Flexible setup of constraints for cooling technologies

[adrivinca]

The PR changes some hard code to a flexible adjustment of constraints on cooling technologies, to improve flexibility

The cooling technologies are added as add-on to power plants (parent technologies). in some scenarios, however, the power plant are subject to constraints e.g. for phase-out, and the cooling tecnhologies growth_activity_lo need to be adjusted accordingly to avoid infeasibilities. Before this was done manually, now I added a function relax_growth_constraint that should do it automatically for each specific scenario.
I also added a test function to test the behavior of the function.

How to review

Check the code and test are in line with the standards.
Eventually run the code on a scenario at choice and see it the model solves mix-models --url=ixmp://ixmp_dev/%model%/%scenario% water-ix --regions=R12 cooling , maybe @measrainsey

PR checklist

• Continuous integration checks all ✅
• Add or expand tests; coverage checks both ✅
• Update doc/whatsnew.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 87.50000% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 75.5%. Comparing base (687c4c4) to head (2f9625f).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...essage_ix_models/model/water/data/water_for_ppl.py	86.8%	5 Missing ⚠️
message_ix_models/model/water/cli.py	0.0%	1 Missing ⚠️
message_ix_models/model/water/data/water_supply.py	0.0%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #242   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   75.5%   75.5%           
=====================================
  Files        203     203           
  Lines      15503   15545   +42     
=====================================
+ Hits       11706   11747   +41     
- Misses      3797    3798    +1     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
message_ix_models/model/water/report.py	7.9% <ø> (ø)
...odels/tests/model/water/data/test_water_for_ppl.py	100.0% <100.0%> (ø)
message_ix_models/model/water/cli.py	33.0% <0.0%> (-0.4%)	⬇️
message_ix_models/model/water/data/water_supply.py	77.2% <0.0%> (+0.8%)	⬆️
...essage_ix_models/model/water/data/water_for_ppl.py	93.9% <86.8%> (-0.7%)	⬇️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[adrivinca]

Thanks Frido and Meas.

I am not sure why this error appears, but I also had it on my machine, probably to do with some pandas update?

FAILED message_ix_models/tests/model/water/data/test_water_for_ppl.py::test_cool_tec[no_climate] - IndexError: index 0 is out of bounds for axis 0 with size 0
FAILED message_ix_models/tests/model/water/data/test_water_for_ppl.py::test_cool_tec[6p0] - IndexError: index 0 is out of bounds for axis 0 with size 0```

[glatterf42]

All in all, good work as far as the coding goes :)
However, I'd like to see several small improvements and please check why the tests are failing on this PR and ensure they don't do that.

[glatterf42]

I am not sure why this error appears, but I also had it on my machine, probably to do with some pandas update?

FAILED message_ix_models/tests/model/water/data/test_water_for_ppl.py::test_cool_tec[no_climate] - IndexError: index 0 is out of bounds for axis 0 with size 0
FAILED message_ix_models/tests/model/water/data/test_water_for_ppl.py::test_cool_tec[6p0] - IndexError: index 0 is out of bounds for axis 0 with size 0```

To figure this out, you can recreate a virtual environment locally that has the same pandas and numpy and Python versions installed as one of the failing workflows. Then, try to run the tests in there and use a debugger or add auxiliary output print() to study the variables as you go.

What the error message says is that years[years > x] is a numpy array of size 0, so there's not a single element inside. Thus, when you try to access the [0]th element, numpy complains. That could be because x is too large or maybe years doesn't contain a single value to begin with.

[glatterf42]

I'm sorry, I tried to rebase this branch on main to keep it up to date (since some of @measrainsey's branches were merged earlier today), but this seems to have broken the tests again.
Thanks for fixing them before! If we fix them now and add this PR to doc/whatsnew (and @measrainsey's review comes in), I think we're close to getting this merged :)

[glatterf42]

The errors were caused by updating sdmx1 to 2.19.0, let's see as to why exactly this happens...
Thanks to @khaeru for fixing this issue with the v2.19.1 release :)

[khaeru]

@adrivinca given the name of this branch (wat_SSP_upd2) I assume this is related to #234, so I have added it in the list there. If that's not the case, please clarify.

[adrivinca]

thanks, so the sdmx1 issue is solves, right?
@khaeru you are right, there will be many other, I will remember to add them to #234

I am quite in a tight timeline, so I'm happy with the current changes. I might add a couple of things before merge