From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.    More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.     Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405      Vens
From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.

More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.

Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405

Vensim graphical representation from "Meta-SD blog", Tom Fiddaman.


2 months ago
Fig 2 to 14 Land Use added to 4 Quadrant Model SD Model from  Eskanasi 2014   thesis 
Fig 2 to 14 Land Use added to 4 Quadrant Model SD Model from Eskanasi 2014  thesis 
9 months ago
 This is the original model version (v1.0) with default "standard run" parameter set: see detailed commentary  here  and  here . As of 2 September 2015, ongoing development has now shifted to  this version  of the model.   The significance of reduced energy return on energy invested (EROI) in the tr
This is the original model version (v1.0) with default "standard run" parameter set: see detailed commentary here and here. As of 2 September 2015, ongoing development has now shifted to this version of the model.

The significance of reduced energy return on energy invested (EROI) in the transition from fossil fuel to renewable primary energy sources is often disputed by both renewable energy proponents and mainstream economists.​ This model illustrates the impact of EROI in large-scale energy transition using a system dynamics approach. The variables of primary interest here are: 1) net energy available to "the rest of the economy" as renewable penetration increases [Total final energy services out to the economy]; and 2) the size of the energy sector as a proportion of overall economic activity, treating energy use as a very rough proxy for size [Energy services ratio].
This model aggregates energy supply in the form of fuels and electricity as a single variable, total final energy services, and treats the global economy as a single closed system.
The model includes all major incumbent energy sources, and assumes a transition to wind, PV, hydro and nuclear generated electricity, plus biomass electricity and fuels. Hydro, biomass and nuclear growth rates are built into the model from the outset, and wind and PV emplacement rates respond to the built-in retirement rates for fossil energy sources, by attempting to make up the difference between the historical maximum total energy services out to the global economy, and the current total energy services out. Intermittency of PV and wind are compensated via Li-ion battery storage. Note, however, that seasonal variation of PV is not fully addressed i.e. PV is modeled using annual and global average parameters. For this to have anything close to real world validity, this would require that all PV capacity is located in highly favourable locations in terms of annual average insolation, and that energy is distributed from these regions to points of end use. The necessary distribution infrastructure is not included in the model at this stage.
It is possible to explore the effect of seasonal variation with PV assumed to be distributed more widely by de-rating capacity factor and increasing the autonomy period for storage.

This version of the model takes values for emplaced capacities of conventional sources (i.e. all energy sources except wind and PV) as exogenous inputs, based on data generated from earlier endogenously-generated emplaced capacities (for which emplacement rates as a proportion of existing installed capacity were the primary exogenous input).
From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.    More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.     Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405      Vens
From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.

More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.

Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405

Vensim graphical representation from "Meta-SD blog", Tom Fiddaman.


From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.    More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.     Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405      Vens
From Warren C. Sanderson in Population - Development - Environment, Wolfgang Lutz (Ed.), 1994, Springer.

More readable equations in Milik et al. Environemental Modeling and Assessment 1(1996)3-17.

Additional informations in Sanderson 1995: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08898489509525405

Vensim graphical representation from "Meta-SD blog", Tom Fiddaman.


Major update 12 December 2015 (v3.0): This new version of the model overhauls the way that incumbent energy source (fossil sources plus biomass, hydro electricity and nuclear electricity) supply capacity is implemented. This is now based on direct (exogenous) input of historical data, with the futur
Major update 12 December 2015 (v3.0): This new version of the model overhauls the way that incumbent energy source (fossil sources plus biomass, hydro electricity and nuclear electricity) supply capacity is implemented. This is now based on direct (exogenous) input of historical data, with the future supply curve also set directly (but using a separate input array to the historical data). For coal and natural gas fired electricity, this also requires that the simple, direct-input EROI method be used (i.e. same as for coal and NG heating, and petroleum transport fuels).

Note that this new version of the model no longer provides a historical view of the emplacement rates for energy supply sources other than wind and PV, and therefore no longer allows comparison of required emplacement rates for wind and PV with incumbent energy sources. Output data relating to this is available in model version v2.5 (see link below), for the specific transition duration built into that version of the model.

The previous version of the model (version 2.5) is available here.

The original "standard run" version of the model (v1.0) is available here.
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available  here . These are discussed further  here  and  here .  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" value
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available here. These are discussed further here and here.

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 detailed description of all model input parameters is available  here . These are discussed further  here  and  here .  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" value
A detailed description of all model input parameters is available here. These are discussed further here and here.

