Update CSP - #504

Open

awongel wants to merge 7 commits into

PyPSA:master from

awongel:master

Open

Update CSP #504
awongel wants to merge 7 commits into
PyPSA:master from
awongel:master

Conversation

@awongel

@awongel awongel commented Apr 26, 2026 •

edited by FabianHofmann

Loading

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Changes proposed in this Pull Request

CSP conversion now models the actual collector geometry instead of assuming perfect sun-tracking. Both technologies are computed via SurfaceOrientation with TiltedDirectIrrad = (cosincidence / sin(altitude)) * influx_direct. Solar tower (tracking="dual") yields cosincidence = 1, so its output is unchanged DNI. Parabolic trough now uses tracking="horizontal" (single-axis tracking), so it collects less than DNI when the sun is not aligned with its rotation axis — correcting the previous overestimate. The old atlite/csp.py module (with its hardcoded 3.75° altitude clamp) was removed and folded into convert.py; the public cutout.csp() API is unchanged. Reworked the working-with-csp example to showcase the difference.

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.

awongel and others added 2 commits

April 20, 2026 16:26

@awongel


 Update CSP

ec2edc3

@pre-commit-ci


 [pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks

199aa46

for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci

@awongel awongel mentioned this pull request

Apr 26, 2026

Potential issue with calculation of CSP incidence radiation for PTC #503

Open

2 tasks

fneum

fneum requested changes

May 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

@fneum fneum left a comment

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.

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

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

atlite/gis.py Outdated

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,

@fneum fneum May 4, 2026

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?

@awongel awongel May 17, 2026

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!

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.
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.

@FabianHofmann

FabianHofmann commented Jul 17, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor

@awongel should I update the code according to @fneum review? I would also argue we should remove the allow_rechunk for now and generalize the exposure of dask kwargs.

FabianHofmann added 3 commits

July 17, 2026 10:23

@FabianHofmann


 Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into awongel/master

6ed598c

# Conflicts:
#	atlite/csp.py
#	atlite/gis.py
#	examples/working-with-csp.ipynb

@FabianHofmann


 Remove Saudi Arabia example and allow_rechunk arg

9df451d

Drop the second-location (Saudi Arabia) example from the CSP notebook per
review, along with its reference CSV. Revert the allow_rechunk regrid arg.

@FabianHofmann


 Always allow rechunk in regrid

ae75259

reproject needs the full spatial plane, so multi-chunk spatial inputs
(e.g. SARAH2) must be merged rather than error.

@FabianHofmann

FabianHofmann commented Jul 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor

@awongel took the freedom to merge the latest master and remove the saudi arabia example. we should keep the allow_rechunk in as it is generally needed for sarah cutouts and regrid operations. I have the changes locally but don't want to push on your master unless you say its okay. alternatively I can raise another pr superseding this one

@awongel

awongel commented Jul 18, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Author

@FabianHofmann, awesome, thanks for picking this up again! Yes, please feel free to push your changes directly to my master.
Absolutely, will follow your judgement on allow_rechunk. (It just felt wrong to push something that wouldn't run for me.)

FabianHofmann added 2 commits

August 13, 2026 12:54

@FabianHofmann


 Merge branch 'master' into awongel/master

ced9ee2

@FabianHofmann


 Add release notes for CSP update

71995a5

FabianHofmann

FabianHofmann approved these changes

Aug 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

@FabianHofmann FabianHofmann left a comment

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks @awongel for the contribution. I updated the release notes and want to update the pr summary for the record. (would be nice in future to have a summary written by the author)

@awongel

awongel commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Author

Thanks @FabianHofmann! Happy to write a summary if you point me to what you mean, I thought the description at the beginning was the summary.

@FabianHofmann

FabianHofmann commented Aug 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Copy link

Copy Markdown

Contributor

Thanks @FabianHofmann! Happy to write a summary if you point me to what you mean, I thought the description at the beginning was the summary.

Exactly, but note the current summary is a what I wrote (GitHub allows editing comments from others), before it was empty. So, no worries

Labels

None yet

3 participants

@awongel @FabianHofmann @fneum

Uh oh!

Conversation

@awongel awongel commented Apr 26, 2026 • edited by FabianHofmann Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Changes proposed in this Pull Request

Checklist

Uh oh!

@fneum fneum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

@fneum fneum May 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

@awongel awongel May 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

FabianHofmann commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

FabianHofmann commented Jul 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

awongel commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

@FabianHofmann FabianHofmann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

awongel commented Aug 15, 2026

Uh oh!

FabianHofmann commented Aug 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

@awongel awongel commented Apr 26, 2026 •

edited by FabianHofmann

Loading

FabianHofmann commented Jul 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

FabianHofmann commented Aug 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading