scholarly journals Cumulative Environmental Effects of Hydropower Stations Based on the Water Footprint Method—Yalong River Basin, China

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (21) ◽  
pp. 5958 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu ◽  
Jia ◽  
Wu ◽  
Wu ◽  
Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Environmental Effects ◽  
Water Scarcity ◽  
Water Footprint ◽  
Environmental Flow ◽  
Blue Water ◽  
Development And Utilization ◽  
Hydropower Stations ◽  
Yalong River ◽  
Yalong River Basin

The construction of hydropower stations is not without controversy as they have a certain degree of impact on the ecological environment. Moreover, the water footprint and its cumulative effects on the environment (The relationship between the degree of hydropower development and utilization in the basin and the environment) of the development and utilization of cascade hydropower stations are incompletely understood. In this paper, we calculate the evaporated water footprint (EWF, water evaporated from reservoirs) and the product water footprint of hydropower stations (PWF, water consumption per unit of electricity production), and the blue water scarcity (BWS, the ratio of the total blue water footprint to blue water availability) based on data from 19 selected hydropower stations in the Yalong River Basin, China. Results show that: (a) the EWFs in established, ongoing, proposed, and planning phases of 19 hydropower stations are 243, 123, 59, and 42 Mm3, respectively; (b) the PWF of 19 hydropower stations varies between 0.01 and 4.49 m3GJ−1, and the average PWF is 1.20 m3GJ−1. These values are quite small when compared with hydropower stations in other basins in the world, and the difference in PWF among different hydropower stations is mainly derived from energy efficiency factor; (c) all the BWS in the Yalong River Basin are below 100% (low blue water scarcity), in which the total blue water footprint is less than 20% of the natural flow, and environmental flow requirements are met. From the perspective of the water footprint method, the cumulative environmental effects of hydropower development and utilization in the Yalong River Basin will not affect the local environmental flow requirements.

Distribution features of landslides in the Yalong River Basin, Southwest China

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gang Jin ◽  
Yunsheng Wang ◽  
Wenbin Wu ◽  
Tai Guo ◽  
Jialu Xu
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Southwest China ◽  
Distribution Features ◽  
Yalong River ◽  
Yalong River Basin

scholarly journals The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 763-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra
Keyword(s):  
Water Balance ◽  
River Basin ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Water Footprint ◽  
Grid Cell ◽  
Blue Water ◽  
Total Water ◽  
Grey Water ◽  
Global Average ◽  
Average Water

Abstract. This study quantifies the green, blue and grey water footprint of global crop production in a spatially-explicit way for the period 1996–2005. The assessment is global and improves upon earlier research by taking a high-resolution approach, estimating the water footprint of 126 crops at a 5 by 5 arc min grid. We have used a grid-based dynamic water balance model to calculate crop water use over time, with a time step of one day. The model takes into account the daily soil water balance and climatic conditions for each grid cell. In addition, the water pollution associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizer in crop production is estimated for each grid cell. The crop evapotranspiration of additional 20 minor crops is calculated with the CROPWAT model. In addition, we have calculated the water footprint of more than two hundred derived crop products, including various flours, beverages, fibres and biofuels. We have used the water footprint assessment framework as in the guideline of the water footprint network. Considering the water footprints of primary crops, we see that global average water footprint per ton of crop increases from sugar crops (roughly 200 m3 ton−1), vegetables (300 m3 ton−1), roots and tubers (400 m3 ton−1), fruits (1000 m3 ton−1), cereals} (1600 m3 ton−1), oil crops (2400 m3 ton−1) to pulses (4000 m3 ton−1). The water footprint varies, however, across different crops per crop category and per production region as well. Besides, if one considers the water footprint per kcal, the picture changes as well. When considered per ton of product, commodities with relatively large water footprints are: coffee, tea, cocoa, tobacco, spices, nuts, rubber and fibres. The analysis of water footprints of different biofuels shows that bio-ethanol has a lower water footprint (in m3 GJ−1) than biodiesel, which supports earlier analyses. The crop used matters significantly as well: the global average water footprint of bio-ethanol based on sugar beet amounts to 51 m3 GJ−1, while this is 121 m3 GJ−1 for maize. The global water footprint related to crop production in the period 1996–2005 was 7404 billion cubic meters per year (78% green, 12% blue, 10% grey). A large total water footprint was calculated for wheat (1087 Gm3 yr−1), rice (992 Gm3 yr−1) and maize (770 Gm3 yr−1). Wheat and rice have the largest blue water footprints, together accounting for 45% of the global blue water footprint. At country level, the total water footprint was largest for India (1047 Gm3 yr−1), China (967 Gm3 yr−1) and the USA (826 Gm3 yr−1). A relatively large total blue water footprint as a result of crop production is observed in the Indus River Basin (117 Gm3 yr−1) and the Ganges River Basin (108 Gm3 yr−1). The two basins together account for 25% of the blue water footprint related to global crop production. Globally, rain-fed agriculture has a water footprint of 5173 Gm3 yr−1 (91% green, 9% grey); irrigated agriculture has a water footprint of 2230 Gm3 yr−1 (48% green, 40% blue, 12% grey).

scholarly journals Assessing the Impact of Reservoir Parameters on Runoff in the Yalong River Basin using the SWAT Model

Water ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 643 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuan Liu ◽  
Mingxiang Yang ◽  
Xianyong Meng ◽  
Fan Wen ◽  
Guangdong Sun
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Flood Control ◽  
Hydrological Cycle ◽  
Swat Model ◽  
Relative Location ◽  
Reservoir Capacity ◽  
Joint Operation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Yalong River ◽  
Yalong River Basin

