6 g wadi network for see-zlatanović&dimkić
TRANSCRIPT
Nikola Zlatanović
Dejan Dimkić
Who are we? Full Name: Water for Sustainable Development and
Adaptation to Climate Change
Status: UNESCO Category 2 Centre
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Hosting organization: Institute for the Development of Water Resources “Jaroslav Černi”
Established: 2013
2
What is G-WADI?• Established 2003 -Paris plenary meeting
• Response to IHP 2003-2007; then 2008-2013
• The strategic objective of the G-WADI network is to strengthen the global capacity to manage the water resources of arid and semi-arid areas.
• Activities:
• To develop and maintain website and web-based activities
• Capacity building through workshops
• Publications and publicity
• Development of Regional Centres plus Core Activity
• eg: Asia, Arabian, Latin-America, Africa
3
www.g-wadi.org
4
OrganizationGlobal Secretariat – ICIWaRM
Asian G-WADI
African G-WADI
Latin American G-WADI
Arab G-WADI
Southeastern European G-WADI
UN
ES
CO
5
G-WADI Achievements
CHRS (Irvine, CA) –PERSIANN geoserver
LAC G-WADI –drought and flood monitor
workshops, conferences...
6
G-WADI Meeting Belgrade 2014
7
G-WADI Meeting Belgrade 2014 MAJOR OUTCOMES
WSDAC has become the G-WADI secretariat for SEE Regional experts have formed G-WADI SEE Advisory Group Major issues and gaps have been identified
FUTURE ACTIVITIES Create, host and maintain G-WADI SEE website Publish news and disseminate regional information Link with global G-WADI activities Raise awareness through brochures, workshops, conferences,
etc. Build capacity through manuals, training and education
8
G-WADI Meeting Belgrade 2014 PARTICIPANTS
WSDAC, Belgrade, Serbia International Commission for the
Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)
International Sava River Basin Commission (ISRBC)
UNESCO/INWEB, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
National Meteorological Administration, Romania
Slovenian Environmental Agency University of Ljubljana, Slovenia University of Belgrade, Faculty of
Civil Engineering, Serbia Republic Hydrometeorological
Service of Serbia (RHMSS)
PROJECTS UNESCO IHP
IDI
DMCSEE
ASSIMO
CCWARE
DRINKADRIA
CCWATERS
WATERWEB
9
G-WADI SEE Activities Satellite-based Rainfall validation
Rain gauge data: 15 stations
daily rainfall data
Period: 2001-2010
Satellite data: 0.25 deg (28 x 20km), daily
TRMM (PRT), PERSIANN (NRT)
10
Comparing Satellite Rainfall Estimates with Rain-Gauge Data
RESULTS – Yearly cumulative rainfall EXAMPLES
11
Comparing Satellite Rainfall Estimates with Rain-Gauge Data
RESULTS – daily rainfall scatter plots (2001-2010)
12
Comparing Satellite Rainfall Estimates with Rain-Gauge Data
RESULTS – 10-day rainfall scatter plots (2001-2010)
13
1. Observed climate and hydrological changes
Figure 1 Recorded annual trends in Serbia (1949-2006), based on T-26, P-34 and Q-18 stations
Table 1 Registered temperature and precipitation monthly trends and annual averages (1949-2006)
Type of station Station JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
SEP
OCT NOV DEC Aver
Temperature
(°C/100years) Average of 26 stations
1.9 1.3 3.2 -0.1 1.7 1.1 1.1 0.8 -1.4 1.2 -1.9 -2.2 0.6
Precipitation
(%/100years) Average of 34 stations
-16.0 -21.7 -12.4 35.7 -43.7 -6.6 11.5 43.1 70.9 6.3 -41.4 -17.9 -0.3
Hydrological
(%/100yrs) Average of 18 stations
-12 -55 -22 -20 -70 -31 -27 -7 19 -22 -76 -68 -36.7
All three trend charts were generated using Surfer software, removing the stochastic component by regional averaging. 14
1. Observed river discharge trends in Serbia in period 1949 - 2006
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Jadra (profil
Zavlaka) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0199x + 42,476
R2 = 0,0744
0,000
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qs
r,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Jasenice
(profil D.Satornja) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0013x + 3,135
R2 = 0,0073
0,000
0,200
0,400
0,600
0,800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qs
r,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Lugomira
(profil Majur) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0061x + 13,827
R2 = 0,0123
0,000
0,500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Velike
Morave (profil Varvarin) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,6843x + 1560,6
R2 = 0,0298
0,0
100,0
200,0
300,0
400,0
500,0
600,0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Crnice (profil
Paracin) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0054x + 14,158
