EMEP pyaro/eeareader

[magnusuMET]

Change Summary

Utilise the pyaro eeareader for the emep report template

Result at https://aeroval-test.met.no/magnusu/pages/evaluation/?project=eeareadertest&experiment=2024-reporting-mock-postprocess-3&station=ALL&parameter=concNno#

Missing the vmrox variable

Something is broken when comparing EMEP/EBAS-h as concNno, concpm10, concpm25` are fetched, even when the emep hourly does not contain these variables. This might be a result of changed data, but is not related to this PR.

The pyaro reader of the EEA data is stricter than the previous reader, which results in less datapoints.

Related issue number

Fixes #1452

Checklist

• Start with a draft-PR
• The PR title is a good summary of the changes
• PR is set to AeroTools and a tentative milestone
• Documentation reflects the changes where applicable
• Tests for the changes exist where applicable
• Tests pass locally
• Tests pass on CI
• At least 1 reviewer is selected
• Make PR ready to review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.48%. Comparing base (82a50eb) to head (75da8a0).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main-dev.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           main-dev    #1463      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     78.49%   78.48%   -0.01%     
============================================
  Files           139      139              
  Lines         21090    21084       -6     
============================================
- Hits          16554    16548       -6     
  Misses         4536     4536              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	78.48% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[heikoklein]

Why did you split out NO into a separate entry?

[magnusuMET]

It used to be it's own component for some reason and I've kept it like that

[heikoklein]

Ok, looks strange that the post_processing and name_match sections don't match the obs_vars, though.

Not sure why we still need to split NO, now that it should be included in all outputs. For simplicity, just keep it merged.

[magnusuMET]

@thorbjoernl Are you familiar with the cause of the CI failure?

[thorbjoernl]

@thorbjoernl Are you familiar with the cause of the CI failure?

No. It may be related to the emep changes I've made, but I don't think any of those PRs caused this issue on their own.

[heikoklein]

Thanks