Advertisement

Water Resources Management

, Volume 29, Issue 14, pp 5185–5200 | Cite as

A High Spatiotemporal Assessment of Consumptive Water Use and Water Scarcity in the Conterminous United States

  • Brandon C. Moore
  • André M. ColemanEmail author
  • Mark S. Wigmosta
  • Richard L. Skaggs
  • Erik R. Venteris
Article

Abstract

There is an inextricable link between energy production and food/feed/fiber cultivation with available water resources. Currently in the United States, agriculture represents the largest sector of consumptive water use making up 80.7 % of the total. Electricity generation in the U.S. is projected to increase by 24 % in the next two decades and globally, the production of liquid transportation fuels are forecasted to triple over the next 25-years, having significant impacts on the import/export market and global economies. The tension between local water supply and demand across water use sectors needs to be evaluated with regards to risk evaluation and planning. To this end, we present a systematic method to spatially and temporally disaggregate nationally available 5-year county-scale water use data to a monthly 1/8° scale. Our study suggests that while 81.9 % of the U.S. exhibits unstressed local conditions at the annual scale, 13.7 % is considered water scarce; this value increases to 17.3 % in the summer months. The use of mean annual water scarcity at a coarser basin scale (~373,000 ha) was found to mask information critical for water planning whereas finer spatiotemporal scales revealed local areas that are water stressed or water scarce. Nationally, ~1 % of these “unstressed” basins actually contained water stressed or water scarce areas equivalent to at least 30 % and 17 %, respectively, of the basin area. These percentages increase to 34 % and 48 % in the summer months. Additionally, 15 % of basins classified as “unstressed” contained water scarce areas in excess of 10 % during the summer.

Keywords

Water demand Water supply Energy security Water-energy nexus Sustainability Agriculture Bioenergy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Support for this research was provided by the Analysis and Sustainability Program of the Bioenergy Technology Office under the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is operated by Battelle Memorial Institute for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830.

Supplementary material

11269_2015_1112_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (881 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 880 kb)

