Remote northern communities face major energy-transition challenges due to extreme climates, prolonged heating seasons, geographic isolation, dependence on imported fossil fuels, and limited energy infrastructure. Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) can address the mismatch between renewable heat availability and winter heating demand, but technology selection must account for environmental, geological, logistical, economic, and socio-technical constraints alongside conventional engineering performance. This review evaluates seven STES technologies using a northern-specific multidimensional framework integrating thermodynamic performance, technical maturity, economic performance, constructability and logistics, permafrost compatibility, and community implementation capacity. The framework operationalizes this assessment through non-compensable feasibility screening and TOPSIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis using a literature-informed technology-performance matrix, an equal-weight reference, two contrasting northern deployment archetypes, and weight- and score-sensitivity analyses. Results show that suitability depends on the interaction between technology characteristics and deployment context rather than engineering performance alone. Tank Thermal Energy Storage (TTES) exhibits the most robustly favourable profile across the evaluated scenarios and sensitivity analyses, whereas Pit Thermal Energy Storage (PTES), Borehole Thermal Energy Storage (BTES), and Rock Thermal Energy Storage (RTES) are more context dependent. Phase Change Material (PCM) and Thermochemical Energy Storage (TCES) offer high theoretical storage potential but remain limited by large-scale operational validation, while Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) is conditional on suitable hydrogeological conditions. The proposed framework shifts STES selection from performance-based ranking toward context-driven decision support, providing developers, utilities, engineering practitioners, and community decision-makers with a transparent and reproducible methodology for identifying robust candidates, context-sensitive alternatives, and critical deployment constraints before detailed site-specific assessment in northern Canada and other circumpolar regions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brahiti et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: