity increases as a proportion of overall electricity supply. The threshold proportion for maximum autonomy period is user adjustable. Ramping uses interpolation based on an elliptical curve between zero and the threshold proportion, to avoid discontinuities that produce poor response shape in key variables.

Update 23 September 2015 (v2.1): added capital investment calculation and associated LCOE contribution for wind generation plant, PV generation plant and storage batteries.

**This version (v2.0) includes refined energy conversion efficiency estimates, increasing the global mean efficiency, but also reducing the aggressiveness of the self-demand learning curves for all sources. The basis for the conversion efficiencies, including all assumptions relating to specific types of work & heat used by the economy, is provided in this Excel spreadsheet.

Conversion of self power demand to energy services demand for each source is carried out via a reference global mean conversion efficiency, set as a user input using the global mean conversion efficiency calculated in the model at the time of transition commencement (taken to be the time for which all EROI parameter values are defined. A learning curve is applied to this value to account for future improvement in self power demand to services conversion efficiency.**

The original "standard run" version of the model is available here.
[The Model of COVID-19 Pandemic Outbreak in Burnie, TAS]   A model of COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from the government with the impact on the local economy and medical supply.      It is assumed that the government policy is triggered and rely on reported COVID-19 cases when the confirmed cases
[The Model of COVID-19 Pandemic Outbreak in Burnie, TAS]

A model of COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from the government with the impact on the local economy and medical supply. 

It is assumed that the government policy is triggered and rely on reported COVID-19 cases when the confirmed cases are 10 or less. 

Interesting insights
The infection rate will decline if the government increase the testing ranges, meanwhile,  the more confirmed cases will increase the pressure on hospital capacity and generate more demand for medical resources, which will promote government policy intervention to narrow the demand gap and  affect economic performance by increasing hospital construction with financial investment.

A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative. 




A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover       Assumptions   Govt policy reduces infection and
A sample model for class discussion modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government with the effect on the local economy.  Govt policy is dependent on reported COVID-19 cases, which in turn depend on testing rates less those who recover

Assumptions
Govt policy reduces infection and economic growth in the same way.

Govt policy is trigger when reported COVID-19 case are 10 or less.

A greater number of COVID-19 cases has a negative effect on the economy.  This is due to economic signalling that all is not well.

Interesting insights

Higher testing rates seem to trigger more rapid government intervention, which reduces infectious cases.  The impact on the economy though of higher detected cases though is negative.