Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- climate change (1)
- global (1)
- reservoirs (1)
- water storage (1)
- water use (1)
- wetland (1)
Wetlands such as bogs, swamps, or freshwater marshes are hotspots of biodiversity. For 5.1 million km2 of inland wetlands, the dynamics of area and water storage, which strongly impact biodiversity and ecosystem services, were simulated using the global hydrological model WaterGAP. For the first time, the impacts of both human water use and man‐made reservoirs (WUR) and future climate change (CC) on wetlands around the globe were quantified. WUR impacts are concentrated in arid/semiarid regions, where WUR decreased mean wetland water storage by more than 5% on 8.2% of the mean wetland area during 1986–2005 (Am), with highest decreases in groundwater depletion area. Using output of three climate models, CC impacts on wetlands were quantified, distinguishing unavoidable impacts [i.e., at 2 °C global warming (GW)] from avoidable impacts (difference between 3 °C and 2 °C impacts). Even unavoidable CC impacts are projected to be much larger than WUR impacts, also in arid/semiarid regions. On most wetland area with reliable estimates, avoidable CC impacts are more than twice as large as unavoidable impacts. In case of 2 °C GW, half of Am is estimated to be unaffected by mean storage changes of more than 5%, but only one third in case of 3 °C GW. Temporal variability of water storage will increase for most wetlands. Wetlands in dry regions will be affected the most, particularly by water storage decreases in the dry season. Different from wealthier countries, low‐income countries will dominantly suffer from a decrease in wetland water storage due to CC.
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.