`make_global_summaries` not compatible with scenario management

Version Checks (indicate both or one)

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the lastest release of PyPSA-Eur.

• I have confirmed this bug exists on the current master branch of PyPSA-Eur.

Issue Description

Potentially related #2100 .

In the lines here the input files are manually constructed instead of relying on snakemake.input. This can lead to an inconsistency, if e.g. planning_horizon is overwritten in a scenario to a value that is not in the config:

https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur/blob/master/scripts/make_global_summary.py#L46-L54

e.g. config defines planning_horizon: [2030] but scenario defines planning_horizon: [2040]. In that case the snakemake workflow will produce 2030 for the files (incorrect), but the script is looking for 2040 (correct).

As far as I can tell the problem lies with using config here directly, instead of the overwritten config:

https://github.com/PyPSA/pypsa-eur/blob/master/rules/postprocess.smk#L307

Reproducible Example

-

Expected Behavior

Installed Versions

Start with scripts/make_global_summary.py lines 46-54 and rules/postprocess.smk around line 307, comparing the manually constructed paths with snakemake.input and the overwritten scenario configuration. Reproduce the case where planning_horizon changes from 2030 to 2040 and verify that the workflow and summary script use the same files.