MGA updates & employment outputs by atpham88 · Pull Request #21 · ReEDS-Model/ReEDS

atpham88 · 2026-04-16T18:17:08Z

Summary

This PR adds some updates to MGA, cplex settings for national MGA runs, and employment outputs using employment factors from JEDI and literature.

Technical details

Implementation notes

Employment factors input files are added to inputs/employment folder.
b_inputs.gms: Read in employment factors input (from JEDI, Mayfield et al. (2023), Rutovitz et al, (2024), or Ram et al. (2020)).
- JEDI already specifies employment factors for CCS upgrades.
- For the upgrade techs and CCS upgrades from non-JEDI sources, employment factors are assumed to be half of those of new techs.
c_mga.gms: Add option to run MGA max/min for all capacity, generation, and employment (sum of construction, FOM, and VOM jobs-years for power plants and transmission lines).
e_report.gms: Add employment outputs.
Two additional cplex setting files are added for MGA runs, cplex.op3 and cplex.op4. Default setting is cplex.op3. Users can switch to cplex.op4 if runs still hang with cplex.op3 settings.
compare_cases.py and reedsplots.py: Add employment outputs to comparison report.
log.py: For some reason runtimes are not read properly from gamslog.txt when using cplex.op3 and cplex.op4, so add encoding to fix this issue.

Switches added/removed/changed

GSw_EmploymentFactor: Employment factor by technologies, options including JEDI, and recent literature including Mayfield_et_al, Rutovitz_et_al, and Ram_et_al. Default is JEDI.
GSw_gopt_mga: cplex opt file for MGA run. Default is 3.
GSw_MGA_Objective: Add generation and employment options.
GSw_MGA_SubObjective: Add all option to maximize/minimize all capacity.

Issues resolved

Known incompatibilities

Relevant sources or documentation

Charge code for review

GDOP.12495.25.01.01

Validation, testing, and comparison report(s)

Comparison reports pending.

Checklist for author

Details to double-check

General information to guide review

Zero impact on results of default case
No large data file(s) added/modified
No substantive impact on runtime for full-US reference case
No substantive impact on folder size for full-US reference case
No change to process flow (runbatch.py, d_solve_iterate.py)
No change to code organization
No change to package requirements (environment.yml or Project.toml)

Did you use LLM tools (chatbot or copilot) in the preparation of this PR? If so, describe how

Tag points of contact here if you would like additional review of the relevant parts of the model

patrickbrown4

Thanks! Sorry about all the minor formatting stuff; just trying to avoid conflicts since a few other open PRs touch these same files. Happy to discuss the transmission FOM stuff if helpful.

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T19:38:34Z

Can you add an inputs/employment/README.md file describing the sources (with links) and explicit units for each of the files in this folder?

We should also add a section on the employment calculations to the docs.

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T19:40:34Z

I'd suggest transposing this file (construction/fom as columns and sources as rows); then it would match the format of the other files, and you could add new sources without every line showing up as changed. And I guess you could add a vom column (all zero values) to exactly match the format of the others.

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T19:43:34Z

+electrolyzer,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+smr,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+smr_ccs,,,,,,,,,,,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+dac,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+dac_gas,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,YES


I think electrolyzer, SMR, and DAC should be excluded from GENTECH

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T19:44:21Z

+battery_li,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,YES,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+dr_shed_1*dr_shed_2,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,YES,
+evmc_storage_1*evmc_storage_10,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,YES,,,,YES,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,
+evmc_shape_1*evmc_shape_10,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,YES,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,
+pumped-hydro,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,YES,YES,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES
+pumped-hydro-flex,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,YES


Should we exclude all the storage technologies from GENTECH too?

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T19:45:15Z

(nitpick/optional) Could revert the rest of the changes to this file since it didn't end up being changed

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T23:21:25Z

+          trans_cost_cap_fin_mult(t) 
+          * ((TRAN_CAPEX_BINS(r,rr,tscbin,t)) 
+          * pvf_capital(t)
+          * employment_factor_inter_transmission("construction"))}


Suggested change

* employment_factor_inter_transmission("construction"))}

* TRAN_CAPEX_BINS is only defined for r < rr so is not divided by 2

* employment_factor_inter_transmission("construction"))}

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-29T23:22:28Z

+          $routes(r,rr,trtype,t)],
+          CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) 
+          * pvf_onm(t)
+          * employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom")  }


Sorry I missed this earlier but it seems like there should be a / 2 here

Suggested change

* employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom") }

* CAPTRAN_ENERGY is defined in both directions so needs to be divided by 2

* employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom") / 2 }

Actually it looks like we're high by a factor of 2 in the objective function too (so it makes sense why it's not included here):

ReEDS/c_supplyobjective.gms

Line 180 in 13224b8

transmission_line_fom(r,rr,trtype) * CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) }

