evaluation of groundwater sustainability in selected ...€¦ · nus presentation title 2001 •...
TRANSCRIPT
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Evaluation of Groundwater Sustainability in Selected Regions of China and Future Projection under Climate Change
Zhou YiminA0105556H
Supervisor: A/P Yeh Jen-Feng Pat
9th May 2016
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
1
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Outline
• Introduction• Objective• Methodology• Procedures and Results
• Determine study area• Data evaluation• Results
• Discussion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
2
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Introduction – Why Study Groundwater Sustainability
• Groundwater is a limited resource.
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Source: Adapted from Figure 2, Freshwater Series No. A-2, Water - Here, There and Everywhere.
3
0.77%
NUS Presentation Title 2001
• Human activities such as pumping and irrigation need large amounts of groundwater supply.
1.5-billion people rely on groundwater for drinking water supply (Karamouz, Ahmadi & Akhbari, 2011).
In cities such as Beijing or Tianjin, groundwater supplies more than 70% of total water resources (Beijing Municipal Water Conservancy Bureau, 2002; Dong et al., 2013).
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Introduction – Why Study Groundwater Sustainability
4
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Introduction – Why Study Groundwater Sustainability• Current Available Estimates of Global Groundwater Storage
and Groundwater Flux in Literature are of High Uncertainty.
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Source Total groundwater storage (106 km3) Mean groundwater flux (103
km3/year)
L’Vovich (1967, 1974) 60.0 12.0
Korzun (1974) 23.4 13.32
UNESCO (1978) 13.2
National Council on Scientific Research USA (1986) 15.3UNESCO (1990) 23.4
Döll et al. (2002) 14.0
FAO (2003) 11.284
Döll and Flörke (2005) 12.882
Döll and Fiedler (2008) 12.7
Wada et al. (2010) 15.2
AQUASTAT (2011) 11.968
Richey et al. (2015) 7.0 (lower limit) & 23.0 (higher limit)
7.6 times
230% difference
24% difference
5
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Objectives
• Establish groundwater resource database in China over the last several decades
• Evaluate groundwater availability and usage• Assess renewable groundwater stress (RGS) in selected
basins in China• Make comparison of RGSs calculated using different
definitions and data sources• Make suggestions on groundwater management
How sustainable groundwater (GW) is ?
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 6
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Methodology – GRACE
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
• Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE)
• Measure gravity anomalies• Three research institutes (CSR,
GFZ, JPL) provides three different sets of data applying different methods, models and coefficients.
• Level 3 product: global gridded water storage anomalies (in equivalent water height)
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 7
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Methodology – GLDAS
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
• Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS)
• Four global-scale hydrological models in GLDAS : Common Land Model (CLM), Mosaic (MOS), NOAH and Variable Infiltration Capacity (VIC).
• The model simulation output data from all four hydrologic models are used in this study.
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 8
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Methodology – Moving Average Filter
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
• A 13-month moving average filter is applied.
• Average of GW anomalies from January 2005 to January 2006 in equivalent water height is calculated as the first moving average for July 2005.
• A series of moving average from July 2005 to January 2015 can be calculated by keeping moving the 13-month subsets forward.
• Eliminate short-term fluctuations and highlight long-term trend.
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 9
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Renewable GW Stress (RGS)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
𝑅𝐺𝑆 = %&()*%&+,+-.+/-.-01
(Richey et al., 2015)
GW use is defined as GW depletion.
GW availability is defined as mean groundwater recharge.
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 10
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Renewable GW Stress (RGS) – GW Depletion
Natural (N), Anthropogenic (A) Surface Water (SW)Snow Water Equivalent (SWE)Canopy Water Storage (CWS)Soil Moisture (SM)Groundwater (GW)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Δ𝑆345 = Δ 𝑆𝑊+ 𝑆𝑊𝐸+ 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 + 𝐺𝑊 345
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ 𝑆𝑊 + SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 345
11
𝑅𝐺𝑆 =𝐺𝑊𝑢𝑠𝑒
𝐺𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦
GRACE GLDAS
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Renewable GW Stress (RGS) – GW Availability
𝑅𝐺𝑆 =𝐺𝑊𝑢𝑠𝑒
𝐺𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦
Availability: mean groundwater rechargeModels: Community Land Model version 4.0
PCR-GLOBWB global hydrological model
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 12
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area
Source: UNESCO (2008)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
• Severe groundwater quantity issues exist in China.
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 13
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
• Severe groundwater quantity issues exist in China.
Country GW recharge(km3/year)
Population (million) (The World Bank, 2011) GW recharge (m3/year per capita)
Russia 788 142.96 5512
Canada 370 34.34 10775
China 829 1344.13 617
The USA 1384 311.72 4440
Brazil 1874 200.52 9346
Australia 72 22.34 3223
India 432 1247.45 346
Mean annual GW recharge per capita for seven largest countries in land area (2011).
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 14
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Qinling Mountain-Huaihe River Line
Yangtze River
550 million
100 million
650 million
Two geographical dividing lines between Northern and Southern China
Population (million)
Northern China ~600
Southern China ~700
15
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
0100200300400500600700
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
GW
rec
harg
e (k
m3/
yr)
Year
Comparison of GW recharge in Northern and Southern China
North South
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
GW
use
(km
3/yr
)Year
Comparison of GW use in Northern and Southern China
North South
GW quantity issue in Northern China is much more serious than that in Southern China.
16
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area
North China Aquifer SystemSong-Liao BasinTarim Basin
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Data availability
GRACEresolution (~200,000
km3)
More seriousproblem in Northern
China
Three study aquifers chosen
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 17
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area – North China Plain Aquifer (NCP)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
• 34°N to 40°N, 113°E to 119°E
• Land area of 140,000 km2
• NCP covers Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Henan and Shandong provinces.
• Semi-humid Area
18
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area – Songliao Basin
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
• 40°N to 49°N, 120°E to 129°E
• Land area of 350,000 km2
• NCP covers Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning and Inner Mongolia provinces.
• Semi-humid Area
19
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Study Area – Tarim Basin
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
• 36°N to 42°N, 75°E to 93°E
• Land area of 560,000 km2
• NCP covers part of Xinjiang provinces.
• Arid Area with mean annual precipitation less than 100mm.
20
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Data Evaluation – GRACE
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
Three GRACE observations are internally consistent with each other.
21
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Data Evaluation – GRACE
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
The peaks of TWS is delayed compared with the peaks of precipitation. The delayed time is from half an month to one month.
22
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Data Evaluation – GRACE
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
• Large difference between these two estimations• Sources of error for GLDAS: no component of GW, high
dependency on the accuracy of data inputs
Comparison of TWS by GRACE and GLDAS, take NCP as example
23
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Data Evaluation
• Use GLDAS simulations for SM, SWE and CWS.• Similar to GRACE observations on TWS, four GLDAS
models (CLM, MOS, NOAH, VIC) have consistent results for SM, SWE and CWS.
• Calculate the average of three observations on TWS and average of four simulations for SM, SWE and CWS. The two averages are going to be used for further calculation.
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 24
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Data Evaluation – Recharge
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion
• The peaks for NCP and Songliao Basin appear in July and August each year (consistent with rainfall data)
• Tarim Basin has relatively stable but small amount of recharge as it is within arid zone.
PCR-GLOBWB modelsimulation on recharge in NCP, Songliao Basin and Tarim Basin
25
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 26
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 345
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 27
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 345
Aquifer name Depletion rate (mm/year)
NCP -8.83
Songliao Basin 7.13
Tarim Basin 1.16
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 28
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 345
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 29
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 345
Aquifer name Depletion rate (mm/year)
NCP -8.86
Songliao Basin 3.67
Tarim Basin 0.972
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 30
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 345(With a 13-month moving average filter)
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 31
ΔGW = Δ𝑆345 − Δ SWE + 𝐶𝑊𝑆 + 𝑆𝑀 345(With a 13-month moving average filter)
Aquifer name Depletion rate (mm/year)
NCP -7.19
Songliao Basin 3.15
Tarim Basin 0.636
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 32
ΔGW = u ∗ ΔH(u:specificyield,ΔH:changeinGWtable)From in-situ observations, only available in NCP.