R2 = 0,0068
0,000
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Peka (profil
Kusici) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0386x + 85,264
R2 = 0,033
0,000
4,000
8,000
12,000
16,000
20,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Drine (profil
Bajina Basta) za period 1949-2006
y = -1,0845x + 2478,5
R2 = 0,0666
0,0
100,0
200,0
300,0
400,0
500,0
600,0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Moravice
(profil Arilje) za period 1949-2006
y = -6E-05x + 10,765
R2 = 1E-07
0,000
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Zapadne
Morave (profil Jasika) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,1704x + 443,2
R2 = 0,0082
0,0
50,0
100,0
150,0
200,0
250,0
300,0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv J. Morave
(profil Aleksinac) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,4559x + 989,76
R2 = 0,0603
0,0
25,0
50,0
75,0
100,0
125,0
150,0
175,0
200,0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Nisave
(profil Nis) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,1861x + 396,99
R2 = 0,1051
0,000
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Timoka
(profil Tamnic) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,1889x + 400,79
R2 = 0,0812
0,000
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Lima (profil
Prijepolje) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,2605x + 592,98
R2 = 0,0627
0,0
20,0
40,0
60,0
80,0
100,0
120,0
140,0
160,0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Studenice
(profil Devici) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0005x + 3,967
R2 = 0,0001
0,000
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Ibra (profil
Raska) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,1801x + 397,02
R2 = 0,0476
0,000
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Toplice
(profil Donja Selova) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,008x + 19,36
R2 = 0,0111
0,000
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Veternice
(profil Leskovac) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0231x + 49,734
R2 = 0,0583
0,000
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qs
r,g
od
( m
3/s
)
Promena srednje godisnjih protoka - sliv Belog
Timoka (profil Knjazevac) za period 1949-2006
y = -0,0468x + 100,52
R2 = 0,0608
0,000
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
G o d i n e
Qsr,
go
d (
m3/s
)
A very approximate geographical distribution of the downward average annual river discharge trends for Serbia is shown on the previous slide. It should be noted that within all river discharge trend isolines there are rivers and monitoring stations which often exhibit
significant trend variations (both up and down), as a result of Human use of water impact. It is also noteworthy that the long-term trends (annual averages) for the Danube and Sava river in Serbia generally approximated -10%/100 years.
15
2. Future hydrological prediction
Observed hydrological changes told us that there is a downward average annual riverflow trend in Serbia. If temperature continues to increase, what is to be expected with regard to hydrological trends?
Common approach (RCM models) try to give us answer with different scenarios of future society changing. Great possible misunderstandings become when comparing the results of different models: In addition to applied climate scenario, differences in approach of Hydrology assessment are present: some of them analyze just Climate change, without changes in Land use and Human use of water, and some of them analyze all three factors.
In addition to common approach, the good way of arriving at the answer to this question is to analyze what has happened in the past with average annual temperature vs. average annual riverflow, and it is also useful to establish the same type of correlation between temperature and precipitation (Dimkić at all, 2012; JCI, 2012). 16
2. Future hydrological prediction - Methodology and Results
Temperature deviation
category (°C)
Relative discharge
(average)
Relative precipi-
tation (average)
Temperature
difference (average)
Number of data
points (years)
ΔTav < -1.0°C 1.27 1.09 -1.22 74
-1.0 < ΔTav < -0.5 1.11 1.05 -0.72 148
-0.5 < ΔTav < 0.0 1.04 1.00 -0.24 327
All data for 18 C.A. 1.00 1.00 0.00 1044
0.0 < ΔTav < 0.5 0.96 1.00 0.22 278
0.5 < ΔTav < 1.0 0.90 0.99 0.70 123
1.0°C < ΔTav 0.72 0.88 1.36 94
Figure 2 Average annual riverflow and precipitation, relative to the average, as a function of temperature
deviation (all 18 watersheds).
y = -0,1997x + 1,0033
R2 = 0,9809
y = -0,0508x3 + 0,0141x2 - 0,1313x + 0,9981
R2 = 0,9986
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
1,10
1,20
1,30
1,40
1,50
1,60
-2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0
ΔT av ( °C )
Qre
l
y = -0,0728x + 1,0015
R2 = 0,9032
y = -0,0348x3 - 0,0021x2 - 0,0243x + 1,0055
R2 = 0,9703
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
1,10
1,20
1,30
1,40
1,50
1,60
-2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0
ΔT av ( °C )
Pre
l
The results of direct correlation between average annual temperature against precipitation and river discharge for the 18 analyzed catchments are shown in relative values in Figure 2.
17
2. Future hydrological predictionResults
It should be noted that the coefficient of determination is very high in both graphs, leading to the
conclusion that a deviation of the average annual temperature by +1°C has an inversely proportional
effect on the average annual precipitation levels of about 7%, and on the average annual riverflow of
about 20%. The results differ from C.A. to C.A., but in most cases this variation is not great. If these linear and 3
rd degree polynomial trends are extrapolated to +2°C, the following values are derived for
relative riverflow and relative precipitation (Table 3).
Table 3 ΔTav ( °C ) → 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Linear trend 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 Relative riverflow (Qrel)
3rd
degree polynomial trend 0.93 0.83 0.66 0.39
Linear trend 0.97 0.93 0.89 0.86 Relative precipitation (Prel)
3rd
degree polynomial trend 0.99 0.94 0.85 0.67
This methodology could be basis for the most probable average riverflow assessment (decline)
for the near future (30 years) in Serbia, in dependence of the average yearly temperature
increasing. The same methodology could be applied for many countries and regions.
If the average annual temperature were to increase by +2ºC, based on the correlations established to date between average annual river discharges and average annual temperatures, we could expect, on average, approximately -50% less water in rivers whose catchment areas largely lie within Serbia.
18
Prikaz zastupljenosti (verovatnoce) razlike ostvarenih
relativnih i racunskih relativnih protoka
0.000
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.080
0.100
0.120
0.140
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Qostvareno - Qracun,linear
Za
stu
plj
en
os
t (p
)
Qostvar
Q121
Q11111
Distribution of differences between observed relative annual and calculated relativeannual discharges with linear trend line:
1. For all pairs of data relative T – relative Q (58 years x 18 T and Q stations) we calculaterelative annual discharges using trendline formula:
Qav.yrs.rel,calc., trendline = -0.1997 x ∆Tav.yrs. + 1.0033
2. For all pairs of data we calculate difference: Qav.yrs.rel,observ. - Q av.yrs.rel,calc., trendline
3. Then we group them in to the classes, count the number in each class and the resultinggraph is as follows:
2. Future hydrological prediction
19
3. Climate change issue in Water Management planning
How to respond to these pressures and adapt Water sector against scarcity in hydrological dry years?
1. With increasing water efficiency (loss reduction, cost recovery approach - increasing price of water, WSC inside reorganization, etc.)
2. In parallel, Serbia needs to invest in and develop new systems, which distribute water from region with water suficit to region with water deficit . Many of them are already needed today.
The main problem is that all these regional systems require substantial financing and detailed long-term planning. Several scenario were done. Possibilities in pessimistic scenario are shown on this Figure.
20
Relationships between summary annual Precipitations and average annual Temperatures (rel. values) in Europe
Oslo - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1938-2011)
y = 0.0495x + 1.0168
R2 = 0.353
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Falun - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1918-2011)
y = -0.0047x + 1.0009
R2 = 0.0093
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Sodankyla - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1908-2011)
y = 0.0299x + 1.0179
R2 = 0.28
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Arhangelsk relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1881-2011)
y = 0.0472x + 0.9914
R2 = 0.4202
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-)
N O R T H E U R O P E Kopenhagen - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1874-2011)
y = 0.0293x + 0.9923
R2 = 0.4323
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Hamburg Fuhlsbuettel - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1891-
2011)y = 0.0445x + 0.9966
R2 = 0.6213
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Bremen - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1890-2011)
y = -0.0638x + 0.9915
R2 = 0.5603
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Siedlce - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1966-2011)
y = 0.0272x + 0.9947
R2 = 0.3008
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
N O R T H M I D D L E E U R O P E
Salzburg - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1901-2011)
y = -0.0131x + 0.9988
R2 = 0.1646
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Praha - Klementinum relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1804-
1953) y = -0.0225x + 0.9824
R2 = 0.2007
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Hurbanovo - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-2011)
y = 0.0004x + 1.0031
R2 = 0.0003
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Oravska Lesna - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-2009)y = 0.0257x + 1.0032
R2 = 0.2358
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-)
M I D D L E E U R O P E
Madrid - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1920-2011)
y = -0.0718x + 1.0198
R2 = 0.7033
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Brindisi - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-2011)y = -0.073x + 1.0305
R2 = 0.2126
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Split - Marjan - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1948-2010)
y = -0.0621x + 1.0384
R2 = 0.2045
0.8
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Larissa - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1955-2011)
y = -0.0838x + 1.0134
R2 = 0.3569
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
S O U T H E U R O P E
21
Relationships between summary annual Precipitations and average annual Temperatures (rel. values) in Europe
Tromso - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1931-2011)
y = 0.0048x + 0.9974
R2 = 0.0249
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Stensele - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1918-2011)
y = -0.0028x + 0.991
R2 = 0.0045
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Helsinki - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-2011)
y = 0.0239x + 1.0069
R2 = 0.1382
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Murmansk relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1936-2011)
y = 0.0427x + 1.0029
R2 = 0.5976
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
N O R T H E U R O P E
Rostock - Warnemunde - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-
2011)y = 0.0101x + 1.0013
R2 = 0.0363
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Berlin - Tempelhof - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1874-
2011)
y = 0.0026x + 1.015
R2 = 0.0019
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Berlin - Dahlem - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1874-2011)
y = 0.0025x + 1.0187
R2 = 0.0017
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Leba - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1966-2011)
y = 0.0104x + 1.0136
R2 = 0.02
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
N O R T H M I D D L E E U R O P E
Murska Sobota - Rakican - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T
(1961-2011)
y = -0.0406x + 0.9934
R2 = 0.3560.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Kosice - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1951-2011)
y = -0.0324x + 1.0083
R2 = 0.39990.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Arad - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1896-2011)
y = -0.0648x + 1.0023
R2 = 0.8435
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
M I D D L E E U R O P E
Barcelona - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1926-2011)
y = -0.0453x + 0.9945
R2 = 0.4448
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Osijek - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1899-2010)
y = -0.1661x + 1.0301
R2 = 0.8525
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Sarajevo - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1891-2011)
y = -0.0435x + 0.9961
R2 = 0.6157
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
Corfu - relativan odnos godisnjih P i T (1955-2011)
y = -0.0242x + 1.0068
R2 = 0.2832
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
-2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
∆T (°C)
Pre
l (-
)
S O U T H E U R O P E
22
5. Conclusion
• Observed data are extremely important, as is continued systematic monitoring in the future.
• Regional integration is very important (SEE or the Danube River Basin in the case of Serbia), as is the use of the same approach to produce various maps.
• Exchange of knowledge, experience and ideas between countries and regions that share the same problem is important (e.g. regions that record upward or downward precipitation trends, or sub-arid regions, etc.).
• It is extremely important to apply various methods to assess past and predict future climate and hydrological developments.
• If predictions for the near future under RCMs and through correlation and extrapolation of observed data do not differ to a large extent, the reliability of such predictions is quite high.
23
For whom these results could be interesting (apart from Serbia)
Who can perhaps benefit from the outcomes of this research?
Apart from Serbia, it is believed that the presented results will be of interest to the entire region of Southeast Europe, especially eastern and southeastern part of Balkan peninsula.
Ultimately, the proposed methodology for the assessment of average temperature impact on average river discharge and precipitation could certainly be applied in many parts of the world, especially in regions where a long-term decreasing precipitation trend is recorded. It may also be used in other regions, but the results might not be as straightforward.
24