Let's do the fix for that in a separate PR though

Thinking about it more, I'm not sure I understand how a transmission employment factor in terms of [job-years/MW] would work, so maybe best to discuss. The alternative would be to keep it in [job-years/$] and use equations similar to the transmission FOM calculation (with interface-dependent costs) in the objective function:

ReEDS/c_supplyobjective.gms

Lines 178 to 188 in 13224b8

* transmission lines

+ sum{(r,rr,trtype)$routes(r,rr,trtype,t),

transmission_line_fom(r,rr,trtype) * CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) }

* LCC and B2B AC/DC converter stations

+ sum{(r,rr,trtype)$[lcclike(trtype)$routes(r,rr,trtype,t)],

cost_acdc_lcc * 2 * trans_fom_frac * CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) }

* VSC AC/DC converter stations

+ sum{r,

cost_acdc_vsc * trans_fom_frac * CAP_CONVERTER(r,t) }

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-30T14:48:13Z

+$offempty
+
+* Employment factors of transmission deployment and flow
+parameter employment_factor_inter_transmission(jtype)  "--job-years/MW or job-years/$M-- employment factors of transmission lines by job type (construction or o&m jobs)"


Sorry, I think we discused this but am forgetting the details. How does it work to have job-years/MW for transmission FOM? I would think that 1000 MW on a 100-mile path would have more O&M requirements than 1000 MW on a 1-mile path, but if the units are [job-years/MW], they'd come out the same.

Also can you specify the units used for each jtype as noted above?

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-30T14:50:56Z

+*====================================
+* Employment factors of construction and operation of power plants
+$onempty
+Table employment_factor_plant(i,jtype) "--job-years/MW or job-years/MWh-- employment factors of power plants by technology and job type (construction and o&m jobs)"


For all of these comments, can you specify the jtype that each set of units applies to? Like --job-years/MW (construction & fom), job-years/MWh (vom)--

patrickbrown4 · 2026-04-30T19:12:24Z

+employment_transmission_fom(r,rr,t) = sum{trtype
+                                          $[routes(r,rr,trtype,t)],
+                                          CAPTRAN_ENERGY.l(r,rr,trtype,t) 
+                                          * employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom") } ;


I think the transmission FOM treatment might need to be adjusted (see comments on c_mga.gms); just a flag that if we change it there we'd need to change it here too.

atpham88 added 18 commits April 16, 2026 12:10

move files to github.com

b91d8e0

use gentech as MGA subobjective instead of all techs

261d0f4

resolve conflicts

0149846

Update user_guide.md

c980617

resolve conflicts

54fac41

Merge branch 'main' into ap_MGA

864ec0e

clean up

4edc116

remove all cap MGA max/min option

145d3c2

add gentech to i_subtech set

6f8216b

resolve to pass github tests

ffd3c6f

Update futurefiles.csv

255c39f

Merge branch 'main' into ap_MGA

76a989d

reduce number of employment output files

ab732e8

consolidate employment output files

ea35ef8

clean up

a010fcc

clean up

de30597

fix construction job-years calculation

98f2e43

no longer need encoding when writing log file

13224b8

patrickbrown4 self-requested a review April 28, 2026 15:06

patrickbrown4 reviewed Apr 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

	* employment_factor_inter_transmission("construction"))}
	* TRAN_CAPEX_BINS is only defined for r < rr so is not divided by 2
	* employment_factor_inter_transmission("construction"))}

	* employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom") }
	* CAPTRAN_ENERGY is defined in both directions so needs to be divided by 2
	* employment_factor_inter_transmission("fom") / 2 }

	* transmission lines
	+ sum{(r,rr,trtype)$routes(r,rr,trtype,t),
	transmission_line_fom(r,rr,trtype) * CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) }

	* LCC and B2B AC/DC converter stations
	+ sum{(r,rr,trtype)$[lcclike(trtype)$routes(r,rr,trtype,t)],
	cost_acdc_lcc * 2 * trans_fom_frac * CAPTRAN_ENERGY(r,rr,trtype,t) }

	* VSC AC/DC converter stations
	+ sum{r,
	cost_acdc_vsc * trans_fom_frac * CAP_CONVERTER(r,t) }

Conversation

atpham88 commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Technical details

Implementation notes

Switches added/removed/changed

Issues resolved

Known incompatibilities

Relevant sources or documentation

Charge code for review

Validation, testing, and comparison report(s)

Checklist for author

Details to double-check

General information to guide review

Did you use LLM tools (chatbot or copilot) in the preparation of this PR? If so, describe how

Tag points of contact here if you would like additional review of the relevant parts of the model

Uh oh!

patrickbrown4 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

patrickbrown4 Apr 29, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

atpham88 commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

patrickbrown4 Apr 29, 2026 •

edited

Loading