The weather station chosen by ecobee for my location doesn’t reflect the temperature and humidity recorded by my Tempest and ecowitt weather stations, which are pretty close to each other. While both are quite distinct (as much 5F) from temperature data reported by ecobee.
I export both of my weatherstations to Wunderground, and I’d be chuffed if there was some way to replace the weather stream in data from ecobee with the more accurate data from my PWS.
I agree and would welcome this, although I don’t know that beestat can affect ecobee’s sources. There are a lot of personal weather stations (I have one) that would probably provide better inputs.
But all the analysis that beestat does uses downloaded data.
So from a simplistic perspective, beestat could download data from ecobee and data from Wunderground, then discard weather information from the ecobee data set and substitute it using weather information from the wunderground data set, prior to performing the computational analyses that @ziebelje has programmed into beestat.
AFAIK, there is nothing computational done on ecobee’s servers for beestat.
The biggest issue I’ve always had with using third party data sources for weather data in beestat is that the cost to sync the data is not sustainable. If I did explore this, it would definitely require a subscription for beestat to cover the costs.
This would definitely be a worthwhile feature! I’ve had Ecobee support try every nearby station they can choose and it’s still wildly inaccurate (from 10-15° low to 10-15° high). It’s my biggest complaint about Ecobee thermostats and it negatively impacts the results in beestat.
What about having people provide their own Wunderground API key to avoid the extra cost? My RainMachine sprinkler controller and one or two other products already do that and it’s been working great. So long as the integration isn’t very chatty, it shouldn’t exceed the cap.