Planning for climate change impacts on hydropower in the

Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 21 133ndash151 2017wwwhydrol-earth-syst-scinet211332017doi105194hess-21-133-2017copy Author(s) 2017 CC Attribution 30 License

Planning for climate change impacts on hydropowerin the Far NorthJessica E Cherry1 Corrie Knapp2 Sarah Trainor3 Andrea J Ray4 Molly Tedesche5 and Susan Walker6

1International Arctic Research Center and Institute of Northern Engineering University of Alaska FairbanksFairbanks Alaska 99775 USA2Department of Environment amp Sustainability Western State Colorado University Gunnison Colorado 81231 USA3Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks Alaska 99775 USA4Earth System Research Laboratory-Physical Sciences Division National Oceanographic and Atmospheric AdministrationBoulder Colorado 80305 USA5International Arctic Research Center University of Alaska Fairbanks Fairbanks Alaska 99775 USA6National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration-National Marine Fisheries Service Juneau Alaska 99801 USA

Correspondence to Jessica E Cherry (jessicacherryalaskaedu)

Received 11 April 2016 ndash Published in Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 24 May 2016Revised 4 November 2016 ndash Accepted 27 November 2016 ndash Published 9 January 2017

Abstract Unlike much of the contiguous United States newhydropower development continues in the Far North whereclimate models project precipitation will likely increase overthe next century Regional complexities in the Arctic and sub-Arctic such as glacier recession and permafrost thaw how-ever introduce uncertainties about the hydrologic responsesto climate change that impact water resource managementThis work reviews hydroclimate changes in the Far Northand their impacts on hydropower it provides a template forapplication of current techniques for prediction and estimat-ing uncertainty and it describes best practices for integratingscience into management and decision-making The growingnumber of studies on hydrologic impacts suggests that infor-mation resulting from climate change science has maturedenough that it can and should be integrated into hydropowerscoping design and management Continuing to ignore thebest available information in lieu of status quo planning islikely to prove costly to society in the long term

1 Introduction

The generation of conventional hydroelectric power in thecontiguous United States has declined over the past severaldecades while use of other renewables has grown consid-erably (Fig 1) Hydropower generation has declined due to

the impacts of precipitation variability and drought enforce-ment of in-stream flow regulations and a drop in capacitywhen dams are removed (EIA 2015 Malewitz 2014) Fewnew facilities have been built in the United States because ofthe impacts of dams on fish habitat challenges of propertyand water rights the high cost of dam construction and sim-ply because easy-to-develop projects were already built in theearly years of the national reclamation movement (Gallucci2014 Malewitz 2014) In contrast both hydropower gener-ation and capacity in the Far North ndash Alaska Canada andmuch of Scandinavia ndash are actively growing (Figs 2 and 3)In Alaska in particular several new projects are being pro-posed including a massive 750-foot high 600 MW Dam onthe Susitna River in the south-central part of the state (AEA2016 REAP 2016) This project was still in the pre-licensingphase at the time of writing

While the Far North (defined here as the Arctic and sub-Arctic) may have considerable water resources (eg AEDI2016 Conner and Francfort 1997) questions about cli-mate change impacts on existing and proposed hydropowerprojects relate to unique environmental complexities that re-quire consideration across the boreal sub-Arctic and Arc-tic regions How will climate change impact glacier runoffHow does thawing of permafrost (soils that used to remainfrozen throughout the year) impact partitioning of runoffinto surface and subsurface waters Where and when will

Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union

134 J E Cherry et al Planning for climate change impacts on hydropower in the Far North

199013 199113 199213 199313 199413 199513 199613 199713 199813 199913 200013 200113 200213 200313 200413 200513 200613 200713 200813 200913 201013 201113 201213 201313

Million13 MWh13

Year13

Hydro13 genera5on13 Genera5on13 from13 other13 renewables13 Linear13 (Hydro13 genera5on)13

Figure 1 Trends in hydropower production and other renewables in the United States Data are from httpwwweiagovelectricityannual

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013 201213

Billion

13 Kilo

hours13

Year13

Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska10013

Finland1013

Figure 2 Trends in hydropower generation in selected northern regions 1980ndash2012 Data are from the Energy Information Administrationand the Alaska Energy Data Gateway Generation statistics in Alaska and Finland have been multiplied by factors that make them easier tovisualize on the same graph as the other data

the phase of precipitation change from snow to rain andhow will total precipitation volumes and timing of stor-age change How do changes in air and water tempera-tures impact the timing of snowmelt river ice cover andrunoff Do changes in glaciers and ground ice impact riversediment loads and subsequently fish habitat and potentialor existing hydropower infrastructure While these climate-related questions also apply to alpine hydropower areas inthe contiguous United States they are major concerns forhydropower in the Far North and have received little atten-

tion Figure 4 shows that the percent of hydropower capacityused in the Far North has actually decreased in several coun-tries suggesting either the impacts of a changing climatea misalignment of infrastructure and resources or both Itmay also reflect an increasing number of in-stream flow reg-ulations and other actions responding to concerns about theimpacts of hydropower on ecosystems and the environmentBecause of the ongoing energy development throughout theFar North there is an urgent need to understand the interac-tion of changing climate and hydropower

Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 21 133ndash151 2017 wwwhydrol-earth-syst-scinet211332017

J E Cherry et al Planning for climate change impacts on hydropower in the Far North 135

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

Million13 Kilowa

s13 Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska10013

Finland1013

Figure 3 Trends in hydropower capacity in selected northern regions 1980ndash2012 Data are from the Energy Information Administrationand the Alaska Energy Data Gateway Capacity statistics in Alaska and Finland have been multiplied by factors that make them easier tovisualize on the same graph as the other data

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

1313 c

ity 1313 u

sed 1313

Year13

Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska13

Finland13

Figure 4 Percent capacity of hydropower used in selected northern regions 1980ndash2012 Data are from the Energy Information Administra-tion and the Alaska Energy Data Gateway

There is widespread consensus that climate change willimpact water resources globally and regionally (Geor-gakakos et al 2014 Jimeacutenez Cisneros et al 2014Mukheibir 2013 Beniston 2012 Viviroli et al 2011 Fen-ner 2009 Vicuna et al 2008 Barnett et al 2005 Payne etal 2004) The volume and timing of runoff in many north-ern locations are already changing (eg Wolken et al 2015Dahlke et al 2012 Jones and Rinehart 2010 Wilson et al

2010) as well as the amount and form of precipitation (Walshet al 2014 Callaghan et al 2011a b) Increasing precipita-tion patterns are expected to favor northern latitudes (Fig 5)increasing the water available for hydropower production(Jimeacutenez Cisneros et al 2014 Hamududu and Killingtveit2012) However the impacts of climate change will be fur-ther complicated by several factors including glacial wastingpermafrost thaw and erosion (Bliss et al 2014 Quinton et

wwwhydrol-earth-syst-scinet211332017 Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 21 133ndash151 2017

al 2011 Wada et al 2011) These characteristics of north-ern systems may impact the long-term risk associated withhydropower projects through changes to in-stream flow in-creased sedimentation and vulnerability to hazards such asglacial burst flooding and seismic activity related to changesin waterglacier mass loading

Because of the long design life of hydropower infrastruc-ture (100 years or longer) it is important to consider cli-mate change and impacts unique to far northern regions inboth the project planning and operations phases (Viers 2011Markoff and Cullen 2008) Uncertainties related to these cli-mate impacts may affect the viability of a proposed projectThe intent of this article is to discuss the state of the rel-evant climate science with a focus on far northern regionsto describe methods for predicting water supply and estimat-ing uncertainty in northern hydroclimatology and also to dis-cuss strategies for integration of climate change science intohydropower planning management and barriers to this pro-cess Finally we propose best practices for the use of climatechange information in planning new projects and operatingexisting facilities to incorporate the range of possible futurescenario represented by uncertainty

2 Climate change impacts on hydropower

21 Scope and methods of study

The scope of this article is to describe the observed and pro-jected climate impacts that would affect proposed and exist-ing projects and how this information relates to planning andmanagement In the subsections below we will discuss gen-eral impacts of climate change and variability on hydropowersystems followed by a focus on far northern regions Weacknowledge that hydropower projects may be an opportu-nity to mitigate global climate change and in some regionsmay represent the best possible power source for minimizingthe carbon footprint environmental pollution and feedbacksto the global climate Interest in the sustainability of hy-dropower relative to other sources of energy is contributing toits growth trend in regions outside of the contiguous UnitedStates and as we will argue hydropower infrastructure isvulnerable to climate change and variability This growth inhydropower development makes it critical to study the link-ages between hydrologic change and project risk (Harrisonet al 2003)

Likewise there are significant effects that hydropowerprojects have on their environments which are argumentsagainst their sustainability These include destruction offish habitat and damage to the ecosystems that depend onthem They include flooding of land that previously hadother ecosystem functions and may have contained pri-vate property or cultural resources Furthermore the green-house gas methane is produced from anoxic decomposi-tion of submerged vegetation in newly flooded areas behind

dams (Scherer and Pfister 2016) There are also changesto local microclimates and enhanced evaporation caused byreservoirs in conventional large hydropower projects Thesefeedbacks from hydropower facilities onto the environmentagain are not the focus of this article In the subsections be-low we will discuss general impacts of climate change andvariability on hydropower systems followed by a focus on farnorthern regions

Literature was analyzed using an inductive approach anincomplete set of prior hydrologic studies have been per-formed in many regions let alone the Far North but spe-cific examples were used to construct more generalized bestpractices Googlersquos default search engine as well as GoogleScholar and ISIrsquos Web of Science were scanned with thefollowing terms hydrology hydrologic modeling water re-sources glaciers groundwater water and climate changehydropower hydroelectric power with and without regionalqualifiers such as Canada Russia Scandinavia (and spe-cific countries therein) and Alaska Large publications in thefield such as those by the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-mate Change author teams and the National Climate Assess-ment author teams were searched for relevant material Re-sulting articles from peer-reviewed and gray literature werecataloged in a database Analysis focused on peer-reviewedand government-authored reports and viewed trade publica-tions (for example from the hydropower industry) as poten-tially biased

22 Climate change impacts on hydropower supply anddemand

The water supply for generating hydropower is derived fromprecipitation (rain and snow) surface water groundwaterthat makes its way to the surface and glacial melt in north-ern and alpine areas In much of the tropical and temperateregions water supply is a balance of precipitation evapotran-spiration (ET) and storage Globally trends in precipitationhave been difficult to detect but the IPCC AR5 describedthe increase in historical precipitation from 60 to 90 N aslikely1 The problem of trend detection in the Far North ismore challenging than in warm climates because solid pre-cipitation is particularly difficult to measure and much ofthe year precipitation falls as snow Measurement errors sit-ing biases poor spatial coverage and network heterogene-ity over time all reduce the confidence in trends of snowfall(Cherry et al 2005a 2007) However for three out of fourglobal data sets the trend for precipitation between 60 and90 N was shown by the IPCC AR5 authors to have increasedfor the period 1951ndash2008 and more so than in any other re-gion

McAfee et al (2013 2014) published two studies that fo-cused on estimating precipitation trends in Alaska Using sta-

1The IPCC defines likely as having a 66ndash100 probability(Mastrandrea et al 2010)

Figure 5 Projected change in average annual precipitation reproduced from the 3rd National Climate Assessment (Walsh et al 2014) Grayhatching represents statistically significant changes that are also consistent across multiple models

tion data and gridded analyses these studies showed that in-homogeneity in the observational networks makes trend de-tection here nearly impossible at this time Those authorsfound that virtually no significant trends in precipitationcould be derived directly from station data According toMcAfee et al (2013 2014) the gridded Global Precipita-tion Climatology Center (GPCC) data set appears most re-liable shows an increase in annual precipitation in ArcticAlaska and a slight decrease in annual precipitation in thesouthern half of the state between 1980 and 2008 though fewregions show any statistical significance These authors alsoreviewed more than a dozen other studies on precipitationtrend analyses in Alaska and showed that results are entirelydependent on the sites used and the period of time selectedRawlins et al (2010) did a similar calculation for precipita-tion trends across the pan-Arctic using observations climatemodels and reanalysis data and found increasing precipita-tion trends from 1950 to 2008 and 1980 to 2008 for all butone data set

Of these precipitation trend analyses few have focusedon long-term snowfall in particular In Canada however astudy found that snowfall increased in the northern part of thecountry but actually decreased in the southern part (Mekisand Vincent 2011) In the future this will most likely be thepattern from first principles of the physics and thermodynam-ics of a rotating planet because of the warming atmosphereand enhanced transport of moisture from lower latitudes thenorthern-most regions of the Far North will likely receivemore snowfall and the southern portion of the Far North willlikely receive more rain in a changing climate (Serreze andBarry 2014) These results are also seen in modeling stud-ies (eg Peacock 2012) For hydropower in the Far Norththis is likely to mean more supply available overall In thesouthern-most parts of this region more precipitation will

arrive in liquid form and be available earlier in the season forhydropower generation rather than stored in the snowpackuntil spring melt In the Far North ET is a relatively smallportion of the hydrologic budget and precipitation dominates(Kane et al 1990) though ET will increase as the grow-ing season continues to lengthen as it has in recent decades(Genet et al 2013 Olchev and Novenko 2011 Zeng etal 2011) Other aspects of the supply side which includegroundwater storage and glacier storage will be addressedin the next section on regional complexity

Air temperature increases in the Far North are a robust sig-nal and the IPCC AR5 report denotes high confidence2 inthese trends In the Arctic temperature has had the biggestincreasing trend in autumn (SeptemberndashNovember) over thepast 3 decades (Cohen et al 2012a Alaska Climate Re-search Center 2016) This increase in autumn air tempera-tures may delay the establishment of the snowpack and re-duce availability of water in reservoirs during the followingspring An increase in the number of rain on snow eventsdriven by warming can also lead to more available waterin northern reservoirs during the cold season Air temper-ature trends also have a major impact on hydropower de-mand especially in areas where home and commercial heat-ing is supplied by this electricity Many places in the FarNorth have warmed considerably during the winter seasonbut in other places recent modeling work has shown thatcolder winters particularly in northern Europe over the last3 decades are also consistent with climate change (Cohen etal 2012b) Seasonal asymmetries in warming trends (Cohenet al 2012a) certainly have the ability to change the timingand magnitude of the demand for hydropower

2The IPCC defines high confidence as having both high agree-ment and robust evidence (Mastrandrea et al 2010)

The co-variability of temperature and precipitation anoma-lies is important because it can affect the impact or hard-ship experienced by hydropower users For example if thereis a shortage of precipitation but a warm air temperatureanomaly the impact of the water shortage might be muchless than if there were a wintertime cold anomaly Cherryet al (2005b) showed that the co-variability of Scandinavianprecipitation and temperature driven by the North AtlanticOscillation (NAO) trends tended to cause significant impactsbecause cold winters occurred during dry anomalies and thehydropower supply was short when demand was high Modesof climate variability such as El NintildeondashSouthern Oscillation(ENSO) and the NAO influence temperaturendashprecipitationco-variability as well as seasonal asymmetries in long-termclimate trends

For both precipitation and temperature there is some de-bate whether non-stationarity (change in the long-term mean)persists over the period of instrumental record (Rhines andHuybers 2013 Hansen et al 2012) and this has obvi-ous implications for reservoir construction and management(Brekke et al 2009) However changes in climate vari-ability including location timing magnitude and extremeevents also have implications for reservoir construction (iedesign capacity) and management (ie timing of generationflood control and water spilling)

There are relatively few publications about changes in ex-treme events for the Far North probably due to the sameissues with data quality that affect our confidence in basictrends However atmospheric circulation has shifted pole-ward since the 1970s and this has pushed the storm tracksnorthward and contracted the polar vortex (Hartmann et al2013) providing a physical basis for changes in extremes ata given place An assessment by Melillo et al (2014) showsa significant decrease in cold days and cold nights and a sig-nificant increase in warm days and warm nights observedfor the high latitudes since 1950 Bennett and Walsh (2015)looked at historical and projected changes in extreme tem-perature and precipitation events in Alaska and found sig-nificantly fewer extreme minimum temperatures in the coldseasons and significantly more 5-day duration precipitationevents The impact of these changes on hydropower is thatdesigners of new projects need to consider the possibility ofheavier precipitation events and more surface runoff duringfall winter and early spring due to warmer nights This couldlead to the spillage of excess water without generation if thereservoirs are capacity limited and already full during thosetimes of the year

Extreme temperature and precipitation events may alsolink to sedimentation in reservoirs because on principlemore force moves more sediment (Toniolo and Schultz2005) Other impacts of climate change on hydropower sup-ply and demand include factors that affect runoff partitioninginto surface water and groundwater These could be changesin the mean or extreme events These factors include climate-driven changes in vegetation and soil moisture Studies of

these trends however would depend on long-term consis-tent accurate and co-located measurements of river dis-charge vegetation precipitation and soil moisture whichare hard to find in the Far North

23 Climate change complexity in the Far North

There are also complexities of changes in the Arctic sub-Arctic and alpine areas that are unique to the Far NorthThese include permafrost sedimentation from thaw slumpsand glaciers Ice rich permafrost acts as an aquatard blockingpassage of water through soil and limiting subsurface con-nectivity in groundwater (Carey et al 2013)3 As it thaws un-der a warming climate subsurface storage and connectivity isanticipated to increase but there is uncertainty about whetherthis will lead to more runoff and water availability for hy-dropower production and other hydroclimate impacts Forexample in areas of currently continuous permafrost per-mafrost could thaw disconnected areas and pull water downto the subsurface but these could be in isolated voids and notpart of a groundwater system that contributes to runoff In ar-eas of discontinuous permafrost additional thawing is morelikely to lead to changes in river discharge since the subsur-face is more likely connected to runoff pathways If surfacewaters infiltrate into the subsurface and soil is allowed to dryunder either of these scenarios there may be less moisturecontributed to the regional atmosphere from the land surfaceand less summer precipitation in turn

Permafrost degradation in ice rich soil can also lead tothermokarst formation in which thermal and water-drivenerosion releases a significant volume of sediment into a wa-terway typically during a catastrophic collapse over a periodof a few weeks to a couple of years These types of sedi-mentation events can reduce reservoir capacity and increasewear and tear on turbines in projects built adjacent to per-mafrost (Toniolo and Schultz 2005 Gurnell 1995) Newlybuilt reservoirs will also impact permafrost distributions asthe reservoirs fill and water has the potential to thaw addi-tional soil in the newly formed or enlarged lake

Glacier dynamics is an additional complexity in north-ern climates Glacial retreat is a widespread phenomenonthroughout the Far North and many existing and proposedhydropower projects depend on river discharge from catch-ments with glaciers in the headwaters As glaciers melt theygenerate increasing annual discharge until this runoff reachesa peak and declines thereafter (Fig 6) Several researchershave suggested that most non-coastal glaciers are alreadypast peak melt and that discharge from glacial sources is al-ready declining (OrsquoNeel et al 2014 Radic and Hock 2014Arendt et al 2002 2009) Thus the state and trajectory ofglacial runoff is an important factor in designing hydropower

3Permafrost that is not ice rich may simply be frozen gravel orother material that still allows liquid to pass through to the deepersubsurface Ice rich permafrost tends to be associated with big icewedges and lenses which are effective aquatards

Surface water runo Q

TimePeriod of Glacial Wasting

Figure 6 Conceptual graph of surface water runoff as a function oftime when glaciers are wasting Modified from Jansson et al (2003)

projects and accurately estimating future reservoir inflowThe rates of melting glacial ice can also impact soil mois-ture and runoff partitioning fast melt will lead to more sat-urated soil and surface runoff while slow melt is more likelyto contribute to groundwater so long as there is some dis-continuity of the permafrost in the watershed Finally likepermafrost degradation retreating glaciers can leave behindlarge amounts of mobile sediment (Gurnell 1995 Harrisonet al 1983) which can be transported into hydropower in-frastructure and reduce the lifespan of turbines and reser-voirs

Climate change is also increasing the potential for glacialhazards The melting of permafrost along with glacialwastage can lead to glacial lake outburst events (Bolch et al2011) which have increased in number and magnitude in re-cent years (Sorg et al 2012 Narama et al 2010 Horstmann2004 Agrawala et al 2003) These glacial hazards maybe a threat to hydropower infrastructure (Richardson andReynolds 2000) In addition glacial wastage is likely to in-crease the potential for flooding (Veijalainen et al 2010 Ku-tuzov and Shahgedanova 2009) While dams can be dam-aged by flooding they can also be a way to mitigate floodrisk by controlling water flow (World Bank 2009)

Climate change is likely influencing the thickness of riverand lake ice as well as the timing of breakup which has asignificant impact on reservoir inflows Numerous ice-relatedchanges can be a challenge for hydropower operation includ-ing a shift in patterns or frequency of ice blockage and jams(Gebre et al 2013) Hydropower operators need to take intoaccount these changing ice conditions regardless of whethera project is run-of-river or has a reservoir (Prowse et al2011) Change in the duration and extent of ice cover is likely(Timalsina et al 2013 Andrishak and Hicks 2008) Thelater freeze up of lakes and rivers can lead to increased de-velopment of ice dam flooding or damage to infrastructure inthe autumn (Molarius et al 2010) Climate change has beenshown to increase the frequency of spring ice jam floods insome regions (Bergstrom et al 2001) while mid-winter iceon snow events and atypical mid-winter thaws can also resultin mid-winter ice jams and associated flooding (Prowse andBeltaos 2002)

Polar climate is changing more rapidly than that of lowerlatitudes a phenomenon known as polar amplification (Ser-reze and Barry 2014) The movements of pressure centersand the polar vortex as well as changing sea ice cover areimpacting regional hydroclimatology Researchers have de-scribed several mechanisms for polar amplification in the cli-mate system One of these mechanisms is the lowering of po-lar surface albedo as light-colored ice and snowmelt expos-ing dark ocean and land surfaces which in turn absorb moreheat from solar radiation Other reasons for polar amplifica-tion relate to the mass gradient in the atmosphere from theEquator to the poles driven by atmospheric temperature andpressure Heat and moisture tend to flow along this gradientpoleward Projected rates of hydroclimate change in global-or low-latitude studies may underestimate the true rates ofchange for high latitudes in the future because of the imper-fect representation of these processes in models (Clark et al2015 Christensen et al 2013)

While scientists anticipate climate change will drivewarmer moister air poleward air parcels are rarely trans-ported directly meridionally (Francis and Vavrus 2015) In-stead they are subject to Coriolis deflection and controlledby persistent lows and highs in the atmosphere In the FarNorth the Aleutian low Icelandic low Siberian high andpolar vortex are persistent patterns of circulation that helpdirect atmospheric fronts and the movement of weather pat-terns that ultimately add up to climate These persistentco-varying patterns of circulation also known as oceanndashatmosphere oscillations (such as the Pacific Decadal Oscil-lation NAO or ENSO) are modes of climate variabilityWhile quantifying this variability with an oscillation indexor another statistical tool can be useful for analyzing impactsthere are limits to how well the indices describe or predict thedynamics of persistent circulation patterns that actually de-termine local weather In other words while climate changetheory and models predict a warmer wetter north that doesnot mean that more precipitation will necessarily arrive at aparticular locality it may be further to the east or west be-cause of persistent circulation patterns

Finally other complexities in the Far North relate to socialimpacts of hydropower development in a changing climateWhile the northern-most regions of the Earth are relativelysparsely populated many indigenous and other rural peoplenot only live in communities that depend heavily on sub-sistence and commercial hunting and fishing but also facehigh costs for electricity generated by non-renewable sources(Hochstein 2015) Climate change is threatening the viabil-ity of food resources through physical biological and geo-chemical shifts It is necessary to consider the additional im-pact that hydropower development and management of exist-ing facilities has on the habitat of fish and game in a changingclimate even when it provides cheaper electricity

3 Predicting far northern hydrology and estimatinguncertainty

31 Long-term projections

Long-term climate projections from global climate models(GCMs) have now been recognized as valuable for bothexisting and future hydropower infrastructure planning andmanagement (Viers 2011) Traditional water supply projec-tions lead to different conclusions than projections that takeinto account climate change including the range of plausi-ble futures or ldquouncertaintyrdquo around the model projections(Barsugli et al 2012 Hamlet 2011) The following generaltechniques are used in recent work to predict future hydro-logic regimes (Clark et al 2015 Hagemann et al 2013Barsugli et al 2012 Chen et al 2012 2014 Balsamo et al2009 2011 Brekke et al 2011 Koutsoyiannis et al 2009Lawrence and Hisdal 2011 Frigon et al 2007 Hagg et al2006 Bergstrom et al 2001)

1 using a high-quality baseline historical observationaldata set that is at least 40 years long

2 interpolating or ldquogriddingrdquo temperature and precipita-tion data to the spatial resolution of interest or assim-ilating these and other data into a reanalysis model toproduce gridded fields

3 applying perturbations various statistical techniquesor ldquoerror barsrdquo around the observations or using priorknowledge to estimate the observational uncertainty

4 running multiple GCMs each either stand-alone or witha regional model nested in a global model with a varietyof different emissions scenarios and forcing data values(ensembles) for the historical period to represent obser-vational uncertainty

5 downscaling the GCM output to a local scale using sta-tistical or dynamical methods

6 comparing gridded baseline climatologic observationsand model output for the historical period to evaluatemodel biases

7 using the GCM output to force a hydrologic model or toperform a fully coupled simulation with river routing

8 comparing hydrologic model output to runoff observa-tions for the historical period

These hydrological impact studies are the precursors to un-derstanding climate impacts to hydropower (Jost and We-ber 2012 Pittock 2010) Hydroclimate models can be usedto understand glacier and snowmelt dynamics (Huss et al2008 Jonsdottir 2008 Schaefli et al 2007 Johannesson2006) but they can also be linked with energy market modelsto understand financial and technical feasibility economic

vulnerability to climate change (Cherry et al 2005b Harri-son et al 2003 Harrison and Whittington 2002) and theycan provide a methodological approach to understand trade-offs (Rheinheimer et al 2013) Because getting to detailedprecise information at the watershed scale requires intensiveeffort and significant computing power these methods havemostly been applied to case studies of particular basins (Ben-nett et al 2012 Shrestha et al 2012 in the Far North) Landsurface models within GCMs and regional climate models(RCMs) are another class of model that have been tested andcompared for hydrologic applications and are designed forglobal domains but challenges of river routing (Li et al2013) and other local processes cause these tools to havelarge uncertainties at the watershed scale (Clark et al 2015)The hydrologic modeling should also be used to drive modelsof sediment load for projecting reservoir in-filling and wearand tear on turbines (Toniolo and Schultz 2005)

National assessments are important for understanding rel-ative hydroclimate vulnerability (Rummukainen et al 2003Hurd et al 1999 Lettenmaier et al 1999) while basin-level models can provide more specific projections to in-form water management (Doumlll et al 2015 Frigon et al2007) In several studies of the Colorado River basin it wasfound that under most projected climate scenarios reducedflows in the river result in annual in-stream allocations be-ing met less frequently along with hydropower productiondeclines (Vano et al 2010 Rajagopalan et al 2009 Chris-tensen 2004) Basin-level studies have also revealed shifts inflow timing and hydropower production (Finger et al 2012)Hydropower modeling can provide specific information atthe plant level to assess changing potential due to climatechange (Chernet et al 2013) and tailor management in orderto maintain efficient production (Burn and Simonovic 1996)Plant-level modeling can also integrate electricity market in-formation in order to understand the economic impact of cli-mate change on both the supply and demand for power (Gau-dard et al 2013)

32 Seasonal and shorter-term prediction

Northern states countries and individual utilities vary inthe extent to which they use seasonal hydrologic predic-tion which may reflect these organizationsrsquo existing capacityto utilize future projections as well (Inderberg and Loslashchen2012 Kirkinen et al 2005) For example the Alaska PacificRiver Forecast Center will use the National Oceanic and At-mospheric Administration (NOAA) Climate Prediction Cen-ter seasonal outlook temperature and precipitation productsas a general reference during the flood-prone spring riverbreak-up season but they do not use these products quanti-tatively to force hydrologic models during the season aheadHydro-Quebec and Norsk Hydro (large semi-public utilities)on the other hand have considerably more resources to usequantitative hydrologic modeling at the seasonal scale In theUnited States climate- or weather-model-driven seasonal hy-

drologic forecasting (SHF) is an emerging field and one stilllimited to selected regions and a limited number of models(Yuan et al 2015 Gochis et al 2014) For hydropower man-agement however quantitative seasonal forecasting shouldbe routine and these model simulations will depend on a ro-bust observational network Ensemble approaches are a typ-ical means for estimating uncertainty for seasonal forecastsand other researchers have innovated methods for quantify-ing uncertainty in the land surface models through Bayesianand other statistical techniques (Beven et al 2012 Clark etal 2011)

Shorter-term synoptic-scale quantitative prediction of hy-droclimate is of high value to facility managers in operationsHowever the accuracy of these forecasts is unknown in basinswith few or no direct observations With few observationsand no quantitative forecasts operators must rely on theirpast experiences and qualitative estimates of the impacts ofsynoptic weather events During extreme events such as anunprecedented rain-on-snow storms managers may not havethe past experience to anticipate the necessary operationaldecision-making Short-term coupled hydroclimate predic-tion systems could provide a valuable source of informationfor decision makers Like with longer-term projections thesetoo need uncertainty estimates

33 Estimating and reducing uncertainty

For new large hydropower projects it is imperative to con-duct a future hydroclimate projection study during the pre-licensing phase of the project to determine long-term watersupplies and downstream impacts given all of the climatechange complexities noted above Estimates of uncertaintyor the range of plausible futures either quantitative or qual-itative should be an essential component of these studiesFor example studies ordered by the Federal Energy Regu-latory Commission (FERC 2013a b) for the pre-licensingphase of the proposed Susitna-Watana dam in central Alaskadid not include a detailed analysis of climate risks or un-certainty as had been requested by NOAANMFS (2012)The license applicant the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)funded a study to assess glacial and hydrologic regimes thatwent above and beyond what the FERC ordered (FERC2013c) but this study only used a single climate model forits analysis (Wolken et al 2015) This leaves stakeholderswith only a single estimate of future runoff and little senseof the uncertainty of these estimates Brekke et al (2011)described methods to include the uncertainty or spread pro-jected by GCMs the bias in climate models and to accountfor local terrain and weather (for example through downscal-ing or high-resolution hydrologic modeling)

Two technological bottlenecks slow progress towards re-ducing uncertainty in this field (1) accuracy and representa-tiveness of hydroclimate observations in time and space and(2) quality and fidelity of models (Kundzewicz and Stakhiv2010 Hawkins and Sutton 2009) These two issues are of

particular concern in the Far North because they also makeit difficult to understand natural climate variability Rela-tive to the contiguous United States or mainland Europe theFar North is particularly data poor with respect to hydrocli-mate observations (Key et al 2015 McClelland et al 2015and references therein) The shortcomings in estimates of ETand precipitation have already been discussed Very little isknown or understood about groundwater in the Far North orhow it might be changing because observations are so sparse(Bense et al 2009 Moran and Solin 2006) There are con-siderable unknowns about the timing of glacial retreat thaw-ing of permafrost and change in subsurface storage of water(Walsh et al 2014 Murray et al 2010)

Climate models also represent the climate system imper-fectly particularly the complexities in the Far North thisis another source of uncertainty The global trajectory ofgreenhouse gas emissions into the future is another unknownMany authors have characterized and summarized these un-certainties over the past decade of literature (Eum et al2014 Kunreuther et al 2013 and references therein Lof-gren et al 2013 Clark et al 2011) For example Wilby andDessai (2010) described a cascading pyramid of uncertaintywherein each step away from the global climate model (to-wards regional impact and adaptations models) generatesmore and more permutations of reality and thus uncertaintyWhile this framework may seem daunting they also use it tosuggest concrete measures to adapt water resource manage-ment to climate change

In order to improve predictions of far northern hydrol-ogy and estimate uncertainty for hydropower planning weneed to (1) improve expand and sustain observational sys-tems while (2) continuing to improve global and regional hy-droclimate models and output the necessary model parame-ters needed for decision-making Observational systems in-clude not just measurements of precipitation and dischargebut also topographic data sets and dynamic maps of subsur-face features such as permafrost and groundwater To im-prove models process studies must occur in study basinsbut then techniques learned in these efforts must propagateinto the models Local downscaling is an essential compo-nent of hydrologic projections but (3) a better quantitativeevaluation of the uncertainty of these downscaled productsis needed based on emerging statistical techniques and en-semble simulations (Barsugli et al 2013 Chen et al 20122014 Dibike et al 2008)

4 Best practices for integration of climate changescience into project planning and management

41 Amass high-quality information via baselineobservations process studies and hydroclimatemodeling

For proposed and existing hydropower projects project man-agers need to pull together a meaningful body of knowledgeabout the hydroclimate system employing all of the tech-niques described in the preceding section In doing so itmay be necessary to evaluate and potentially deploy addi-tional observational systems and if appropriate keep themrunning over the lifespan of the project for decision supportAt the current time researchers are most confident about his-torical trends in climate in the Far North that are derivedfrom long-term consistently instrumented stations or remotesensing records (Curran et al 2012) In general these obser-vations are limited to air temperature ground temperaturesnow-covered area and river discharge at just a few stationsor they have limited temporal coverage From the subset ofthese records that cover at least 40 years or more meaning-ful statistics can be generated about the historic patterns ofvariability and change 60ndash80 years of data are even betterThe more that observational networks expand and improve toaccurately measure ET precipitation groundwater and wa-ter storage over long periods of time and in many locationsthe more confident we will be in our knowledge of water re-source availability

Historic observations provide a basis to predict futurechange given what we know about other mechanisms in theEarth system which may affect how these future climate tra-jectories unfold Unfortunately the 2 years of river dischargemeasurements required for a standard water use permit inthe state of Alaska for example provide almost no infor-mation about the variability of that water source on inter-annual decadal and multi-decadal timescales Models cal-ibrated with long-term high-quality historic data with finetemporal and spatial scales are the most robust quantitativeway to predict water resources into the future as well as pro-vide uncertainty estimates (Pechlivanidis et al 2011)

Detailed hydrologic process studies in the project basinare also necessary in the Far North to ensure that appropri-ate models are developed and continue to be refined Thesewould include observations and modeling of small-scale sys-tems impacting a resource watershed such as those fromglacier groundwater permafrost surface water and meteo-rological inputs These process studies help researchers andresource managers understand how watersheds respond tochanges in temperature precipitation vegetation etc andgive experts the confidence and information necessary tomake qualitative and quantitative predictions about futureavailability of water resources

The modeling techniques described above in the long-termprojections subsection should be employed to further push

regional hydroclimate modeling capabilities While Earthsystem modeling has focused on regional model develop-ment and polar modeling has made progress in this re-spect (eg Regional Arctic System Model httpwwwocnpseduNAMERASMhtm) these fully coupled polar mod-els are still relatively new and are used to simulate domainswith a land surface resolution of sim 50 km grid cells GlobalEarth system models still do not simulate hydrology realis-tically in the Far North because they do not have detailedglacier groundwater and permafrost physics on the spatialscales necessary for water resource planning or management(Wolken et al 2015) These physically based approaches arenecessary to reduce uncertainty about hydrologic processesa decade or more into the future and can provide both qual-itative and quantitative information Decision makers needlong-term hydroclimate projections over the managed basinupdated at least every 5 years as data records grow and themodels advance A release of each new generation of IPCCclimate model outputs every 4ndash5 years would be a logicaltrigger for new downscaled runoff estimates This informa-tion is needed in the management of the water resourcesthemselves but also upstream and downstream impacts onhabitat and ecosystems For existing hydropower projectshydroclimate projections should be used to consider struc-tural operational and management adaptations which arediscussed in the next subsection

42 Create structural and management adaptations forhydropower under climate change

A number of structural or operational adaptation practicescould help integrate climate change science into project plan-ning and management (ICOLD 2013 Arsenault et al 2013)These include

1 A more adaptive and regionalized hydropower facil-ity licensing process The current licensing process inthe United States has not been responsive to climatechange impacts (Viers 2011) especially when manage-ment procedures such as storage and spill thresholds arefirm and fixed Several suggestions that have emerged inthe literature include adaptive licensing shorter-term li-censes and more integrative licenses across basins Ex-plicit adaptive licensing could include specific opera-tional responses to thresholds (Rheinheimer et al 2013)or more frequent assessment of performance (ICOLD2013 Brekke et al 2009 Madani 2011) Brekke etal (2009) and these other studies reiterate that we canno longer assume a stationary hydrological future andlicensing structures need to reflect this Methods de-scribed by Brekke et al (2011) could be used in FERC-ordered studies (in the United States) as part of the li-censing process to include the uncertainty or spreadprojected by GCMs in order to have estimates of fu-ture reservoir inflows that are representative of the range

and uncertainty across climate models Study requeststo FERC have included such methods but FERC has notyet fully accepted them (NOAANMFS 2012 2016)Shorter contracts for hydropower licensing could al-low operators to better consider and integrate climatechange impacts on a regular basis (Viers 2011) Re-opening licenses is not an adequate adaptation changesin hydrology that impact hydropower project operationscan be projected at a useful level during project pre-licensing and re-licensing processes and should be ad-dressed at those stages Finally it is important to pro-mote coordination of water management across projectsso that cumulative effects within a basin are consid-ered (Viers 2011) This more regional approach wouldallow for greater balancing between ecological andproduction-related goals (Brown et al 2015 Viers2011 Marttila et al 2005) Robust strategies in thelicensing and operations (ie strategies that will lastfor more than a year or two under a variety of dif-ferent climate and economic conditions) may have aneven bigger impact than making more precise predic-tions (Wilby 2010)

2 Flexible and adaptable operations rules One of themost consistent messages in the literature related to cli-mate change and hydropower is that operations needto adapt their rules if they want to manage for opti-mal productivity (Gaudard et al 2013 Vicuna et al2011 Madani 2010 Minville et al 2009 2010a bRaje and Mujumdar 2010 Alfieri et al 2006 Burnand Simonovic 1996) For example operational rulesshould allow for management changes to facilities uti-lizing glacially fed basins once the glaciers have signif-icantly receded and glacial melt has declined If droughtfrequency increases 30 years after a project was built anew operating paradigm is needed This has been sup-ported by studies that have shown that there is a de-crease in performance of hydropower systems if man-agement is rigid and does not adapt to changing con-ditions (Mehta et al 2011 Perez-Diaz and Wilhelmi2010 Minville et al 2009 2010a b Schaefli et al2007 Robinson 1997)

3 Training for hydropower managers Water resourcemanagers need support to more adequately incorpo-rate climate change projections into the managementof hydropower plants Water managers often lack guid-ance about how to best integrate climate change intodecision-making detailed guidance and training shouldbe developed through collaborations between FERChydropower trade organizations (internationally) theWorld Meteorological Organization and the WorldBank Several studies have called for a better transferof information from climate scientists to water man-agers (Lund 2015 Milly et al 2008 Oki and Kanae

2006) This transfer can be accomplished by bound-ary organizations4 which can bridge science and prac-tice by translating projections in a way that can in-form decision-making (Gordon et al 2016 Miller et al2001 Cash et al 2001 Lowrey et al 2009) This couldinclude higher-resolution and more faithful models (iemore accurate for the correct physical reasons) a sta-ble institutional platform for information exchange andbetter communication about the precise needs of deci-sion makers Training should also address better under-standing about the uncertainty inherent in projectionsUncertainty is one of the reasons that climate forecastsare rarely used by managers (Rayner et al 2005) de-spite these forecastsrsquo utility However relying on thestatus quo of assuming hydrologic stationarity is coun-terproductive because the effects of climate change areevident already While uncertainty cannot be fully over-come it is possible to make wise management decisionsdespite this uncertainty (Ouranos 2008)

43 Engage hydropower-supporting institutions toconvey climate change guidance

There are several international organizations that are in-volved in different aspects of hydropower advocacy infor-mation development and planning These entities might bewell positioned to act as boundary organizations to incorpo-rate climate change information in project scoping and man-agement The International Hydropower Association (IHA)is a non-profit organization and global network working toadvance sustainable hydropower However this organizationhas shown few tangible efforts to explore climate change im-pacts on hydropower While IHA acknowledges that adap-tation to climate change is a component of sustainable hy-dropower resource and reservoir planning (IHA 2010) theirrecent conferences have had few sessions on climate changeand hydropower Those sessions that did address these top-ics focused more on climate change mitigation than climatechange adaptation (IHA 2013) Locher et al (2010) re-viewed IHArsquos recently published sustainability assessmentprotocol (IHA 2010) and found that it pays insufficient at-tention to climate change and its impact on hydropower Fi-nally the IHA (2013) report describes a new protocol formeasuring carbon emissions from reservoirs but has littleother mention of climate change

The World Commission on Dams (WCOD) is a globalmulti-stakeholder body initiated by the World Bank andWorld Conservation Union in response to opposition to largedam projects A recent report discussed how climate changewould likely reduce dam safety through an increase in ex-treme weather events (WCOD 2000) They recommend thatplanning and ongoing monitoring should include modeling

4These are organizations whose central purpose is to create andsustain meaningful and mutually beneficial links between knowl-edge producers and users (Guston 2001)

potential changes in flow due to climate change (WCOD2000) The International Centre for Hydropower (ICH) is aninternational association of companies and organizations thatare active in all aspects of hydropower generation and sup-ply Recent ICH conference proceedings suggest that climatechange will impact all hydropower development and cannotbe ignored (ICH 2016) Several sessions on hydropower andclimate change suggest growing awareness of the effects ofclimate change on hydropower development and operations

The International Energy Agency (IEA) is an organizationthat works to ensure reliable clean and affordable energyfor its 28 member countries IEA tracks global energy statis-tics such as hydropower generation and consumption mak-ing those data freely available for analysis There has beena shift in their attention to climate change but few concreteactions have been taken In 2000 there was no clear directionor policy on climate change and hydropower within IEA ac-cording to their publications while by 2013 it was mentionedas a key priority for moving forward within the organization(IEA 2013)

The World Bank is another organization that is involvedin the funding of development projects around the globeincluding hydropower The World Bank has described howinvestments in the water sector are vulnerable to climatechange (World Bank 2009) In response they have statedthat infrastructure should be designed using the best climatechange information available which should be taken intoaccount when planning new projects (World Bank 2009)They have found that traditional water supply projectionslead to different conclusions than projections that take cli-mate change into account (Ilimi 2007)

Finally the International Commission on Large Dams(ICOLD) is a professional organization whose goal is to setguidelines and standards for building dams that are safe ef-ficient economical environmentally sound and equitableA technical committee is currently drafting a report on cli-mate change dams reservoirs and water resources (ICOLD2013) This report if completed will describe the risksand uncertainties related to climate change and hydropowerpresent an impact assessment framework describe otherdrivers of change discuss hydropower emissions and pro-vide suggestions and strategies for adaptation from the pointof view of a pro-dam organization

These types of hydropower-supporting organizations ndash re-gardless of how central advocacy is to their mission ndash couldall benefit from having the best available information aboutclimate change and helping convey it to stakeholders Be-cause stakeholders are accustomed to getting informationguidance and training from these organizations extendingthat support to include climate change science could behighly effective

5 Summary and conclusions

In summary

1 The climate of the Far North is changing It is pro-jected to get warmer and wetter here through the endof the century Permafrost will continue to thaw land-locked glaciers will continue to recede and the surfacendashsubsurface partitioning of water fluxes and storage willchange We have reviewed how some of these hydro-climate changes will likely impact hydropower in farnorthern regions how this information relates to plan-ning and management and we have described the state-of-the-art techniques for predicting and estimating un-certainty

2 In order to improve predictions of far northern hydrol-ogy and estimating uncertainty for hydropower plan-ning it is necessary to improve expand and sustain ob-servational systems while continuing to improve globaland regional hydroclimate models A better quantitativeevaluation of the uncertainty of these products is alsoneeded based on emerging statistical techniques

3 Best practices in hydropower planning include hav-ing high-quality information available to stakehold-ers from observations process studies and hydrocli-mate modeling It is imperative to create structural andmanagement adaptations for hydropower under climatechange These include a more adaptive and regional hy-dropower facility licensing process flexible and adapt-able operations rules and training for operators) Fi-nally hydropower-supporting institutions should be en-gaged as boundary organizations to convey climatechange guidance

4 We have shown that hydropower infrastructure is vul-nerable to climate change For new large projects suchas the proposed Susitna-Watana dam in Alaska it is es-sential to incorporate climate change the complexitiesnoted above and uncertainty analysis into the researchduring the scoping phase to determine long-term watersupplies and downstream impacts

The changing climate and hydrology of the Far North isundoubtedly complex While the hydroclimate research com-munity is aware of shortcomings in models and data setsndash and is actively improving these tools ndash techniques haveemerged for hydrologic prediction and uncertainty analysisthat are currently employable in water resource management(Ray and Brown 2015) We need to continue to improve ourbaseline observations conduct process studies that help im-prove models quantify uncertainties where possible and alsoidentify when data are too sparse or of too poor quality to usefor decision-making

Best practices are just that practices based on the bestavailable information for hydropower planning and opera-tions Is this information perfect Absolutely not but thetwo pertinent questions are (1) is this information worththe cost it takes to generate and (2) is it good enough fordecision-making For planned and existing projects worthmillions or billions of dollars hydroclimate prediction anduncertainty estimation require a tiny fraction of the cost ofmaintaining the facility Given the potential impacts to hy-dropower production and efficiency adaptation to climatechange should be considered in the development of new hy-dropower projects (Kaunda et al 2012 Ouranos 2008)

Is the best available climate change information goodenough for decision-making Yes and it can be used in thesame risk assessment framework that is currently used inother aspects of hydropower planning such as the assess-ment of risks associated with earthquakes or flooding (Pateland Singhal 2015) For those facilities built 30 to 50 yearsago we did not have the technology to adequately projectclimate change It is clear from the impacts of drought in thewestern United States and other regions that climate changeis already affecting existing hydropower projects (Andreadisand Lettenmaier 2006 Mote 2006) If hydropower man-agers were to ignore the best available hydroclimate informa-tion today the cost to society could be quite high Buildingflexible adaptations to climate change into hydropower plan-ning and management is in the best interest of all who wantto see these projects sustained or expanded

Author contributions Jessica E Cherry prepared the bulk of themanuscript and crafted the paperrsquos outline and arguments Cor-rie Knapp performed a literature review of many related social sci-ence and physical publications which was woven throughout thepaper Sarah Trainor helped guide Corrie Knapprsquos literature reviewand helped improve the writing Andrea J Ray helped identify ap-propriate literature refine the paperrsquos arguments and helped im-prove the writing Molly Tedesche performed a preliminary liter-ature review focused on hydrology and helped proofread the finalpaper Susan Walker helped identify components to make the paperrelevant for stakeholder decision-making and proofread the final pa-per

Acknowledgements Jessica E Cherry wishes to thank the Na-tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-National MarineFisheries Service (NOAA-NMFS) for financial support of thiseffort (award no HA-133F-12-SE-2460) and Lily Cohen at theUniversity of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) for helping organize thereferences Molly Tedesche Corrie Knapp and Sarah Trainoracknowledge financial support from NOAA-NMFS under thatsame award number Sarah Trainor also acknowledges supportfrom NOAA Climate Program Office grant NA11OAR4310141through the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy atUAF Alaska EPSCoR NSF award no OIA-1208927 and the stateof Alaska Rayrsquos participation in this effort was supported in-kindby the NOAAESRL Physical Sciences Division and Walker was

supported in-kind by NOAA-NMFS The authors wish to thankACCAP and IARC for covering the cost of page charges

Edited by S UhlenbrookReviewed by two anonymous referees

References

Agrawala S Raksakulthai V Aalst M Larsen P Smith J andReynolds J Development and climate change in Nepal Focuson water resources and hydropower Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development Paris France 2003

Alaska Climate Research Center httpclimategialaskaedu lastaccess 4 April 2016

Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) Susitna-Watana Project httpwwwsusitna-watanahydroorg last access 8 February 2016

Alaska Energy Data Inventory (AEDI) httpwwwakenergyinventoryorg last access 8 February 2016

Alfieri L Perona P and Burlando P Optimal water allocation foran alpine hydropower system under changing scenarios WaterResour Manag 20 761ndash778 2006

Andreadis K M and Lettenmaier D P Trends in 20th centurydrought over the continental United States Geophys Res Lett33 L10403 doi1010292006GL025711 2006

Andrishak R and Hicks F Simulating the effects of climatechange on the ice regime of the Peace River Can J Civil Eng35 461ndash472 2008

Arendt A A Echelmeyer K A Harrison W D Lingle C Sand Valentine V B Rapid wastage of Alaska glaciers and theircontribution to rising sea level Science 297 382ndash386 2002

Arendt A A Walsh J and Harrison W Changes ofGlaciers and Climate in Northwestern North America dur-ing the Late Twentieth Century J Climate 22 4117ndash4134doi1011752009JCLI27841 2009

Arsenault R Brissette F Malo J S Minville M and LeconteR Structural and Non-Structural Climate Change AdaptationStrategies for the Pribonka Water Resource System Water Re-sour Manag 27 2075ndash2087 2013

Balsamo G Viterbo P Beljaars A van den Hurk B HirschiM Betts A K and Scipal K A revised hydrology for theECMWF model Verification from field site to terrestrial waterstorage and impact in the integrated forecast system J Hydrom-eteorol 10 623ndash643 doi1011752008JHM10681 2009

Balsamo G Pappenberger F Dutra E Viterbo P and van denHurk B A revised land hydrology in the ECMWF model Astep towards daily water flux prediction in a fully-closed watercycle Hydrol Process 25 1046ndash1054 doi101002hyp78082011

Barnett T P Adam J C and Lettenmaier D P Potential impactsof a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominatedregions Nature 438 303ndash309 2005

Barsugli J J Vogel J Kaatz L Smith J Waage M and Ander-son C A Two faces of uncertainty climate science and waterutility planning methods J Water Res Pl-ASCE 138 389ndash3952012

Barsugli J J Guentchev G Horton R M Wood A Mearns LO Liang X Z Winkler J A Dixon K Hayhoe K RoodR B Goddard L Ray A J Buja L and Ammann C The

Practitionerrsquos Dilemma How to Assess the Credibility of Down-scaled Climate Projections Eos T Am Geophys Un 94 424ndash25 2013

Beniston M Impacts of climatic change on water and associatedeconomic activities in the Swiss Alps J Hydrol 412 291ndash2962012

Bennett K E and Walsh J E Spatial and temporal changes inindices of extreme precipitation and temperature for Alaska IntJ Climatol 35 1434ndash1452 doi101002joc4067 2015

Bennett K E Werner A T and Schnorbus M Uncertaintiesin hydrologic and climate change impacts analyses in headwa-ter basins of British Columbia J Climate 25 5711ndash5730 2012

Bense V F Ferguson G and Kooi H Evolution of shallowgroundwater flow systems in areas of degrading permafrost Geo-phys Res Lett 36 L22401 doi1010292009GL039225 2009

Bergstrom S Carlsson B Gardelin M Lindstrom G Petters-son A and Rummukainen M Climate change impacts onrunoff in Sweden ndash assessments by global climate models dy-namical downscaling and hydrological modeling Climate Res16 101ndash112 2001

Beven K Smith P Westerberg I and Freer J Comment onldquoPursuing the method of multiple working hypotheses for hy-drological modelingrdquo by Clark et al Water Resour Res 48W11801 doi1010292012WR012282 2012

Bliss A Hock R and Radic V Global response of glacier runoffto twenty-first century climate change J Geophys Res-Earth119 717ndash730 2014

Bolch T Peters J Yegorov A Pradhan B Buchroithner Mand Blagoveshchensky V Identification of potentially danger-ous glacial lakes in the northern Tien Shan Nat Hazards 591691ndash1714 2011

Brekke L White K Olsen J R Townsley E Williams D Han-bali F Hennig C Brown C Raff D and Wittler R Ad-dressing Climate Change in Long-Term Water Resources Plan-ning and Management User Needs for Improving Tools and In-formation US Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Techni-cal Series CWTS-10-02 httpwwwusbrgovclimateuserneeds(last access 4 April 2016) 2011

Brekke L D Maurer E P Anderson J D Dettinger M DTownsley E S Harrison A and Pruitt T Assessing reser-voir operations risk under climate change Water Resour Res45 W04411 doi1010292008WR006941 2009

Brown C M Lund J R Cai X Reed P M Zagona E AOstfeld A Hall J Characklis G W Yu W and Brekke LThe future of water resources systems analysis Toward a sci-entific framework for sustainable water management Water Re-sour Res 51 6110ndash6124 doi1010022015WR017114 2015

Burn D H and Simonovic S P Sensitivity of Reservoir Opera-tion Performance to Climatic Change Water Resour Manag 10463ndash478 1996

Callaghan T V Johansson M Brown R D Groisman P YLabba N Radionov V Barry R G Bulygina O N Essery RL H Frolov D M Golubev V N Grenfell T C PetrushinaM N Razuvaev V N Robinson D A Romanov P ShindellD Shmakin A B Sokratov S A Warren S and Yang DQ The Changing Face of Arctic Snow Cover A Synthesis ofObserved and Projected Changes Ambio 40 17ndash31 2011a

Callaghan T V Johansson M Brown R D Groisman P YLabba N Radionov V Bradley R S Blangy S Bulygina O

N Christensen T R Colman J E Essery R L H ForbesB C Forchhammer M C Golubev V N Honrath R E Ju-day G P Meshcherskaya A V Phoenix G K Pomeroy JRautio A Robinson D A Schmidt N M Serreze M CShevchenko V P Shiklomanov A I Shmakin A B SkoldP Sturm M Woo M K and Wood E F Multiple Effects ofChanges in Arctic Snow Cover Ambio 40 32ndash45 2011b

Carey S K Boucher J L and Duarte C M Inferring ground-water contributions and pathways to streamflow during snowmeltover multiple years in a discontinuous permafrost subarctic envi-ronment (Yukon Canada) Hydrogeol J 21 67ndash77 2013

Cash D W In Order to Aid in Diffusing Useful and Practical In-formation Agricultural Extension and Boundary OrganizationsScience Technology and Human Values 26 431ndash53 2001

Chen J Brissette F P and Leconte R Coupling statistical anddynamical methods for spatial downscaling of precipitation Cli-matic Change 114 509ndash526 2012

Chen J Brissette F P and Leconte R Assessing regression-based statistical approaches for downscaling precipitation overNorth America Hydrol Process 28 3482ndash3504 2014

Chernet H H Alfredsen K and Killingtveit A The impacts ofclimate change on a Norwegian high-head hydropower systemJ Water Clim Change 4 17ndash37 2013

Cherry J E Tremblay L-B Deacutery S and Stieglitz M Solid pre-cipitation reconstruction using snow depth measurements and aland surface hydrology model Water Resour Res 41 W09401doi1010292005WR003965 2005a

Cherry J E Cullen H Visbeck M Small A and Uvo CImpacts of the North Atlantic Oscillation on Scandinavian hy-dropower production and energy markets Water Resour Manag19 673ndash691 2005b

Cherry J E Tremblay L-B Stieglitz M Gong G and DeacuteryS Development of the Pan-Arctic Snowfall Reconstruction newland-based solid precipitation estimates for 1940ndash1999 J Hy-drometeorol 8 1243ndash1263 2007

Christensen J H Krishna Kumar K Aldrian E An S-I Cav-alcanti I F A de Castro M Dong W Goswami P Hall AKanyanga J K Kitoh A Kossin J Lau N-C Renwick JStephenson D B Xie S-P and Zhou T Climate Phenomenaand their Relevance for Future Regional Climate Change in Cli-mate Change 2013 The Physical Science Basis Contribution ofWorking Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change edited by Stocker T FQin D Plattner G-K Tignor M Allen S K Boschung JNauels AXia Y Bex V and Midgley P M Cambridge Uni-versity Press Cambridge United Kingdom and New York NYUSA 2013

Christensen N S Wood A W Voisin N Lettenmaier D Pand Palmer R N The effects of climate change on the hydrol-ogy and water resources of the Colorado River basin ClimaticChange 62 337ndash363 2004

Clark M P Kavetski D and Fenicia F Pursuing the method ofmultiple working hypotheses for hydrological modeling WaterResour Res 47 W09301 doi1010292010WR009827 2011

Clark M P Fan Y Lawrence D M Adam J C BolsterD Gochis D J Hooper R P Kumar M Leung L RMackay D S Maxwell R M Shen C Swenson S C andZeng X Improving the representation of hydrologic processes

in Earth System Models Water Resour Res 51 5929ndash5956doi1010022015WR017096 2015

Cohen J L Furtado J C Barlow M Alexeev V A and CherryJ E Asymmetric seasonal temperature trends Geophys ResLett 39 L04705 doi1010292011GL050582 2012a

Cohen J L Furtado J C Barlow M Alexeev V A andCherry J E Arctic warming increasing snow cover andwidespread boreal winter cooling Environ Res Lett 7 014007doi1010881748-932671014007 2012b

Conner A M and Francfort J E US Hydropower Resource As-sessment for Alaska Idaho National Lab whitepaper DOEID-10430(AK) httphydropowerinlgovresourceassessmentpdfsstatesakpdf (last access 3 April 2016) 1997

Curran J H Streamflow record extension for selected streams inthe Susitna River Basin Alaska US Geological Survey ScientificInvestigations Report 2012ndash5210 36 2012

Dahlke H E Lyon S W Stedinger J R Rosqvist G and Jans-son P Contrasting trends in floods for two sub-arctic catch-ments in northern Sweden ndash does glacier presence matter Hy-drol Earth Syst Sci 16 2123ndash2141 doi105194hess-16-2123-2012 2012

Dibike Y B Gachon P St-Hilaire A Ouarda T B MJ and Nguyen V T-V Uncertainty analysis of statisticallydownscaled temperature and precipitation regimes in NorthernCanada Theor Appl Climatol 91 149ndash170 2008

Doumlll P Jimeacutenez-Cisneros B Oki T Arnell N W Ben-ito G Cogley J G Jiang T Kundzewicz Z WMwakalila S and Nishijima A Integrating risks of climatechange into water management Hydrolog Sci J 60 4ndash13doi101080026266672014967250 2015

Energy Information Administration (EIA) httpwwweiagovelectricityannual (last access 1 March 2015) 2015

Eum H I Dibike Y and Prowse T Uncertainty in modelingthe hydrologic responses of a large watershed a case study ofthe Athabasca River basin Canada Hydrol Process 28 4272ndash4293 2014

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Study Plan Deter-mination for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project ProjectNo P-14241 1 February 2013 httpwwwsusitna-watanahydroorgwp-contentuploads20151120130201_FERC_SPDpdf(last access 1 June 2016) 2013a

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Study PlanDetermination on 14 remaining studies for the Susitna-WatanaHydroelectric Project Project No P-14241 1 April 2013httpwwwsusitna-watanahydroorgwp-contentuploads20151120130401_FERC_SPD14remainingStudiespdf (last access1 June 2016) 2013b

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) DirectorrsquosFormal Study Dispute Determination for the Susitna-WatanaHydroelectric Project Project No P-14241 26 April 2013httpwwwsusitna-watanahydroorgwp-contentuploads20151120130426_FERC_DirectorsDisputeDeterminationpdf2013c

Fenner R A Ice Snow and Water impacts of climate changeon California and Himalayan Asia UCSD Sustainability Solu-tions Institute Publication Series httpescholarshiporgucitem8wh378h7 (last access 3 April 2016) 2009

Finger D Heinrich G Gobiet A and Bauder A Projectionsof future water resources and their uncertainty in a glacierized

catchment in the Swiss Alps and the subsequent effects on hy-dropower production during the 21st century Water ResourRes 48 W03903 doi1010292011WR010733 2012

Francis J A and Vavrus S J Evidence for a wavier jet streamin response to rapid Arctic warming Environ Res Lett 10014005 doi1010881748-9326101014005 2015

Frigon A Slivitzky M Caya D and Roy R Construc-tion of hydro-climatic projections and first-order estima-tion of their associated uncertainties from Regional ClimateModel simulations Application to water management of hy-dropower reservoirs in Quebec La Houille Blanche 6 97ndash103doi101051lhb2007089 2007

Gallucci M Solar and wind power poised to overtake hydropoweras largest source of US Renewable Electricity Generation In-ternational Business Times 1 August 2014

Gaudard L Gilli M and Romerio F Climate Change Impactson Hydropower Management Water Resour Manag 27 5143ndash5156 2013

Gebre S Alfredsen K Lia L Stickler M and Tesaker E Re-view of Ice Effects on Hydropower Systems J Cold Reg Eng27 196ndash222 2013

Genet H Oberbauer S F Colby S J Staudhammer C L andStarr G Growth responses of Sphagnum hollows to a growingseason lengthening manipulation in Alaskan Arctic tundra PolarBiol 36 41ndash50 2013

Georgakakos A P Fleming P Dettinger M Peters-Lidard CRichmond T C Reckhow K White K and Yates D WaterResources Chapter National Climate Assessment httpncadacglobalchangegov (last access 15 April 2015) 2014

Gochis D J Yu W and Yates D N The WRF-Hydromodel technical description and userrsquos guide version 20NCAR Technical Document httpwwwralucareduprojectswrf_hydro (last access 15 April 2015) 120 pp 2014

Gordon E Dilling L McNie E and Ray A J Parris A SGarfin G M Dow K Meyer R and Close S L 11 Navigat-ing scales of knowledge and decision-making in the Intermoun-tain West implications for science policy in Climate in Con-text Science and Society Partnering for Adaptation John Wileyamp Sons Ltd Chichester UK 235ndash254 ISBN 97811184747922016

Gurnell A M Sediment yield from Alpine glacier basins in Sed-iment and Water Quality in River Catchments edited by FosterI D L Gurnell A M and Webb B W Wiley New York407ndash435 1995

Guston D H Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policyand Science An Introduction Sci Technol Hum Val 26 399ndash408 2001

Hagemann S Chen C Clark D B Folwell S Gosling S NHaddeland I Hanasaki N Heinke J Ludwig F Voss Fand Wiltshire A J Climate change impact on available wa-ter resources obtained using multiple global climate and hydrol-ogy models Earth Syst Dynam 4 129ndash144 doi105194esd-4-129-2013 2013

Hagg W Braun L N Weber M and Becht M Runoff mod-elling in glacierized Central Asian catchments for present-dayand future climate Nord Hydrol 37 93ndash105 2006

Hamlet A F Assessing water resources adaptive capacity toclimate change impacts in the Pacific Northwest Region of

North America Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15 1427ndash1443doi105194hess-15-1427-2011 2011

Hamududu B and Killingtveit A Assessing Climate Change Im-pacts on Global Hydropower Energies 5 305ndash322 2012

Harrison G P and Whittington H W Vulnerability of hy-dropower projects to climate change IEEEE P-Gener TransmD 149 249ndash255 2002

Harrison G P Whittington H W and Wallace A R Climatechange impacts on financial risk in hydropower projects IEEET Power Syst 18 1324ndash1330 2003

Harrison W Drage B Bredthauer S Johnson D Schoch Cand Follet A Reconnaissance of the Glaciers of the SusitnaRiver Basin in Connection with Proposed Hydroelectric Devel-opment Ann Glaciol 4 99ndash104 1983

Hansen J Ruedy R Sato M and Lo K Global sur-face temperature change Rev Geophys 48 RG4004doi1010292010RG000345 2010

Hartmann D L Klein Tank A M G Rusticucci M Alexan-der L V Broumlnnimann S Charabi Y Dentener F J Dlugo-kencky E J Easterling D R Kaplan A Soden B J ThorneP W Wild M and Zhai P M Observations Atmosphere andSurface in Climate Change 2013 The Physical Science BasisContribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Reportof the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change edited byStocker T F Qin D Plattner G-K Tignor M Allen S KBoschung J Nauels A Xia Y Bex V and Midgley P MCambridge University Press Cambridge United Kingdom andNew York NY USA 2013

Hawkins E and Sutton R The Potential to Narrow Uncertainty inRegional Climate Predictions B Am Meterol Soc 90 1095ndash1107 2009

Hochstein A Arctic Renewable Energy a Focal Point for the USArctic Council Chairmanship DIPNOTEUS Dept of State Offi-cial Blog 7 May 2015 httpsblogsstategovstories 2015

Horstmann B Glacial Lake Outburst Floods in Nepal and Switzer-land New Threats due to Climate Change Germanwatch Bonnhttpgermanwatchorgen2753 (last access 18 February 2014)2004

Hurd B Leary N Jones R and Smith J Relative regional vul-nerability of water resources to climate change J Am WaterResour As 35 1399ndash1409 1999

Huss M Farinotti D Bauder A and Funk M Modelling runofffrom highly glacierized alpine drainage basins in a changing cli-mate Hydrol Process 22 3888ndash3902 2008

Ilimi A Estimating Global Climate Change Impacts on Hy-dropower Projects The World Bank Policy Research WorkingPaper 4344 2007

Inderberg T H and Loslashchen L A Adaptation to climate changeamong electricity distribution companies in Norway and Swe-den lessons from the field Local Environment 17 663ndash678doi101080135498392011646971 2012

International Centre for Hydropower (ICH) Risk Management inHydropower Development Proceedings 2016

International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD) Draft Bul-letin Global Climate Change Dams Reservoirs and RelatedWater Resources httpwwwicold-cigborg (last access 3 April2016) 2013

International Energy Agency (IEA) Overview of IEA Hy-dropower Implementation Agreement httpwwwneforjp

ieahydrocontentspdfinfoinfo201303-1-3pdf (last access 3April 2016) 2013

International Hydropower Association (IEA) IHA HydropowerReport httpswwwhydropowerorgpublications (last access 3April 2016) 2010

International Hydropower Association (IEA) IHA Hydropower Re-port httpswwwhydropowerorg2013-hydropower-report (lastaccess 3 April 2016) 2013

Jimeacutenez Cisneros B E Oki T Arnell N W Benito G CogleyJ G Doumlll P Jiang T and Mwakalila S S Freshwater re-sources in Climate Change 2014 ImpactsAdaptation and Vul-nerability Part A Global and Sectoral Aspects Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change edited by Field C BBarros V R Dokken D J Mach K J Mastrandrea M DBilir T E Chatterjee M Ebi K L Estrada Y O Genova RC Girma B Kissel E S Levy A N MacCracken S Mas-trandrea P R and White L L Cambridge University PressCambridge United Kingdom and New York NY USA 229ndash269 2014

Jansson P Hock R and Schneider T The concept of glacierstorage a review J Hydrol 282 116ndash129 doi101016S0022-1694(03)00258-0 2003

Johannesson T Aethalgeirsdoacutettir G Ahlstrom A Andreassen LM Bjornsson H de Woul M Elvehoy H Flowers G EGuethmundsson S Hock R Holmlund P Palsson F RadicV Sigurethsson O and Thorsteinsson T The impact of climatechange on glaciers and glacial runoff in the Nordic countries Eu-ropean Conference on Impacts of Climate Change on RenewableEnergy Sources Reykjavik Iceland 5ndash9 June 31ndash34 2006

Jones J B and Rinehart A J The long-term response of streamflow to climatic warming in headwater streams of interior AlaskaCan J Forest Res 40 1210ndash1218 2010

Jonsdottir J F A runoff map based on numerically simulated pre-cipitation and a projection of future runoff in Iceland HydrologSci J 53 100ndash111 2008

Jost G and Weber F Potential Impacts of ClimateChange on BC Hydrorsquos Water Resources BC BC Hydrohttpswwwbchydrocomcontentdamhydromedialibinternetdocumentsaboutclimate_change_report_2012pdf (last access28 December 2016) 2012

Kane D L Gieck R E and Hinzman L D Evapotranspirationfrom a Small Alaskan Arctic Watershed Nord Hydrol 21 253ndash272 1990

Kaunda C S Kimambo C Z and Nielsen T K Hydropowerin the Context of Sustainable Energy Supply A Review of Tech-nologies and Challenges International Scholarly Research No-tices 2012

Key J Goodison B Schoner W Godoy O Ondras M andSnorrason A A Global Cryosphere Watch Arctic 68 48ndash582015

Kirkinen J Martikainen A Holttinen H Savolainen I Auvi-nen O and Syri S Impacts on the energy sector and adapta-tion of the electricity network business under a changing climatein Finland FINADAPT Working Paper 10 Finnish EnvironmentInstitute Mimeographs 340 Helsinki 36 pp 2005

Koutsoyiannis D Montanari A Lins H F and Cohn T ADiscussion of ldquoThe implications of projected climate change forfreshwater resources and their managementrdquo Climate hydrology

and freshwater towards an interactive incorporation of hydro-logical experience into climate research Hydrolog Sci J 54394ndash405 2009

Kundzewicz Z W and Stakhiv E Z Are climate models ldquoreadyfor prime timerdquo in water resources management applicationsor is more research needed Hydrolog Sci J 55 1085ndash10892010

Kunreuther H Heal G Allen M Edenhofer O Field C B andYohe G Risk management and climate change Nature ClimateChange 3 447ndash450 2013

Kutuzov S and Shahgedanova M Glacier retreat and climaticvariability in the eastern Terskey-Alatoo inner Tien Shan be-tween the middle of the 19th century and beginning of the 21stcentury Global Planet Change 69 59ndash70 2009

Lawrence D and Hisdal H Hydrological projections for floodsin Norway under a future climate Report 5 Norwegian WaterResources and Energy Directorate 47 pp 2011

Lettenmaier D P Wood A W Palmer R N Wood E F andStakhiv E Z Water resources implications of global warmingA US regional perspective Climatic Change 43 537ndash579 1999

Li H Wigmosta M S Huang H W M Ke Y Coleman A Mand Leung L R A Physically Based Runoff Routing Model forLand Surface and Earth System Models J Hydrometeorol 14808ndash828 2013

Locher H Hermansen G Y Johannesson G A Xuezhong YPhiri I Harrison D Hartmann J Simon M OrsquoLeary DLowrance C Fields D Abadie A Abdel-Malek R ScanlonA and Nyman K Initiatives in the hydro sector post-WorldCommission on Dams ndash The Hydropower Sustainability Assess-ment Forum Water Alternatives 3 43ndash57 2010

Lofgren B M Gronewold A D Acciaioli A Cherry J ESteiner A and Watkins D Methodological Approaches to Pro-jecting the Hydrologic Impacts of Climate Change Earth Inter-act 17 1ndash19 doi1011752013EI0005321 2013

Lowrey J Ray A and Webb R Factors Influencing the Use ofClimate Information by Colorado Municipal Water ManagersClim Res 40 103ndash119 2009

Lund J R Integrating social and physical sciences inwater management Water Resour Res 51 5905ndash5918doi1010022015WR017125 2015

Madani K Hydropower licensing and climate change Insightsfrom cooperative game theory Adv Water Resour 34 174ndash1832011

Madani K and Lund J R Estimated impacts of climate warm-ing on Californiarsquos high-elevation hydropower Climatic Change102 521ndash538 2010

Malewitz J Drought Hastens End of a Regionrsquos Hydropower EraThe Texas Tribune and the New York Times httpnytims1cLfBrx (last access 3 April 2016) 2014

Markoff M S and Cullen A C Impact of climate change onPacific Northwest hydropower Climatic Change 87 451ndash4692008

Marttila V Granholm H Laanikari J Yrjoumllauml T Aalto A Heik-inheimo P Honkatukia J Jaumlrvinen H Liski J Merivirta Rand Paunio M Finlandrsquos National Strategy for Adaptation toClimate Change Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of FinlandPublication 1a2005 2005

Mastrandrea M D Field C B Stocker T F Edenhofer OEbi K L Frame D J Held H Kriegler E Mach K J

Matschoss P R Plattner G-K Yohe G W and Zwiers F WGuidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth AssessmentReport on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties Intergovern-mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) httpswwwipccchpdfsupporting-materialuncertainty-guidance-notepdf (last ac-cess 27 December 2016) 2010

McAfee S Guentchev G and Eischeid J Reconciling precipita-tion trends in Alaska 2 Gridded data analyses J Geophys Res-Atmos 119 13820ndash13837 doi1010022014JD022461 2014

McAfee S A Guentchev G and Eischeid J K Reconcilingprecipitation trends in Alaska 1 Station-based analyses J Geo-phys Res-Atmos 118 7523ndash7541 2013

McClelland J W Tank S E Spencer R G M and ShiklomanovA I Coordination and Sustainability of River Observing Activ-ities in the Arctic Arctic 68 59ndash68 2015

Mehta V K Rheinheimer D E Yates D Purkey D R Viers JH Young C A and Mount J F Potential impacts on hydrol-ogy and hydropower production under climate warming of theSierra Nevada J Water Clim Change 2 29ndash43 2011

Mekis Eacute and Vincent L A An overview of the second generationadjusted daily precipitation dataset for trend analysis in CanadaAtmos Ocean 49 163ndash177 2011

Melillo J M Richmond T C and Yohe G W (Eds) Cli-mate Change Impacts in the United States The Third NationalClimate Assessment US Global Change Research Program841 pp doi107930J0Z31WJ2 2014

Miller C Hybrid management boundary organizations sciencepolicy and environmental governance in the climate regime SciTechnol Hum Val 26 478ndash500 2001

Milly P C D Betancourt J Falkenmark M Hirsch R MKundzewicz Z W Lettenmaier D P and Stouffer R J Cli-mate change ndash Stationarity is dead Whither water managementScience 319 573ndash574 2008

Minville M Brissette F Krau S and Leconte R Adaptationto Climate Change in the Management of a Canadian Water-Resources System Exploited for Hydropower Water ResourManag 23 2965ndash2986 2009

Minville M Brissette F and Leconte R Impacts and Uncer-tainty of Climate Change on Water Resour Manag of the Peri-bonka River System (Canada) J Water Res Pl-ASCE 136376ndash385 2010a

Minville M Krau S Brissette F and Leconte R Behaviour andPerformance of a Water Resource System in Quebec (Canada)Under Adapted Operating Policies in a Climate Change ContextWater Resour Manag 24 1333ndash1352 2010b

Molarius R Keranen J Schabel J and Wessberg N Creatinga climate change risk assessment procedure Hydropower plantcase Finland Hydrol Res 41 282ndash294 2010

Moran E H and Solin G L Preliminary water-table map andwater-quality data for part of the Matanuska-Susitna ValleyAlaska 2005 US Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1209 43 pp 2006

Mote P W Climate-Driven Variability and Trends in MountainSnowpack in Western North America J Climate 19 6209ndash6220 2006

Mukheibir P Potential consequences of projected climate changeimpacts on hydroelectricity generation Climatic Change 12167ndash78 2013

Murray M S Anderson L Cherkashov G Cuyler C ForbesB Gascard J C Haas C Schlosser P Shaver G ShimadaK Tjernstroumlm M Walsh J Wandell J and Zhao Z Interna-tional Study of Arctic Change Science Plan ISAC InternationalProgram Office Stockholm 2010

Narama C Duishonakunov M Kaumlaumlb A Daiyrov M and Ab-drakhmatov K The 24 July 2008 outburst flood at the westernZyndan glacier lake and recent regional changes in glacier lakesof the Teskey Ala-Too range Tien Shan Kyrgyzstan Nat Haz-ards Earth Syst Sci 10 647ndash659 doi105194nhess-10-647-2010 2010

NOAANMFS Study request to the Federal Energy RegulatoryCommission Susitna-Watana Project Alaska (P-14241) Enclo-sure 12 Susitna River Project Effects Under Changing ClimateConditions Study Request 31 May 2012 httpsalaskafisheriesnoaagovsitesdefaultfilesfercsusitnamasterstudypdf (last ac-cess 27 December 2016) 2012

NOAANMFS Study modification request to the Fed-eral Energy Regulatory Commission Susitna-WatanaProject Alaska (P-14241) 77 Glacial and RunoffChanges httpsalaskafisheriesnoaagovsitesdefaultfilesfercsusitnafinalreviewdocument062216pdf 37 pp 27 Decem-ber 2016

Oki T and Kanae S Global hydrological cycles and world waterresources Science 313 1068ndash1072 2006

Olchev A and Novenko E Estimation of potential and actualevaportranspiration of boreal forest ecosystems in the Euro-pean part of Russia during the Holocene Environ Res Lett 6045213 doi1010881748-932664045213 2011

OrsquoNeel S Hood E Arendt A and Sass L Assessing streamflow sensitivity to variations in glacier mass balance ClimaticChange 123 329ndash341 doi101007s10584-013-1042-7 2014

Ouranos The Impact of Climate Change on Hydro-Electricity Gen-eration CEATI REPORT No T072700-0409 wwwceaticom(last access 3 April 2016) 2008

Patel G P and Singhal S Perception and management of risk inhydropower projects in Proceedings of the International Confer-ence on Hydropower for Sustainable Development 5ndash7 Febru-ary 2015 Dehradun India 331ndash338 2015

Payne J T Wood A W Hamlet A F Palmer R N and Let-tenmaier D P Mitigating the effects of climate change on thewater resources of the Columbia River Basin Climatic Change62 233ndash256 2004

Peacock S Projected Twenty-First-Century Changes in Temper-ature Precipitation and Snow Cover over North America inCCSM4 J Climate 25 4405ndash4428 doi101175JCLI-D-11-002141 2012

Pechlivanidis I G Jackson B M and McIntyre N R Catch-ment scale hydrological modelling a review of model typescalibration approaches and uncertainty analysis methods in thecontext of recent developments in technology and ApplicationsGlobal NEST J 13 193ndash214 2011

Perez-Diaz J I and Wilhelmi J R Assessment of the economicimpact of environmental constraints on short-term hydropowerplant operation Energ Policy 38 7960ndash7970 2010

Pittock J Viewpoint ndash Better Management of Hydropower in anEra of Climate Change Water Alternatives 3 444ndash452 2010

Prowse T Alfredsen K Beltaos S Bonsal B Bowden W BDuguay C Korhola A McNamara J Vincent W F Vuglin-

sky V Walter Anthony K M and Weyhenmeyer G A Ef-fects of changes in Arctic river and lake ice Ambio 40 63ndash74doi101007s13280-011-0217-6 2011

Prowse T D and Beltaos S Climatic control of river-ice hydrology a review Hydrol Process 16 805ndash822doi101002hyp369 2002

Quinton W L Hayashi M and Chasmer L E Permafrost-thaw-induced land-cover change in the Canadian subarctic implica-tions for water resources Hydrol Process 25 152ndash158 2011

Radic V and Hock R Glaciers in the Earthrsquos Hydrological CycleAssessments of Glacier Mass and Runoff Changes on Global andRegional Scales Surv Geophys 35 813ndash837 2014

Rajagopalan B Nowak N Prairie J Hoerling M Harding BBarsugli J Ray A and Udall B Water supply risk on theColorado River Can management mitigate Water Resour Res45 W08201 doi1010292008WR007652 2009

Raje D and Mujumdar P P Reservoir performance under uncer-tainty in hydrologic impacts of climate change Adv Water Re-sour 33 312ndash326 2010

Rawlins M A Steele M Holland M Adam J C Cherry JE Francis J A Groisman P Hinzman L D Huntington TG Kane D L Kimball J S Kwok R Lammers R B Let-tenmaier D P McDonald K C Podest E Pundsack J WRudels B Serreze M C Shiklomanov A Skagseth O TroyT J Vorosmarty C J Wensnahan M Wood E R WoodgateR Yang D Zhang K and Zhang T Analysis of the ArcticSystem Freshwater Cycle Intensification Observations and Ex-pectations J Climate 23 5715ndash5737 2010

Ray P A and Brown C M Confronting climate uncertaintyin water resources planning and project design the decisiontree framework Washington DC World Bank Group 149 pp2015

Rayner S Lach D and Ingram H Weather forecasts are forwimps Why water resource managers do not use climate fore-casts Climatic Change 69 197ndash227 2005

REAPRenewable Energy Alaska Projects httpalaskarenewableenergyorgindexphpclean-energy-in-alaskamap-of-re-installations last access 27 December 2016

Rheinheimer D E Yarnell S M and Viers J H HydropowerCosts of Environmental Flows and Climate Warming in Califor-niarsquos Upper Yuba River Watershed River Res Appl 29 1291ndash1305 2013

Rhines A and Huybers P Frequent summer temperature ex-tremes reflect changes in the mean not the variance P NatlAcad Sci USA 110 E546 doi101073pnas12187481102013

Richardson S D and Reynolds J M An overview of glacial haz-ards in the Himalayas Quatern Int 65 31ndash47 2000

Robinson P J Climate change and hydropower generation Int JClimatol 17 983ndash996 1997

Rummukainen M Raisanen J Bjorge D Christensen J HChristensen O B Iversen T Jylha K Olafsson H andTuomenvirta H Regional climate scenarios for use in Nordicwater resources studies Nord Hydrol 34 399ndash412 2003

Schaefli B Hingray B and Musy A Climate change and hy-dropower production in the Swiss Alps quantification of po-tential impacts and related modelling uncertainties HydrolEarth Syst Sci 11 1191ndash1205 doi105194hess-11-1191-2007 2007

Scherer L and Pfister S Hydropowerrsquos Biogenic Carbon FootprintPLoS ONE 11 e0161947 doi101371journalpone01619472016

Serreze M C and Barry R G The Arctic Climate System 2ndEdn Cambridge University Press Cambridge 415 pp 2014

Shrestha R R Schnorbus M A Werner A T and Berland A JModelling spatial and temporal variability of hydrologic impactsof climate change in the Fraser River basin British ColumbiaCanada Hydrol Process 26 1840ndash1860 2012

Sorg A Bolch T Stoffel M Solomina O and Beniston MClimate change impacts on glaciers and runoff in Tien Shan(Central Asia) Nature Climate Change 2 725ndash731 2012

Timalsina N P Charmasson J and Alfredsen K T Simulationof the ice regime in a norwegian regulated river Cold Reg SciTechnol 94 61ndash73 2013

Toniolo H and Schultz J Experiments on sediment trap efficiencyin reservoirs Lakes amp Reservoirs Research and Management10 13ndash24 2005

Vano J A Scott M J Voisin N Stoumlckle C O Hamlet A FMickelson K E B Elsner M M G and Lettenmaier D PClimate change impacts on water management and irrigated agri-culture in the Yakima River Basin Washington USA ClimaticChange 102 287ndash317 doi101007s10584-010-9856-z 2010

Veijalainen N Lotsari E Alho P Vehvilainen B and KayhkoJ National scale assessment of climate change impacts on flood-ing in Finland J Hydrol 391 333ndash350 2010

Vicuna S Leonardson R Hanemann M W Dale L L andDracup J A Climate change impacts on high elevation hy-dropower generation in Californiarsquos Sierra Nevada a case studyin the Upper American River Climatic Change 87 S123ndashS1372008

Vicuna S Dracup J A and Dale L Climate change impacts ontwo high-elevation hydropower systems in California ClimaticChange 109 151ndash169 2011

Viers J H Hydropower Relicensing and Climate Change J AmWater Resour As 47 655ndash661 2011

Viviroli D Archer D R Buytaert W Fowler H J GreenwoodG B Hamlet A F Huang Y Koboltschnig G Litaor MI Loacutepez-Moreno J I Lorentz S Schaumldler B Schreier HSchwaiger K Vuille M and Woods R Climate change andmountain water resources overview and recommendations forresearch management and policy Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 15471ndash504 doi105194hess-15-471-2011 2011

Walsh J Wuebbles D Hayhoe K Kossin J Kunkel KStephens G Thorne P Vose R Wehner M Willis J An-derson D Doney S Feely R Hennon P Kharin V Knut-son T Landerer F Lenton T Kennedy J and Somerville RCh 2 Our Changing Climate Climate Change Impacts in theUnited States The Third National Climate Assessment editedby Melillo J M Richmond T C and Yohe G W US GlobalChange Research Program 19ndash67 doi107930J0KW5CXT2014

Wada T Chikita K A Kim Y and Kudo I Glacial Effectson Discharge and Sediment Load in the Subarctic Tanana RiverBasin Alaska Arct Antarct Alp Res 43 632ndash648 2011

Wilby R L Evaluating climate model outputs for hydrological ap-plications Hydrolog Sci J 55 1090ndash1093 2010

Wilby R L and Dessai S Robust adaptation to climate changeWeather 65 180ndash185 doi101002wea543 2010

Wilson D Hisdal H and Lawrence D Has streamflow changedin the Nordic countries ndash Recent trends and comparisons to hy-drological projections J Hydrol 394 334ndash346 2010

World Bank Directions in hydropower Washington DCWorld Bank httpdocumentsworldbankorgcurateden20090312331040directions-hydropower (last access 3 April 2016)2009

World Commission on Dams (WCOD) Dams and DevelopmentA new framework for Decision-Making wwwuneporgdamsWCDreportWCD_DAMSreportpdf (last access 27 December2016 356 pp 2000

Wolken G Bliss A Hock R Whorton E Braun J LiljedahlA Zhang J Youcha E Schulla J Gusmeroli A Aubry-Wake C Beedlow A C and Hoffman A Susitna-WatanaHydroelectric Project (FERC No 14241) Glacier and RunoffChanges Study Final Study Report 2015

Yuan X Roundy J K Wood E F and Sheffield J Seasonalforecasting of global hydrologic extremes system developmentand evaluation over GEWEX basins B Am Meteorol Soc 961895ndash1912 doi101175BAMS-D-14-000031 2015

Zeng H Jia G and Epstein H Recent changes in phe-nology over the northern high latitudes detected from multi-satellite data Environ Res Lett 6 045508 doi1010881748-932664045508 2011

Abstract

Introduction

Climate change impacts on hydropower

Scope and methods of study

Climate change impacts on hydropower supply and demand

Climate change complexity in the Far North

Predicting far northern hydrology and estimating uncertainty

Long-term projections

Seasonal and shorter-term prediction

Estimating and reducing uncertainty

Best practices for integration of climate change science into project planning and management

Amass high-quality information via baseline observations process studies and hydroclimate modeling

Create structural and management adaptations for hydropower under climate change

Engage hydropower-supporting institutions to convey climate change guidance

Summary and conclusions

Author contributions

Acknowledgements

References

199013 199113 199213 199313 199413 199513 199613 199713 199813 199913 200013 200113 200213 200313 200413 200513 200613 200713 200813 200913 201013 201113 201213 201313

Million13 MWh13

Year13

Hydro13 genera5on13 Genera5on13 from13 other13 renewables13 Linear13 (Hydro13 genera5on)13

Figure 1 Trends in hydropower production and other renewables in the United States Data are from httpwwweiagovelectricityannual

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013 201213

Billion

13 Kilo

hours13

Year13

Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska10013

Finland1013

Figure 2 Trends in hydropower generation in selected northern regions 1980ndash2012 Data are from the Energy Information Administrationand the Alaska Energy Data Gateway Generation statistics in Alaska and Finland have been multiplied by factors that make them easier tovisualize on the same graph as the other data

the phase of precipitation change from snow to rain andhow will total precipitation volumes and timing of stor-age change How do changes in air and water tempera-tures impact the timing of snowmelt river ice cover andrunoff Do changes in glaciers and ground ice impact riversediment loads and subsequently fish habitat and potentialor existing hydropower infrastructure While these climate-related questions also apply to alpine hydropower areas inthe contiguous United States they are major concerns forhydropower in the Far North and have received little atten-

tion Figure 4 shows that the percent of hydropower capacityused in the Far North has actually decreased in several coun-tries suggesting either the impacts of a changing climatea misalignment of infrastructure and resources or both Itmay also reflect an increasing number of in-stream flow reg-ulations and other actions responding to concerns about theimpacts of hydropower on ecosystems and the environmentBecause of the ongoing energy development throughout theFar North there is an urgent need to understand the interac-tion of changing climate and hydropower

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

Million13 Kilowa

s13 Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska10013

Finland1013

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

1313 c

ity 1313 u

sed 1313

Year13

Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska13

Finland13

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

Million13 Kilowa

s13 Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska10013

Finland1013

198013 198213 198413 198613 198813 199013 199213 199413 199613 199813 200013 200213 200413 200613 200813 201013

1313 c

ity 1313 u

sed 1313

Year13

Canada13

Norway13

Russia13

Sweden13

Alaska13

Finland13

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

In summary

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Abstract

Introduction














Acknowledgements

References

Documents

Planning for climate change impacts on hydropower in the