Update IDAES to 2.1.0

[lbianchi-lbl]

Summary/Motivation:

• Check whether changes in Speed up multiperiod model IDAES/idaes-pse#1180 cause regressions in DISPATCHES
  • This is moot as the PR has been merged and is already part of IDAES 2.1.0
• Fix remaining issues due to IDAES 2.1.0/Pyomo 6.6.1

Changes proposed in this PR:

Legal Acknowledgement

By contributing to this software project, I agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution:

1. I agree my contributions are submitted under the license terms described in the LICENSE.md and COPYRIGHT.md file at the top level of this directory.
2. I represent I am authorized to make the contributions and grant the license. If my employer has rights to intellectual property that includes these contributions, I represent that I have received permission to make contributions and grant the required license on behalf of that employer.

[radhakrishnatg]

@lbianchi-lbl @nareshsusarla @esrawli The test failures in the fossil case study do not appear to be related to the changes in the MultiPeriodModel class. I see initialization and solver errors. So, could you please take a look at that?

@dguittet There is a test failure in the RE case study. I think it has to do with the length of the data being passed to the build_multi_period_model method. I think this should be an easy fix.

[adam-a-a]

@lbianchi-lbl @nareshsusarla @esrawli The test failures in the fossil case study do not appear to be related to the changes in the MultiPeriodModel class. I see initialization and solver errors. So, could you please take a look at that?

@dguittet There is a test failure in the RE case study. I think it has to do with the length of the data being passed to the build_multi_period_model method. I think this should be an easy fix.

One issue seems to occur within test_costing_method in dispatches\case_studies\fossil_case\ultra_supercritical_plant\storage\tests\test_integrated_storage_with_ultrasupercritical_power_plant.py, specifically at initialize_with_costing, where a negative value is being raised to a power:

[adam-a-a]

So, the failure mentioned above seems to be attributed (at least initially) to m.fs.hxd.steam_reynolds_number going to negative values.

I should also note that three of these errors already exist when I run tests without any of the changes associated with the IDAES PR.

[lbianchi-lbl]

• The test failures that are actually related to the changes in Speed up multiperiod model IDAES/idaes-pse#1180 will be addressed here (i.e. on the DISPATCHES side); no further functionality changes are planned on the IDAES PR
• The other test failures will be investigated separately. @lbianchi-lbl will open another PR against IDAES/idaes:main and start looking for possible commits causing the failures

[radhakrishnatg]

@lbianchi-lbl I ran the tests locally, and test_RE_flowsheet.py is not failing on my laptop. I don't know why those tests are failing here.

[radhakrishnatg]

Based on #202, the remaining RE test failures do not seem to be related to the changes in the IDAES PR.

[radhakrishnatg]

Hi @lbianchi-lbl Is IDAES 2.1.* compatible with Pyomo 6.5.? If yes, please change the Pyomo version to 6.5.. I'm trying to figure out whether RE test failures are caused by Pyomo version or the IDAES version.

[lbianchi-lbl]

We've decided to use IDAES 2.0/Pyomo 6.5 for the June release.