Improve label for investment chart

[vgeorge]

Comment by Chiara:

‘Additional” investment requirement for 2030, as they are additional to 2025 (semantics on the website)

Is it sufficient to add a comment in the popover like we did for the population chart?

Actual Investment Chart

Population Chart Popover

cc @akorkovelos @olafveerman

[nicolinalindblad]

What we need are the accumulated numbers for 2030. Meaning when the 2030 scenario is shown, the graphs should indicate the required investments etc. for the entire model period (2018-2030), and not only 2025-2030 as it appears now. This requires some work I suppose on the backend too @akorkovelos

[nicolinalindblad]

I just wanted to follow up and see how you are doing on this/ if you need any input?

[olafveerman]

@nicolinalindblad We made the necessary changes to the backend to show them in the Explorer. Once a new version of the backend is released, this will be unblocked.

[vgeorge]

This will be fixed when https://github.com/global-electrification-platform/data-service/pull/94 is merged and deployed.

[nicolinalindblad]

Thank you! @vgeorge and @olafveerman

[vgeorge]

@nicolinalindblad the live version is displaying accumulated investment values from start year.

Example:

• https://electrifynow.energydata.info/explore/bj-1?year=2025&scenario=0_0_0_0_0_0&filters=r5_1242249%7Cr0_254%7C1_3_5_6_7%7Cr0_80%7Cr0_25%7Cr23_2456

• https://electrifynow.energydata.info/explore/bj-1?year=2030&scenario=0_0_0_0_0_0&filters=r5_1242249%7Cr0_254%7C1_3_5_6_7%7Cr0_80%7Cr0_25%7Cr23_2456

[AndreasSahlberg]

Dear all, It seems like all summary charts are correct with the exception of Investment 2030.

It seems like it currently is: INVESTMENT REQUIRED = (InvestmentCost2025 + InvestmentCost2030) x ElecStatusIn2030

But it should be: INVESTMENT REQUIRED = (InvestmentCost2025 x ElecStatusIn2025) + (InvestmentCost2030 x ElecStatusIn2030)

To clarify, exactly the same calculations that were made for 2025 should be replicated for 2030 and these should be summed to get the cumulative investments. As it is now, the total investments are a bit too high (taking into account the investment cost in 2025 also for settlements that were actually not electrified then), and also does not consider the fact that we might have a change of technologies between 2025 and 2030.

[vgeorge]

Hi @AndreasSahlberg, thanks for catching this. We are working on a fix at https://github.com/global-electrification-platform/data-service/pull/98. We will let you know when it is done.

[nicolinalindblad]

Andreas, how are the different costs for respective technology being accounted for here?

Den tis 28 jan. 2020 kl 08:23 skrev Vitor George notifications@github.com:

Hi @AndreasSahlberg https://github.com/AndreasSahlberg, thanks for catching this. We are working on a fix at global-electrification-platform/data-service#98 https://github.com/global-electrification-platform/data-service/pull/98. We will let you know when it is done.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/global-electrification-platform/explorer/issues/238?email_source=notifications&email_token=AKYWYN4QW3BSV466UMCBKMDRAAWWTA5CNFSM4I6SGKCKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEKDI2YI#issuecomment-579243361, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKYWYN342JO3FXTI2IHT2Y3RAAWWTANCNFSM4I6SGKCA .

[vgeorge]

@AndreasSahlberg a fix on investment cost was pushed to the API, please review if it is following your description.

[AndreasSahlberg]

Dear @vgeorge ,

Thank you for this! I have reviewed some scenarios for Angola (ao), Benin (bj) and Botswana (bw) on the platform.

It seems to me like the following scenarios are correct after the changes: ao-1-0-2-0-0-0-0 ao-1-0-1-0-0-0-0 bj-1-1-0-0-0-0-0 bj-1-0-1-0-0-0-0 bj-1-0-2-0-0-0-0 bw-1-1-0-0-0-0-0 bw-1-0-1-0-0-0-0 bw-1-0-2-0-0-0-0

However, the following are correct for 2025 but not for 2030 (where the investment cost is too high): ao-1-0-0-0-0-0-0 ao-1-1-0-0-0-0-0 bj-1-0-0-0-0-0-0 bw-1-0-0-0-0-0-0

Not sure if the changes have not been implemented for all scenarios yet, or if there is another issue to look into.