Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (47)
- Working Paper (5)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (53)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (53)
Keywords
- climate change (6)
- Modellierung (3)
- Grundwasser (2)
- Grundwasserneubildung (2)
- Klimawandel (2)
- agriculture (2)
- global modeling (2)
- groundwater recharge (2)
- Anthropogene Klimaänderung (1)
- Bayesian network (1)
Institute
Local climate change risk assessments (LCCRAs) are best supported by a quantitative integration of physical hazards, exposures and vulnerabilities that includes the characterization of uncertainties. We propose to use Bayesian Networks (BNs) for this task and show how to integrate freely-available output of multiple global hydrological models (GHMs) into BNs, in order to probabilistically assess risks for water supply. Projected relative changes in hydrological variables computed by three GHMs driven by the output of four global climate models were processed using MATLAB, taking into account local information on water availability and use. A roadmap to set up BNs and apply probability distributions of risk levels under historic and future climate and water use was co-developed with experts from the Maghreb (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco) who positively evaluated the BN application for LCCRAs. We conclude that the presented approach is suitable for application in the many LCCRAs necessary for successful adaptation to climate change world-wide.
Analyzing the impact of streamflow drought on hydroelectricity production: a global-scale study
(2021)
Electricity production by hydropower is negatively affected by drought. To understand and quantify risks of less than normal streamflow for hydroelectricity production (HP) at the global scale, we developed an HP model that simulates time series of monthly HP worldwide and thus enables analyzing the impact of drought on HP. The HP model is based on a new global hydropower database (GHD), containing 8,716 geo-localized plant records, and on monthly streamflow values computed by the global hydrological model WaterGAP with a spatial resolution of 0.5°. The GHD includes 44 attributes and covers 91.8% of the globally installed capacity. The HP model can reproduce HP trends, seasonality, and interannual variability that was caused by both (de)commissioning of hydropower plants and hydrological variability. It can also simulate streamflow drought and its impact on HP reasonably well. Global risk maps of HP reduction were generated for both 0.5° grid cells and countries, revealing that 67 out of the 134 countries with hydropower suffer, in 1 out of 10 years, from a reduction of more than 20% of mean annual HP and 18 countries from a reduction of more than 40%. The developed HP model enables advanced assessments of drought impacts on hydroelectricity at national to international levels.
Global water models (GWMs) simulate the terrestrial water cycle, on the global scale, and are used to assess the impacts of climate change on freshwater systems. GWMs are developed within different modeling frameworks and consider different underlying hydrological processes, leading to varied model structures. Furthermore, the equations used to describe various processes take different forms and are generally accessible only from within the individual model codes. These factors have hindered a holistic and detailed understanding of how different models operate, yet such an understanding is crucial for explaining the results of model evaluation studies, understanding inter-model differences in their simulations, and identifying areas for future model development. This study provides a comprehensive overview of how state-of-the-art GWMs are designed. We analyze water storage compartments, water flows, and human water use sectors included in 16 GWMs that provide simulations for the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b (ISIMIP2b). We develop a standard writing style for the model equations to further enhance model improvement, intercomparison, and communication. In this study, WaterGAP2 used the highest number of water storage compartments, 11, and CWatM used 10 compartments. Seven models used six compartments, while three models (JULES-W1, Mac-PDM.20, and VIC) used the lowest number, three compartments. WaterGAP2 simulates five human water use sectors, while four models (CLM4.5, CLM5.0, LPJmL, and MPIHM) simulate only water used by humans for the irrigation sector. We conclude that even though hydrologic processes are often based on similar equations, in the end, these equations have been adjusted or have used different values for specific parameters or specific variables. Our results highlight that the predictive uncertainty of GWMs can be reduced through improvements of the existing hydrologic processes, implementation of new processes in the models, and high-quality input data.
Drought is understood as both a lack of water (i.e., a deficit compared to demand) and a temporal anomaly in one or more components of the hydrological cycle. Most drought indices, however, only consider the anomaly aspect, i.e., how unusual the condition is. In this paper, we present two drought hazard indices that reflect both the deficit and anomaly aspects. The soil moisture deficit anomaly index, SMDAI, is based on the drought severity index, DSI (Cammalleri et al., 2016), but is computed in a more straightforward way that does not require the definition of a mapping function. We propose a new indicator of drought hazard for water supply from rivers, the streamflow deficit anomaly index, QDAI, which takes into account the surface water demand of humans and freshwater biota. Both indices are computed and analyzed at the global scale, with a spatial resolution of roughly 50 km, for the period 1981–2010, using monthly time series of variables computed by the global water resources and the model WaterGAP 2.2d. We found that the SMDAI and QDAI values are broadly similar to values of purely anomaly-based indices. However, the deficit anomaly indices provide more differentiated spatial and temporal patterns that help to distinguish the degree and nature of the actual drought hazard to vegetation health or the water supply. QDAI can be made relevant for stakeholders with different perceptions about the importance of ecosystem protection, by adapting the approach for computing the amount of water that is required to remain in the river for the well-being of the river ecosystem. Both deficit anomaly indices are well suited for inclusion in local or global drought risk studies.
Global water models (GWMs) simulate the terrestrial water cycle on the global scale and are used to assess the impacts of climate change on freshwater systems. GWMs are developed within different modelling frameworks and consider different underlying hydrological processes, leading to varied model structures. Furthermore, the equations used to describe various processes take different forms and are generally accessible only from within the individual model codes. These factors have hindered a holistic and detailed understanding of how different models operate, yet such an understanding is crucial for explaining the results of model evaluation studies, understanding inter-model differences in their simulations, and identifying areas for future model development. This study provides a comprehensive overview of how 16 state-of-the-art GWMs are designed. We analyse water storage compartments, water flows, and human water use sectors included in models that provide simulations for the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b (ISIMIP2b). We develop a standard writing style for the model equations to enhance model intercomparison, improvement, and communication. In this study, WaterGAP2 used the highest number of water storage compartments, 11, and CWatM used 10 compartments. Six models used six compartments, while four models (DBH, JULES-W1, Mac-PDM.20, and VIC) used the lowest number, three compartments. WaterGAP2 simulates five human water use sectors, while four models (CLM4.5, CLM5.0, LPJmL, and MPI-HM) simulate only water for the irrigation sector. We conclude that, even though hydrological processes are often based on similar equations for various processes, in the end these equations have been adjusted or models have used different values for specific parameters or specific variables. The similarities and differences found among the models analysed in this study are expected to enable us to reduce the uncertainty in multi-model ensembles, improve existing hydrological processes, and integrate new processes.
Drought is understood as both a lack of water (i.e., a deficit as compared to some requirement) and an anomaly in the condition of one or more components of the hydrological cycle. Most drought indices, however, only consider the anomaly aspect, i.e., how unusual the condition is. In this paper, we present two drought hazard indices that reflect both the deficit and anomaly aspects. The soil moisture deficit anomaly index, SMDAI, is based on the drought severity index, DSI, but is computed in a more straightforward way that does not require the definition of a mapping function. We propose a new indicator of drought hazard for water supply from rivers, the streamflow deficit anomaly index, QDAI, which takes into account the surface water demand of humans and freshwater biota. Both indices are computed and analyzed at the global scale, with a spatial resolution of roughly 50 km, for the period 1981-2010, using monthly time series of variables computed by the global water resources and the model WaterGAP2.2d. We found that the SMDAI and QDAI values are broadly similar to values of purely anomaly-based indices. However, the deficit anomaly indices provide more differentiated, spatial and temporal patterns that help to distinguish the degree of the actual drought hazard to vegetation health or the water supply. QDAI can be made relevant for stakeholders with different perceptions about the importance of ecosystem protection, by adapting the approach for computing the amount of water that is required to remain in the river for the well being of the river ecosystem. Both deficit anomaly indices are well suited for inclusion in local or global drought risk studies.
Global‐scale gradient‐based groundwater models are a new endeavor for hydrologists who wish to improve global hydrological models (GHMs). In particular, the integration of such groundwater models into GHMs improves the simulation of water flows between surface water and groundwater and of capillary rise and thus evapotranspiration. Currently, these models are not able to simulate water table depth adequately over the entire globe. Unsatisfactory model performance compared to well observations suggests that a higher spatial resolution is required to better represent the high spatial variability of land surface and groundwater elevations. In this study, we use New Zealand as a testbed and analyze the impacts of spatial resolution on the results of global groundwater models. Steady‐state hydraulic heads simulated by two versions of the global groundwater model G3M, at spatial resolutions of 5 arc‐minutes (9 km) and 30 arc‐seconds (900 m), are compared with observations from the Canterbury region. The output of three other groundwater models with different spatial resolutions is analyzed as well. Considering the spatial distribution of residuals, general patterns of unsatisfactory model performance remain at the higher resolutions, suggesting that an increase in model resolution alone does not fix problems such as the systematic overestimation of hydraulic head. We conclude that (1) a new understanding of how low‐resolution global groundwater models can be evaluated is required, and (2) merely increasing the spatial resolution of global‐scale groundwater models will not improve the simulation of the global freshwater system.
In global hydrological models, groundwater (GW) is typically represented by a bucket-like linear groundwater reservoir. Reservoir models, however, (1) can only simulate GW discharge to surface water (SW) bodies but not recharge from SW to GW, (2) provide no information on the location of the GW table, and (3) assume that there is no GW flow among grid cells. This may lead, for example, to an underestimation of groundwater resources in semiarid areas where GW is often replenished by SW or to an underestimation of evapotranspiration where the GW table is close to the land surface. To overcome these limitations, it is necessary to replace the reservoir model in global hydrological models with a hydraulic head gradient-based GW flow model.
We present G3M, a new global gradient-based GW model with a spatial resolution of 5′ (arcminutes), which is to be integrated into the 0.5∘ WaterGAP Global Hydrology Model (WGHM). The newly developed model framework enables in-memory coupling to WGHM while keeping overall runtime relatively low, which allows sensitivity analyses, calibration, and data assimilation. This paper presents the G3M concept and model design decisions that are specific to the large grid size required for a global-scale model. Model results under steady-state naturalized conditions, i.e., neglecting GW abstractions, are shown. Simulated hydraulic heads show better agreement to observations around the world compared to the model output of de Graaf et al. (2015). Locations of simulated SW recharge to GW are found, as is expected, in dry and mountainous regions but areal extent of SW recharge may be underestimated. Globally, GW discharge to rivers is by far the dominant flow component such that lateral GW flows only become a large fraction of total diffuse and focused recharge in the case of losing rivers, some mountainous areas, and some areas with very low GW recharge. A strong sensitivity of simulated hydraulic heads to the spatial resolution of the model and the related choice of the water table elevation of surface water bodies was found. We suggest to investigate how global-scale groundwater modeling at 5′ spatial resolution can benefit from more highly resolved land surface elevation data.
In global hydrological models, groundwater storages and flows are generally simulated by linear reservoir models. Recently, the first global gradient-based groundwater models were developed in order to improve the representation of groundwater-surface water interactions, capillary rise, lateral flows and human water use impacts. However, the reliability of model outputs is limited by a lack of data as well as model assumptions required due to the necessarily coarse spatial resolution. The impact of data quality is presented by showing the sensitivity of a groundwater model to changes in the only available global hydraulic conductivity data-set. To better understand the sensitivity of model output to uncertain spatially distributed parameter inputs, we present the first application of a global sensitivity method for a global-scale groundwater model using nearly 2000 steady-state model runs of the global gradient-based groundwater model G3M. By applying the Morris method in a novel domain decomposition approach that identifies global hydrological response units, spatially distributed parameter sensitivities are determined for a computationally expensive model. Results indicate that globally simulated hydraulic heads are equally sensitive to hydraulic conductivity, groundwater recharge and surface water body elevation, though parameter sensitivities vary regionally. For large areas of the globe, rivers are simulated to be either losing or gaining, depending on the parameter combination, indicating a high uncertainty of simulating the direction of flow between the two compartments. Mountainous and dry regions show a high variance in simulated head due to numerical difficulties of the model, limiting the reliability of computed sensitivities in these regions. This instability is likely caused by the uncertainty in surface water body elevation. We conclude that maps of spatially distributed sensitivities can help to understand complex behaviour of models that incorporate data with varying spatial uncertainties. The findings support the selection of possible calibration parameters and help to anticipate challenges for a transient coupling of the model.