The construction and operation of cascade reservoirs has changed the natural hydrological cycle in the Yalong River Basin, and reduced the accuracy of hydrological forecasting. The impact of cascade reservoir operation on the runoff of the Yalong River Basin is assessed, providing a theoretical reference for the construction and joint operation of reservoirs. In this paper, eight scenarios were set up, by changing the reservoir capacity, operating location, and relative location in the case of two reservoirs. The aim of this study is to explore the impact of the capacity and location of a single reservoir on runoff processes, and the effect of the relative location in the case of joint operation of reservoirs. The results show that: (1) the reservoir has a delay and reduction effect on the flood during the flood season, and has a replenishment effect on the runoff during the dry season; (2) the impact of the reservoir on runoff processes and changes in runoff distribution during the year increases with the reservoir capacity; (3) the mitigation of flooding is more obvious at the river basin outlet control station when the reservoir is further downstream; (4) an arrangement with the smaller reservoir located upstream and the larger reservoir located downstream can maximize the benefits of the reservoirs in flood control.

scholarly journals Sensitivity and uncertainty in crop water footprint accounting: a case study for the Yellow River Basin

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Zhuo ◽  
M. M. Mekonnen ◽  
A. Y. Hoekstra
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Water Footprint ◽  
Yellow River ◽  
Yellow River Basin ◽  
The Yellow River ◽  
Blue Water ◽  
Total Water ◽  
Crop Water ◽  
Input Variables ◽  
The Yellow River Basin

Abstract. Water Footprint Assessment is a quickly growing field of research, but as yet little attention has been paid to the uncertainties involved. This study investigates the sensitivity of water footprint estimates to changes in important input variables and quantifies the size of uncertainty in water footprint estimates. The study focuses on the green (from rainfall) and blue (from irrigation) water footprint of producing maize, soybean, rice, and wheat in the Yellow River Basin in the period 1996–2005. A grid-based daily water balance model at a 5 by 5 arcmin resolution was applied to compute green and blue water footprints of the four crops in the Yellow River Basin in the period considered. The sensitivity and uncertainty analysis focused on the effects on water footprint estimates at basin level (in m3 t−1) of four key input variables: precipitation (PR), reference evapotranspiration (ET0), crop coefficient (Kc), and crop calendar. The one-at-a-time method was carried out to analyse the sensitivity of the water footprint of crops to fractional changes of individual input variables. Uncertainties in crop water footprint estimates were quantified through Monte Carlo simulations. The results show that the water footprint of crops is most sensitive to ET0 and Kc, followed by crop calendar and PR. Blue water footprints were more sensitive to input variability than green water footprints. The smaller the annual blue water footprint, the higher its sensitivity to changes in PR, ET0, and Kc. The uncertainties in the total water footprint of a crop due to combined uncertainties in climatic inputs (PR and ET0) were about ±20% (at 95% confidence interval). The effect of uncertainties in ET0 was dominant compared to that of precipitation. The uncertainties in the total water footprint of a crop as a result of combined key input uncertainties were on average ±26% (at 95% confidence level). The sensitivities and uncertainties differ across crop types, with highest sensitivities and uncertainties for soybean.

Assessment of Water Footprint for Koshi River Basin (KRB), Nepal

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raj Deva Singh ◽  
Kumar Ghimire ◽  
Ashish Pandey
Keyword(s):  
River Basin ◽  
Water Use ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Agricultural Land ◽  
Water Footprint ◽  
Green Water ◽  
Blue Water ◽  
Total Water ◽  
Green And Blue Water ◽  
Koshi River Basin

<p>Nepal is an agrarian country and almost one-third of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is dependent on agricultural sector. Koshi river basin is the largest basin in the country and serves large share on agricultural production. Like another country, Nepalese agriculture holds largest water use in agriculture. In this context, it is necessary to reduce water use pressure. In this study, water footprint of different crop (rice, maize, wheat, millet, sugarcane, potato and barley) have been estimated for the year 2005 -2014 to get the average water footprint of crop production during study period. CROPWAT model, developed by Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO 2010b).</p><p>For the computation of the green and blue water footprints, estimated values of ET (the output of CROPWAT model) and yield (derived from statistical data) are utilised. Blue and green water footprint are computed for different districts (16 districts within KRB) / for KRB in different years (10 years from 2005 to 2014) and crops (considered 7 local crops). The water footprint of crops production for any district or basin represents the average of WF production of seven crops in the respective district or basin.</p><p>The study provides a picture of green and blue water use in crop production in the field and reduction in the water footprint of crop production by selecting suitable crops at different places in the field. The Crop, that has lower water footprint, can be intensified at that location and the crops, having higher water footprint, can be discontinued for production or measure for water saving technique needs to be implemented reducing evapotranspiration. The water footprint of agriculture crop production can be reduced by increasing the yield of the crops. Some measures like use of an improved variety of seed, fertilizer, mechanized farming and soil moisture conservation technology may also be used to increase the crop yields.</p><p>The crop harvested areas include both rainfed as well as irrigated land. Agricultural land occupies 22% of the study area, out of which 94% areas are rainfed whereas remaining 6% areas are under irrigation. The study shows 98% of total water use in crop production is due to green water use (received from rainfall) and remaining 2 % is due to blue water use received from irrigation (surface and ground water as source). Potato has 22% blue water proportion and contributes 85% share to the total blue water use in the basin. Maize and rice together hold 77% share of total water use in crops production. The average annual water footprint of crop production in KRB is 1248 cubic meter/ton having the variation of 9% during the period of 2005-2014. Sunsari, Dhankuta districts have lower water footprint of crop production. The coefficient of variation of water footprint of millet crop production is lower as compared to those of other crops considered for study whereas sugarcane has a higher variation of water footprint for its production.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document