Change Angel N. Menndez INA Hydraulics Laboratory Univ. Buenos Aires - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
change
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Change Angel N. Menndez INA Hydraulics Laboratory Univ. Buenos Aires - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 29, 2022 396 likes •812 views

HydroPredict2010 Prague, Czech Republic, 20-23 Sept Integrated Hydrological Modelling to Asses Flood and Drought Risk under Climate and Land Use Change Angel N. Menndez INA Hydraulics Laboratory Univ. Buenos Aires Eng. Dept.

slide-1
SLIDE 1

HydroPredict’2010 Prague, Czech Republic, 20-23 Sept

Integrated Hydrological Modelling to Asses Flood and Drought Risk under Climate and Land Use Change

Angel N. Menéndez INA – Hydraulics Laboratory

  • Univ. Buenos Aires – Eng. Dept.

Argentina

slide-2
SLIDE 2

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-3
SLIDE 3

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Salado Basin (Argentina)

170,000 km2 (A1: 15,000 km2)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Salado Basin (Argentina)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-7
SLIDE 7

HYDROLOGIC MODEL

  • Integrated surface and groundwater
  • Spatially distributed
  • Time continuous

MIKE SHE

slide-8
SLIDE 8

DEM for Land Surface

(SRTM)

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Depression Storage

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Land Use Map

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Land Use

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Ene Mar May Jul Set Nov Ene Mar May Jul Set Nov

Indice de Area Foliar (-) Maíz Soja Trigo Pastura Girasol

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Ene Mar May Jul Set Nov Ene Mar May Jul Set Nov

Profundidad de Raiz (m) Maíz Soja Trigo Pastura Girasol

Yearly Cycle

LAI RDF

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Land Use

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 ene-63 ene-68 ene-73 ene-78 ene-83 ene-88 ene-93 ene-98 ene-03 LAI (-) 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 RD (mm) LAI Gral. Villegas RD Gral. Villegas

Historical Time Series

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Streams

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Surface Flow Obstructions

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Hydrogeologic Formations

  • 200
  • 150
  • 100
  • 50

50 100 150 5200000 5240000 5280000 5320000 5360000 5400000 X (GK F5) Cota (m IGM) Nivel de Terreno Piso de la Formación Junín Piso del Pampeano Piso del Araucano y Puelche Piso de la 1º Capa de Cálculo Pampeano Araucano Puelche Formación Junín

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Rainfall Stations

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Climatic Stations

slide-18
SLIDE 18

1,000 m x 1,000 m → 14,000 grid cells

Horizontal discretization

slide-19
SLIDE 19

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-20
SLIDE 20

Phreatic levels

Freatímetro Junín 1 Freatímetro General Pinto

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Años Nivel de agua subterránea (m) Nivel de Terreno Simulado Medido 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Años Nivel de agua subterránea (m) Medido Nivel de Terreno Simulado

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Discharge

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Caudal (m3/s) Mediciones A1-032 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Caudal (m3/s) Mediciones A1-032

Río Salado en Junín 1980-2004 Río Salado en Junín 1997-2004

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Flooded Area

1993 1997 2001

Área inundada Registrada % Área inundada Modelada % Imagen de 1993 26.7% 19.5% Imagen de 1997 4.8% 7.0% Imagen de 2001 10.3% 13.6%

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Relation discharge/phreatic level

50 100 150 200 250 300 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Caudal (m3/s)

Discharge

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Profundidad Freática Media (m)

Mean Phreatic Level

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Flooded Area

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Area Inundada (miles de Ha) 0.0% 3.4% 6.9% 10.3% 13.7% 17.2% 20.6% 24.1% 27.5% 30.9% 34.4% Area Inundada (%) 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 1991 1992 1995 1996 1999 2000 2003 Area Inundada (miles de Ha) 0% 3% 7% 10% 14% 17% 21% 24% 27% 31% 34% Area Inundada (%) 17/12/1993 27/11/1997 05/03/2001

Flooded Area 1960-2004 Flooded Area 1991-2004

slide-25
SLIDE 25

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Scenarios of Rainfall Change

  • Scenario A1: reversion to rainfall

conditions back in about three decades

  • Scenario A2: 30 years projection of

yearly mean rainfall increase trend (3 mm/year) during the last decades of the XXth century

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Scenarios of Rainfall Change

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Mean Phreatic Depth (m) Year Baseline A1 A2

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Scenarios of Rainfall Change

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

01-ene 31-ene 02-mar 01-abr 02-may 01-jun 02-jul 01-ago 01-sep 01-oct 01-nov 01-dic 01-ene

Discharge (m3/s) Date Baseline A1 A2

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Scenarios of Rainfall Change

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

01/ene 31/ene 02/mar 01/abr 02/may 01/jun 02/jul 01/ago 01/sep 01/oct 01/nov 01/dic 01/ene

Mean Phreatic Depth (m) Date Baseline A1 A2

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Scenario of Temperature Increase

  • Scenario B: 30 years projection, with a

yearly mean temperature increase of 0.011°C, which leads to an increase in potential evapotranspiration

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Scenario of Temperature Increase

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

01-ene 31-ene 02-mar 01-abr 02-may 01-jun 02-jul 01-ago 01-sep 01-oct 01-nov 01-dic 01-ene

Discharge (m3/s) Date Baseline B

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Scenario of Temperature Increase

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

01/ene 31/ene 02/mar 01/abr 02/may 01/jun 02/jul 01/ago 01/sep 01/oct 01/nov 01/dic 01/ene

Mean Phreatic Depth (m) Date Baseline B

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Scenario of Agriculturization

  • Scenario C: complete agriculturization of

the basin with soybean, which reflects in an increase of the amplitude of oscillation

  • f infiltration through changes in LAI and

RDF

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Scenario of Agriculturization

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0

01-ene 31-ene 02-mar 01-abr 02-may 01-jun 02-jul 01-ago 01-sep 01-oct 01-nov 01-dic 01-ene

Discharge (m3/s) Date Baseline C

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Scenario of Agriculturization

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

01/ene 31/ene 02/mar 01/abr 02/may 01/jun 02/jul 01/ago 01/sep 01/oct 01/nov 01/dic 01/ene

Mean Phreatic Depth (m) Date Baseline C

slide-36
SLIDE 36

PRESENTATION

  • The Salado Basin
  • Implementation of Hydrologic Model
  • Calibration of Hydrologic Model
  • Model Scenarios
  • Conclusions
slide-37
SLIDE 37

CONCLUSIONS (1/2)

  • Plaussible projected changes in climate and

land use over a planning horizon: significant effects on hydrologic response of very mild slope basin

  • Increase in mean precipitation and

agriculturization: increase in flood risk, decrease in drought risk

  • Increase in temperature: decrease in flood

risk, increase in drought risk

  • Decrease in mean precipitation: flood risk

unchanged, increase in drought risk

slide-38
SLIDE 38

CONCLUSIONS (2/2)

  • Methodology to quantify risk changes:

valuable input for sustainable agricultural management planning

  • Time lag (of about a decade) for system

response can be determined, and should be taken into account

  • Combined scenarios should also be

studied

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Thank you…

http://laboratorios.fi.uba.ar/lmm