We use the term "unit" when referring to an asset to mean an independently retained/decommissioned/mothballed component of the asset's capacity (which consists of a "unit size" and a "number of units")
I think the term "unit" here is confusing, as it's a fundamentally distinct concept to "unit of measurement", or the units module in MUSE.
With the current terminology, the term "capacity unit" could reasonably be interpreted to mean three things:
- the
Capacity unit struct in the MUSE code
- the unit of measurement for an asset's capacity (e.g. GW)
- an independently retained/decommissioned/mothballed component of an asset's capacity (which could, for example, be 5 GW)
I think this is causing some confusion in the code, and making the documentation hard to write. For the last point, I think we should move back to referring to these as "tranches".
We use the term "unit" when referring to an asset to mean an independently retained/decommissioned/mothballed component of the asset's capacity (which consists of a "unit size" and a "number of units")
I think the term "unit" here is confusing, as it's a fundamentally distinct concept to "unit of measurement", or the
unitsmodule in MUSE.With the current terminology, the term "capacity unit" could reasonably be interpreted to mean three things:
Capacityunit struct in the MUSE codeI think this is causing some confusion in the code, and making the documentation hard to write. For the last point, I think we should move back to referring to these as "tranches".