POPULATION CONTROL BASED ON THE 2017 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER RELOCATION IN WEATHER CHANGES IN FLOODS AND DROUGHTS AND EXTENDED TROPICAL AND HORSE LATTITUDE CYCLONE ACTIVITY AROUND HADLEY CELLS

This expanded World3 model is a detailed simulation of human population growth from 1900 into the future. It includes many environmental and demographic factors.

THIS MODEL BY GUY LAKEMAN, FROM METRICS OBTAINED USING A MORE COMPREHENSIVE VENSIM SOFTWARE MODEL, SHOWS CURRENT CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE LATEST WEATHER EXTREMES AND LOSS OF ARABLE LAND BY THE  ALBEDO EFECT MELTING THE POLAR CAPS TOGETHER WITH NORTHERN JETSTREAM SHIFT NORTHWARDS, AND A NECESSITY TO ACT BEFORE THERE IS HUGE SUFFERING.

Buying and storing electricity when it is cheap, and selling it when it is expensive. What are the benefits, both public and private?

Buying and storing electricity when it is cheap, and selling it when it is expensive. What are the benefits, both public and private?

This is a simulation of growth rate

This model prototypes the working of an Smart Grid with Electric Vehicles

The objective is testing the theoretical advantages of batteries (also batteries in Electric Vehicles) in combination with renewable energies. The model considers two houses, that store energy both in Electric Vehicles (Vehicle to Grid), and in a communal battery.

Except when specified otherwise, the units of all variables are expressed in W/h.

Press "Story" in the lower bar for a guided tour over the model. Better seen at 50% zoom.

by Carlos Varela (cvarela@gmx.at)

The list of properties to be tested in the right order. The properties are organized in such a way that the chemist comes in one way and comes out the order. The process has to be as smooth as possible. 

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.

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).

​

The current electricity portfolio of Texas is heavily reliant on high-emission sources of fossil fuel (i.e. Coal). Texas has a range of energy options at its disposal and has the opportunity to make choices that grow renewables (e.g. solar and wind) while encouraging the production of less carbon-intensive fossil fuels (e.g. natural gas).

As boundaries to our problem, we will be using 35 years as our time frame. We will also limit our model to the State of Texas as our spatial extent. Over the past decade, Texas is becoming a major natural gas consumer; the electricity portfolio has been gradually changing. However, around 40% of electricity is still generated from burning coal, and only a very minor portion of electricity is from renewables. Texas is betting better in adopting solar and wind energy, however generally speaking the state is still falling behind in renewable energy.

The two main goals are to lower the overall emission of greenhouse gases for the electricity grid and to encourage growth of cleaner, renewable energy resources.

Our objectives include maximizing the economic benefits of exploring unconventional oil and natural gas resources, diversifying the energy portfolio of Texas, encouraging the production and exportation of unconventional hydrocarbon resources, and reallocating the added revenue to the transition to renewables, like wind and solar

Buying and storing electricity when it is cheap, and selling it when it is expensive. What are the benefits, both public and private?

Shows the payout sub-model for the energy savings the consultants provide

A model of an energy system.

THE 2017 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER RELOCATION IN WEATHER CHANGES IN FLOODS AND DROUGHTS AND EXTENDED TROPICAL AND HORSE LATTITUDE CYCLONE ACTIVITY AROUND HADLEY CELLS

The World3 model is a detailed simulation of human population growth from 1900 into the future. It includes many environmental and demographic factors.

THIS MODEL BY GUY LAKEMAN, FROM METRICS OBTAINED USING A MORE COMPREHENSIVE VENSIM SOFTWARE MODEL, SHOWS CURRENT CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE LATEST WEATHER EXTREMES AND LOSS OF ARABLE LAND BY THE  ALBEDO EFECT MELTING THE POLAR CAPS TOGETHER WITH NORTHERN JETSTREAM SHIFT NORTHWARDS, AND A NECESSITY TO ACT BEFORE THERE IS HUGE SUFFERING.

