Including Variability across Climate Change Projections in Assessing Impacts on Water Resources in an Intensively Managed Landscape
Abstract
:Key Points
- Parameters of a stochastic weather generator are estimated from 11 bias-corrected simulations of two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5, and weather observations of the recent past.
- We generate one hundred realizations of daily weather for RCP 4.5, RCP 8.5, and ten recent past (PAST) scenarios and input them into a model capturing natural hydrology and water management in an intensively managed system.
- Model outputs allow us to quantify probability distributions of allocated and unsatisfied irrigation water and their spatial patterns and indicate that warmer scenarios are associated with higher and more variable unsatisfied demand.
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Study Area
3. Methods and Models
3.1. Creation of Forcing Ensembles
3.1.1. The Stochastic Weather Generator
3.1.2. Modeling Scenario Design
- (1)
- PAST: This scenario group evaluates a 30-year period of observed weather conditions as a baseline, against which the two other categories of climate change impacts are compared.
- (2)
- RCP4.5: This scenario group uses bias-corrected, statistically downscaled GCM projections from IPCC Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) RCP4.5, reflecting the stabilization scenario in which total radiative forcing is assumed to be stabilized before 2100 by employing a range of technologies and strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It assumes that net anthropogenic radiative forcing values in the year 2100 will be 4.5 W/m2 above preindustrial values.
- (3)
- RCP8.5: This scenario group uses bias-corrected, statistically downscaled GCM projections from IPCC RCP8.5, reflecting increasing greenhouse gas emissions over time. This scenario group represents the most extreme warming outlook captured by the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report and is meant to represent a “business as usual” response to global warming. It represents a net anthropogenic radiative forcing of 8.5 W/m2 relative to preindustrial values in the year 2100.
3.1.3. Creation of Forcing Ensembles
3.2. Coupled Socio-Hydrology Systems Model
4. Datasets
5. Results
5.1. Climate Change Analysis
5.2. Irrigation Water Analysis
6. Discussion
6.1. Adopting Stochastic Weather Generators with GCM Output May Avoid the Deficiencies Employing Individual Method
6.2. The Effects of Climate Change on Regional Scale Hydrology and Irrigation
6.3. Limitations
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Boxplot of Monthly Climate Statistics (12 Variables) of 11 Selected GCMs. The Circles Indicate the PAST Monthly Average
References
- Klos, P.Z.; Link, T.E.; Abatzoglou, J.T. Extent of the rain-snow transition zone in the western US under historic and projected climate. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2014, 41, 4560–4568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steimke, A.L.; Han, B.; Brandt, J.S.; Flores, A.N. Climate Change and Curtailment: Evaluating Water Management Practices in the Context of Changing Runoff Regimes in a Snowmelt-Dominated Basin. Water 2018, 10, 1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vano, J.A.; Nijssen, B.; Lettenmaier, D.P. Seasonal hydrologic responses to climate change in the Pacific Northwest. Water Resour. Res. 2015, 51, 1959–1976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giorgi, F.; Jones, C.; Asrar, G.R. Addressing climate information needs at the regional level: The CORDEX framework. World Meteorol. Org. (WMO) Bull. 2009, 58, 175. [Google Scholar]
- Hawkins, E.; Sutton, R.; Hawkins, E.; Sutton, R. The Potential to Narrow Uncertainty in Regional Climate Predictions. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2009, 90, 1095–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abatzoglou, J.T. Development of gridded surface meteorological data for ecological applications and modelling. Int. J. Climatol. 2013, 33, 121–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abatzoglou, J.T.; Brown, T.J. A comparison of statistical downscaling methods suited for wildfire applications. Int. J. Climatol. 2012, 32, 772–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dosio, A.; Paruolo, P. Bias correction of the ENSEMBLES high-resolution climate change projections for use by impact models: Evaluation on the present climate. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2011, 116, D16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; François, P.B.; Leconte, R. A daily stochastic weather generator for preserving low-frequency of climate variability. J. Hydrol. 2010, 388, 480–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, C.W. Stochastic simulation of daily precipitation, temperature, and solar radiation. Water Resour. Res. 1981, 17, 182–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, C.W.; Wright, D.A. WGEN: A Model for Generating Daily Weather Variables; US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service: Washington, DC, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Semenov, M.A.; Barrow, E.M. Use of a Stochastic Weather Generator in the Development of Climate Change Scenarios. Clim. Chang. 1997, 35, 397–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilks, D.S. Use of stochastic weathergenerators for precipitation downscaling. WIREs Clim. Chang. 2010, 1, 898–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, C.Y. From GCMs to river flow: A review of downscaling methods and hydrologic modelling approaches. Prog. Phys. Geogr. 1999, 23, 229–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrich, C.R. Treasure Valley Hydrologic Project Executive Summary; Idaho Water Resources Research Institute: Boise, ID, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Urban, S.M.; Petrich, C.R. Water Budget for the Treasure Valley Aquifer System; Treasure Valley Hydrologic Project Research Report; Idaho Department of Water Resources: Boise, ID, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Han, B.; Benner, S.G.; Bolte, J.P.; Vache, K.B.; Flores, A.N. Coupling biophysical processes and water rights to simulate spatially distributed water use in an intensively managed hydrologic system. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2017, 21, 3671–3685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouzaher, A.; Shogren, J.F.; Holtkamp, D.; Gassman, P.W.; Archer, D.; Lakshminarayan, P.G.; Carriquiry, A.L.; Reese, R. Agricultural Policies and Soil Degradation in Western Canada: An Agro-Ecological Economic Assessment, Report 2: The Environmental Modeling System; Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University: Ames, IA, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Forsythe, N.; Fowler, H.J.; Blenkinsop, S.; Burton, A.; Kilsby, C.G.; Archer, D.R.; Harpham, C.; Hashmi, M.Z. Application of a stochastic weather generator to assess climate change impacts in a semi-arid climate: The Upper Indus Basin. J. Hydrol. 2014, 517, 1019–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayhoe, H.N.; Stewart, D.W. Evaluation of CLIGEN and WXGEN weather data generators under Canadian conditions. Can. Water Resour. J. 1996, 21, 53–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kilsby, C.G.; Jones, P.D.; Burton, A.; Ford, A.C.; Fowler, H.J.; Harpham, C.; James, P.; Smith, A.; Wilby, R.L. A daily weather generator for use in climate change studies. Environ. Model. Softw. 2007, 22, 1705–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Racsko, P.; Szeidl, L.; Semenov, M. A serial approach to local stochastic weather models. Ecol. Model. 1991, 57, 27–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qian, B.; Gameda, S.; Hayhoe, H.; De Jong, R.; Bootsma, A. Comparison of LARS-WG and AAFC-WG stochastic weather generators for diverse Canadian climates. Clim. Res. 2004, 26, 175–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolte, J.P.; Hulse, D.W.; Gregory, S.V.; Smith, C. Modeling biocomplexity–actors, landscapes and alternative futures. Environ. Model. Softw. 2006, 22, 570–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarlock, A.D. Prior appropriation: Rule, principle, or rhetoric. N.D.L. Rev. 2000, 76, 881. [Google Scholar]
- Stocker, T.F. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- USGS. Irrigation Water Use. 2015. Available online: https://water.usgs.gov/watuse/wuir.html (accessed on 23 January 2019).
Model | Development Center |
---|---|
BNU-ESM | College of Global Change and Earth System Science, Beijing Normal University, China |
CanESM2 | Canadian Center for Climate Modeling and Analysis |
CNRM-CM5 | National Center of Meteorological Research, France |
CSIRO-Mk3-6-0 | Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization/Queensland Climate Change Center of Excellence, Australia |
GFDL-ESM2G | NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, USA |
GFDL-ESM2M | NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, USA |
IPSL-CM5A-LR | Institut Pierre Smon Laplace, France |
IPSL-CM5A-MR | Institut Pierre Smon Laplace, France |
IPSL-CM5B-LR | Institut Pierre Smon Laplace, France |
MIROC5 | Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute (The University of Tokyo), National Institute of Environmental Studies, and Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology |
MRI-CGCM3 | Meteorological Research Institute, Japan |
Variable | Description |
---|---|
PRECIP | Average monthly precipitation |
TMAX | Average monthly maximum air temperature |
TMIN | Average monthly minimum air temperature |
PWD | Monthly probability of wet day after dry day |
PWW | Monthly probability of wet day after wet day |
DAYP | Average number days of rain per month days |
RAD | Average monthly solar radiation |
SDMX | Monthly average standard deviation of daily maximum temperature |
SDMM | Monthly average standard deviation of daily minimum temperature |
SDRF | Monthly standard deviation of daily precipitation |
SKRF | Monthly skew coefficient for daily precipitation |
RH | Monthly average relative humidity (fraction) |
WS | Average monthly wind speed |
Input Data | Data Source | Year | Use in Model | Link |
---|---|---|---|---|
Streams | NHDPlus | 2012 | Build stream network and flow routing | http://www.horizon-systems.com/nhdplus/NHDPlusV2_17.php |
Land use/land cover | National Landcover dataset (NLCD) | 2011 | Evaportranspirtaion | http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2011.php |
Water Rights | Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) | 2010 | Irrigation (Watermaster) | http://www.idwr.idaho.gov/ftp/gisdata/Spatial/WaterRights |
Major climate variables | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) | 1981–2014 | Climate input | http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/CDO/cdodata.cmd |
Solar radiation | National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) | 1981–2010 | Climate input | http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/ |
Reservoir Inflow | Hydromet Pacific Northwest Region | 2012 | Inflow boundary | http://www.usbr.gov/pn/hydromet/arcread.html |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Han, B.; Benner, S.G.; Flores, A.N. Including Variability across Climate Change Projections in Assessing Impacts on Water Resources in an Intensively Managed Landscape. Water 2019, 11, 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020286
Han B, Benner SG, Flores AN. Including Variability across Climate Change Projections in Assessing Impacts on Water Resources in an Intensively Managed Landscape. Water. 2019; 11(2):286. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020286
Chicago/Turabian StyleHan, Bangshuai, Shawn G. Benner, and Alejandro N. Flores. 2019. "Including Variability across Climate Change Projections in Assessing Impacts on Water Resources in an Intensively Managed Landscape" Water 11, no. 2: 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020286
APA StyleHan, B., Benner, S. G., & Flores, A. N. (2019). Including Variability across Climate Change Projections in Assessing Impacts on Water Resources in an Intensively Managed Landscape. Water, 11(2), 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020286