Skip to content
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

Split US into Balancing Authorities #2301

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Mar 24, 2020
Merged

Split US into Balancing Authorities #2301

merged 9 commits into from
Mar 24, 2020

Conversation

robertahunt
Copy link
Contributor

@robertahunt robertahunt commented Mar 22, 2020

solves #143 (Hopefully!)

This PR uses two sets of geojsons:

  1. The first is a simplified version of the US with the overlaps crudely removed (for each overlapping polygon/balancing authority, it will always show the smaller one).
  2. The other will be used for the backend when querying by latitude/longitude, and for getting temperature and weather data.

The original shape data was obtained from https://hifld-geoplatform.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/control-areas

Example 'look' (the carbon intensities values were chosen at random here, just to illustrate how it could look, they are not at all related to the true US carbon intensities):

image

Some still TBD items:

  • Test api lat/lon queries - Currently will only return one area when multiples discovered. Should fix this in private repo
  • Add zones to zones.json
  • Add exchanges to exchanges.json
  • replace EIA parsers with BA specific parsers where possible
  • add exchanges and zones to EIA.py
  • generate bounding boxes

TBD after contrib implementation:

  • refetch historic data
  • retrain forecasts

@robertahunt
Copy link
Contributor Author

@fbarl Ideally I would also like it to show the 'true' (larger) balancing authority area when hovering over the zone, Is this possible/easy? It looked to me like modifying web.js might do it, but I am not so familiar with the frontend.

'US-NY->US-PJM': 'EBA.NYIS-PJM.ID.H',

#Exchanges to non-US BAs
'US-CAL-CISO->MX-BC': 'EBA.CISO-CFE.ID.H', #Unable to verify if MX-BC is correct
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

given the comment, is there any action item here? Something we should check before merging?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I tried to find more information on which Mexican BAs had exchanges, but was unable to find it on the Mexico side. Since we don't have any mexican production data at this point, I don't think this will affect anything yet, this is more a note for the future, if we find a source for mexican data we should check these exchanges too.

Copy link
Member

@corradio corradio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Amazing work!

@martincollignon
Copy link
Contributor

wait do we have the US zones ready??!?!

@robertahunt robertahunt merged commit 81be63b into master Mar 24, 2020
@robertahunt robertahunt deleted the rob/us_zones branch March 24, 2020 08:58
@robertahunt robertahunt restored the rob/us_zones branch March 25, 2020 13:54
@MaximeBaudette
Copy link
Contributor

Seems like there is an error in mapping CAISO in CA, USA. Half of northern CA is included in WAPA, When I believe it is part of CAISO.
Screen Shot 2020-08-25 at 16 08 47

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.

4 participants