GenesisAeon
P112 · v1.0.1 · 2026-08-31
Multi Purpose Water Storage
multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
Can one basin do it all? Pit Thermal Energy Storage (Xiang et al. 2022, Vojens seasonal + Hoeje Taastrup weekly cycles), Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (Dutch deployment scale, 2800-3500+ systems), reservoir-supplied wetland environmental flow (Akbarichegeni & Yosefvand 2026, a modeling study), and navigation-weir/wetland connectivity (Hein et al. 2016's real Danube data, -68% floodplain loss vs pre-regulation) -- then honestly documents that no literature-demonstrated case integrates all of them in one structure. Deliberately includes a finding that complicates its own motivating question. No UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge. GenesisAeon P112.
Live von GitHub, Stand 11.09.2026, 20:51
Laienverständliche Fassung (Deutsch)
Paket-DOI
Keine eigene Paket-DOI in CITATION.cff oder .zenodo.json.
Quellen-DOIs
Literatur je Paket
A comprehensive review on pit thermal energy storage: Technical elements, numerical approaches and recent applications
Journal of Energy Storage, 2022
10.1016/j.est.2022.105716Multiobjective Optimization of the Operation of Multireservoir Systems With the Approach of Supplying the Environmental Flow of the Bakhtegan Wetland
Irrigation and Drainage, 2026
Current status and restoration options for floodplains along the Danube River
Science of the Total Environment, 2016
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.073
Schlagworte
Disclaimer
DISCLAIMER — Four Real Technologies, One Undemonstrated Combination, No Framework Bridge
Why no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge: not only because the cited literature
already provides the necessary quantitative structure -- a deliberate
choice. This project's highly speculative AFET/UTAC experiments must
never stand in the way of climate/ecology topics being accessible and
usable to people who don't work inside that construct and aren't
looking for renormalization groups. Real, checkable science, without
the burden of an unproven framework. See PACKAGE_REGISTRY.md's "Why
no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge in the climate/ecology series" (2026-08-31) in
the GenesisAeon workspace root for the full canonical note.Status: Real, independently verified science and real institutional monitoring data for four separate pieces; an honest, explicit non-finding for their combination. NO UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge.
What this is
Every academic citation was checked directly against the paper/DOI on 2026-08-16; the ATES deployment figures are aggregated from Dutch water-research institute monitoring (KWR, Deltares), not one peer-reviewed paper, and are labeled "documented tier" accordingly.
- **Xiang, Y., Xie, Z., Furbo, S., Wang, D., Gao, M., Fan, J.
- (2022)*, Journal of Energy Storage*, 55, 105716,
- DOI: 10.1016/j.est.2022.105716 — a real, comprehensive PTES review.
- Vojens and Høje Taastrup, Denmark — two real, operating PTES
- installations, cited via the Xiang et al. (2022) review and
- corroborated by independent secondary reporting (Danish district
- energy award documentation, IEA District Heating and Cooling
- program materials).
- Dutch ATES deployment — aggregated institutional monitoring
- figures (KWR Water Research Institute, Deltares), document
…
README
Technische Dokumentation (Englisch)
multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
GenesisAeon Package 112 — can one basin do it all? Grew out of a direct question during a conversation: if we build large artificial water basins (see glacier-buffer-replacement-utac, P100's AGBR reservoirs), could the same basins also generate power, store heat, and feed local wetlands and inland-waterway navigation channels? This package documents four real, independently quantified pieces of that question — then honestly documents what a dedicated search for a real INTEGRATED system actually found. Deliberately has no UTAC/CREP/AFET bridge — see DISCLAIMER.md.
For a plain-language explanation of the same topic (German, no jargon, written for general audiences), see WHITEPAPER.md.
Deliberately not one-sided
The navigation-weir module directly complicates the intuitive expectation that motivated this package: does_navigation_infrastructure_reconnect_wetlands_by_default() returns False — real, basin-wide Danube data shows navigation infrastructure disconnects wetlands by default (−68% floodplain extent vs. pre-regulation), not feeds them. And the closing module, is_integrated_system_literature_documented() (also False), is paired with absence_of_evidence_means_impossible() (also False) to make explicit that "not found in the literature" is a much weaker claim than "impossible."
What's real here
- Xiang, Xie, Furbo, Wang, Gao & Fan (2022, Journal of Energy
- Storage)* — a real Pit Thermal Energy Storage (PTES) review, plus
- two real Danish cases with different cycle durations: Vojens
- (200,000 m³, world's largest, operational since 2015, >50% solar
- fraction, a genuine seasonal cycle) vs. Høje Taastrup
- (70,000 m³, 3,300 MWh, 30 MW, operational since 2023, explicitly a
- weekly cycle — PTES cycle duration is a design choice, not an
- inherent property of the technology).
- Dutch ATES deployment (KWR Water Research Institute / Deltares
- monitoring data, documented tier) — the Netherlands has an
- estimated 2,800–3,500+ Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage systems,
- the large majority below 25°C; the first full-scale
- high-temperature system only came online in Middenmeer in 2021.
- ATES depends on suitable confined-aquifer geology — it does not
- transfer automatically to arbitrary (e.g. alpine) terrain.
- Akbarichegeni & Yosefvand (2026, Irrigation and Drainage)* — a
- real, peer-reviewed multiobjective-optimization study on
- re-operating reservoirs to supply environmental flow to the
- Bakhtegan wetland (Iran) — kept explicitly at the tier it supports:
- a real open research question with a proposed method, not a
- report of an already-implemented
…