scholarly journals Assessment of climate change impact and difference on the river runoff in four basins in China under 1.5 and 2.0 °C global warming

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 4219-4231
Author(s):  
Hongmei Xu ◽  
Lüliu Liu ◽  
Yong Wang ◽  
Sheng Wang ◽  
Ying Hao ◽  
...  

Abstract. To quantify climate change impact and difference on basin-scale river runoff under the limiting global warming thresholds of 1.5 and 2.0 ∘C, this study examined four river basins covering a wide hydroclimatic setting. We analyzed projected climate change in four basins, quantified climate change impact on annual and seasonal runoff based on the Soil Water Assessment Tool, and estimated the uncertainty constrained by the global circulation model (GCM) structure and the representative concentration pathways (RCPs). All statistics for the two river basins (the Shiyang River, SYR, and the Chaobai River, CBR) located in northern China indicated generally warmer and wetter conditions, whereas the two river basins (the Huaihe River, HHR, and the Fujiang River, FJR) located in southern China projected less warming and were inconsistent regarding annual precipitation change. The simulated changes in annual runoff were complex; however, there was no shift in seasonal runoff pattern. The 0.5 ∘C global warming difference resulted in 0.7 and 0.6 ∘C warming in basins in northern and southern China, respectively. This led to a projected precipitation increase by about 2 % for the four basins and to a decrease in simulated annual runoff of 8 % and 1 % in the SYR and the HHR, respectively, but to an increase of 4 % in the CBR and the FJR. The uncertainty in projected annual temperature was dominated by the GCMs or the RCPs; however, that of precipitation was constrained mainly by the GCMs. The 0.5 ∘C difference decreased the uncertainty in the annual precipitation projection and the annual and monthly runoff simulation.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongmei Xu ◽  
Lüliu Liu ◽  
Yong Wang ◽  
Sheng Wang ◽  
Ying Hao ◽  
...  

Abstract. To quantify climate change impact and difference on basin-scale river runoff under the limiting global warming thresholds of 1.5 °C and 2.0 °C, this study examined four river basins covering a wide hydroclimatic setting. We analyzed projected climate change in four basins, quantified climate change impact on annual and seasonal runoff based on the Soil Water Assessment Tool, and estimated the uncertainty constrained by the global circulation models (GCMs) structure and the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). All statistics for the two basins located in northern China indicated generally warmer and wetter conditions, whereas the two basins located in southern China projected less warming and were inconsistent regarding annual precipitation change. The simulated changes in annual runoff were complex; however, there was no shift in seasonal runoff pattern. The 0.5 °C global warming difference caused 0.7 °C and 0.6 °C warming in basins in northern and southern China, respectively. This led to projected precipitation increase by about 2 % for the four basins, and to a decrease in simulated annual runoff of 8 % and 1 % in the Shiyang and Huaihe rivers, respectively, but to an increase of 4 % in the Chaobai and Fujiang rivers. The uncertainty in projected annual temperature was dominated by the GCMs or the RCPs; however, that of precipitation was constrained mainly by the GCM. The 0.5 °C difference decreased the uncertainty both in the annual precipitation projection and the annual and monthly runoff simulation.


Author(s):  
Olga N. Nasonova ◽  
Yeugeniy M. Gusev ◽  
Evgeny E. Kovalev ◽  
Georgy V. Ayzel

Abstract. Climate change impact on river runoff was investigated within the framework of the second phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP2) using a physically-based land surface model Soil Water – Atmosphere – Plants (SWAP) (developed in the Institute of Water Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences) and meteorological projections (for 2006–2099) simulated by five General Circulation Models (GCMs) (including GFDL-ESM2M, HadGEM2-ES, IPSL-CM5A-LR, MIROC-ESM-CHEM, and NorESM1-M) for each of four Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6.0, and RCP8.5). Eleven large-scale river basins were used in this study. First of all, SWAP was calibrated and validated against monthly values of measured river runoff with making use of forcing data from the WATCH data set and all GCMs' projections were bias-corrected to the WATCH. Then, for each basin, 20 projections of possible changes in river runoff during the 21st century were simulated by SWAP. Analysis of the obtained hydrological projections allowed us to estimate their uncertainties resulted from application of different GCMs and RCP scenarios. On the average, the contribution of different GCMs to the uncertainty of the projected river runoff is nearly twice larger than the contribution of RCP scenarios. At the same time the contribution of GCMs slightly decreases with time.


2013 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 737-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikołaj Piniewski ◽  
Frank Voss ◽  
Ilona Bärlund ◽  
Tomasz Okruszko ◽  
Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justas Kažys ◽  
Walter Leal Filho ◽  
Edvinas Stonevičius ◽  
Gintaras Valiuškevičius ◽  
Egidijus Rimkus

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 4579-4638 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Peel ◽  
R. Srikanthan ◽  
T. A. McMahon ◽  
D. J. Karoly

Abstract. Two key sources of uncertainty in projections of future runoff for climate change impact assessments are uncertainty between Global Climate Models (GCMs) and within a GCM. Within-GCM uncertainty is the variability in GCM output that occurs when running a scenario multiple times but each run has slightly different, but equally plausible, initial conditions. The limited number of runs available for each GCM and scenario combination within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) and phase 5 (CMIP5) datasets, limits the assessment of within-GCM uncertainty. In this second of two companion papers, the primary aim is to approximate within-GCM uncertainty of monthly precipitation and temperature projections and assess its impact on modelled runoff for climate change impact assessments. A secondary aim is to assess the impact of between-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff. Here we approximate within-GCM uncertainty by developing non-stationary stochastic replicates of GCM monthly precipitation and temperature data. These replicates are input to an off-line hydrologic model to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on projected annual runoff and reservoir yield. To-date within-GCM uncertainty has received little attention in the hydrologic climate change impact literature and this analysis provides an approximation of the uncertainty in projected runoff, and reservoir yield, due to within- and between-GCM uncertainty of precipitation and temperature projections. In the companion paper, McMahon et al. (2014) sought to reduce between-GCM uncertainty by removing poorly performing GCMs, resulting in a selection of five better performing GCMs from CMIP3 for use in this paper. Here we present within- and between-GCM uncertainty results in mean annual precipitation (MAP), temperature (MAT) and runoff (MAR), the standard deviation of annual precipitation (SDP) and runoff (SDR) and reservoir yield for five CMIP3 GCMs at 17 world-wide catchments. Based on 100 stochastic replicates of each GCM run at each catchment, within-GCM uncertainty was assessed in relative form as the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean of the 100 replicate values of each variable. The average relative within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs for 2015–2044 (A1B) were: MAP 4.2%, SDP 14.2%, MAT 0.7%, MAR 10.1% and SDR 17.6%. The Gould–Dincer Gamma procedure was applied to each annual runoff time-series for hypothetical reservoir capacities of 1× MAR and 3× MAR and the average uncertainty in reservoir yield due to within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs were: 25.1% (1× MAR) and 11.9% (3× MAR). Our approximation of within-GCM uncertainty is expected to be an underestimate due to not replicating the GCM trend. However, our results indicate that within-GCM uncertainty is important when interpreting climate change impact assessments. Approximately 95% of values of MAP, SDP, MAT, MAR, SDR and reservoir yield from 1× MAR or 3× MAR capacity reservoirs are expected to fall within twice their respective relative uncertainty (standard deviation/mean). Within-GCM uncertainty has significant implications for interpreting climate change impact assessments that report future changes within our range of uncertainty for a given variable – these projected changes may be due solely to within-GCM uncertainty. Since within-GCM variability is amplified from precipitation to runoff and then to reservoir yield, climate change impact assessments that do not take into account within-GCM uncertainty risk providing water resources management decision makers with a sense of certainty that is unjustified.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Bolbot ◽  
Vasyl Grebin

<p>The current patterns estimation of the water regime under climate change is one of the most urgent tasks in Ukraine and the world. Such changes are determined by fluctuations in the main climatic characteristics - precipitation and air temperature, which are defined the value of evaporation. These parameters influence on the annual runoff distribution and long-term runoff fluctuations. In particular, the annual precipitation redistribution is reflected in the corresponding changes in the river runoff.<br>The assessment of the current state and nature of changes in precipitation and river runoff of the Siverskyi Donets River Basin was made by comparing the current period (1991-2018) with the period of the climatological normal (1961-1990).<br>In general, for this area, it was defined the close relationship between the amount of precipitation and the annual runoff. Against the background of insignificant (about 1%) increase of annual precipitation in recent decades, it was revealed their redistribution by seasons and separate months. There is a decrease in precipitation in the cold period (November-February). This causes (along with other factors) a decrease in the amount of snow and, accordingly, the spring flood runoff. There are frequent cases of unexpressed spring floods of the Siverskyi Donets River Basin. The runoff during March-April (the period of spring flood within the Ukrainian part of the basin) decreased by almost a third.<br>The increase of precipitation during May-June causes a corresponding (insignificant) increase in runoff in these months. The shift of the maximum monthly amount of precipitation from May (for the period 1961-1990) to June (in the current period) is observed.<br>There is a certain threat to water supply in the region due to the shift in the minimum monthly amount of precipitation in the warm period from October to August. Compared with October, there is a higher air temperature and, accordingly, higher evaporation in August, which reduces the runoff. Such a situation is solved by rational water resources management of the basin. The possibility of replenishing water resources in the basin through the transfer runoff from the Dnieper (Dnieper-Siverskyi Donets channel) and the annual runoff redistribution in the reservoir system causes some increase in the river runoff of summer months in recent decades. This is also contributed by the activities of the river basin management structures, which control the maintenance water users' of minimum ecological flow downstream the water intakes and hydraulic structures in the rivers of the basin.<br>Therefore, in the period of current climate change, the annual runoff distribution of the Siverskyi Donets River Basin has undergone significant changes, which is related to the annual precipitation redistribution and anthropogenic load on the basin.</p>


2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1615-1639 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. C. Peel ◽  
R. Srikanthan ◽  
T. A. McMahon ◽  
D. J. Karoly

Abstract. Two key sources of uncertainty in projections of future runoff for climate change impact assessments are uncertainty between global climate models (GCMs) and within a GCM. Within-GCM uncertainty is the variability in GCM output that occurs when running a scenario multiple times but each run has slightly different, but equally plausible, initial conditions. The limited number of runs available for each GCM and scenario combination within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 3 (CMIP3) and phase 5 (CMIP5) data sets, limits the assessment of within-GCM uncertainty. In this second of two companion papers, the primary aim is to present a proof-of-concept approximation of within-GCM uncertainty for monthly precipitation and temperature projections and to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff for climate change impact assessments. A secondary aim is to assess the impact of between-GCM uncertainty on modelled runoff. Here we approximate within-GCM uncertainty by developing non-stationary stochastic replicates of GCM monthly precipitation and temperature data. These replicates are input to an off-line hydrologic model to assess the impact of within-GCM uncertainty on projected annual runoff and reservoir yield. We adopt stochastic replicates of available GCM runs to approximate within-GCM uncertainty because large ensembles, hundreds of runs, for a given GCM and scenario are unavailable, other than the Climateprediction.net data set for the Hadley Centre GCM. To date within-GCM uncertainty has received little attention in the hydrologic climate change impact literature and this analysis provides an approximation of the uncertainty in projected runoff, and reservoir yield, due to within- and between-GCM uncertainty of precipitation and temperature projections. In the companion paper, McMahon et al. (2015) sought to reduce between-GCM uncertainty by removing poorly performing GCMs, resulting in a selection of five better performing GCMs from CMIP3 for use in this paper. Here we present within- and between-GCM uncertainty results in mean annual precipitation (MAP), mean annual temperature (MAT), mean annual runoff (MAR), the standard deviation of annual precipitation (SDP), standard deviation of runoff (SDR) and reservoir yield for five CMIP3 GCMs at 17 worldwide catchments. Based on 100 stochastic replicates of each GCM run at each catchment, within-GCM uncertainty was assessed in relative form as the standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean of the 100 replicate values of each variable. The average relative within-GCM uncertainties from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs for 2015–2044 (A1B) were MAP 4.2%, SDP 14.2%, MAT 0.7%, MAR 10.1% and SDR 17.6%. The Gould–Dincer Gamma (G-DG) procedure was applied to each annual runoff time series for hypothetical reservoir capacities of 1 × MAR and 3 × MAR and the average uncertainties in reservoir yield due to within-GCM uncertainty from the 17 catchments and 5 GCMs were 25.1% (1 × MAR) and 11.9% (3 × MAR). Our approximation of within-GCM uncertainty is expected to be an underestimate due to not replicating the GCM trend. However, our results indicate that within-GCM uncertainty is important when interpreting climate change impact assessments. Approximately 95% of values of MAP, SDP, MAT, MAR, SDR and reservoir yield from 1 × MAR or 3 × MAR capacity reservoirs are expected to fall within twice their respective relative uncertainty (standard deviation/mean). Within-GCM uncertainty has significant implications for interpreting climate change impact assessments that report future changes within our range of uncertainty for a given variable – these projected changes may be due solely to within-GCM uncertainty. Since within-GCM variability is amplified from precipitation to runoff and then to reservoir yield, climate change impact assessments that do not take into account within-GCM uncertainty risk providing water resources management decision makers with a sense of certainty that is unjustified.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document