References

  1. Averyt K, Meldrum J, Caldwell P, Sun G, McNulty S, Huber-Lee A, Madden N (2013) Sectoral contributions to surface water stress in the conterminous U.S. Environ Res Lett 8:035046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bannayan M, Sanjani S, Alizadeh A, Lotfabadi SS, Mohamadian A (2010) Association between climate indices, aridity index, and rainfed crop yield in northeast of Iran. Field Crop Res 118(2):105–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonhomme R (2000) Bases and limits to using ‘degree.day’ units. Eur J Agron 13(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brakebill JW, Wolock DM, Terziotti SE (2011) Digital hydrologic networks supporting applications related to spatially referenced regression modeling. J Am Water Resour Assoc 47(5):916–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brinkmann WAR (1979) Growing season length as an indicator of climate variations? Clim Chang 2(2):127–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown A, Matlock MD (2011) A review of water scarcity idiced and methodologies. Universtiy of Arkansas, The Sustainability Consortium White Paper, 106Google Scholar
  7. Chiu Y-W, Wu M (2012) Assessing county-level water footprints of different cellulosic-biofuel feedstock pathways. Environ Sci Technol 46(16):9155–9162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Curlee TR, Sale MJ (2003) Water and energy security. Proceedings of the Conference, Water Security in the 21st Century, July 30–August 1, 2003, The University Council on Water Resources, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  9. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) (2006) Energy demands on water resources. United States Department of Energy Report to Congress on the Interdependency of Energy and Water. http://www.sandia.gov/energy-water/docs/121-RptToCongress-EWwEIAcomments-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 28 May 2013
  10. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) (2014) The water-energy nexus: challenges and opportunities, U.S. Department of Energy, June, 2014. Available online, http://www.energy.gov/downloads/water-energy-nexus-challenges-and-opportunities
  11. Doll P, Siebert S (2002) Global modeling of irrigation water requirements. Water Resour Res 38(4):1–10Google Scholar
  12. EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration) (2010) http://www.eia.doe.gov/. Accessed 24 June 2010
  13. EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration) (2013) Annual energy outlook 2013: with projections to 2040, Washington, DC. Department of Energy, DOE/EIA-0383. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/. Accessed 28 May 2013
  14. EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) (2011) Water use for electricity generation and other sectors: recent changes (1985–2005) and future projections (2005–2030). Palo Alto, CA: EPRI Report 1023676Google Scholar
  15. European Commission (2010) An energy policy for consumers. Commission Staff Working Paper, SEC (2010) 1407 final. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  16. Franczyk J, Chang H (2009) Spatial analysis of water use in Oregon, USA, 1985–2005. Water Resour Manag 23(4):755–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fthenakis V, Kim HC (2010) Life-cycle uses of water in the U.S. electricity generation. Renew Sust Energ Rev 14(7):2039–2048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fulton J, Cooley H, Gleick PH (2014) Water footprint outcomes and policy relevance change with scale considered: evidence from California. Water Resour Manag 28(11):3637–3649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gain AK, Wada Y (2014) Assessment of future water scarcity at different spatial and temporal scales of the Brahmaputra river basin. Water Resour Manag 28(4):999–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. GAO (U.S. Government Accounting Office) (2012) Energy-water nexus: coordinated federal approach needed to better manage energy and water tradeoffs. Report to the Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, United States Government Accountability Office, September 2012, GAO-12-880Google Scholar
  21. Gergely KJ, McKerrow A (2013) Land cover—national inventory of vegetation and land use: U.S. Geological Survey fact sheet 2013–3085, 1 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2013/3085/
  22. Gupta E (2012) Global warming and electricity demand in the rapidly growing dity of Delhi: a semi-parametric variable coefficient approach. Energy Econ 34(5):1407–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamon WR (1963) Computation of direct runoff amounts from storm rainfall. Int Assoc Sci Hydrol Publ 63:52–62Google Scholar
  24. Hutson SS, Barber NL, Kenny JF, Linsey KS, Lumia DS, Maupin MA (2004) Estimated use of water in the United States in 2000. U.S. Geological Survey Circ., 1268Google Scholar
  25. IEA, International Energy Agency (2011) Technology roadmap: biofuels for transport. Available online, http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Biofuels_Roadmap_WEB.pdf
  26. Jolly WM, Nemani R, Running SW (2005) A generalized, bioclimatic index to predict foliar phenology in response to climate. Glob Chang Biol 11:619–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kalkstein LS, Davis RE (1989) Weather and human mortality: an evaluation of demographic and interregional responses in the United States. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 79(1):44–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Karl TR, Melillo JM, Peterson TC (eds) (2009) Global climate change impacts in the United States. U.S. Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Lardy G, Stoltenhow C, Johnson R (2008) Livestock and water. North Dakota State University Extension Service, Fargo, North Dakota, AS-954Google Scholar
