Advertisement

Evaluation of national and regional groundwater resources under climate change scenarios using a GIS-based water budget procedure

  • G. Braca
  • M. Bussettini
  • D. DucciEmail author
  • B. Lastoria
  • S. Mariani
Foreseeing Groundwater Resources
  • 22 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Foreseeing Groundwater Resources
  2. Foreseeing Groundwater Resources

Abstract

The present study investigates the impact of climate change on the availability of groundwater resources in Italy and in Campania region (Southern Italy). A 20-year average from 1996 to 2015 of annual water budget components (namely total precipitation, actual evapotranspiration, surface runoff and aquifer recharge) has been evaluated over a 1-km resolution grid and have been projected considering four climate change scenarios (from the Fifth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and three different future 20-year time periods (2020–2039, 2040–2059 and 2080–2099). The groundwater balance has been carried out on a yearly basis using the “Nationwide GIS-based regular gridded hydrological water budget” procedure, which has been developed by the Italian National Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA). The different scenarios of groundwater resources have been compared and matched to the 20-year average of latest historical values related to the period 1996–2015, leading to interesting considerations about the future depletion of groundwater resources. Nationwide results have been compared with those of Campania region, in order to underline the significant differences of climate change impact on groundwater resources at local scale, especially in a typical Mediterranean climate where groundwater resources represent the main source of water for human needs.

Keywords

Water budget Water resources Groundwater Climate change scenarios Downscaling GIS 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research uses data provided by the Community Climate System Model project, supported by the Directorate for Geosciences of the National Science Foundation and the Office of Biological and Environmental Research of the U.S. Department of Energy. NCAR GIS Initiative provided CCSM data in a GIS format through GIS Climate Change Scenarios portal (http://www.gisclimatechange.org).

The authors are grateful to the Italian regional hydrological services for the hydrological data used in this study. ISPRA is acknowledged for making available the national layer of hydrogeological units and the SCIA system (Sistema nazionale per la raccolta, l’elaborazione e la diffusione di dati Climatici di Interesse Ambientale—http://www.scia.isprambiente.it/) gridded temperature fields.

References

  1. Álvarez J, Sánchez A, Quintas L (2005) SIMPA, a GRASS based tool for hydrological studies. Int J Geoinform 1(1):13–20Google Scholar
  2. Braca G, Ducci D (2018) Development of a GIS based procedure (BIGBANG 1.0) for evaluating groundwater balances at National scale and comparison with groundwater resources evaluation at local scale. In: Groundwater and global change in the western mediterranean area. Springer, Cham, pp 53–61Google Scholar
  3. Camici S, Brocca L, Melone F, Moramarco T (2014) Impact of climate change on flood frequency using different climate models and downscaling approaches. J Hydrol Eng 19(8):04014002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen J, Brissette FP, Leconte R (2011) Uncertainty of downscaling method in quantifying the impact of climate change on hydrology. J Hydrol 401(2011):190–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ducci D, Polemio M (2018) Quantitative impact of climate variations on groundwater in southern Italy. In: Groundwater and global change in the western mediterranean area. Springer, Cham, pp 101–108Google Scholar
  6. Ducci D, Tranfaglia G (2008) Effects of climate change on groundwater resources in Campania (Southern Italy). Geol Soc Spec Publ 288:25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ESRI (ed) (2012) ArcGIS desktop: release 10.1. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  8. European Commission (2015) Guidance document on the application of water balances for supporting the implementation of the WFD, technical report 2015-090, pp 126Google Scholar
  9. Fioravanti G, Toreti A, Fraschetti P, Perconti W, Desiato F (2010) Gridded monthly temperatures over Italy. EMS annual meeting abstracts, 7, EMS2010-306, ECAC Conference, Zurich, 13–17 September 2010Google Scholar
  10. Fiorillo F, Guadagno F (2012) Long karst spring discharge time series and droughts occurrence in Southern Italy. Environ Earth Sci 65(8):2273–2283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. In: Core Writing Team, Pachauri RK, Meyer LA (eds) contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC, Geneva, p 151Google Scholar
  13. Sarr MA, Seidoub O, Tramblayc Y, El Adlouni S (2015) Comparison of downscaling methods for mean and extreme precipitation in Senegal. J Hydrol Reg Stud 4(2015):369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smid M, Costa AC (2017) Climate projections and downscaling techniques: a discussion for impact studies in urban systems. Int J Urban Sci.  https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2017.1409132 Google Scholar
  15. Toreti A, Fioravanti G, Percontia W, Desiato F (2009) Annual, seasonal precipitation over Italy from 1961 to 2006. Int J Climatol 29:1976–1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tóth G, Jones A, Montanarella L (eds) (2013) LUCAS topsoil survey. Methodology, data and results. JRC technical reports. Luxembourg. Publications Office of the European Union, EUR26102—Scientific and Technical Research series—ISSN 1831-9424 (online); ISBN 978-92-79-32542-7;  https://doi.org/10.2788/97922
  17. Turc L (1961) Estimation of irrigation water requirements, potential evapotranspiration: a simple climatic formula evolved up to date. Ann Agron 12:13–49Google Scholar
  18. van Vuuren DP, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt GC, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque JF, Masui T, Meinshausen M, Nakicenovic N, Smith SJ, Rose SK (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Change 109:5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wayne G (2013) The Beginner’s guide to representative concentration pathways, Version 1.0, August 2013, pp 24, https://www.skepticalscience.com/docs/RCP_Guide.pdf

Webography

  1. National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), https://ncar.ucar.edu/
  2. ISPRA SCIA—Sistema nazionale per la raccolta, l’elaborazione e la diffusione dei dati Climatici di Interesse Ambientale, http://www.scia.isprambiente.it/home_new.asp
  3. European Environmental Agency (2017) EEA Reference Grid, https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-andmaps/data/eea-reference-grids-2
  4. ESDAC European Soil Data Centre—LUCAS (2009) TOPSOIL data, https://esdac.jrc.ec.europa.eu/content/lucas-2009-topsoil-data

Copyright information

© Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Italian National Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA)RomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of Naples Federico IINaplesItaly

Personalised recommendations