Difference in county level resolution from ReEDS
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 148
- Forks
- 55
- Avg merge
- 2d 11h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 18
Description
I had a user reach out with a question that @ktehranchi is probably better suited to answer! Please find below the question.
While comparing data, I noticed that most states have more counties listed in ReEDS than in PyPSA. In the PyPSA config file, the simulations runs smoothly when I set clusters equal to the number of ReEDS counties, but only for Arizona, California, and Wyoming. For instance, in California, setting clusters = 58 matches the 58 counties in ReEDS and works perfectly. However, in Montana, the number of clusters needs to be reduced from 45 (ReEDS) to 38 for the simulation to run successfully. Any thoughts?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the PyPSA-USA config and ReEDS inputs/county2zone.csv named in the report. Reproduce the comparison for Montana, including runs with 38 and 45 clusters, and trace where the county counts affect the simulation. Done means explaining the county-resolution mismatch and why the higher cluster count fails.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- data
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100