Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Artificial groundwater circulation using well doublets can substantially mitigate heat accumulation around borehole heat-exchanger (BHE) arrays, even in geologically heterogeneous settings. We develop a single-platform MODFLOW 6 model that couples the Groundwater Flow and Groundwater Energy packages to simulate a nine-BHE array within a five-layer aquifer system and quantify the cooling benefit of an engineered injection–extraction pair under both confined and unconfined conditions. After a vertical discretization analysis, we adopt a mesh that resolves interlayer temperature structure and use it to assess circulation rates from 0 to 66~ m³\,d⁻¹ . Forced circulation lowers 10-year temperatures near the BHE array by as much as 8.7~^∘ C , with unconfined cases remaining slightly warmer than confined cases at equal rates. Furthermore, we examine the effect of heterogeneity on the efficiency of the well doublet heat-mitigation strategy. Groundwater circulation consistently reduces subsurface temperatures. Unresolved hydraulic-conductivity heterogeneity introduces uncertainty in groundwater temperature predictions, resulting in temperature variations of up to 4~^∘ C among realizations, while the ensemble-mean temperature differs from that of the corresponding homogeneous aquifer by approximately 1~^∘ C . Shorter hydraulic-conductivity correlation lengths yield lower average temperatures. These results provide process-based guidance: (i) high-resolution characterization of the geothermal site is important for the efficient design of geothermal energy systems; (ii) deploy well doublets and tune pumping–injection rates Q to advect heat away from the BHE array, recognizing diminishing returns at high rates; (iii) preferentially site BHE fields along high hydraulic conductivity pathways identified by site characterization; and (iv) account for partially saturated layers where relevant, as they modestly elevate groundwater temperatures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: