Economy Models
These models and simulations have been tagged “Economy”.
Clone of Investment vs Austerity v3
Overview
It is a model simulating logging and adventure tourism (mountain bike riding) competition in Derby, Tasmania. It is a chance for northeast Tasmania to become an exciting, new, world-class product for the mountain bike tourism industry, which drives local economic development.
Simulation borrowed from the Easter Island simulation.
How the model works
l Trees grow; we cut them down because of demand for Timber and sell the logs.
l The mountain bike visits depend on previous experience and suggestions.
l Previous experience and suggestions depend on the number of trees compared to visitors and adventure number of trees and users. Park capacity limits the number of mountain bike trail users.
l The employment opportunity depends on the mountain bike demand and demand for Timber.
Interesting Insights
Mountain biking appears to be unaffected by heavy logging. The visitor experience and numbers are improved by reducing park capacity. The main issue is that any success with the mountain bike park increases visitor numbers. A high timber price is also required to balance the park's popularity. Mountain biking appears to require only a narrow corridor; that is, single-track mountain bike trails are enough. The employment is a measure of the economic acting, a recession or growth trends.
BMA708 Marketing Insights into Big Data_Complex Systems_Mountain bike riding versus logging in Derby, Tasmania
Microeconomic measures can produce counterintuitive
'emergent' effects at the macro or systemic level. The commendable act of
saving money by individuals during uncertain economic times has the perverse macroeconomic
effect of making a recession worse: in aggregate there will be less money available
for spending, suppressing demand for goods and services. Economists call this effect 'the paradox of thrift'. Similarly, logical efforts
by companies in such conditions to reduce their wage bill or their postponement
of investment decisions will reduce spending in the economy and deepen the economic downturn.
What can be done to counteract this harmful dynamic? The missing spending can be replaced by government spending: governments have it within their power to effectively counter economic downturns!
Clone of Microeconomic Savings can convert to Macroeconomic Costs
Model showing the effect of bank lending of deposited money as a multiplier in the creation of new money. Multiplier effect is shown as related to the bank reserve requirement on deposited funds.
Clone of Bank Deposit Money Multiplier
Overview
This model simulates logging and mountain biking competition in Derby, Tasmania. The Simulation is referenced to simulate Derby mountain biking with logging.
Model Work
The tourism industry is represented on the model's left side, and the logging industry is on the right side. Interactions between these two industries generate tax revenues. Logging and tourism have different growth rates regarding people working/consuming. The initial values of these two industries in the model are not fixed but increase yearly due to inflation or economic growth.
Detail Insights
From the perspective of tourism, as the number of tourists keeps growing, the number of people who choose to ride in Derby City also gradually increases. And the people who ride rate the ride. The negative feedback feeds back into the cycling population. Similarly, positive cycling reviews lead to more customer visits. And all the customers will create a revenue through tourism, and a certain proportion of the income will become tourism tax.
From a logging perspective, it is very similar to the tourism industry. As the number of people working in the industry is forecast to increase, the industry's overall size is predicted to grow. And as the industry's size continues to rise, the taxes on the logging industry will also continue to rise. Since logging is an industry, the tax contribution will be more significant than the tourism excise tax.
This model assumption is illustrated below:
1. The amount of tax reflects the level of industrial development.
2. The goal of reducing carbon emissions lets us always pay attention to the environmental damage caused by the logging industry.
3. The government's regulatory goal is to increase overall income while ensuring the environment.
4. Logging will lead to environmental damage, which will decrease the number of tourists.
This model is based on tourism tax revenue versus logging tax revenue. Tourism tax revenue is more incredible than logging tax revenue, indicating a better environment. As a result of government policy, the logging industry will be heavily developed in the short term. Growth in the logging industry will increase by 40%. A growth rate of 0.8 and 0.6 of the original is obtained when logging taxes are 2 and 4 times higher than tourism taxes.
Furthermore, tourism tax and logging tax also act on the positive rate, which is the probability that customers give a positive evaluation. The over-development of the logging industry will lead to the destruction of environmental resources and further affect the tourism industry. The logging tax will also affect the tourism Ride Rate, which is the probability that all tourism customers will choose Derby city.
This model more accurately reflects logging and tourism's natural growth and ties the two industries together environmentally. Two ways of development are evident in the two industries. Compared to tourism, logging shows an upward spiral influenced by government policies. Government attitudes also affect tourism revenue, but more by the logging industry.
Clone of Simulating Derby Mountain Biking Versus Logging
ABOUT THE MODEL
This is a dynamic model that shows the correlation between the health-related policies implemented by the Government in response to COVID-19 outbreak in Burnie, Tasmania, and the policies’ impact on the Economic activity of the area.
ASSUMPTIONS
The increase in the number of COVID-19 cases is directly proportional to the increase in the Government policies in the infected region. The Government policies negatively impact the economy of Burnie, Tasmania.
INTERESTING INSIGHTS
1. When the borders are closed by the government, the economy is severely affected by the decrease of revenue generated by the Civil aviation/Migration rate. As the number of COVID-19 cases increase, the number of people allowed to enter Australian borders will also decrease by the government.
2. The Economic activity sharply increases and stays in uniformity.
3. The death rate drastically decreased as we increased test rate by 90%.
COVID-19 Outbreak in Burnie Tasmania (Rajaa Sajjad, 538837)
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.
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.
Clone of Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v2.6)
Simulates personal accounts over time.
Clone of Sustainable Money System
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 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).
Clone of Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v1.0)
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.
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.
Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v2.7)
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.
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.
Clone of Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v3.1)
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 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.
Clone of Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v2.5)
A model to gain understanding of the causes and effects of a population's interest in engineering.
