Address hardcoded 2018 MECS in GHG methods - #688
Conversation
…y mecs fbs data/approach
(cherry picked from commit d84a592)
Energy FBS national totals (2022 MECS) — follow-up fix incomingWhile building the NEU activity-set pivot for this review, I found a pipeline bug that inflates 2022 MECS energy weights (e.g. Table 2.1 HGL national FBS ≈ 2,176 mmbbl vs MECS Root cause: 2018 MECS does not hit this path (source and target are both NAICS 2017, so Separate note: Change in disclosure for some sectors causes significant jumps between MECS years.There are just a few cases, but data suppression, especially |
|
Also turns out there are some extra blank columns in the 2022 Non-energy tables so the fuels were mis aligned |
--------- Co-authored-by: Ben Young <ben.young@erg.com>
cc:
Closes: #488
What changed? Why?
EPA_GHGIattribution tables, which needed to be replaced withUMD_GHGIAdataEIA_MECS_Energy_CEDA_allocaition.yamlFBA - which called on CEDA functions and instead created FBS methods with use theflowsalogic/approach. This does modify how the EIA MECS data is used for attribution. The FBA calculated kg CO₂e weights, which were then used to allocate the GHG data. The FBS does not convert the MECS data to kg co2e, keeping data in original units - still used to proportionally attribute GHG.Cornerstone_2025industry spec and makes it clear/easy to follow what data sources are being used for attribution, rather than the buried, hard coded sources.Intentionally changed approach from CEDA:
Testing
Total FBS values for 2018 and 2024 are the same as we see on Main. There is a shift in results for T-3-11 and T-3-14.
Compared the results for the 2018 and 2024 GHG Cornerstone FBS
2018 national by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)
2018 T_3_11 by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)
2018 T_3_14 by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)
2024 national by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)
2024 T_3_11 by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)
2024 T_3_14 by NAICS-2 (nonzero diff)