You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In pr #96 we clarified what are fuels and what are techs in the config.yaml file (yay!). This highlighted a bigger problem that we are repeating fuel definitions in the configuration file, which is making tracking the flow of data hard.
# list of storage technologies (In the future may have 'TNK' # Tank)
sto_techs: []
# mapping of technologies to fuels
tech_to_fuel:
'BIO': 'BIO'
'CCG': 'GAS'
'CTG': 'GAS'
'COA': 'COA'
'COC': 'COA'
'HYD': 'HYD'
'SPV': 'SPV'
'URN': 'URN'
'WND': 'WND'
Im wondering if its better to remove the mine_fuels and rnw_fuels and instead specify what technologies are renewable and consumable fuels (ie. require MIN) techs. Then we can just search through the tech_to_fuel dictionary to get the fuels?
So the master_techs dictionary would instead look something like...
In pr #96 we clarified what are fuels and what are techs in the
config.yaml
file (yay!). This highlighted a bigger problem that we are repeating fuel definitions in the configuration file, which is making tracking the flow of data hard.Canada-U.S.-ElecTrade/scripts/config.yaml
Lines 31 to 75 in a2d6e4f
Im wondering if its better to remove the
mine_fuels
andrnw_fuels
and instead specify what technologies are renewable and consumable fuels (ie. require MIN) techs. Then we can just search through thetech_to_fuel
dictionary to get the fuels?So the
master_techs
dictionary would instead look something like...This may also simplify the the
techDataFrame( ... )
function as well (so we arnt mixing techs and fuels quite as much)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: