Merge pull request #292 from martavp/refine-doc

Add small spelling/maths correction to documentation

doc/myopic.rst

@@ -81,12 +81,12 @@ Conventional carriers indicate carriers used in the existing conventional techno
 Options
 =============
 The total carbon budget for the entire transition path can be indicated in the `sector_opts <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/f13902510010b734c510c38c4cae99356f683058/config.default.yaml#L25>`_ in ``config.yaml``. The carbon budget can be split among the ``planning_horizons`` following an exponential or beta decay. 
-E.g. ``'cb40ex0'`` splits a carbon budget equal to 40 GtCO_2 following an exponential decay whose initial linear growth rate $r$ is zero.
+E.g. ``'cb40ex0'`` splits a carbon budget equal to 40 Gt :math:`_{CO_2}` following an exponential decay whose initial linear growth rate r is zero.
 They can also follow some user-specified path, if defined `here <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/413254e241fb37f55b41caba7264644805ad8e97/config.default.yaml#L56>`_.
 The paper `Speed of technological transformations required in Europe to achieve different climate goals (2022) <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2022.04.016>`__ defines CO_2 budgets corresponding to global temperature increases (1.5C – 2C) as response to the emissions. Here, global carbon budgets are converted to European budgets assuming equal-per capita distribution which translates into a 6.43% share for Europe. The carbon budgets are in this paper distributed throughout the transition paths assuming an exponential decay. Emissions e(t) in every year t are limited by
 
 .. math::
-  e(t) = e_0 (1+ (r+m)t) e^(-mt)
+  e(t) = e_0 (1+ (r+m)t) e^{-mt}
 
 where r is the initial linear growth rate, which here is assumed to be r=0, and the decay parameter m is determined by imposing the integral of the path to be equal to the budget for Europe. Following this approach, the CO_2 budget is defined. Following the same approach as in this paper, add the following to the ``scenario.sector_opts``
 E.g.  ``-cb25.7ex0`` (1.5C increase)

doc/supply_demand.rst

@@ -427,7 +427,7 @@ We assume that the primary route can be replaced by a third route in 2050, using
    FeO + H_2  \xrightarrow{} Fe + H_2O
 
 
-This circumvents the process emissions associated with the use of coke. For hydrogen- based DRI, we assume energy requirements of 1.7 MWh :math:`_{H_2}` /t steel (Vogl et. al) <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.279>`_ and 0.322 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t steel `(HYBRIT 2016) <https://dh5k8ug1gwbyz.cloudfront.net/uploads/2021/02/Hybrit-broschure-engelska.pdf>`_. 
+This circumvents the process emissions associated with the use of coke. For hydrogen- based DRI, we assume energy requirements of 1.7 MWh :math:`_{H_2}` /t steel `(Vogl et. al) <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.279>`_ and 0.322 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t steel `(HYBRIT 2016) <https://dh5k8ug1gwbyz.cloudfront.net/uploads/2021/02/Hybrit-broschure-engelska.pdf>`_. 
 
 
 The share of steel produced via the primary route is exogenously set in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/3daff49c9999ba7ca7534df4e587e1d516044fc3/config.default.yaml#L279>`_. The share of steel obtained via hydrogen-based DRI plus EAF is also set exogenously in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/3daff49c9999ba7ca7534df4e587e1d516044fc3/config.default.yaml#L287>`_. The remaining share is manufactured through the secondary route using scrap metal in EAF. Bioenergy as alternative to coke in blast furnaces is not considered in the model (`Mandova et.al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2018.04.021>`_, `Suopajärvi et.al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.01.060>`_).
@@ -453,15 +453,15 @@ Statistics for the production of ammonia, which is commonly used as a fertilizer
 
 The Haber-Bosch process is not explicitly represented in the model, such that demand for ammonia enters the model as a demand for hydrogen ( 6.5 MWh :math:`_{H_2}` / t :math:`_{NH_3}` ) and electricity ( 1.17 MWh :math:`_{el}` /t :math:`_{NH_3}` ) (see `Wang et. al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2018.04.017>`_). Today, natural gas dominates in Europe as the source for the hydrogen used in the Haber-Bosch process, but the model can choose among the various hydrogen supply options described in the hydrogen section (see :ref:`Hydrogen supply`)
 
-The total production and specific energy consumption of chlorine and methanol is taken from a `DECHEMA report <https://dechema.de/dechema_media/Downloads/Positionspapiere/Technology_study_Low_carbon_energy_and_feedstock_for_the_European_chemical_industry.pdf>`_. According to this source, the production of chlorine amounts to 9.58 MtCl/a, which is assumed to require electricity at 3.6 MWh `:math:`_{el}`/t of chlorine and yield hydrogen at 0.937 MWh :math:`_{H_2}`/t of chlorine in the chloralkali process. The production of methanol adds up to 1.5 MtMeOH/a, requiring electricity at 0.167 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of methanol and methane at 10.25 MWh :math:`_{CH_4}`/t of methanol.
+The total production and specific energy consumption of chlorine and methanol is taken from a `DECHEMA report <https://dechema.de/dechema_media/Downloads/Positionspapiere/Technology_study_Low_carbon_energy_and_feedstock_for_the_European_chemical_industry.pdf>`_. According to this source, the production of chlorine amounts to 9.58 MtCl/a, which is assumed to require electricity at 3.6 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of chlorine and yield hydrogen at 0.937 MWh :math:`_{H_2}`/t of chlorine in the chloralkali process. The production of methanol adds up to 1.5 MtMeOH/a, requiring electricity at 0.167 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of methanol and methane at 10.25 MWh :math:`_{CH_4}`/t of methanol.
 