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 33
Method Depletion in NCP(mm/year)
Depletion inSongliao Basin(mm/year)
Depletion inTarim Basin(mm/year)
Equation 2.3(include SM)
-8.83 7.13 1.16
Equation 2.4(exclude SM)(Depletion a)
-8.86 3.67 0.972
Moving averagefilter(Depletion b)
-7.19 3.15 0.636
In-situobservation ofGW table
-33.23 N.A. N.A.
Richey et al.(2015b)
-7.50 2.40 -0.23
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – GW Recharge
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 34
Source NCP Songliao Basin Tarim BasinPCR-GLOBWBmodel (Wada, 2010)(Recharge a)
17.25 12.77 14.77
China WaterResources (2005)
111.16 69.24 37.81
Average of PCR-GLOBWB modeland China WaterResources bulletin(Recharge b)
64.21 41.01 26.29
Richey et al. (2015b) 96.56 20.16 -0.74
5.4 times difference
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Results – Renewable Groundwater Stress
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 35
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑎
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑏𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑎
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑏
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑏𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑏
Richey et al.
(2015b)
NCP -0.514 -0.417 -0.138 -0.112 -0.08
Songliao
Basin
0.287 0.247 0.089 0.077 0.12
Tarim
Basin
0.066 0.043 0.037 0.024 0.32
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Evaluation of Stress
Variable Stress Unstressed
Overstresshuman-
dominated stress
Positive Use(Gaining)
Negative Use(Extracting)
Positive availability(Recharging)
𝑅𝐺𝑆 =𝐺𝑊𝑢𝑠𝑒
𝐺𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦
Negative availability(Discharging)
Stress Scale for VariableStress
0-0.1 Low
0.1-0.2 Moderate
0.2-0.4 High
Above 0.4 Extreme
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 36
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Evaluation of Stress
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 37
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑏𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑏
𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑏𝑅𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑏
Richey et al.
(2015b)
NCP Variable Stress
(Extreme)
Variable Stress
(Extreme)
Variable Stress
(Moderate)
Variable Stress
(Moderate)
Variable Stress
(Low)
Songliao
Basin
Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed
Tarim
Basin
Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed Unstressed
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Discussion – Difference on GW Depletion
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 38
Method Depletion in NCP(mm/year)
Depletion inSongliao Basin(mm/year)
Depletion inTarim Basin(mm/year)
Equation 2.3(include SM)
-8.83 7.13 1.16
Equation 2.4(exclude SM)(Depletion a)
-8.86 3.67 0.972
Moving averagefilter(Depletion b)
-7.19 3.15 0.636
In-situobservation ofGW table
-33.23 N.A. N.A.
Richey et al.(2015b)
-7.50 2.40 -0.23
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Discussion – Difference on GW Depletion
Causes of differences:
• Over-estimation of in-situ GW anomalies due to the over-estimation of specific yield (𝛥𝐺𝑊 = 𝑢 ∗ 𝛥𝐻 ).
• Under-estimation of GW depletion due to model errors in GLDAS (no GW component).
• Other sources of GW: South-North Water Transfer Project (~5.7mm/year)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 39
NUS Presentation Title 2001
TGS
𝑇𝐺𝑆 =𝐺𝑊𝑆𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒
𝐺𝑊𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
RGS𝑅𝐺𝑆 =
𝐺𝑊𝑢𝑠𝑒𝐺𝑊𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦
1RGS =
𝐺𝑊availability(𝑟𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒)𝐺𝑊use(𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)
Comparison with Total Groundwater Stress (TGS)
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 40
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Further Consideration
• Derive Renewable Groundwater Stress in time series instead of a time-averaged value
• Revise recharge models
• Integrate more climate change data
• Give recommendations on the limit of pumping based on groundwater stress
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
Introduction Objective Methodology Procedures and Results Discussion 41
NUS Presentation Title 2001
Sources: World Resources Institute
Groundwater stress Atlas
NUS Hydrology & Water Resources Group
42
43