ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON WATER RESOURCES: THREE WESTERN U.S. CASE STUDIES - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON WATER RESOURCES: THREE WESTERN U.S. CASE STUDIES PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 1e37aa-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON WATER RESOURCES: THREE WESTERN U.S. CASE STUDIES

Description:

... derived from Penn State State STATSGO in the U.S., FAO global soil map elsewhere. ... Putuligayuk River, Alaska. 2000 = wet = dry. a. b. c. d. e. Simulated ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:56
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 78
Provided by: SurfaceWat
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON WATER RESOURCES: THREE WESTERN U.S. CASE STUDIES


1
ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON
WATER RESOURCES THREE WESTERN U.S. CASE
STUDIES
  • Civil and Environmental Engineering
  • (CEE 500) Seminar
  • October 10, 2002

2
Outline of this talk
  • 1) Summary of ongoing research in my group
  • 2) Climate variability and change context
  • Prediction and assessment approach
  • Accelerated Climate Prediction Initiative (ACPI)
  • 5) Results and comparative analysis for
    Columbia, Sacramento-San Joaquin, and Colorado
    River basins

3
1) Summary of ongoing research
  1. Model development and updates catchment scale
    (DHSVM) and macroscale (VIC)
  2. Remote sensing applications to hydrology (MODIS,
    GPM, RADARSAT, Scatterometer
  3. LDAS and global modeling
  4. Arctic hydrology
  5. Sediment and temperature modeling

4
Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC) Macroscale
Hydrology Model
5
Distributed Hydrology-Soil-Vegetation Model
(DHSVM)
6
Snow Cover in the Missouri River Basin Remote
Sensing Estimates
  • MODIS images since early 2000
  • NOHRSC current operational product
  • Recent study shows improvement

7
Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM)
8
RadarSATSAR ground truth data
9
Number of days below 0 C, from QuikSCAT and
gridded observations
10
Land Data Assimilation System (LDAS)
Retrospective Derived Surface Data, 1950-2000
  • VIC model implemented for 15 sub-regions, with
    consistent forcings.
  • Surface forcing data
  • Daily precipitation maximum and minimum
    temperatures (from gauge measurements)
  • Radiation, humidity parameterized from Tmax and
    Tmin
  • Wind (from NCEP/NCAR reanalysis)
  • Soil parameters derived from Penn State State
    STATSGO in the U.S., FAO global soil map
    elsewhere.
  • Vegetation coverage from the University of
    Maryland 1-km Global Land Cover product (derived
    from AVHRR)

11
Validation with Observed Runoff
Hydrographs of routed runoff show good
correspondence with observed and naturalized
flows.
12
Mean Normalized Observed and Simulated Soil
Moisture
Central Eurasia, 1980-1985
13
Global Precipitation (1/2 degree) Gridded Catch
Ratios
Catch Ratio ()
14
Adjustment Effects
  • Global Mean Annual Increase of 11.2

Wind-Induced Snow
All Adjustments
Undercatch
Wetting Losses
Wind-Induced Rain Undercatch
15
Blowing Snow
Günter Eisenhardt 3.31.2002, Iceland
16
Non-Equilibrium Transport
snow
17
Saturated extent 1999 and 2000Putuligayuk River,
Alaska
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
18
Simulated 10 year maximumstream temperatures
  • Wenatchee River 5th field watersheds
  • Current conditions

Temperatures in degrees Celsius
19
  • Slope stability analysis for Icicle Creek basin
  • analysis assumes steady state rainfall
  • implemented version will use dynamic soil
    moistures

20
2) Climate variability and change context
21
Humans are altering atmospheric composition
22
The earth is warming -- abruptly
23
Natural Climate Influence
Human Climate Influence
All Climate Influences
24
(No Transcript)
25
Temperature trends in the PNW over the
instrumental record
  • Almost every station shows warming (filled
    circles)
  • Urbanization not a major source of warming

26
Trends in timing of spring snowmelt (1948-2000)
20d later 20d earlier
Courtesy of Mike Dettinger, Iris Stewart, Dan
Cayan
27
Trends in snowpack
28
(No Transcript)
29
3) Prediction and assessment approach
30
Climate Scenarios
Performance Measures
Downscaling
Global climate simulations, next 100 yrs
Delta Precip, Temp
Reliability of System Objectives
Reservoir Model
Hydrologic Model (VIC)
DamReleases, Regulated Streamflow
Natural Streamflow
31

Coupled Land-Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation
Model
Reservoir Model
Hydrology Model
32
Bias Correction and Downscaling Approach
  • climate model scenario
  • meteorological outputs

? hydrologic model inputs
  • snowpack
  • runoff
  • streamflow
  • 2.8 (T42)/0.5 degree resolution
  • monthly total P, avg. T
  • 1/8-1/4 degree resolution
  • daily P, Tmin, Tmax

33
Bias Correction
Note future scenario temperature trend (relative
to control run) removed before, and replaced
after, bias-correction step.
34
Downscaling
35
(No Transcript)
36
Overview of ColSim Reservoir Model
Reservoir Operating Policies
Reservoir Storage Regulated Streamflow Flood
Control Energy Production Irrigation
Consumption Streamflow Augmentation
Physical System of Dams and Reservoirs
Streamflow Time Series
37
Dam Operations in ColSim
Storage Dams
Virgin
Regulated
Run-of-River Dams
Flow InFlow out Energy
H
38
  • Storage Reservoirs
  • Releases Depend on
  • Storage and Inflow
  • Rule Curves (streamflow forecasts)
  • Flood Control Requirements
  • Energy Requirements
  • Minimum Flow Requirements
  • System Flow Requirements

