Skip to main content

Impact of climate change on stormwater drainage in urban areas

Abstract

Climate change and urbanization are significantly magnifying flood hazard, leading to a greater vulnerability of urban concentrations. This paper investigates the impact of climate change on urban flooding using future projected rainfall data and a calibrated hydraulic model. Two urban watersheds in Delhi, India (the Qudesia Nallah catchment and the Jahangirpuri drain catchment) are considered to evaluate the climate change impact on urban flooding. Regional climate models (RCMs) are used to project future precipitation, which is then utilized by the hydraulic model to evaluate the impact on flooding. Climate data from three RCMs extracted from the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) are used to study the impact of climate change for historical (1990–2016) and future scenario (Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5, 2021–2100). The rainfall projections are fed as 2-, 5-, 10-, and 20-year return periods to a calibrated hydrodynamic Storm Water Management Model (SWMM). The results show that the flooded nodes vary between 2–6 and 12–43, respectively, in the Qudesia Nallah catchment and the Jahangirpuri drain catchment under present conditions but increase from 11 to 51 and 42 to 91, respectively, for future climate conditions. The results suggest that the risk of occurrence of flooding, duration, and frequency in the two study areas will increase in the future when compared to those under the present conditions. The results also indicate that the damage induced by the 20-year return period rainfall at the present time will likely be caused just by the 2-year return period in the future. This is due to the greater likelihood of rainfall extremes in the region. The potential flooding sites identified in this study will provide the urban municipalities with substantive information to perform ameliorative strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Code availability

The code may be obtained from the authors upon request.

References

  1. Aditya S, Lal M, Silva N S, McCartney M (2017) Understanding the hydrological impacts of climate change in the Tana River Basin, Kenya. IWMI Working Paper, (178)

  2. Agrawal P, Sinha A, Kumar S, Agarwal A, Banerjee A, Villuri VGK, Annavarapu CSR, Dwivedi R, Dera VVR, Sinha J, Pasupuleti S (2021) Exploring artificial intelligence techniques for groundwater quality assessment. Water 13(9):1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmed KF, Wang G, Silander J, Wilson AM, Allen JM, Horton R, Anyah R (2013) Statistical downscaling and bias correction of climate model outputs for climate change impact assessment in the U.S. northeast. Global Planet Change 100:320–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahmed F, Moors E, Khan MSA, Warner J, Van Scheltinga CT (2018) Tipping points in adaptation to urban flooding under climate change and urban growth: the case of the Dhaka megacity. Land Use Policy 79:496–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Anand J, Devak M, Gosain AK, Khosa R, Dhanya CT (2017) Spatial extent of future changes in the hydrologic cycle components in ganga basin using ranked CORDEX RCMs. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss. 9:1https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2017-189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Andimuthu R, Kandasamy P, Mudgal BV, Jeganathan A, Balu A, Sankar G (2019) Performance of urban storm drainage network under changing climate scenarios: flood mitigation in Indian coastal city. Sci Rep 9(1):1–10

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ashley RM, Balmforth DJ, Saul AJ, Blanskby JD (2005) Flooding in the future–predicting climate change, risks and responses in urban areas. Water Sci Technol 52(5):265–273

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Avashia V, Garg A (2020) Implications of land use transitions and climate change on local flooding in urban areas: an assessment of 42 Indian cities. Land Use Policy 95:104571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Barco J, Wong KM, Stenstrom MK (2008) Automatic calibration of the US EPA SWMM model for a large urban catchment. J Hydraul Eng 134(4):466–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruen M, Yang J (2006) Combined hydraulic and black-box models for flood forecasting in urban drainage systems. J Hydrol Eng 11(6):589–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen J, Brissette FP, Chaumont D, Braun M (2013) Finding appropriate bias correction methods in downscaling precipitation for hydrologic impact studies over North America. Water Resour Res 49(7):4187–4205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chow VT (1964) Handbook of applied hydrology: a compendium of water-resources technology. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chowdhury RK, Alam MJ, Das P, Alam MA (2007) Short duration rainfall estimation of Sylhet: IMD and USWB method. J Indian Water Works Assoc 39(4):285–292

    Google Scholar 

  14. Denault C, Millar RG, Lence BJ (2006) Assessment of possible impacts of climate change in an urban catchment 1. J Am Water Resour Assoc 42(3):685–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Djordjević S, Butler D, Gourbesville P, Mark O, Pasche E (2011) New policies to deal with climate change and other drivers impacting on resilience to flooding in urban areas: the CORFU approach. Environ Sci Policy 14(7):864–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dougherty M, Dymond RL, Grizzard TJ Jr, Godrej AN, Zipper CE, Randolph J (2007) Quantifying long-term hydrologic response in an urbanizing basin. J Hydrol Eng 12(1):33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Emami F, Koch M (2018) Sustainability assessment of the water management system for the Boukan Dam, Iran using CORDEX-south asia climate projections. Water 10(12):1723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Erler AR, Frey SK, Khader O, d’Orgeville M, Park YJ, Hwang HT, Lapen DR, Richard Peltier W, Sudicky EA (2019) Simulating climate change impacts on surface water resources within a lake-affected region using regional climate projections. Water Resour Res 55(1):130–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fang T, Ball JE (2007) Evaluation of spatially variable control parameters in a complex catchment modelling system: a genetic algorithm application. J Hydroinf 9(3):163–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fiseha BM, Setegn SG, Melesse AM, Volpi E, Fiori A (2014) Impact of climate change on the hydrology of upper Tiber River Basin using bias corrected regional climate model. Water Resour Manage 28(5):1327–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gao X, Wang M, Giorgi F (2013) Climate change over China in the 21st century as simulated by BCC_CSM1. 1-RegCM4. 0. Atmos Ocean Sci Lett 6:381–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Giorgi F, Jones C, Asrar GR (2009) Addressing climate information needs at the regional level the CORDEX framework. World Meteorol Organ (WMO) Bull 58(3):175

    Google Scholar 

  23. Givati A, Thirel G, Rosenfeld D, Paz D (2019) Climate change impacts on streamflow at the upper Jordan river based on an ensemble of regional climate models. J Hydrol: Reg Stud 21:92–109

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gu X, Zhang Q, Li J, Singh VP, Sun P (2019) Impact of urbanization on nonstationarity of annual and seasonal precipitation extremes in China. J Hydrol 575:638–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Guo Y (2006) Updating rainfall IDF relationships to maintain urban drainage design standards. J Hydrol Eng 11(5):506–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Guo Y, Senior MJ (2006) Climate model simulation of point rainfall frequency characteristics. J Hydrol Eng 11(6):547–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gupta S (2017) Climatrans: a Report on Impact of Flood in Delhi. School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hamdi R, van de Vyver H, de Troch R, Termonia P (2014) Assessment of three dynamical urban climate downscaling methods: Brussels’s future urban heat island under an A1B emission scenario. Int J Climatol 34(4):978–999. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hamouz V, Møller-Pedersen P, Muthanna TM (2020) Modelling runoff reduction through implementation of green and grey roofs in urban catchments using PCSWMM. Urban Water J 17(9):813–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hazen A (1914) The storage to be provided in impounding reservoirs for municipal water supply. Trans Am Soc Civ Eng 77:1539–1669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Huber WC, Dickinson RE (1992) Storm water management model user’s manual, version 4. Environmental Protection Agency, Georgia

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hung CLJ, James LA, Carbone GJ, Williams JM (2020) Impacts of combined land-use and climate change on streamflow in two nested catchments in the Southeastern United States. Ecol Eng 143:105665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2019.105665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Huq E, Abdul-Aziz OI (2021) Climate and land cover change impacts on stormwater runoff in large-scale coastal-urban environments. Sci Total Environ 778:146017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146017

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. IPCC (2018) Global warming of 1.5 °C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia W, Péan C, Pidcock R, Connors S, Matthews JBR, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis MI, Lonnoy E, Maycock T, Tignor M, Waterfield T (eds)]. In Press

  35. Jewell TK, Nunno TJ, Adrian DD (1978) Methodology for calibrating stormwater models. J Environ Eng Div 104(3):485–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Karamouz M, Hosseinpour A, Nazif S (2011) Improvement of urban drainage system performance under climate change impact: case study. J Hydrol Eng 16(5):395–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kaspersen PS, Halsnæs K (2017) Integrated climate change risk assessment: a practical application for urban flooding during extreme precipitation. Clim ServicesServ 6:55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kiesel J, Stanzel P, Kling H, Fohrer N, Jähnig SC, Pechlivanidis I (2020) Streamflow-based evaluation of climate model sub-selection methods. Clim Change 163(3):1267–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kite GW (1977) Frequency and risk analysis in hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, Colorado, p 224

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kumar S, Kaushal DR, Gosain AK (2018) Assessment of stormwater drainage network to mitigate urban flooding using gis compatible PCSWMM model. In: Singh UP, Chahar BR, Yadav HRP, Vij SK (eds) Urbanization challenges in emerging economies: energy and water infrastructure; transportation infrastructure; and planning and financing. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, pp 38–46

  41. Kumar S, Kaushal DR, Gosain AK (2019) Evaluation of evolutionary algorithms for the optimization of storm water drainage network for an urbanized area. Acta Geophys 67(1):149–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kumar S, Agarwal A, Villuri VGK, Pasupuleti S, Kumar D, Kaushal DR, Gosain AK, Bronstert A, Sivakumar B (2021) Constructed wetland management in urban catchments for mitigating floods. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess, vol 35. pp. 1–20

  43. Larsen AN, Gregersen IB, Christensen OB, Linde JJ, Mikkelsen PS (2009) Potential future increase in extreme one-hour precipitation events over Europe due to climate change. Water Sci Technol 60(9):2205–2216

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lemonsu A, Kounkou-Arnaud R, Desplat J, Salagnac J-L, Masson V (2013) Evolution of the Parisian urban climate under a global changing climate. Clim Change 116(3):679–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Linnekamp F, Koedam A, Baud ISA (2011) Household vulnerability to climate change: examining perceptions of households of flood risks in Georgetown and Paramaribo. Habitat Int 35(3):447–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mehrotra R, Sharma A (2012) An improved standardization procedure to remove systematic low frequency variability biases in GCM simulations. Water Resour Res 48(12):W12601. https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR012446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50(3):885–900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Muleta MK, Nicklow JW (2005) Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis coupled with automatic calibration for a distributed watershed model. J Hydrol 306(1):127–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nguyen TH (2020) Linking climate change to urban storm drainage system design: an innovative approach to modeling of extreme rainfall processes over different spatial and temporal scales. J Hydro-Environ Res 29:80–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Niemczynowicz J (1989) Impact of the greenhouse effect on sewerage systems—Lund case study. Hydrol Sci J 34(6):651–666

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Olsson JABKAOMAVM, Berggren K, Olofsson M, Viklander M (2009) Applying climate model precipitation scenarios for urban hydrological assessment: a case study in Kalmar City Sweden. Atmos Res 92(3):364–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Ovbiebo T, She N (1995) Urban runoff quality modeling in a subbasin of the Duwamish River using XP-SWMM. In Proc Watershed Manag Symp. pp. 14–19

  53. Roozbahani A, Behzadi P, Bavani AM (2020) Analysis of performance criteria and sustainability index in urban stormwater systems under the impacts of climate change. J Clean Prod 271:122727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Rosenberger L, Leandro J, Pauleit S, Erlwein S (2021) Sustainable stormwater management under the impact of climate change and urban densification. J Hydrol 596:126137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rossman LA (2010) Storm water management model user’s manual version 5.0. Water Supply and Water Resources Division National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Cincinnati

    Google Scholar 

  56. Samuelsson P, Jones CG, Will´En U, Ullerstig A, Gollvik S, Hansson ULF, Jansson E, Kjellstro MC, Nikulin G, Wyser K (2011) The rossby centre regional climate model RCA3: model description and performance. Tellus a: Dynamic Meteorol Oceanogr 63(1):4–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Semadeni-Davies A, Hernebring C, Svensson G, Gustafsson LG (2008) The impacts of climate change and urbanization on drainage in Helsingborg, Sweden: combined sewer system. J Hydrol 350(1–2):100–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Singh J, Knapp HV, Arnold JG, Demissie M (2005) Hydrological modelling of the Iroquois River watershed using HSPF and SWAT. J Am Water Resour Assoc 41(2):343–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Stocker T, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor MMB, Allen SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Stocker T, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen S, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley P (eds) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York, NY, USA, pp 3–29

  60. Storch H, Downes NK (2011) A scenario-based approach to assess Ho Chi Minh City’s urban development strategies against the impact of climate change. Cities 28(6):517–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Strandberg G, Bärring L, Hansson U, Jansson C, Jones C, Kjellström E, Kupiainen M, Nikulin G, Samuelsson P, Ullerstig A (2015) CORDEX scenarios for Europe from the Rossby Centre regional climate model RCA4, SMHI

  62. Temprano J, Arango O, Cagiao J, Suarez J, Tejero I (2007) Stormwater quality calibration by SWMM: a case study in Northern Spain. Water SA 32(1):55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Themeßl MJ, Gobiet A, Heinrich G (2012) Empirical-statistical downscaling and error correction of regional climate models and its impact on the climate change signal. Clim Change 112(2):449–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Tran HD, Molavi S, Muttil N (2011) Assessment framework for the impacts of climate change and urbanization on urban drainage systems. In: Pipelines 2011: a sound conduit for sharing solutions. pp. 1403–1412

  65. Van Liew MW, Veith TL, Bosch DD, Arnold JG (2007) Suitability of SWAT for the conservation effects assessment project: comparison on USDA agricultural research service watersheds. J Hydrol Eng 12(2):173–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Vemula S, Srinivasa Raju K, Sai Veena S (2020) Modelling impact of future climate and land use land cover on flood vulnerability for policy support–Hyderabad. India Water Policy 22(5):733–747. https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2020.106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Wan B, James W (2002) SWMM calibration using genetic algorithms. In: 9th Int Conf Urban Drain 112: 92–105. Doi: 10.14796/jwmm.r208-07

  68. Waters D, Watt WE, Marsalek J, Anderson BC (2003) Adaptation of a storm drainage system to accommodate increased rainfall resulting from climate change. J Environ Planning Manage 46(5):755–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Wernstedt K, Carlet F (2014) Climate change, urban development, and storm water: perspectives from the field. J Water Resour Plan Manag 140(4):543–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Wilcke RAI, Mendlik T, Gobiet A (2013) Multi-variable error correction of regional climate models. Clim Change 120(4):871–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Xiong Y, Melching CS (2005) Comparison of kinematic-wave and nonlinear reservoir routing of urban watershed runoff. J Hydrol Eng 10:39–49. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0699(2005)10:1(39)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Yevjevich V (1972) Probability and statistics in hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, CO, pp 149–158

    Google Scholar 

  73. Yira Y, Diekkrüger B, Steup G, Bossa AY (2017) Impact of climate change on hydrological conditions in a tropical West African catchment using an ensemble of climate simulations. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 21(4):2143–2161

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Delhi Government for providing the data to carry out the work. SK would like to acknowledge Computational Hydraulics International (CHI) Canada for providing PCSWMM academics license for SWMM model development. The authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers and the Associate Editor for their constructive comments and useful suggestions on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Funding

SK, VKG, SP, and DK acknowledge the financial support provided by the Indian Institute of Technology (Indian School of Mines) Dhanbad, for conducting this research work. DRK and AKG acknowledge the financial support provided by the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, for conducting this research work. AA and AG acknowledge the joint funding support from the University Grant Commission (UGC) and DAAD under the framework of the Indo-German Partnership in Higher Education (IGP).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bellie Sivakumar.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest/competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 17 KB)

Appendices

Appendix

See Fig. 9 

Fig. 9
figure9

Results of sensitivity analysis of the parameters

, Table 6

Table 6 Definition of sensitive parameters

Sensitivity analysis

For developing the SWMM, sensitivity analysis of the parameters is carried out, i.e. before the calibration procedure, the sensitivity analysis is done using all the eight parameters to analyze which parameters are more sensitive to minimize the error between simulated and measured hydrographs. A similar methodology has been adopted by Jewell et al. (1978), in which parameters are varied by definite percentage, i.e. ± 5%, upon their initial values holding other parameters constant and recording the difference between the model results. The sensitivity analysis of the parameters is shown in Figure A1 and descriptions of the sensitivity parameters along with the ranking is shown in Table A1.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, S., Agarwal, A., Ganapathy, A. et al. Impact of climate change on stormwater drainage in urban areas. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-021-02105-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Climate change
  • Urban flooding
  • Regional climate model (RCM)
  • Storm water management model (SWMM)
  • Stormwater drain