the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Carbon Monitor Power - Simulators (CMP-SIM v1.0) across countries: a data-driven approach to simulate daily power demand
Léna Gurriaran
Yannig Goude
Katsumasa Tanaka
Biqing Zhu
Zhu Deng
Xuanren Song
Philippe Ciais
Abstract. The impact of climate change on power demand has become increasingly significant, with changes in temperature, relative humidity, and other climate variables affecting cooling and heating demand for households and industries. Accurately predicting power demand is crucial for energy system planning and management. It is also crucial to understand the evolution of power demand to estimate the amount of CO2 emissions released into the atmosphere, allowing stakeholders to make informed plans to reduce emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. Artificial intelligence techniques have been used to investigate energy demand-side responses to external factors at various scales in recent years. However, few have explored the impact of climate and weather variability on power demand. This study proposes a data-driven approach to model daily power demand provided by the Carbon Monitor Power project by combining climate variables and human activity indices as predictive features. Our investigation spans the years 2020 to 2022 and focuses on eight countries or groups of countries selected to represent different climates and economies, accounting for over 70 % of global power consumption. These countries include Australia, Brazil, China, the European Union (EU), India, Russia, South Africa, and the United States. We assessed various machine-learning regressors to simulate daily power demand at the national scale. For countries within the EU, we extended the analysis to one group of countries. We evaluated the models based on key evaluating metrics: coefficient of determination (R2), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), and Median Absolute Error (MedAE). We also used the models to identify the most influential variables that impact power demand and apprehend their relationship with it. Our findings provide insight into variations in important predictive features among countries, along with the role played by distinct climate variables and indicators of the level of economic activity, such as weekends and working days, vacations and holidays, and the influence of COVID-19.
- Preprint
(2579 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(27078 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Léna Gurriaran et al.
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1313', Matteo De Felice, 23 Oct 2023
The article covers a very interesting topic and the authors try to assess a wide range of models in multiple regions. However, the article presents two main flaws:
1. The authors do not explain what the goal of this power demand model would be, given the challenges posed by this task, its target use is fundamental to understand the quality (and the usefulness) of the results
2. There is no mention to many works on the link between electricity demand and meteorological factors, as for example in the Copernicus Climate Change Service ECEM project and papers like (this is just an example) https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/met.1858, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/12/124025/meta, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa69c6/meta
In addition, I would highlight a few issues that should be addressed:
1. The authors should use a simple model as a baseline (for example a linear regression) to show the value of using more complex methodologies to model the power demand. In other words, showing the added value of non-linearity or ensemble approaches.
2. The authors define the power demand as the total generation, assuming no cross-border exchanges of electricity that happen in many of the selected regions (e.g., exchanges between US and Canada). I think that defining this methodology as "daily power demand simulation" is a bit stretched, perhaps it would be more correct to change the title of the paper to "simulate daily power generation".
3. TOY is not correctly coded in the methodology, using a linear factor put 1st January and 31st December at the opposites, while they are actually consecutive. I would suggest using a sinusoidal function.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1313-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-1313', Giacomo Falchetta, 31 Oct 2023
Many thanks for the opportunity to review this very interesting, well written, and comprehensively presented paper.
While align with all the comments/criticism pointed out by Referee 1, in particular on the necessity of revising the terminology (e.g., generation, and not demand) and of testing simpler models to show the value added of non-parametric statistical modelling, I a couple of additional comments to add.
Fist of all, while certainly significant and novel, the study should cite previous similar papers, e.g. (just an example, there is likely more) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142061518336196, which are missing from the review of the literature in the first part of the paper. The authors should then better emphatise their contribution compared to previous large-scale energy production/generation demand studies.
Moreover, the authors validate the model using daily resolution power generation. I think a crucial and valuable addition to demonstrate the extent to which the model and output data can be used for plannning purposes would be to also evaluate the model error in each country/region in terms of weekly/monthly/seasonal peak. This is because the peak load (maximum value)'s magnitude and modelling error are of great importance if the data is used in future studies and/or for planning and policy support purposes.
Finally, and relatedly, it would be interesting if the authors could explicitly account for the availability and use of cooling and heating technologies in each country, as these are strongly affecting the relation between meteorological variables and energy consumption, see https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-31469-z
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-1313-RC2
Léna Gurriaran et al.
Léna Gurriaran et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
204 | 86 | 15 | 305 | 17 | 5 | 10 |
- HTML: 204
- PDF: 86
- XML: 15
- Total: 305
- Supplement: 17
- BibTeX: 5
- EndNote: 10
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1