Reserves price stacking #273
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
michaelbynum
approved these changes
Apr 5, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary/Motivation:
We should stack the reserve prices reported by Egret according to the way they are stacked in the ancillary service formulations.
This PR also fixes a bug in the supplemental reserves procurement constraint, and reformulates the interaction between zonal reserve shortfall and system reserve shortfall. It seems better to count these separately because otherwise a failure to procure reserves zonally essentially forces a failure to procure them on the system-wide level.
Legal Acknowledgement
By contributing to this software project, I have read the contribution guide and agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution: