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

Use scalars_base.csv as input for prepare_re_potential.py #171

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 14, 2022

Conversation

SabineHaas
Copy link
Collaborator

address #159

@SabineHaas SabineHaas added this to the v0.0.1 milestone Mar 3, 2022
@SabineHaas SabineHaas requested review from jnnr and MaGering March 3, 2022 15:04
Snakefile Outdated
Comment on lines 146 to 149
assumptions="raw/scalars_base.csv",
script="scripts/prepare_re_potential.py"
output:
directory("results/_resources/RE_potential/")
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know if this is already planned / intended here, but this would ensure that the correct scalars are selected via wildcards:

Suggested change
assumptions="raw/scalars_base.csv",
script="scripts/prepare_re_potential.py"
output:
directory("results/_resources/RE_potential/")
assumptions="raw/scalars_{range}.csv",
script="scripts/prepare_re_potential.py"
output:
directory("results/_resources/{range}/RE_potential/")
wildcard_constraints:
range=("base|high|low")

However, if we were to build on our current scalars structure, then the wildcards would have to be extended by the specification of a year and hence adjusted to:

Suggested change
assumptions="raw/scalars_base.csv",
script="scripts/prepare_re_potential.py"
output:
directory("results/_resources/RE_potential/")
assumptions="raw/scalars_{range}_{year}.csv",
script="scripts/prepare_re_potential.py"
output:
directory("results/_resources/{range}_{year}/RE_potential/")
wildcard_constraints:
range=("base|high|low"),
year=("2040|2050")

Just a thought without any particular change request.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you @MaGering!
The thing is, that using the different csvs does not have any effect on the input data to the simulations, as the renewable potential is not copied to _resources/scal_base.csv.
I would add the potential automatically in prepare_scalars.py using results/_resources/scal_power_potential_wind_pv.csv as input. Do you agree @jnnr?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@MaGering I will include that, giving you credit, in #176 after the release. thanks again!

@SabineHaas SabineHaas requested review from MaGering and jnnr and removed request for jnnr March 14, 2022 12:00
@jnnr jnnr merged commit 566a116 into release/0.0.1 Mar 14, 2022
@jnnr jnnr deleted the fix/input_path_re branch March 14, 2022 16:07
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 this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants