General metadata updates based on internal metadata review

[dt-woods]

A series of metadata improvements including, but not limited to:

• Fix data source reference from NETL (2025) (too ambiguous) to ElectricityLCI (2025) (to match the source)
• Fix 'NREL' to 'NLR'
• Add system boundary to LCI method (e.g., "Attributional, gate-to-gate" for most processes).
• Create separate Sources for 2019 NG model report and the 2024 NG model report (depending on user selection)
• Create separate sections in process_metadata.yml for upstream renewables (e.g., for 2016, construction and O&M for solar PV, solar thermal and wind are together; in 2020, these are separate processes).
• Double-check nuclear power upstream process includes O&M in system boundary. O&M is listed in the metadata, but it should probably be just upstream processes and construction.
• Correct the time period of generation processes (fuel, regional mix, consumption mixes) to be just their EIA generation or trading year (exceptions for geothermal, hydro, and nuclear). Add time descriptions to accompany these start/end dates (e.g., "Based on EIA data").
• Incorporate 'Description' field from process_metadata.yml in generation and consumption mix processes
• Update description fields for all processes to follow general template (e.g., high-level summary, functional unit, co-products, default co-product approach, data source, and intended application).
• Add temporal description

[dt-woods]

The plan is to follow suit of KeyLogicLCA@065a484 to create new subkeys for coal and renewables to parse their metadata fields within process_description_creation and process_doc_creation methods in process_metadata.yml.

I also plan to (re-)introduce the time description field somewhere; currently skipped (set to None in OLCA_TO_METADATA dict).

[dt-woods]

@m-jamieson, moving into v2.1 and beyond our boilerplate project description (copied below) is a little outdated:

US EPA contribution to this research was conducted as part of the USEPA Air, Climate, and Energy national research program. US DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory contribution to this research was prepared by MESA for the US DOE NETL, under DOE NETL Contract Number DE-FE0025912. Support was provided by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory through interagency agreement DW-89-92448301-1, by Eastern Research Group (ERG) through USEPA contract EP-C-16-015, task order 008, and by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) through contract numbers DE-FE0025912 and 23CFE000075.

Considering the following as revised language:

This project Current project development is funded by the Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory (DOE/NETL) under the SA Contract (89243323CFE000075). Support for this project is provided by Eastern Research Group (ERG). Previous releases of this model were development was supported by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) under the USEPA Air, Climate, and Energy national research program and by the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NREL).

Thoughts?

[m-jamieson]

This is probably nitpicking, but I read the EPA and NREL contributions as no longer applicable - that their contributions exist only in previous releases I guess. Maybe we could shift from "This project is funded" to "Current project development is funded" and then "Previous development was supported by USEPA...and NREL"? Just trying to convey the reality that significant portions of code and data are still being used, but maybe that's not needed in the world of software development.

Other than that, I agree with the need for an update and the direction so far.