  30. Liang X, Lettenmaier DP, Wood EF, Burges SJ (1994) A simple hydrologically based model of land surface water and energy fluxes for GSMs. J Geophys Res 99(D7):14, 415–14,428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Livneh B, Rosenberg AA, Lin C, Nijssen B, Mishra V, Andreadis K, Maurer EP, Lettenmaier DP (2013) A long-term hydrologically based data set of land surface fluxes and states for the conterminous United States: updates and extensions. J Clim 26(23):9384–9392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marella RL (2008) Water use in Florida 2005 and trends 1950–2005. U.S. Geological Survey, Fact Sheet 2008–3080Google Scholar
  33. Maurer EP, Wood AW, Adam JC, Lettenmaier DP, Nijssen B (2002) A long-term hydrologically-based data set of land surface fluxes and states for the conterminous United States. J Clim 15(22):3237–3251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McMahon JE, Price SK (2011) Water and energy interactions. In: Gadgil A, Liverman DM (eds) Annual review of environment and resources, vol 36. Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, pp 163–191Google Scholar
  35. Mitchell KE et al (2004) The multi-institution North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system. J Geophys Res 109, D07S90Google Scholar
  36. Ramireddygari SR, Sophocleous MA, Koelliker JK, Perkins SP, Govindaraju RS (2000) Development and application of a comprehensive simulation model to evaluate impacts of watershed structures and irrigation water use on streamflow and groundwater: the case of Wet Walnut Creek Watershed, Kansas, USA. J Hydrol 236(3–4):223–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Roy SB, Ricci PF, Summers KV, Chung C-F, Goldstein RA (2005) Evaluation of the sustainability of water withdrawals in the United States, 1995 to 2025. J Am Water Resour Assoc 41(5):1091–1108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sagarika S, Kalra A, Ahmed S (2014) Evaluating the effect of persistence on long-term trends and analyzing step changes in streamflows of the continental United States. J Hydrol 517:36–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shaffer KH (2009) Variations in withdrawal, return flow, and consumptive use of water in Ohio and Indiana, with selected data from Wisconsin, 1999–2004. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5096, 93 pGoogle Scholar
  40. Skaggs R, Hibbard KA, Frumhoff P, Lowry T, Middleton R, Pate R, Tidwell VC, Arnold JG, Averyt K, Janetos AC, Izaurralde RC, Rice JS, Rose SK (2012) Climate and energy-water-land system interactions technical report to the U.S. Department of Energy in Support of the National Climate Assessment. PNNL-21185, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WAGoogle Scholar
  41. Solley WB (1997) Estimates of water use in the western United States in 1990 and water-use trends 1960–90. USGS Open-File Report 97–176Google Scholar
  42. Solley WB, Merk CF, Pierce RR (1988) Estimated use of water in the United States in 1985. U.S. Geological Survey Circ., 1004Google Scholar
  43. Solley WB, Pierce RR, Perlman HA (1993) Estimated use of water in the United States in 1990. U.S. Geological Survey Circ., 1081Google Scholar
  44. Steadman RG (1994) Norms of apparent temperature in Australia. Aust Meteorol Mag 43:1–16Google Scholar
  45. Sun G, McNulty SG, Amatya DM, Skaggs RW, Swift LW Jr, Shepard JP, Riekerk H (2002) A comparison of the watershed hydrology of coastal forested wetlands and the mountainous uplands in the Southern U.S. J Hydrol 263:92–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sun G, McNulty S, Moore Myers JA, Cohen EC (2008) Impacts of climate change, population growth, land use change, and groundwater availability on water supply and demand across the conterminous U.S. Watershed Update (AWRA Hydrology & Watershed Management Technical Committee) (May–August 2008): 6(2), 30 ppGoogle Scholar
  47. Tidwell VC, Kobos PH, Malczynski LA, Klise G, Castillo CR (2012) Exploring the water-thermoelectric power nexus. J Water Resour Plan Manag 138(5):491–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. U.S. Census Bureau (2000) Census 2000 TIGER/line data. http://arcdata.esri.com/data/tiger2000/tiger_download.cfm. Accessed 28 June 2010
  49. U.S. Census Bureau (2010) Population distribution and change: 2000 to 2010, 2010 census briefs. U.S. Census Bureau, C2010BR-01Google Scholar
  50. U.S. Geological Survey (1997) National handbook of recommended methods for water data acquisition. U.S. Geological Survey, http://water.usgs.gov/public/pubs/chapter11
  51. U.S. Geological Survey (2009) Gap Analysis Program (GAP). National land cover, version 1. http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/gaplandcover/data. Accessed 1 June 2009
  52. U.S. Geological Survey (2010) Water use program. http://water.usgs.gov/watuse. Accessed 23 June 2010
  53. U.S. Water News Online (2002) Idaho denies water rights request for power plants. http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcrights/2idahen8.html, Aug. 2002

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brandon C. Moore
    • 1
    • 2
  • André M. Coleman
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Mark S. Wigmosta
    • 1
  • Richard L. Skaggs
    • 1
  • Erik R. Venteris
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Hydrology Technical GroupRichlandUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeographyUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  3. 3.Glenn Department of Civil EngineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  4. 4.Monsanto CompanySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations