Skip to content

Commit a7567f6

Browse files
committed
updates abstract again
1 parent d6ce58c commit a7567f6

File tree

2 files changed

+50
-42
lines changed

2 files changed

+50
-42
lines changed

docs/00-outline.tex

Lines changed: 18 additions & 18 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -2,26 +2,26 @@ \chapter{Introduction}
22
\label{chapter:introduction}
33
\input{1-introduction/1-introduction.tex}
44

5-
\chapter{Literature Review}
6-
\label{chapter:lit-review}
7-
\input{2-literature/20-literature}
5+
% \chapter{Literature Review}
6+
% \label{chapter:lit-review}
7+
% \input{2-literature/20-literature}
88

9-
\chapter{\acf{osier}}
10-
\label{chapter:osier}
11-
\input{3-osier/30-intro}
9+
% \chapter{\acf{osier}}
10+
% \label{chapter:osier}
11+
% \input{3-osier/30-intro}
1212

13-
\chapter{Benchmark Results}
14-
\label{chapter:benchmark-results}
15-
\input{4-benchmark-results/40-benchmark.tex}
13+
% \chapter{Benchmark Results}
14+
% \label{chapter:benchmark-results}
15+
% \input{4-benchmark-results/40-benchmark.tex}
1616

17-
\chapter{Examples with \acs{osier}}
18-
\label{chapter:examples}
19-
\input{5-examples/50-intro.tex}
17+
% \chapter{Examples with \acs{osier}}
18+
% \label{chapter:examples}
19+
% \input{5-examples/50-intro.tex}
2020

21-
\chapter{Energy modeling, planning, and justice}
22-
\label{chapter:communities}
23-
\input{7-interviews/70-outline}
21+
% \chapter{Energy modeling, planning, and justice}
22+
% \label{chapter:communities}
23+
% \input{7-interviews/70-outline}
2424

25-
\chapter{Conclusions}
26-
\label{chapter:conclusions}
27-
\input{8-conclusion/80-conclusion.tex}
25+
% \chapter{Conclusions}
26+
% \label{chapter:conclusions}
27+
% \input{8-conclusion/80-conclusion.tex}

docs/01-abstract.tex

Lines changed: 32 additions & 24 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -1,28 +1,36 @@
11
Solving climate change will require our globalized society to transition from
22
fossil fuel infrastructure to clean energy infrastructure. This transition must
33
also be done equitably and justly to prevent entrenching further injustices to
4-
marginalized and vulnerable communities. To that end, this thesis develops the
5-
first multi-objective energy system optimization framework, \texttt{Osier}, to
6-
enhance the democratic engagement necessary for a just transition. Rather than
7-
making projections about the future, \texttt{Osier} accomplishes this goal by
8-
combining user-supplied energy demand data with technology-specific data (e.g.,
9-
emissions, land-use, cost) and delivers a set of co-optimal energy systems
10-
(i.e., capacities for different energy generating technologies) that balance
11-
competing priorities (e.g., emissions, cost, or land-use). Further,
12-
\texttt{Osier} acknowledges structural uncertainty --- the existence of
13-
unmodeled or \textit{unmodelable} objectives --- by extending the conventional
14-
modeling-to-generate-alternatives approach into N-dimensional objective space.
15-
This approach does not promise to model the unmodelable, rather it recognizes
16-
that any presentation of ``optimal'' solutions will necessarily miss these
17-
unmodelable priorities and that interesting solutions may be contained in a
18-
models sub-optimal space.
4+
marginalized and vulnerable communities. Current energy planning tools optimize
5+
for a singular cost objective which challenges decision-makers' ability to
6+
balance competing priorities such as sustainability, employment, or land use.
7+
This thesis develops the first multi-objective energy system optimization
8+
framework, \texttt{Osier}, to enhance the democratic engagement necessary for a
9+
just transition.
1910

20-
This thesis verified \texttt{Osier}'s suitability for energy modeling problems
21-
with several \textit{in silico} experiments. The first set of experiments
22-
establish \texttt{Osier}'s superiority at exploring decision space over the
23-
mature \texttt{Temoa} framework. A second set of experiments demonstrates
24-
\texttt{Osier} on relevant problems, such as deciding among many nuclear fuel
25-
cycle options. Finally, this thesis presents the results of thirteen expert
26-
interviews which support \texttt{Osier}'s utility for facilitating democratic
27-
engagement between decision makers and their constituents, thereby attending
28-
to issues related to procedural and recognition justice.
11+
\texttt{Osier} stores information about different energy technologies (e.g.,
12+
wind, solar, nuclear), including their costs, emissions, and other data. Users
13+
provide energy demand data and define one or more goals for their energy system,
14+
such as minimizing cost, maximizing renewable energy, or minimizing land use.
15+
\texttt{Osier} then presents a set of co-optimal energy portfolios that
16+
prescribe how much of each technology should be built. Further, \texttt{Osier}
17+
recognizes that some objectives resist quantification. Rather than claiming to
18+
model the unmodelable, \texttt{Osier} samples near-optimal solution space using
19+
a novel algorithm developed herein. Together, these solution sets expose
20+
tradeoffs and allows communities, planners, and decision-makers to deliberate
21+
over priorities. Beyond planning, \texttt{Osier} serves as an accountability
22+
tool that allows communities or non-profit organizations to evaluate the
23+
alignment between implemented policies and stated values. By producing multiple
24+
solutions, \texttt{Osier} gives modelers and decision-makers the tools to
25+
meaningfully engage with public stakeholders and learn their preferences,
26+
thereby attending to issues of procedural and recognition justice.
27+
28+
This thesis verified \texttt{Osier} through a set of benchmarking experiments,
29+
demonstrating comparable results for a least-cost optimization within 0.5\% of
30+
the mature modeling framework, \texttt{Temoa}. In addition to benchmarking
31+
exercises, this thesis applies \texttt{Osier} to two timely examples related to
32+
nuclear fuel cycle options and powering new data centers. Finally, this
33+
thesis presents results from thirteen expert interviews with Illinois energy planners which
34+
support \texttt{Osier}'s utility for enhancing democratic engagement by enabling
35+
stakeholders to explore tradeoffs and articulate their values, though structural
36+
barriers to energy modeling adoption at the municipal level persist.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)