 
 The production of ammonia, methanol, and chlorine production is deducted from the JRC IDEES basic chemicals, leaving the production totals of high-value chemicals. For this, we assume that the liquid hydrocarbon feedstock comes from synthetic or fossil- origin naphtha (14 MWh :math:`_{naphtha}`/t of HVC, similar to `Lechtenböhmer et al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.07.110>`_), ignoring the methanol-to-olefin route. Furthermore, we assume the following transformations of the energy-consuming processes in the production of plastics: the final energy consumption in steam processing is converted to methane since requires temperature above 500 °C (4.1 MWh :math:`_{CH_4}` /t of HVC, see `Rehfeldt et al. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-017-9571-y>`_); and the remaining processes are electrified using the current efficiency of microwave for high-enthalpy heat processing, electric furnaces, electric process cooling and electric generic processes (2.85 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of HVC).
 
 The process emissions from feedstock in the chemical industry are as high as 0.369 t :math:`_{CO_2}`/t of ethylene equivalent. We consider process emissions for all the material output, which is a conservative approach since it assumes that all plastic-embedded :math:`CO_2` will eventually be released into the atmosphere. However, plastic disposal in landfilling will avoid, or at least delay, associated :math:`CO_2` emissions. 
 
 Circular economy practices drastically reduce the amount of primary feedstock needed for the production of plastics in the model (see `Kullmann et al. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.124660>`_, `Meys et al. (2021) <https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg9853>`_, `Meys et al. (2020) <https://doi.org/10/gmxv6z>`_, `Gu et al. <https://doi.org/10/gf8n9w>`_) and consequently, also the energy demands and level of process emission. The percentage of plastics that are assumed to be mechanically recycled can be selected in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L315>`_, as well as 
-the percentage that is chemically recycled, see `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L316>`_ The energy consumption for those recycling processes are respectively 0.547 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of HVC (as indicated in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L318>`_) (`Meys et al. (2020) <https://doi.org/10/gmxv6z>`_), and 6.9 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of HVC (as indicated in the config file `<https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L319>`_) based on pyrolysis and electric steam cracking (see `Materials Economics <https://materialeconomics.com/publications/industrial-transformation-2050>`_ report). 
+the percentage that is chemically recycled, see `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L316>`_ The energy consumption for those recycling processes are respectively 0.547 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of HVC (as indicated in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L318>`_) (`Meys et al. (2020) <https://doi.org/10/gmxv6z>`_), and 6.9 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of HVC (as indicated in the `config file <https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur-sec/blob/776596ab9ac6a6cc93422ccfd0383abeffb0baa9/config.default.yaml#L319>`_) based on pyrolysis and electric steam cracking (see `Materials Economics <https://materialeconomics.com/publications/industrial-transformation-2050>`_ report). 
 
 
 **Non-metallic Mineral Products**
@@ -486,11 +486,11 @@ With the exception of electricity demand and biomass demand for low-temperature
 
 *Ceramics*
 
-The ceramics sector is assumed to be fully electrified based on the current efficiency of already electrified processes which include microwave drying and sintering of raw materials, electric kilns for primary production processes, electric furnaces for the `product finishing <https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/182725>`_. In total, the final electricity consumption is 0.44 MWh/t of ceramic. The manufacturing of ceramics includes process emissions of 0.03 t :math:`_{CO_2} `/t of ceramic. For a detailed overview of the ceramics industry sector see `Furszyfer Del Rio et al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111885>`_.
+The ceramics sector is assumed to be fully electrified based on the current efficiency of already electrified processes which include microwave drying and sintering of raw materials, electric kilns for primary production processes, electric furnaces for the `product finishing <https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/182725>`_. In total, the final electricity consumption is 0.44 MWh/t of ceramic. The manufacturing of ceramics includes process emissions of 0.03 t :math:`_{CO_2}`/t of ceramic. For a detailed overview of the ceramics industry sector see `Furszyfer Del Rio et al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111885>`_.
 
 *Glass*
 
-The production of glass is assumed to be fully electrified based on the current efficiency of electric melting tanks and electric annealing which adds up to an electricity demand of 2.07 MWh :math:`_{el}l/t` of `glass <https://doi.org/10/f9df2m>`_. The manufacturing of glass incurs process emissions of 0.1 t :math:`_{CO_2} `/t of glass. Potential efficiency improvements, which according to `Lechtenböhmer et al <https://doi.org/10/f9df2m>`_ could reduce energy demands to 0.85 MW :math:`_{el}`/t of glass, have not been considered. For a detailed overview of the glass industry sector see `Furszyfer Del Rio et al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111885>`_.
+The production of glass is assumed to be fully electrified based on the current efficiency of electric melting tanks and electric annealing which adds up to an electricity demand of 2.07 MWh :math:`_{el}`/t of `glass <https://doi.org/10/f9df2m>`_. The manufacturing of glass incurs process emissions of 0.1 t :math:`_{CO_2}`/t of glass. Potential efficiency improvements, which according to `Lechtenböhmer et al <https://doi.org/10/f9df2m>`_ could reduce energy demands to 0.85 MW :math:`_{el}`/t of glass, have not been considered. For a detailed overview of the glass industry sector see `Furszyfer Del Rio et al <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111885>`_.
 
 
 **Non-ferrous Metals**