Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Minor parameter adjustments to process-based dri-eaf steel route #1885

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

clarabachorz
Copy link
Contributor

@clarabachorz clarabachorz commented Nov 15, 2024

Purpose of this PR

I made some corrections to dri-eaf parameters in process-based steel based on POSTED literature, and also added the additional electricity and heat demand for casting and rolling to eaf (this was already included in the bf-bof route).

Type of change

(Make sure to delete from the Type-of-change list the items not relevant to your PR)

  • Bug fix
  • Refactoring
  • New feature
  • Minor change (default scenarios show only small differences)
  • Fundamental change
  • This change requires a documentation update

Checklist:

  • My code follows the coding etiquette
  • I performed a self-review of my own code
  • I explained my changes within the PR, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I checked that the in-code documentation is up-to-date
  • I adjusted the reporting in remind2 where it was needed
  • I adjusted forbiddenColumnNames in readCheckScenarioConfig.R in case the PR leads to deprecated switches
  • All automated model tests pass (FAIL 0 in the output of make test)
  • The changelog CHANGELOG.md has been updated correctly

Changes to process-based steel:

Uptake of DRI-NG / DRI-NG-CCS is reduced and replaced by a larger uptake of H2-DRI, and some small amount of BF-BOF-CCS (especially in MEA).
image

@clarabachorz clarabachorz marked this pull request as ready for review November 19, 2024 10:03
@clarabachorz clarabachorz requested a review from JakobBD November 19, 2024 10:03
@@ -604,18 +604,23 @@ $ifthen.cm_subsec_model_steel "%cm_subsec_model_steel%" == "processes"
!! carbon capture mass is given in tCO2 and converted to tC after that

!! reduction: 504 m^3; heat 242 m^3; conversion: x / 11.126 m^3/kg * 0.0333 MWh/kg
p37_specFeDemTarget("feh2s","idr","h2") = 2.23 / (sm_TWa_2_MWh/sm_giga_2_non); !! Source: POSTED / Rechberger et al 2020, Section 4.2 (per tDRI)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you please also update the comment in the line above, i.e. how you changed the calculation?

Where did you find the differing value?

p37_specFeDemTarget("feels","eaf","pri") = 0.87 / (sm_TWa_2_MWh/sm_giga_2_non); !! Source: POSTED / Vogl et al 2018, Section 3.1 and IEAGHG 2013, Vol 1 Section D Table D-13 and D-15
p37_specFeDemTarget("feels","eaf","sec") = 0.79 / (sm_TWa_2_MWh/sm_giga_2_non); !! Source: POSTED / Vogl et al 2018, Section 3.1 and IEAGHG 2013, Vol 1 Section D Table D-13 and D-15

p37_specFeDemTarget("fegas","eaf","pri") = 0.47 / (sm_TWa_2_MWh/sm_giga_2_non); !! Source: POSTED / IEA GHG 2013, Vol 1 Section D Table D-13 and D-15
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This creates un-capturable NG-emissions for all DRI (also H2) in this form. Okay for the paper, but maybe let's put C&R into a separate process before we merge it to develop?
I may have said something else in the past, but it seems like a bad idea now.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds good. Should we leave this PR open until we add C&R ?

@LaviniaBaumstark
Copy link
Member

is this PR also relevant for our next release? Will it be merged soon?

@JakobBD
Copy link
Contributor

JakobBD commented Nov 27, 2024

no

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