-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Spikes in emission rate data #230
Comments
In
I think this would work, and it shouldn't introduce issues with double counting or not counting data, since the residual profile is not used directly as data, only to shape data from EIA-923. We would just have to be sure not to delete the data from the actual CEMS table, only from the version passed to the residual profile calculation |
I think another root issue here that I'm just realizing is that even if the CEMS data included some small amount of backup generation from a diesel generator, the magnitude of that should be pretty small and not affect the residual profile that much. Looking at the data here though, the diesel generation spikes are many orders of magnitude higher than the total reported nuclear generation. This raises the possibility that the source of this issue is actually outlier data in CEMS (#50) Zooming in on the eia930 profile for nuclear, I'm also noticing something else funny, which is that the nuclear profile seems to be pretty variable: However, looking at the reported EIA-930 data for nuclear in January 2020 reveals what we would expect: that nuclear should be pretty flat: I'm thinking that this is likely a result of the physics reconciliation code, and makes me think that we need to adjust the weighting on the reconciliation so that certain fuel types like nuclear can't be adjusted in this way, or go back to using the raw generation data for the residual calculation (#104). |
It turns out that this is not an issue with shaping at all -- our filters work correctly. Although the
|
Agreed! Let's definitely implement this |
Is there a validation check that we could add to the pipeline to automatically screen for spikes like this and alert us? |
Some BAs have negative spikes in emission rate data. (negative meaning they deviate negatively from the trend)
Eg, PJM:
WACM:
Both the above figures compare real-time (red) to OGE (blue). Both show adjusted emission rate (CO2/MWh). In the OGE data, the relevant variable is
generated_co2_rate_lb_per_mwh_for_electricity_adjusted
inpower_sector_data
.In some small BAs, rate spikes are expected (eg, DEAA where there is only one
natural_gas
plant and so plant startup leads to enormous positive BA-level emission rate spikes). However, we don't expect spikes that are abrupt decreases in rate (eg WACM), and we don't expect spikes in large BAs (eg, PJM)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: