GSYE-719: export carbon emissions after cli simulation #1820
Conversation
src/gsy_e/gsy_e_core/export.py
Outdated
| out_key = results_field_to_json_filename_mapping[in_key] | ||
|
|
||
| # Only to export carbon emissions | ||
| if in_key == "trade_profile" and self.country_code: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it be trade_profile?
hannesdiedrich
left a comment
hannesdiedrich
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two comments, will review again after adapted.
src/gsy_e/gsy_e_core/cli.py
Outdated
| "--country-code", | ||
| type=str, | ||
| default=None, | ||
| help="Country code according to ISO 3166-1 alpha-2.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO a small sentence would be valuable that explains that this option is only needed for the carbon footprint calculation. If not provided, no carbon footprint is extracted.
tests/results/test_results.py
Outdated
| simulation.run() | ||
|
|
||
| # Then | ||
| print("results = ", simulation._results._endpoint_buffer.generate_json_report()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here, nothing is tested.
Additionally, this is an integration test that runs a simulation. We should not run a simulation only for testing if a result file is extracted here. We have an integration test scenario that checks for the export of the files:
"Test aggregated results are exported" You could adapt this one for a kind of e2e test.
The correct way for a unit test would be to check if the carbon_emissions_handler. calculate_from_gsy_imported_exported_energy is called by the ExportAndPlot class under the right circumstances.
Reason for the proposed changes
Please describe what we want to achieve and why.
Proposed changes
INTEGRATION_TESTS_BRANCH=master
GSY_FRAMEWORK_BRANCH=feature/GSYE-719