Dimensional mismatch for VegetationCarbonStorage

[fvilla]

@kbagstad, @bvoigt

[fvilla]

Models are in t/ha_year, data in t/ha. I am temporarily changing the data to t/ha_year to allow testing the training system, but this needs attention - the same concept cannot be at the same time a stock and a rate. The result of the mismatch is that models of vegetation carbon storage break - the system tries to couple data to model and the units are incompatible, which they should never be for the same concept.

[kbagstad]

OK, here's the deal on carbon data. Carbon sequestration (which has underlying training data) and stored carbon release (which lacks underlying training data) are both rates expressed in t/ha*year. Carbon storage - for both vegetation and soil and their summed value - is a stock, in t/ha, and the underlying data should reflect this. What the models say is that a certain fire or deforestation risk yields a certain annual flow of stored carbon release, also based on the stock of standing carbon in vegetation and soils - this lets us convert stock values from carbon storage into an annual flow, which is comparable to the source and use values.

So unless you see any problems with the above logic, all vegetation and soil carbon storage modeling statements and .xml blobs should be changed back to t/ha (from t/ha*year). This should get us where we need to go. I'm happy to make these changes but will wait to hear back from you before I do so.

[fvilla]

Sure Ken, your call, all I care about is that the models and the data have the same units when they have the same concept. If it's OK for you to change it back please do, otherwise say the word and I'll do it, no problem. Closing this one.

[kbagstad]

Since I'm sticking you with a longer explanation of training, let me fix this for you.