Update conda environment

[patrickbrown4]

Summary

This PR updates the conda environment to use new features in gdxpds and geopandas. The main changes are:

• python: 3.11 -> 3.14
• pandas: 2.0 -> 3.0
• gdxpds: 1.4 -> 4.0
  • uses gams.transfer
• geopandas: 0.14 -> 1.1
  • Enables the use of .simplify_coverage(), which speeds up all the geospatial analysis and plotting (which has been slow since Update interzonal transmission costs/distances and use directly calculated values #95, especially in compare_cases.py)

Thanks a lot to @mmowers for taking care of the bokeh update!

Technical details

Implementation notes

Almost all of the code changes are related to pandas 3. The main things to look out for in new code are:

• .groupby() no longer accepts an axis argument, so all the uses of df.groupby(axis=1).something() are now df.T.groupby().something().T
• .fillna(method='ffill') (and analogous) is now just .ffill()
• Type checking in series and dataframes is generally more strict

Additional changes

While working on debugging calc_financial_inputs.py, I simplified the inputs/financials/financials_tech_*.csv files by removing the country column and non-USA entries. They weren't complete anyway, and Canada/Mexico haven't worked since I've been here, so since it simplifies the process for adding new techs, I've kept the change even though it might not actually be required.

Validation, testing, and comparison report(s)

Changes for USA_default are nonzero but quite small: results-v20260708_mainK0_USA_defaults,v20260708_envK0_USA_defaults.pptx

I'll go through the rest of these before merging:

• bokehpivot
• helper scripts
• postprocessing scripts
  • compare_cases.py
  • input_plots.py
  • run_reeds2pras.py
  • single_case_plots.py
  • (I didn't test the ones that are less commonly used)
• hourlize
• reeds_to_rev.py (currently broken; will be addressed by Updates to reeds_to_rev and land_use_analysis #6)
• preprocessing scripts
  • casemaker.py
  • get_case_periods.py
• cases_test.csv
  • Mid_Case
  • USA_decarb
  • USA_defaults
  • Interday_storage
  • MonteCarlo_LHS_MC0001
  • MonteCarlo_LHS_MC0002
  • MonteCarlo_Random_MC0001
  • MonteCarlo_Random_MC0002
  • OR_water
  • Pacific
  • Pacific_2020
  • Pacific_CC
  • Pacific_DR
  • Pacific_LoadSite95
  • Pacific_MGA
  • Pacific_rep15
  • Pacific_weks
  • R2P
  • USA_faster
  • NYVT_mixed
  • PJM_county_CC
  • Pacific_full_year
  • USA_fast
  • Everything
  • MARICTNYNJPAOH_Offshore
  • Simple
  • WECC_county: Fails on both
  • WY_county
• github runner

Checklist for author

Details to double-check

• Charge code provided to reviewers
• Included comparison reports for appropriate test cases
• Code formatting standardized
• Reusable functions used where possible instead of copy/pasted code

General information to guide review

• Zero impact on results of default case
• No large data file(s) added/modified
• No substantive impact on runtime for full-US reference case
• No substantive impact on folder size for full-US reference case
• No change to process flow (runreeds.py, reeds/core/solve/solve.py)
• No change to code organization
• No change to package requirements (environment.yml or Project.toml)

Did you use LLM tools (chatbot or copilot) in the preparation of this PR? If so, describe how

No

[patrickbrown4]

In the end these changes probably weren't necessary, but they were helpful for debugging (and make future updates very slightly easier), so I left them - let me know if you think they should be reverted

[patrickbrown4]

Most minimal way to keep Simple working and maintain the original intent (since ReEDS2PRAS doesn't work for single-zone systems)

[pesap]

Posted environment dependency review comments.

[pesap]

The docs dependency pins here differ pretty significantly from .github/workflows/build-docs.yaml (myst-parser=5.1 / sphinx<9 here vs. myst-parser==2.0.0 / sphinx==7.2.6 in CI). Can we align these so local docs builds and CI use the same dependency set? Otherwise docs may pass locally but fail in CI, or vice versa.

[patrickbrown4]

Do you have a preference on which set of versions to use, these or the ones in build-docs.yaml? For these updates, my process is:

• Remove all the version locks from environment.yml and build the environment
• Get the resulting major.minor versions with conda list and add them back in to environment.yml

I'm not attached to a particular version of sphinx or myst, so happy to do whatever you or @kennedy-mindermann recommend.

[pesap]

I think my preference is that the environment.yml is the source of truth. But not a blocker IMO as long as we sync them.