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.
Update 24 Feburary 2016 (v3.1): This version has biomass, hydro and nuclear continuing at pre-transition maxima, rather than increasing. The combined emplacement rate cap for wind and PV is set at a default value of 5000 GW/year.  Major update 12 December 2015 (v3.0): This new version of the model o
Update 24 Feburary 2016 (v3.1): This version has biomass, hydro and nuclear continuing at pre-transition maxima, rather than increasing. The combined emplacement rate cap for wind and PV is set at a default value of 5000 GW/year.

Major update 12 December 2015 (v3.0): This new version of the model overhauls the way that incumbent energy source (fossil sources plus biomass, hydro electricity and nuclear electricity) supply capacity is implemented. This is now based on direct (exogenous) input of historical data, with the future supply curve also set directly (but using a separate input array to the historical data). For coal and natural gas fired electricity, this also requires that the simple, direct-input EROI method be used (i.e. same as for coal and NG heating, and petroleum transport fuels).

Note that this new version of the model no longer provides a historical view of the emplacement rates for energy supply sources other than wind and PV, and therefore no longer allows comparison of required emplacement rates for wind and PV with incumbent energy sources. Output data relating to this is available in model version v2.5 (see link below), for the specific transition duration built into that version of the model.

The previous version of the model (version 2.5) is available here.

The original "standard run" version of the model (v1.0) is available here.
This is a simulation of monetary flows for a business that uses  Circular Money . All numbers represent 1000's of dollars. So a revenue of 3 means a revenue of $3000.  Revenues and expenses are monthly.
This is a simulation of monetary flows for a business that uses Circular Money.
All numbers represent 1000's of dollars. So a revenue of 3 means a revenue of $3000.
Revenues and expenses are monthly.
3 months ago
  Simulates personal accounts over time.    Model based on the  Sustainable Money System . For a short introduction, read this  short article  or watch the  TEDx talk .
Simulates personal accounts over time.

Model based on the Sustainable Money System.
For a short introduction, read this short article or watch the TEDx talk.
2 months ago
 Visão geral 

 O modelo mostra a
conexão e o conflito da indústria entre o turismo florestal e o turismo de
montanha em Derby, Tasmânia. O objetivo desta simulação é descobrir o ponto de
equilíbrio para a coexistência. 

 Como funciona o
modelo? 

 Ambas as
indústrias podem fornecer contribuições e

Visão geral

O modelo mostra a conexão e o conflito da indústria entre o turismo florestal e o turismo de montanha em Derby, Tasmânia. O objetivo desta simulação é descobrir o ponto de equilíbrio para a coexistência.

Como funciona o modelo?

Ambas as indústrias podem fornecer contribuições económicas para a Tasmânia. Em primeiro lugar, a venda de madeira através da exploração madeireira geraria renda. Além disso, os gastos dos ciclistas de montanha gerariam renda. No entanto, a baixa taxa de regeneração das árvores não pode encobrir a exploração madeireira, o que influencia as belas vistas e as experiências dos ciclistas. Embora a satisfação e a expectativa dependam das opiniões e da experiência, a demanda pelo mountain bike também seria influenciada pelas visitas repetidas e pelo boca a boca.

Informações interessantes

Embora a silvicultura possa fornecer uma grande contribuição económica para a Tasmânia, o excesso de exploração madeireira vai contra a estrutura ESG, além de criar conflito com o turismo de montanha. Desde que o número de visitas de cavaleiros seja estável, o turismo pode sempre proporcionar uma maior contribuição económica em comparação com a silvicultura. Portanto, o governo deveria considerar o ponto de equilíbrio entre as duas indústrias.

4 weeks ago
   Overview   The model shows the industry connection and conflict between Forestry and Mountain Tourism in Derby, Tasmania. The objective of this simulation is to find out the balance point for co-exist.      How Does the Model Work?   Both industries can provide economic contribution to Tasmania.

Overview

The model shows the industry connection and conflict between Forestry and Mountain Tourism in Derby, Tasmania. The objective of this simulation is to find out the balance point for co-exist.

 

How Does the Model Work?

Both industries can provide economic contribution to Tasmania. Firstly, selling timbers through logging would generate income. Also, spendings from mountain bike riders would generate incomes. However, low tree regrowth rate can not cover up logging, which influences the beautiful vistas and riders' experiences. While satisfaction and expectation depend on vistas and experience, the demand of mountain biking would be influenced through repeat visits and world of mouth as well.

 

Interesting Insights

Although forestry can provide a great amount of economic contribution to Tasmania, over logging goes against ESG framework as well as creating conflict with mountain tourism. As long as the number of rider visits is stable, tourism can always provide a greater economic contribution compared to forestry. Therefore, the government should consider the balance point between two industries.

4 weeks ago