Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update to EUDEM slope data in pre-processing #15

Draft
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

brynpickering
Copy link
Member

This is the first step in the workflow to update to using EUDEM slope data, which a user would need to manually download from Copernicus. Full European coverage is 1.8GB, which seems quite manageable. This does away with dependence on SRTM/GMTED elevation data and accordingly a lot of processing steps. It also allows Iceland and upper Nordics to be included at full resolution.

This is a draft PR as the downstream handling of this data is not yet clear to me (as I detail in #4); I would appreciate guidance on this @timtroendle.

@timtroendle
Copy link
Member

See my latest comment in #4. This PR should only change the data source in my opinion, without any downstream changes necessary.

brynpickering added 5 commits May 12, 2021 18:07
* slope_in_europe output is now a binary indicator
of whether any sub-pixel within a land-cover pixel is too steep
@brynpickering
Copy link
Member Author

Although this now is functionally only changing the data source, it also provides the option for more complex slope-based processing in future. However, the initial threshold rule (tech_slope_thresholds) is slow (~20 mins per job). Although it is parallelised, it involves a lot of read-writes, which have a time penalty on the cluster. My hope is that there is a way to parallelise only the vector operation, and then have only one read-write per rule. However, since we don't need the functionality provided here as of yet, I am going to leave this PR as-is, and suggest we consider #24 in its stead.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants