Download Slide 1

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup

Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup

Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup

Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup

Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup

Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup

Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Global warming hiatus wikipedia , lookup

Global warming wikipedia , lookup

Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup

Numerical weather prediction wikipedia , lookup

Climate governance wikipedia , lookup

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change wikipedia , lookup

Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup

Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup

Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup

Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup

Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup

Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup

Atmospheric model wikipedia , lookup

Instrumental temperature record wikipedia , lookup

Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup

Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup

Physical impacts of climate change wikipedia , lookup

Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup

Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup

Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup

Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup

Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup

Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup

Criticism of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup

Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup

Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup

Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup

Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup

General circulation model wikipedia , lookup

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
Modeling
the Boise Reservoir System
with Climate Change
Leslie Stillwater, Pacific NW Region
Reclamation’s Boise Project
The Boise Project provides water to
lands in southwestern Idaho and
eastern Oregon
Boise Basin Project Reservoirs,
active capacities:
Anderson Ranch, 413 kAF
Arrowrock, 272 kAF
LuckyPeak (COE facility), 264 kAF
Lake Lowell, 159 kAF
Irrigated Lands:
224,000 acres primary supply
173,000 acres supplemental supply
Climate Change Is Likely to Bring…
• Warmer Temperatures
• Less Snowpack
• More Precipitation (some say)
• Greater variability in flows
• Earlier runoff
• Higher winter flows; lower summer flows
Preliminary Assessment Questions
• will Reclamation meet it’s current contractual
obligations for water storage and delivery?
• will Reclamation meet it’s environmental
obligations?
• will current flood risk management practices be
adequate?
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC)



The IPCC is a scientific intergovernmental body
set up by the World Meteorological Organization
(WMO) and by the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP).
The IPCC provides an objective and neutral
source of information about climate change.
The IPCC does not conduct research nor does it
monitor climate related data or parameters.
Selected IPCC Model Output
Three projection scenarios for the year 2040 were selected from
among the suite of IPCC models. Each applies an aggressive
emissions scenario, assuming increasing emissions based on
population growth and current technological and economic trends.

ECHAM
• developed by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Germany
• Echam simulations produce moderate temperature and precipitation
trends when compared to other IPCC models.

IPSL
• developed by the IPSL Institut Pierre Simon Laplace, France.
• IPSL simulations produce the greatest warming and increased
precipitation trends.

GISS
• developed by NASA / Goddard Institute for Space Studies, USA
• GISS simulations produce the lowest warming trends and a small
decrease in precipitation.
Selected IPCC Model Output
Modeled Predictions for the Year 2040
6 Scenarios were developed from
3 Climate Change Projections
for Year 2040






Echam - Temp Adjustments Only
Echam - Temp and Precip Adjustments
GISS - Temp Adjustments Only
GISS - Temp and Precip Adjustments
IPSL - Temp Adjustments Only
IPSL - Temp and Precip Adjustments
Climate Impacts Group
(CIG)
The projected precipitation and
temperature changes were downscaled
to the Pacific Northwest by the Joint
Institute for the Study of Atmosphere
and Oceans Climate Impacts Group
(CIG) at the University of Washington.
How Climate Affected
Naturalized Streamflows
were Developed
• T and P Adjustments were obtained from the Climate
Impacts Group for each Climate Scenario
• T and P Adjustments were applied to the National
Weather Service River Forecast System model
(NWSRFS) to produce daily local naturalized
streamflows (WY1949-1996)
NWSRFS Model




Forecasts streamflow
Collection of hydrologic/hydraulic
models calibrated to observed snow,
soil moisture, river, and reservoir
conditions and historical meteorological
data
Model input (for this study): T and P
Model components:
• Sacramento Soil Moisture Accounting Model
• SNOW-17
NWSRFS Concepts
http://meteora.ucsd.edu/~knowles/html/land/mod_descr.html
NWSRFS Concepts
Average
Unregulated
Daily
Flows
LuckyPeak
Peak Dam
Daily
Naturalized
Flows
atatLucky
for Scenarios
with for 2040
using Temperature
Predictions
(NWSRFSAdjustments
model results) Only
Temperature
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
No Adjustment
echam T
giss T
ipsl T
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
1-Sep
1-Aug
1-Jul
1-Jun
1-May
1-Apr
1-Mar
1-Feb
1-Jan
1-Dec
1-Nov
0
1-Oct
cfs
6,000
Average
Unregulated
Daily
Flows
LuckyPeak
Peak Dam
Daily
Naturalized
Flows
atatLucky
with
using Temperaturefor
andScenarios
Precipitation
Predictions for 2040
(NWSRFS
model results)
Temperature
and Precipitation
Adjustments
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
No Adjustment
echam TP
giss TP
ipsl TP
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
1-Sep
1-Aug
1-Jul
1-Jun
1-May
1-Apr
1-Mar
1-Feb
1-Jan
1-Dec
1-Nov
0
1-Oct
cfs
6,000
How Climate Affected Streamflows
were applied in the
Planning and Operations Models
• Naturalized streamflows from each NWSRFS Climate
Scenario were compared to the unadjusted NWSRFS
Scenario (calibrated to historic streamflows) to produce
daily local naturalized streamflow adjustments
• The daily streamflow adjustments were applied to the
Monthly Planning Model (Snake River Revised MODSIM
Model)
• The daily streamflow adjustments were also applied to
the Daily Boise Operations Model (MODSIM)
Model Purposes and Assumptions
• The monthly planning model addresses storage,
Reclamation contract obligations, water rights, irrigation
deliveries and minimum streamflows
– Modeled irrigation deliveries are based on present
level delivery requirements
– Environmental obligations are based on current
practices
• The daily operations model addresses flood risk
management and refill
Results (page1)
• The ability to refill Project reservoirs may not be
significantly impacted by Climate Change, but refill is
dependent on the successful response to changing flood
risks
• Project deliveries are likely to not be significantly
affected by Climate Change (natural flow diversions
decline, Project storage deliveries increase)
• Environmental obligations for storage and streamflows
are likely to not be significantly affected by Climate
Change
Planning Study: Modeled Diversions
Temperature Adjustments Only
Planning Study: Modeled Diversions
Temperature and Precipitation Adjustments
Planning Study: Modeled Refill
Temperature Adjustments Only
1000000
900000
700000
NoAdjust
echam T
giss T
ipsl T
600000
500000
400000
0.95
0.89
0.82
0.75
0.68
0.61
0.55
0.48
0.41
0.34
0.27
0.20
0.14
0.07
300000
0.00
active capacity (acre feet)
800000
Planning Study: Modeled Refill
Temperature and Precipitation Adjustments
1000000
900000
700000
NoAdjust
echam TP
giss TP
ipsl TP
600000
500000
400000
0.95
0.89
0.82
0.75
0.68
0.61
0.55
0.48
0.41
0.34
0.27
0.20
0.14
0.07
300000
0.00
active capacity (acre feet)
800000
Results (page2)
• However, winter and spring flooding and flood control
operations are more likely with Climate Change and will
be the major issue in the Treasure Valley
• Flood risk management and reservoir refill go
hand-in-hand
Observations on Flood Risk Management and
Reservoir Refill (page1)
• Current COE regulations, guidelines and space
requirements are outdated, having been developed
using data from 1895 through 1980.
• Starting about 1980, the guidelines under-predict inflows
prior to April 1 and over-predict inflows after April 1
• With Climate Change, the under- and over- predictions
are even larger
Observations on Flood Risk Management and
Reservoir Refill (page2)
• Accurate forecasts will become more difficult develop to
due to the influences of precipitation on the basin and
increased flow variability
Historic (same as No Adjust Scenario)
Difference between Observed Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
Projection Equation
developed using data prior to
1980
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1901
1903
1905
1907
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1927
1929
1931
1933
1935
1937
1939
1941
1943
1945
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
acre feet
-250,000
echamT Scenario
Difference between Modeled Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
echamTP Scenario
Difference between Observed Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
gissT Scenario
Difference between Observed Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
gissTP Scenario
Difference between Observed Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
ipslT Scenario
Difference between Observed Inflowsand Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
ipslTP Scenario
Difference between Observed Inflows and Projected Inflows
for April 1 - July 31 Inflow Volumes
Projected Inflows are calculated using COE Water Control Manual Projection Equation
grey area shows the range of the
anticipated standard error
150,000
-50,000
-450,000
-650,000
-850,000
-1,050,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
acre feet
-250,000
Boise Project Flood Operations
• Starting on January 1, a volume forecast from ‘now’ until
the end of July is developed
• Part of that forecast will arrive April – July
producing the April 1 space requirements (rule curves)
• The remainder of that forecast will arrive ‘now’ – March
determining the rate of release to get down to the April 1
space requirements
• Measure of success is discharge < 7,000 cfs at
Glenwood Bridge
No Adjustment
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 950,150
achieved = 885,780
Echam T
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 664,530
achieved = 663,780
Giss T
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 822,790
achieved = 820,390
Ipsl T
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 588,970
achieved = 582,100
Echam TP
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 784,410
achieved = 613,210
Giss TP
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 834,650
achieved = 831,930
Ipsl TP
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 852,310
achieved = 244,280
No Adjustment
1970/1971
Apr 1 Space (AF)
required = 950,150
achieved = 885,780
Impacts to Reservoir Refill
• Refill capabilities go hand-in-hand with flood control
operations
• When modeled, perfect forecasts (!) and revised
operating rules produce excellent refill capability in all
Climate Change Scenarios studied
So, will Reservoirs fill?
• Streamflow forecasts will need to be early – that seems
unlikely
• Greater streamflow variability produces greater
uncertainties in streamflow forecasts
• Operators will be hesitant to draw down early and start
an early fill
So, will there be flooding in Boise?
• Most likely*
*given our current assumptions
Comments on the Daily Operations Studies
• Assumptions drive the study results
– A2 IPCC scenarios (aggressive emissions)
– T and P results are scalable to PN Region and to the
Boise Basin
– Starting storage conditions of Nov 2001 (historic
median)
– Perfect forecasts
• We addressed uncertainties by employing
results from a range of IPCC models
Daily Operations Study Results
•
•
•
•
•
Reliable forecasts will be even more critical
Early forecasts (prior to Jan 1) will be required
Drawdown needs to start before Jan 1
Space requirements need to start earlier than Apr 1
Maintaining 55% space in Lucky Peak and Arrowrock
may not be possible
• Glenwood Bridge discharge Jan – Apr will be higher
• Glenwood Bridge discharge > 7,000 cfs can be
anticipated if the wettest scenario is realized
Web sites
• Hydromet teacup diagrams:
– http://www.usbr.gov/pn/hydromet
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change
– http://www.ipcc.ch/
• NWS models
– http://www.nws.noaa.gov/
• Climate Impacts Group, U of Washington
– www.cses.washington.edu/cig/