Measuring exploration: evaluation of modelling to generate alternatives methods in capacity expansion models

Abstract

As decarbonisation agendas mature, macro-energy systems modelling studies have increasingly focused on enhanced decision support methods that move beyond least-cost modelling to improve consideration of additional objectives and tradeoffs. One candidate is modelling to generate alternatives (MGA), which systematically explores new objectives without explicit stakeholder elicitation. This paper provides comparative testing of four existing MGA methodologies and proposes a new Combination vector selection approach. We examine each existing method’s runtime, parallelizability, new solution discovery efficiency, and spatial exploration in lower dimensional ( N ⩽ 100) spaces, as well as spatial exploration for all methods in a three-zone, 8760 h capacity expansion model case. To measure convex hull volume expansion, this paper formalizes a computationally tractable high-dimensional volume estimation algorithm. We find random vector provides the broadest exploration of the near-optimal feasible region and variable Min/Max provides the most extreme results, while the two tie on computational speed. The new Combination method provides an advantageous mix of the two. Additional analysis is provided on MGA variable selection, in which we demonstrate MGA problems formulated over generation variables fail to retain cost-optimal dispatch and are thus not reflective of real operations of equivalent hypothetical capacity choices. As such, we recommend future studies utilize a parallelized combined vector approach over the set of capacity variables for best results in computational speed and spatial exploration while retaining optimal dispatch.

Keywords

• modelling to generate alternatives
• optimization
• multi-objective optimization
• measuring spatial exploration
• comparative evaluation