Skip to content

Update CSP#504

Open
awongel wants to merge 2 commits into
PyPSA:masterfrom
awongel:master
Open

Update CSP#504
awongel wants to merge 2 commits into
PyPSA:masterfrom
awongel:master

Conversation

@awongel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@awongel awongel commented Apr 26, 2026

Closes # (if applicable).

Changes proposed in this Pull Request

Checklist

  • Code changes are sufficiently documented; i.e. new functions contain docstrings and further explanations may be given in doc.
  • Unit tests for new features were added (if applicable).
  • Newly introduced dependencies are added to environment.yaml, environment_docs.yaml and setup.py (if applicable).
  • A note for the release notes doc/release_notes.rst of the upcoming release is included.
  • I consent to the release of this PR's code under the MIT license.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@fneum fneum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @awongel! Looks great. I have two suggestions / requests:

  1. Could you remove the Saudia Arabia example? The example got quite long and to me it didn't add too many new insights.

  2. Do you have a comparison of the convert_csv() output before and after? That would make it easier to see whether the changes are plausible. Just a graphic + code snippet would be helpful.

Comment thread atlite/gis.py
dask_gufunc_kwargs=dict(
output_sizes={"yout": dst_shape[0], "xout": dst_shape[1]}
output_sizes={"yout": dst_shape[0], "xout": dst_shape[1]},
allow_rechunk=True,
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why was this change necessary?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @fneum!

  1. I had discussed with @euronion what we should add and felt that a second location would be useful to show that it works more generally than in a single location. If you think it's too much, I don't mind removing it again.

  2. Since I replaced the calculation, would you suggest to keep the previous way of calculating it somewhere in the code? I wanted to avoid that. Or save the old result somewhere, but then you can't immediately see how it was calculated.

The change in the gis.py file was needed for the sarah data part of the example, which wouldn't run for me otherwise. Happy to remove if you can confirm this is not needed.

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.

2 participants