Upload
piers-peters
View
221
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Dr. Alan F. Hamlet
•JISAO/CSES Climate Impacts Group•Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of Washington
21st Century Water Management: The Myth of Climate Stationarity and Strategies for Water Resources Management in a Rapidly Evolving Climate
Climatological Foundation of U.S. Water Resources Planning and Management:
1) Risks are stationary in time.
2) Observed streamflow records are the best estimate of future variability.
3) Systems and operational paradigms that are robust to past variability are robust to future variability.
Observed Streamflows
Planning Models
System Drivers
Schematic of a Typical Water Planning Framework
y = -22.831x + 214682
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
35000017
50
1775
1800
1825
1850
1875
1900
1925
1950
1975
Flo
w (
cfs)
Observed AnnualStreamflow
Observed 5 yr mean
Reconstructed AnnualStreamflow
Linear (ReconstructedAnnual Streamflow)
Annual streamflow reconstructions at The Dalles, ORusing tree ring growth indices derived from douglas-fir
and limber pine from SE British Columbia - Kamloops to Banff/Jasper (1750-1964)
Columbia Basin Planning Window
Trends in Annual Streamflow at The Dalles from 1858-1998 are strongly downward.
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
1858
1868
1878
1888
1898
1908
1918
1928
1938
1948
1958
1968
1978
1988
1998
An
nu
al M
ean
Flo
w (
cfs)
Annual
5 yr mean
10 yr mean
Linear (Annual)
Relative to the gage record today, flows in the early 20th century appear to be unusually high. How unusual is this period in a longer-term context?
16.4 MAF was considered a conservative estimate at the time of the Compact. However, the average annual flow over the 20th century has been only 15 MAF.
(Figure Courtesy Connie Woodhouse)
“…the timing of the drafting of the Compact was an unfortunate event, in that it did not occur during a representative flow period.”
“The general picture of a collision between water demand and supply in the UCRB in the not-too-distant future is all too apparent.” Stockton and Jacoby 1976
Tree rings placed the gage record in a long-term context
Stockton and Jacoby 1976
Colorado River flow, reconstructed by Stockton and Jacoby, 1976
(Figure Courtesy Connie Woodhouse)
Despite a general awareness of these issues in the water planning community, there is growing evidence that future climate variability will not look like the past and that current planning activities, which frequently use a limited observed streamflow record to represent climate variability, are in danger of repeating the same kind of mistakes made more than 80 years ago in forging the Colorado River Compact.
Long-term planning and specific agreements influenced by this planning (such as long-term water allocation agreements) should be informed by the best and most complete climate information available, but frequently they are not.
What’s the Problem?
Image Credit: National Snow and Ice Data Center, W. O. Field, B. F. Molniahttp://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/special_high_res.html
Aug, 13, 1941 Aug, 31, 2004
The Myth of Stationarity Meets the Death of Stationarity
Muir Glacier in Alaska
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
oct nov dec jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep
Sim
ula
ted
Bas
in A
vg R
un
off
(m
m)
1950
plus2c
Simulated Changes in Natural Runoff Timing in the Naches River Basin Associated with 2 C Warming
Impacts:•Increased winter flow•Earlier and reduced peak flows•Reduced summer flow volume•Reduced late summer low flow
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
419
16
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
Std
An
om
alie
s R
elat
ive
to 1
961-
1990
PNW
CA
CRB
GB
Regionally Averaged Cool Season Precipitation Anomalies
PRECIP
April 1 SWE (mm)
20th Century Climate “2040s” (+1.7 C) “2060s” (+ 2.25 C)
-3.6% -11.5%
Changes in Simulated April 1 Snowpack for the Canadian and U.S. portions of the Columbia River basin(% change relative to current climate)
-21.4% -34.8%
Rebalancing Water Systems in Response to Climate Change
Some Conflicting Objectives Likely to be Impacted by Climate Change:
•Hydropower and water supply vs. flood control
•Hydropower and water supply vs. instream flow and ecosystem services.
•Interstate and international transboundary agreements
Flood Control vs. Refill
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Oct
Nov
Dec Ja
n
Feb
Mar Ap
r
May Ju
n Jul
Aug
Sep
Stor
age
Full0
10002000300040005000600070008000
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar Apr
May Ju
n Jul
Aug
Sep
Rese
rvoi
r Inf
low
: Current Climate
Flood Control vs. RefillStreamflow timing shifts can reduce the reliability of reservoir refill
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Oct
Nov
Dec Ja
n
Feb
Mar Ap
r
May Ju
n Jul
Aug
Sep
Stor
age
Full
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Oct
Nov
Dec Ja
nFe
b
Mar
Apr
May Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Res
ervo
ir In
flow
: Current Climate
+ 2.25 oC
: + 2.25 oC No adaptation
Flood Control vs. RefillStreamflow timing shifts can reduce the reliability of reservoir refill
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
Oct
Nov
Dec Ja
n
Feb
Mar Ap
r
May Ju
n Jul
Aug
Sep
Stor
age
Full
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Oct
No
v
De
c
Jan
Fe
b
Ma
r
Ap
r
Ma
y
Jun
Jul
Au
g
Se
p
Re
serv
oir
Inflo
w
: Current Climate
: + 2.25 oC plus adaption
+ 2.25 oC
: + 2.25 oC No adaption
Major U.S. Flood Control Checkpoints
The Dalles
Columbia Falls
Bonners Ferry
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
Arr
ow
Gra
nd
Co
ule
e
Dw
ors
ha
k
Hu
ng
ryH
ors
e
Mic
a
Lib
by
Du
nca
n
July
31
Ave
rag
e S
tora
ge
De
ficit
(KA
F)
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Flo
w a
t The
Dal
les
(kcf
s)
Storage Deficits
Flood Risks
Climate Change/Optimized
Climate Change/Optimized
Climate Change/No Adaptation
Climate Change/No Adaptation
Optimization Reduces Storage Deficits without Jeopardizing Flood Protection
Source: Lee et al. , 2008, Optimized Flood Control in the Columbia River Basin for a Global Warming Scenario, ASCE Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
20th CenturyCurrent Practice
Adaptation Strategies
Overview of Water Resources Adaptation Challenges:
•Hydroclimatology
•Systems Engineering and Water Resources Engineering Design
•Institutional Considerations
•Politics
•Anticipate changes. Accept that the future climate will be substantially different than the past.
•Use scenario based planning to evaluate options rather than the historic record.
•Expect surprises and plan for flexibility and robustness in the face of uncertain changes rather than counting on one approach.
•Plan for the long haul. Where possible, make adaptive responses and agreements “self tending” to avoid repetitive costs of intervention as impacts increase over time.
Approaches to Adaptation and Planning
Observed Streamflows
Climate Change Scenarios
Planning Models
Altered Streamflows
System Drivers
Schematic of Climate Change Water Planning Framework
•Improved Streamflow Forecasts Incorporating Warming and Other Features of Altered Climate System
•Dynamic Reservoir Operating Systems Using Optimization or Hybrid Optimization/Simulation Approaches to Rebalance the Management System.
Example of a Flexible, Self-Tending Reservoir Operating System
•Such systems are more flexible and adaptable because they do not require a “trigger” for a change in the operating policies, and arguably do not require as much intervention as the climate system gradually changes, because the system responds autonomously to improvements in forecasts (whether related to climate change or other scientific advances)
•These ideas are not really new:
Harvard Water Program ~1965