Metadata-Version: 2.5
Name: multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
Version: 1.0.0
Summary: Can one basin do it all? Pit Thermal Energy Storage (Xiang et al. 2022, Vojens seasonal + Hoeje Taastrup weekly), Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (Dutch deployment scale), reservoir-supplied wetland environmental flow (Akbarichegeni & Yosefvand 2026), and navigation-weir/wetland connectivity (Hein et al. 2016's real Danube data, -68% floodplain loss) -- then honestly documents that no literature-demonstrated case integrates all of them in one structure, no UTAC/CREP bridge
Project-URL: Homepage, https://github.com/GenesisAeon/multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
Project-URL: Repository, https://github.com/GenesisAeon/multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
Author: Römer, Johann
License: MIT
License-File: LICENSE
Requires-Python: >=3.11
Provides-Extra: dev
Requires-Dist: mypy>=1.10.0; extra == 'dev'
Requires-Dist: pre-commit>=3.7.0; extra == 'dev'
Requires-Dist: pytest-cov>=5.0.0; extra == 'dev'
Requires-Dist: pytest>=8.0.0; extra == 'dev'
Requires-Dist: ruff>=0.6.0; extra == 'dev'
Description-Content-Type: text/markdown

# 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](https://github.com/GenesisAeon/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](DISCLAIMER.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, measured outcome.
- **Hein, Schwarz, Habersack, Nichersu, Preiner, Willby & Weigelhofer
  (2016, *Science of the Total Environment*)** — the honesty-check
  citation, directly answering the inland-waterway question: Danube
  floodplain extent is down **68%** versus the pre-regulation
  baseline, driven by navigation/hydropower/flood-protection
  infrastructure — though 8,102 km² is independently assessed as
  having restoration potential (75% high-potential), achievable only
  via deliberate retrofitting, not as an automatic byproduct.

## Quickstart

```bash
pip install multi-purpose-water-storage-utac
```

```python
from multi_purpose_water_storage_utac import (
    VOJENS, HOEJE_TAASTRUP, is_seasonal,
    NETHERLANDS_ATES, is_site_agnostic,
    is_modeling_study_not_implemented_case,
    DANUBE_FLOODPLAIN_STATUS, does_navigation_infrastructure_reconnect_wetlands_by_default,
    is_integrated_system_literature_documented, absence_of_evidence_means_impossible,
)

print(is_seasonal(VOJENS))            # True
print(is_seasonal(HOEJE_TAASTRUP))    # False
print(NETHERLANDS_ATES.system_count_low)  # 2800
print(is_site_agnostic())             # False
print(is_modeling_study_not_implemented_case())  # True
print(DANUBE_FLOODPLAIN_STATUS.loss_pct_vs_pre_regulation)  # 68.0
print(does_navigation_infrastructure_reconnect_wetlands_by_default())  # False
print(is_integrated_system_literature_documented())  # False
print(absence_of_evidence_means_impossible())         # False
```

## Development

```bash
pip install -e ".[dev]"
pre-commit install
ruff check src tests
mypy src
pytest
```

## Citation

See [CITATION.cff](CITATION.cff) and [.zenodo.json](.zenodo.json).