Public interest in engineering
When people talk about a government deficit, they forget
that this is only one side of the ledger. On the other is a corresponding non-government
SURPLUS. The money the government spends is not lost but shows up in the private
sector as income. When one talks only of the deficit then one can understand that
many think it should be reduced or even converted into a surplus, but reducing
the government deficit reduces private sector income and a government surplus
forces a deficit on the private sector with a potentially devastating
effect on private sector wealth and economic activity. Unless the economy is overheating, government
deficits are usually healthy. For countries that run traditionally a trade deficit,
such as the US they are necessary to maintain economic activity. Consider this
fact: for almost all of past 40 years the US and the UK have run deficits without
any harmful effects!
This video by professor Stephanie Kelton contains evidence that supports the modle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6rlprwQB5E
The Dynamic that shows that Government Deficits benefit the Private Sector
Model supporting research of investment vs. austerity implications. Please refer to additional information on the SystemsWiki Focus Page and Modern Money & Public Purpose Video.
Clone of Investment vs Austerity v3
Model in support of an article being written about the relationship between investment and austerity. See Version 2
See also:* Inv vs Aust Sim [IM-2736]
* Inv & Output 1 [IM-2740]
* Inv & Output 2 [IM-2741]
Clone of Investment vs Austerity
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 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).
Clone of Energy transition to lower EROI sources (v1.0)
Model showing the effect of bank lending of deposited money as a multiplier in the creation of new money. Multiplier effect is shown as related to the bank reserve requirement on deposited funds.
Clone of Bank Deposit Money Multiplier
The statement that there can be no economic activity
without energy and that fossil fuels are
finite contrasts with the fact that money is not finite and can be created by governments
via their central banks at zero marginal cost whenever needed.
An important fact about COAL, GAS and OIL (especially when produced via fracking) is that their net energy ratios are falling rapidly. In other words the energy needed to extract a given quantity of fossil fuels is constantly increasing. The falling ratio 'EROI' (Energy Return on Energy Invested ) provides yet another warning that we can no longer rely on fossil fuels to power our economies. In 1940 it took the energy of only one barrel of oil to extract 100. Today the energy of 1 barrel of oil will yield only 15. We cannot wait until the ratio falls to 1/1 before we invest seriously in alternative sources of energy, because by then industrial society as we know it doday will have ceased to exist. An EROI of 1:1 means that it takes the energy of one barrel of oil to extract one barrel of oil - oil production would simply stop!
Clone of Energy and Economic Activity
Simulates personal accounts over time.
http://circularmoney.org
Clone of Circular Money
Neoliberalism
uses a deceptive narrative to declare that money the government spends into the economy in excesses of the taxes it collects creates a ‘government debt’.
In fact, the money the government spends into the economy in excess of the
taxes is an income, a benefit for the private sector. When the government
issues bonds, the money the private sector uses to buy them via banks comes
from a residual cushion of dollars that the government already spent into the
economy but has not yet taxed back. If
this were not the case, if the government had taxed back all the money it spent
into the economy, then the economy could not function. There would be no
dollars in the economy, since the government is the sole supplier of U.S.
dollars! In the doted rectangle in the graph you can see that the dollars paid to
the government for bonds sits in a dollar asset account. When the government issues
bonds it simply provides the public and institutions with a desirable money
substitute that pays interest i.e. Treasury bonds. It is a swap of one kind of financial
asset for another. To register
this swap the government debits the dollar asset account and credits the bond
account. When the time comes to redeem
(take back) the bonds, all the government does is revers the swap, and that’s
all! When you look at the total amount of finacial assets in the private sector, these remain constant at $ 25 BN after the payment of $ 5 BN taxes. This implies that no lending of financial assets of the private sector to the government has taken place during the swap operation. The money was always there. The debt mountain is an illusion!
THE ILLUSION OF A U.S. PUBLIC DEBT MOUNTAIN.
The systemic
problem is to understand what influence the gold price?
(1) https://www.moneymetals.com/news/2017/04/28/who-controls-gold-price-001058
Many articles say that the gold price is manipulated and some analysts predict that the bubble will burst. (1)
We think that understanding how gold can be influenced by different factors is an interesting research topic. The variation of the gold price is a real-world problem which evaluates through the interaction of a group of different elements.
It seems that the gold price is a very complex problem understanding. Of course everybody has his own thinking about the problem according to his own filter.
But this approach is most of the time not valuable because there is not a full view of all the variables and their link. In a context of a growing demand and a constant supply, be able to determine if gold price will continue to increase and if this asset will represent a safe investment for the new decade.
In September 2011, gold price surged a record, $1,274,75 an ounce. According to the Commodities guru George Soros “gold was the ultimate bubble" and was no longer a safe investment.
On the other hand, the research conducts by metal consultant GFMS predicted that gold will hit a new record of $1,300 an ounce. (2)
Who was right? Both of them.
This example illustrates how complex is the problem.
At the time of this research the price of gold is $1,316,79 an ounce.
Wealthy persons are concerned by preserving their fortune, they also look to maximise their wealth and to keep it safe. Many options are available to investors, despite buillion is a popular asset on a long-term portfolio, nowadays is it gold a safe investment? That is a good question. Also understanding the impact of gold on the economy and how it is link to poverty might be interesting. To analyze an issue, one must first define it.
In order to get a better understanding of the gold price we will model this complex problem. Our goal is to visualize the interconnection of elements and be able to identify feedback loops with the aim to understand the complexity of the problem.
We will analyse different documents from various sources, underline variables and identify their relationships over time.
(1) https://www.moneymetals.com/news/2017/04/28/who-controls-gold-price-001058
(2) https://www.bullionbypost.co.uk/index/gold-investment/is-gold-a-safe-investment/
Clone of IS GOLD A SAFE INVESTMENT