Upload
cher
View
37
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
EGU2012-12951 Updating of states in operational hydrological models. Oddbjørn Bruland ( Statkraft Energy) S. Kolberg, K. Engeland, L. Tøfte (SINTEF) A. S. Gragne and K. Alfredsen (Norwegian University of Technology and Science) G. Liston (University of Colorado). Statkraft…. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
EGU2012-12951
Updating of states in operational hydrological models
Oddbjørn Bruland (Statkraft Energy)
S. Kolberg, K. Engeland, L. Tøfte (SINTEF) A. S. Gragne and K. Alfredsen (Norwegian University of Technology and Science) G. Liston (University of Colorado)
Statkraft….
side 2EGU 2012
… a European leader in renewable energy
Hydropower and Hydrology
How important is hydrology to a hydropower producer?
side 3
Importance….
NO1
64 HBV-models within the NO1 area
Precipitation data
98 Precipitation gaugeswithin the NO1 area- provide input to the HBV-models
Precipitation at Vågsli; summer 2008
• 130% of normal precipitation
• is input to 18 HBV-models• Surrounding gauges
showed 80-90% of normal
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
01.09
.07
21.10
.07
10.12
.07
29.01
.08
19.03
.08
08.05
.08
27.06
.08
16.08
.08
Ener
gy (G
Wh)
Snow Accumulation
Normal 1931-2006
Normal 1980-200014000 GWh
Snow surveys
Snow storage NO1Week 36/2007 – 16/2008 (as simulated by HBV models)
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
3000 GWh
How did we act?
Forecast:Very high risk of flooding
0 %
25 %
50 %
75 %
100 %
Byr
te
Lio
Hau
keli
Lang
ese
Bjo
rdal
svat
n
Mår
vatn
Kal
hovd
Mår
Stå
vatn
Kje
lava
tn
Førs
vatn
Bitd
alsv
atn
Son
ga
Vin
je
Tokk
e
Ban
dak
Prob
abili
ty o
f flo
odin
g
How did we act?
Forecast:Very high risk of flooding
Price forecasts indicated price=0
0 %
25 %
50 %
75 %
100 %
Byr
te
Lio
Hau
keli
Lang
ese
Bjo
rdal
svat
n
Mår
vatn
Kal
hovd
Mår
Stå
vatn
Kje
lava
tn
Førs
vatn
Bitd
alsv
atn
Son
ga
Vin
je
Tokk
e
Ban
dak
Prob
abili
ty o
f flo
odin
g
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51
Week no. /2008
EUR/
MW
h
Mean 0% 10% 25% 75% 90% 100%
How did we act?
Forecast:Very high risk of flooding
Price forecasts indicated price=0
=> High production at low prices to reduce risk of flooding
0 %
25 %
50 %
75 %
100 %
Byr
te
Lio
Hau
keli
Lang
ese
Bjo
rdal
svat
n
Mår
vatn
Kal
hovd
Mår
Stå
vatn
Kje
lava
tn
Førs
vatn
Bitd
alsv
atn
Son
ga
Vin
je
Tokk
e
Ban
dak
Prob
abili
ty o
f flo
odin
g
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51
Week no. /2008
EUR/
MW
h
Mean 0% 10% 25% 75% 90% 100%
-120,0
-100,0
-80,0
-60,0
-40,0
-20,0
0,0
Tokk
e
Sim
a
Sira
Kvi
na
Ulla
Før
re
Mår
Bjø
lvo
Leird
øla
Mill
Nok
Summary – economicalSpill from reservoir
Estimated loss of income: ≈ 270 mill NOK (i.e. 45 mUSD or 30 mEUR)
… in Statkraft alone..
side 12
Observations and Met ForecastsEstablished models for hydrological state and forecasting
Hydropower and Hydrology
How do the Hydropower companies apply hydrological information?
For short term production planningOptimizing use of water at the horizon of 5 to 10 daysDaily updating and replanning
side 13
How do the Hydropower companies apply hydrological information?
For short term production planningOptimizing use of water at the horizon of 5 to 10 daysDaily updating and replanning
For Long term planning of water disposalOptimizing the use of water at a seasonal horizonWeekly updating and replanning
Hydropower and Hydrology
side 14
Short vs Long Term planning
Short termProfile and timing is more important than volume
side 15
Short vs Long Term planning
Long termVolume is more important than profile and timing
side 16
Short vs Long Term planning
Short termProfile and timing is more important than volume
Long termVolume is more important than profile and timing
Different Updating approach
side 17
Updating for Short term forecast
Timing, level and tendency in focusShort time storages must be right
side 18
Updating for Long term forecast
Volume and duration in focusSnowstorage is important, relative to normalClimate adjusted climatology
side 24
How do we approach these issues
The project was established in 2009 as a cooperation between all larger hydropower producers in Norway, SINTEF, NTNU, Powel and Liston and the Norwegian Research Council.
With the goal to develop, improve and implement model updating methods and techniques in operational models
side 27side 27 Fordelt hydrologiskmodell
side 28
Project Outline
Developing and implementing updating methods based on available sources of information
Runoff, snow cover, snow measurements
Combined withObservation uncertaintyModel uncertaintyAnd a combination of these
”An open source distributed model system”
What is done…
Using snow distribution model combined with snowobservations – Liston
Using Bayesian statistics weighing model state against satelite observation - Sintef
Using particle filtering to benefit from recent information – Sintef
Using errordetection to detect and explain and correct the model in spesific situations - NTNU
side 29EGU 2012
Snow storage updating 1
Liston’s SnowTran3D snow distribution model is implemented in the model system
Using information from snowcourses to update snowdistribution in simulated snowdistribution from Listons model
side 30
Data averaged over the snow
observation mask.Precipitation
correction factor ~ 0.75.
614 mm SWE on 21 April 2008
Snow storage updating 2
Based on modeled snowdistribution, an predefined (apriori) snowdepletion curve, modelled snow melt progress and snow cover information from satelite images
Methodology based on Bayesian statistics by Sjur Kolberg, SINTEF, has shown promising results and is a candidate for implementation in the model system.
side 31
0 200 400
0 0.5 1 1.50 250 500
E[m]
SD[m]
E[cv]
SD[cv]
E[y0]
SD[y0]
E[λ]
SD[λ]
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 200 400 600 800 1000
m,cv,y0,λ]E [
PriorPosterior
0 0.2 0.4
Snow storage updating 2
Bayesian updating of the Snow Depletion Curve
(Sjur Kolberg, 2010)
More images improves the estimate of (m, cv, y0, {λ(t)})
ie uncertainty decreases as snowcover depletes
Calibration based on previous years also improves estimates
R2 from 0.63 - 0.68 (average for 22 catchments using same parametersets)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 400 800 1200
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 400 800 1200
Snow storage updating 2
y = 0.69x + 184.50R2 = 0.82
0
500
1000
1500
0 500 1000 1500Obs
Sim
y = 1.04x + 19.21R2 = 0.92
0
500
1000
1500
0 500 1000 1500Obs
Sim
More images improves the estimate of (m, cv, y0, {λ(t)})
ie uncertainty decreases as snowcover depletes
Calibration based on previous years also improves estimates
R2 from 0.63 - 0.68 (average for 22 catchments using same parametersets)
Snow storage updating 2
Snow storage updating 3
Early snowfalls are sensitive to threshold temperatures for snow – rain, and melt – freeze.
Wrong values gives simulated ≠ observed twice as both the accumulation and timing of melting get wrong
side 35
Snow storage updating 3
Develop methodology for classification of hydrographs error
Develope methodology for model updating based on these events.
Defined as a main subject in PhD
side 36
Figure 2: Definition of types of error between measured (—) and simulated (---) hydrographs [Source: adopted from Serban and Askew (1991)]
(a) amplitude errors (b) phase errors (c) shape errors
Description of simulation errors
Algorithm for categorization of errors
Error type Subclass Condition
Amplitude (A)
A-p precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T<<0Oc or T>>0OcA-t precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T≠0OcA-pt precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T≈0OcA-m m≠1; q≈0
Phase (P)
P-p precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T<<0Oc or T>>0Oc
P-t precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T≠0OcP-pt precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T≈0OcP-m m≈1; q≠0
Shape Observed data (O) O No explanation
Combination (AP)AP-p precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T≠0OcAP-t precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T<<0Oc or T>>0OcAP-pt precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T≈0Oc
Qsim=m*Qobs+q
• Data: hourly simulation of Votna hydropower plant; hydrologic year 1999.• Mismatches totally compounded to 195 local errors; 51 significant.
Error groups identified (overestimation, exact and underestimated).
Preliminary results
Error type Subclass Number Condition
Amplitude (A)
A-p 5 precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T<<0Oc or T>>0OcA-t 10 precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T≠0OcA-pt 1 precipitation; m≠1; q≈0; T≈0OcA-m - m≠1; q≈0
Phase (P)
P-p - precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T<<0Oc or T>>0OcP-t 2 precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T≠0OcP-pt - precipitation; m≈1; q≠0; T≈0OcP-m - m≈1; q≠0
Shape Observed data (O) 0 10 No explanation
Combination (AP)AP-p - precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T≠0OcAP-t - precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T<<0Oc or T>>0Oc
AP-pt 23 precipitation; m≠1; q≠0; T≈0Oc
Preliminary results
Parameter uncertainty
Parameter uncertainty used in model updating approaches
Autocalibration gives a huge number of parameter sets that objectively are equally good (R2 and waterbalance)But behave significantly different for the same event
For forecasting purpose the model best adapted to the actual situation is assumed to give the best forecast
DYNIA and DREAM are calibration routines relevant for this purpose
side 43
DYNIA
Dynamic Identifiability Analysis (Wagener et. al. 2003)
Applied to a catchment in soutwest norwayTX (snow/rain threshold)
– high sensitivity except from July-Oct, two preferred value rangesK0 , K1 and K2 had all two preferred value ranges
side 45
Saurdal
Stølsdal
Lauvastøl
OsaliSaurdal
Stølsdal
Lauvastøl
Osali
k0
k1
k2
Q=f(k0,k1,k2,h)
k0
Osali
DREAM
Dream (Vrugt et al, 2008) is a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) optimizing algorithm that suits the purpose of detecting the model sensitivity to each parameters value-range
Gives parameters uncertainty/influenceThus also which parameters to test in an updating sequence
Gives apriori distribution of parameters for a calibrated region
Ensemble of models used for weighted updating
side 47
DREAM
side 48
f ieldcapD
ensi
ty
100 200 300
0.00
00.
002
0.00
4
BETA
Den
sity
1.0 2.0 3.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
tvsum
Den
sity
150 300 450
0.00
000.
0015
0.00
30
TX
Den
sity
-2.5 -1.0 0.0
0.0
0.4
0.8
Rtreshold
Den
sity
0 10 30 50
0.00
0.02
0.04
FastDecayRate
Den
sity
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.00
0.10
k0
Den
sity
0.002 0.006 0.010
050
100
150
k1
Den
sity
0.02 0.06 0.10
05
1015
k2
Den
sity
0.2 0.4 0.6
02
46
Windscale
Den
sity
1 2 3 4 5
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Slow DecayRate
Den
sity
10 14 18
0.00
0.04
0.08
prercD
ensi
ty
0.20 0.30 0.40
01
23
45
6
From Dream to ParticleFiltering
Dream gives a ensemble of models with equal likelihood
But also heavily autocorrolated (results)And thus a challange to extract significant information
A likelihood function was used to extract those giving significant information and thus reduce the number of observations.
50
Likelihood function
side 51
Likelihood function
side 52
Particle Filtering
side 53
ParticlesFilter(Runoff, windowsize, weigth)
Re-weigthed particles
Apriori for parameters
fieldcap
Den
sity
100 200 300
0.00
00.
002
0.00
4
BETA
Den
sity
1.0 2.0 3.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
tvsum
Den
sity
150 300 450
0.00
000.
0015
0.00
30
TX
Den
sity
-2.5 -1.0 0.0
0.0
0.4
0.8
Rtreshold
Den
sity
0 10 30 50
0.00
0.02
0.04
FastDecayRate
Den
sity
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.00
0.10
k0
Den
sity
0.002 0.006 0.010
050
100
150
k1
Den
sity
0.02 0.06 0.10
05
1015
k2
Den
sity
0.2 0.4 0.6
02
46
Windscale
Den
sity
1 2 3 4 5
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
Slow DecayRate
Den
sity
10 14 18
0.00
0.04
0.08
prerc
Den
sity
0.20 0.30 0.40
01
23
45
6
Uncertain input(P,T)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
02
46
8
Dag
Q(m
3/s)
Particle Filtering
side 54
Osali original
Date
Stre
amflo
w(m
3/s)
2007.0 2007.2 2007.4 2007.6 2007.8 2008.0
05
1015
20
Filtered runoff – 95% confidence interval
Particle Filtering
side 55
Resultats – filtering on snow
Osali original
Date
Sw
e (m
m)
2007.0 2007.2 2007.4 2007.6 2007.8 2008.0
050
010
0015
00
Osali resampled
Date
Sw
e (m
m)
2007.0 2007.2 2007.4 2007.6 2007.8 2008.0
050
010
0015
00
Particle Filtering
side 56
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
Lauvastøl
Reff
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
Osali
Reff
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
SaurdalRe
ff
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
Stølsdal
Reff
0.48
0.5
0.52
0.54
0.56
0.58
0.6
0.62
Lauvastøl
CRPS
Beste partikkel
Aprio fordeling
Filtrert
Filtrert + usikker temp
Filtrert + usikker temp. og nedb.
Further Work
Improve local optimization by allowing parameters to vary over the domain
And still ensure consistent behaviorDevelop methodology to find and use the criteria for the variability
A new response routine is developed/tested in order to both simplify calibrationto reduce model complexityto get more significant correlation parameters/topographyimprove updating
side 57
Contact info
SINTEFSjur Kolberg : [email protected]ørn Engeland: [email protected] Tøfte: [email protected]
NTNUAshenafi Seifu Gragne: [email protected]
side 58