THE 2018 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION.
WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER RELOCATION IN WEATHER CHANGES IN FLOODS AND DROUGHTS AND EXTENDED TROPICAL AND HORSE LATTITUDE CYCLONE ACTIVITY AROUND HADLEY CELLS

The World3 model is a detailed simulation of human population growth from 1900 into the future. It includes many environmental and demographic factors.

THIS MODEL BY GUY LAKEMAN, FROM METRICS OBTAINED USING A MORE COMPREHENSIVE VENSIM SOFTWARE MODEL, SHOWS CURRENT CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE LATEST WEATHER EXTREMES AND LOSS OF ARABLE LAND BY THE  ALBEDO EFECT MELTING THE POLAR CAPS TOGETHER WITH NORTHERN JETSTREAM SHIFT NORTHWARDS, AND A NECESSITY TO ACT BEFORE THERE IS HUGE SUFFERING.

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


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.

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).

Test

​

The current electricity portfolio of Texas is heavily reliant on high-emission sources of fossil fuel (i.e. Coal). Texas has a range of energy options at its disposal and has the opportunity to make choices that grow renewables (e.g. solar and wind) while encouraging the production of less carbon-intensive fossil fuels (e.g. natural gas).

As boundaries to our problem, we will be using 35 years as our time frame. We will also limit our model to the State of Texas as our spatial extent. Over the past decade, Texas is becoming a major natural gas consumer; the electricity portfolio has been gradually changing. However, around 40% of electricity is still generated from burning coal, and only a very minor portion of electricity is from renewables. Texas is betting better in adopting solar and wind energy, however generally speaking the state is still falling behind in renewable energy.

The two main goals are to lower the overall emission of greenhouse gases for the electricity grid and to encourage growth of cleaner, renewable energy resources.

Our objectives include maximizing the economic benefits of exploring unconventional oil and natural gas resources, diversifying the energy portfolio of Texas, encouraging the production and exportation of unconventional hydrocarbon resources, and reallocating the added revenue to the transition to renewables, like wind and solar

240 volt power system fed from 480 volt service

This simulation examines population growth in Maine.

INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE IMPACT ON POLLUTION AND RESOURCES THE 2017 MODEL (BY GUY LAKEMAN) EMPHASIZES THE PEAK IN POLLUTION BEING CREATED BY OVERPOPULATION WITH THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ARABLE LAND NOW BEING 1.5 TIMES OVER A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE (PASSED IN 1990) AND NOW INCREASING IN LOSS OF HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY DUE TO SEA RISE AND EXTREME GLOBAL WATER RELOCATION IN WEATHER CHANGES IN FLOODS AND DROUGHTS AND EXTENDED TROPICAL AND HORSE LATTITUDE CYCLONE ACTIVITY AROUND HADLEY CELLS

The World3 model is a detailed simulation of human population growth from 1900 into the future. It includes many environmental and demographic factors.

THIS MODEL BY GUY LAKEMAN, FROM METRICS OBTAINED USING A MORE COMPREHENSIVE VENSIM SOFTWARE MODEL, SHOWS CURRENT CONDITIONS CREATED BY THE LATEST WEATHER EXTREMES AND LOSS OF ARABLE LAND BY THE  ALBEDO EFECT MELTING THE POLAR CAPS TOGETHER WITH NORTHERN JETSTREAM SHIFT NORTHWARDS, AND A NECESSITY TO ACT BEFORE THERE IS HUGE SUFFERING.

This model prototypes the working of an Smart Grid with Electric Vehicles

The objective is testing the theoretical advantages of batteries (also batteries in Electric Vehicles) in combination with renewable energies. The model considers two houses, that store energy both in Electric Vehicles (Vehicle to Grid), and in a communal battery.

Except when specified otherwise, the units of all variables are expressed in W/h.

Press "Story" in the lower bar for a guided tour over the model. Better seen at 50% zoom.

by Carlos Varela (cvarela@gmx.at)