Add 2016 historical capacity and generation data

[rouille]

Purpose

Add 2016 historical data to the code base, write attribution file and refactor code to use the 2016 historical data.

Where to look

• ATTRIBUTION.md describes the files in postreise/data
• 2016_Historical_USA_TAMU_Capacity_MW.csv and 2016_Historical_USA_TAMU_Generation_GWh.csv have beedn added to postreise/data
• the summarize module have been refactored to use the above USA generation file. Note that, previously the calculation of the Generation in Texas and the Western/Eastern interconnect was incorrect (usual issue with El Paso, East Texas and Texas Penhandle). The tests have been refactored accordingly.

Time estimate

20min

[BainanXia]

@rouille Yes, we do. You can find those tables in Dropbox (Gates Ventures)/BreakthroughEnergySciences/Results/Scenarios/ScenarioRuns/Western_Texas_Nuclear_Fix_Scenario_Rerun_05_30_20/USA 2016 Basecase

[rouille]

@BainanXia, I don't understand how we can have generation from dfo in e.g, Arizona and California with 0 capacity. It is possible that 2016_Historical_USA_TAMU_Generation_GWh.csv that I added (2900b31) is incorrect.

[BainanXia]

@rouille I believe that table records historical references (from EIA I presume), not our results. We don't have any dfo generators in Western, hence, there is no way to have dfo generation in the results.

[rouille]

@rouille I believe that table records historical references (from EIA I presume), not our results. We don't have any dfo generators in Western, hence, there is no way to have dfo generation in the results.

@BainanXia, So the file 2016_Historical_USA_TAMU_Generation_GWh.csv that I added (2900b31) is incorrect since it is supposed to be the historical generation. Where I can find the correct file?

[BainanXia]

@rouille I believe this has been resolved after we discussed with @danlivengood and we had dfo numbers added in the table which we don't use them in our simulations for now, right?

[rouille]

@rouille I believe this has been resolved after we discussed with @danlivengood and we had dfo numbers added in the table which we don't use them in our simulations for now, right?

I still need to work on this PR. I will likely get back to it next sprint. Yes, thank you @danlivengood @BainanXia for generating the files.

[rouille]

@BainanXia, @danielolsen, @jon-hagg and @kasparm, this PR is ready to go.

[kasparm]

Attribution file looks good. Thanks @rouille

[BainanXia]

Looking through the files and they are as expected. All tests passed. Thanks for taking care of this.