Inflow
ColSim
Consumptive use
Inflow
Inflow
Consumptive use
Inflow
Inflow
Inflow

Inflow
Run of River Reservoirs (inflowoutflow
energy)
System Checkpoint
39
  1. Accelerated Climate Prediction Initiative (ACPI)

40
Accelerated Climate Prediction Initiative (ACPI)
NCAR/DOE Parallel Climate Model (PCM) grid over
western U.S.
41
Climate Change Scenarios
PCM Simulations ( 3 degrees lat-long)
Historical B06.22 (greenhouse CO2aerosols
forcing) 1870-2000 Climate Control
B06.45 (CO2aerosols at 1995 levels) 1995-2048
Climate Change B06.44 (BAU6, future
scenario forcing) 1995-2099 Climate Change
B06.46 (BAU6, future scenario forcing)
1995-2099 Climate Change B06.47 (BAU6,
future scenario forcing) 1995-2099
PNNL Regional Climate Model (RCM) Simulations (
¾ degree lat-long)
Climate Control B06.45 derived-subset
1995-2015 Climate Change B06.44
derived-subset 2040-2060
42
Future streamflows
  • 3 ensembles averaged
  • summarized into 3 periods
  • Period 1 2010 - 2039
  • Period 2 2040 - 2070
  • Period 3 2070 - 2098

43
Regional Climate Model (RCM) grid and hydrologic
model domains
44
ACPI PCM-climate change scenarios, historic
simulation v air temperature observations
45
ACPI PCM-climate change scenarios, historic
simulation v precipitation observations
46
Results Columbia River basin
47
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Columbia River
Basin (Basin Averages)
48
RCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Columbia
River Basin (Basin Averages)
PCM BAU B06.44
RCM BAU B06.44
control (2000-2048)
historical (1950-99)
49
PCM Business-as-Usual Scenarios Snowpack
Changes Columbia River Basin April 1 SWE
50
PCM Business-As-Usual Mean Monthly Hydrographs
Columbia River Basin _at_ The Dalles, OR
1 month 12
1 month 12
51
CRB Operation Alternative 1 (early refill)
52
CRB Operation Alternative 2 (reduce flood storage
by 20)
53
(No Transcript)
54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
Results -- California
57
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios California
(Basin Average)
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
58
PCM Business-as-Usual Scenarios Snowpack
Changes California April 1 SWE
59
PCM Business-As-Usual Mean Monthly Hydrographs
Shasta Reservoir Inflows
60
Sacramento River Basin
Trinity River
Clear Creek
Feather River
Sacramento River
American River
Folsom
Delta
61
Delta San Joaquin R Basin
Mokelumne River
Pardee Camanche
Delta Outflow
Delta
Calaveras River
New Hogan
Stanislaus River
San Luis
San Joaquin River
New Melones
Dam Power Plant River/Canal Transfer
Tuolumne Merced Rivers
New Don Pedro McClure
62
Current Climate vs. Projected Climate
  • Storage Decreases
  • Sacramento
  • Range 5 - 10
  • Mean 8
  • San Joaquin
  • Range 7 - 14
  • Mean 11

63
Current Climate vs. Projected Climate
  • Hydropower Losses
  • Central Valley
  • Range 3 - 18
  • Mean 9
  • Sacramento System
  • Range 3 19
  • Mean 9
  • San Joaquin System
  • Range 16 63
  • Mean 28

64
Results Colorado River basin
65
PCM Business-as-Usual scenarios Colorado (B
asin Average)
BAU 3-run average
historical (1950-99)
control (2000-2048)
66
Temperature Timeseries
PCM Colorado R. Basin Projected Climate
Annual AveragePrecipitation
ctrl. avg.
hist. avg.
Period 1 2010-2039Period 2 2040-2069Period
3 2070-2098
67
Natural Flow at Lee Ferry, AZ
allocated20.3 BCM
Currently used 16.3 BCM
68
Annual Average Hydrograph
Simulated Historic (1950-1999) Period 1
(2010-2039)Control (static 1995 climate) Period
2 (2040-2069) Period 3 (2070-2098)
69
Projected Spatial Change in Runoff
70
CRRM Validation
71
CRRM
  • Historic Inflows to Validate
  • Projected Inflows to assess future performance of
    system
  • Monthly timestep
  • Basin storage aggregated into 4 storage
    reservoirs
  • Lake Powell and Lake Mead have 85 of basin
    storage
  • Reservoir evaporation f(reservoir surface area,
    mean monthly temperature)
  • Hydropower f(release, reservoir elevation)

Storage ReservoirsRun of River Reservoirs
72
Total Basin Storage
73
Releases to the Lower Basin
74
Releases to Mexico
75
Hydropower Production
76
Uncontrolled Spills
77
Comparative analysis
  • 1) Columbia River reservoir system primarily
    provides within-year storage (total storage/mean
    flow 0.3). California is intermediate ( 0.3),
    Colorado is an over-year system (4)
  • 2) Climate sensitivities in Columbia basin are
    dominated by seasonality shifts in streamflow,
    and may even be beneficial for hydropower.
    However, fish flow targets would be difficult to
    meet under altered climate, and mitigation by
    altered operation is essentially impossible.
  • 3) California system operation is dominated by
    water supply (mostly ag), reliability of which
    would be reduced significantly by a combination
    of seaonality shifts and reduced (annual)
    volumes. Partial mitigation by altered
    operations is possible, but complicated by flood
    issues.
  • 4) Colorado system is sensitive primarily to
    annual streamflow volumes. Low runoff ratio
    makes the system highly sensitive to modest
    changes in precipitation (in winter, esp, in
    headwaters). Sensitivity to altered operations
    is modest, and mitigation possibilities by
    increased storage are nil (even if otherwise
    feasible).
About PowerShow.com