Groundwater, geothermal modelling and monitoring at city-scale : reviewing European practice and knowledge exchange : TU1206 COST sub-urban WG2 report

The need for cities to make more effective use of the subsurface on which they stand, is increasingly being recognised in Europe and further afield to be essential for future cities to be sustainable and more resilient [1,2]. However, city planning worldwide remains largely 2D, with very few cities having any substantial subsurface planning or Masterplans – the cities of Helsinki, Montreal, Singapore being rare exceptions [3,4]. The consequences of inadequate consideration and planning of the subsurface are far-reaching, in economic, environmental and social terms. Across Europe, poor understanding of ground conditions is recognised as the largest single cause of construction project delay and overspends [5]. Management of urban groundwater and shallow geothermal energy resources is becoming increasingly important as cities are increasingly looking to use these resources to meet current and future energy and heating and water needs. Whilst these are, alongside potential underground building space, the two most important resources for future cities, the monitoring and regulation of these resource is widely variable across Europe.
\nFor subsurface opportunities such as groundwater and geothermal energy to be realised and utilised to greatest effect to support growing city populations and infrastructure, city planners must be both aware of, and have some understanding of the resources, available data and research, and both the opportunities and risks which the resources provide to city development [6,7]. To supply this understanding to city municipalities and others, geological surveys must have robust datasets of groundwater and geothermal resources at city-scale, and the relevant knowledge and understanding from these data must be made accessible to inform subsurface planning in appropriate datasets relevant to different scale of interest in different planning stages. What density and frequency of data are required for a robust understanding of a city’s groundwater and geothermal resources will be different in different cities, according to the complexity of the resources, and the intensity of subsurface use and demands on the resources. Indeed, no one design of city-scale monitoring or modelling of ground-water and -heat resources is appropriate for all cities, or for all monitoring objectives. However, the guiding principles of good practice for developing robust city-scale monitoring, and datasets are widely applicable, as are the key principles for ensuring these data inform city planning processes.
\nThis report provides an initial review of existing examples of current practices in Europe with respect to groundwater and geothermal monitoring and modelling, as a resource for other cities to learn from and build upon. The report also provides an overview of some of the different practices used for communicating groundwater and geothermal energy data and knowledge to inform urban planning and management

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.