Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update on documentation - configuration section #609

Closed
asv365 opened this issue Feb 16, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #694
Closed

Update on documentation - configuration section #609

asv365 opened this issue Feb 16, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #694

Comments

@asv365
Copy link

asv365 commented Feb 16, 2023

Increased specifications and typo fixes in the documentation. The proposed changes in the documentation are:

  1. Specify a limit on snapshots/start and snapshots/end. Is 2023_01_01 a good upper bound? Is there a lower bound?

  2. There is no section in the documentation for load_options. There, we can specify that the load_options/weather_year has to be within the snapshot range. On load_options/prediction_year are 2030, 2040, 2050, and 2100 the only options for now?

  3. The picture in the lines section includes too many things, the “lines” only appear at the very end. Replace this.

  4. Create subsections in the electricity section, as in the renewables section.

  5. The section load from the documentation doesn’t seem to refer to anything on the config file. Shall we remove this?

@ekatef
Copy link
Member

ekatef commented Feb 16, 2023

Hello @asv365! Thanks a lot for your feedback. That is very helpful to improve the model usability.

Let's go point by point:

  1. The snapshot should correspond to the timeframe for which cutout has been built.
  2. Good point! The available weather_year and prediction_year values can be checked by looking into pypsa-earth/data/ssp2-2.6 folder. Currently there are demand data for 2011, 2013, 2018 weather years and for 2030, 2040, 2050, and 2100 scenario prediction years

I think we may include some explanations on points 1 and 2 into an ongoing PR #603. Many thanks for your suggestions!

Regarding 3-5, absolutely agree that the section structure could be more clear. I'd also say that it would be helpful to supplement each subsection with a short description like it's done for run. However, such a revision should keep in sight the whole structure Configuration section and be consistent with the configuration files. If you want to work on this we would be happy to support you :)

@asv365
Copy link
Author

asv365 commented Feb 17, 2023

Thanks for your feedback, @ekatef! Shall I write a comment on PR #603 about points 1. and 2.?

Regarding point 1., is there a limit on the years for which the cutouts can be built?

I will start working on points 3-5 soon, creating a pull request once it is ready. Agreed on the short description like it's done for run.

@ekatef
Copy link
Member

ekatef commented Feb 18, 2023

Thanks for your feedback, @ekatef! Shall I write a comment on PR #603 about points 1. and 2.?

Regarding point 1., is there a limit on the years for which the cutouts can be built?

I will start working on points 3-5 soon, creating a pull request once it is ready. Agreed on the short description like it's done for run.

Thanks, I have linked #603 with our discussion here :)

Regarding years used to build a cutout, it depends on ERA5 data availability. ERA5 page states that it's available from 1950 and updated continuously with about 3 month delay. They also ask to treat data on 1950-1978 as preliminary (as that is a rather recent development).

Thank you for raising the issue here and looking forward for you PR. You might want to create a draft PR first which can be transformed into a regular PR once ready. Usually we use draft PRs as an opportunity to discuss work in progress :)

@asv365
Copy link
Author

asv365 commented Feb 20, 2023

Points 3, 4, and 5 are being addressed in PR #612.

@ekatef
Copy link
Member

ekatef commented Feb 21, 2023

Points 3, 4, and 5 are being addressed in PR #612

@asv365 Super :) Thanks a lot for taking it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants