UK hydro plants incorrectly labeled as "Run-Of-River" despite being reservoir or pumped storage

Description

In the UK portion of the powerplant dataset used in powerplantmatching, several hydroelectric power stations are classified with:

• component (or Set) = "store" (indicating dispatchable hydro), and
• technology = "Run-Of-River"

This classification is inconsistent. Run-of-river (RoR) hydro plants do not have meaningful storage capacity and should not be modeled as dispatchable store components. Many of these stations are in fact reservoir-based or pumped-storage (PHS) hydro plants and should be reclassified accordingly. This problem also exists in the data of other countires.

Affected entries

Public data sources

• Dinorwig: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinorwig_Power_Station
• Ffestiniog: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ffestiniog_Power_Station
• Sloy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loch_Sloy_Hydro-Electric_Scheme
• Foyers: https://www.sserenewables.com/hydro/foyers/
• Glendoe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glendoe_Hydro_Scheme
• Errochty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tummel_hydro-electric_power_scheme

Suggested fix

• Update the technology field to "Pumped Storage" or "Reservoir" where appropriate in manual_correction.csv
• Optionally implement a preprocessing check to catch inconsistencies where component == "store" but technology == "Run-Of-River"

Why this matters

Incorrect classification leads to incorrect assumptions about generator and storage capacity in PyPSA-Eur. These misclassified hydro plants may distort model outcomes, particularly in scenarios involving high renewable penetration and reliance on dispatchable resources.

Inspect the affected UK entries in manual_correction.csv and compare their technology and component/Set values with the listed public sources for Dinorwig, Ffestiniog, Sloy, Foyers, Glendoe, and Errochty. Reclassify reservoir and pumped-storage plants consistently, then check whether a preprocessing validation is appropriate for store components labeled Run-Of-River.