Standardizing config/mapping files

[abhishek0208]

No description provided.

[maartenbrinkerink]

I reopened this issue as I think that some discussion related to this is merited. Our workflow has expanded quite drastically in the last few years including the addition of custom user configurations. At the same time we still have 1) hardcoded entries in some scripts and 2) 'hidden' config files where e.g. technology names from PLEXOS-World are grouped into technologies with OG naming conventions or where the parameters for certain scripts are defined (e.g. for demand projections).

Just wanted to check how we want to approach this going forward. E.g. with the integration of the GEM data and GESDB storage data we will have to aggregate technologies once again. Should this be done in the config file or in individual csv files? The single config file we have right now is getting rather bulky. Happy to hear your thoughts @abhishek0208 @tniet @trevorb1 @SimoneOseiOwusu

[maartenbrinkerink]

This also relates to a user request as posed in #185.

[maartenbrinkerink]

Conversations as mentioned in #210 and #203 (specifically c605a94) are relevant here.