Water Resources Management

, Volume 31, Issue 12, pp 3723–3744 | Cite as

Assessment of Water Resources Development Projects under Conditions of Climate Change Using Efficiency Indexes (EIs)

  • Parisa-Sadat Ashofteh
  • Taher Rajaee
  • Parvin Golfam
Article

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate Gharanghu multi-purpose reservoir system (East Azerbaijan, Iran) using efficiency indexes (EIs) affected by climate change. At first, the effects of climate change on inflow to the reservoir, as well as changes in the demand volume over a time interval of 30 years (2040–2069) are reviewed. Simulation results show that inflow to the reservoir is decreased in climate change interval compared to the baseline interval (1971–2000), so that comparison of long-term average monthly inflow to the reservoir in climate change interval is reduced about 25% compared to the baseline. Also, water demand in climate change interval will increase, namely volume of water demand for agricultural, drinking and industrial, and environmental in climate change interval is expected to increase by 20%. The simulation results of the water evaluation and planning (WEAP) model is used to determine EIs of multi-purpose reservoir system. Next, three scenarios of water supply for climate change interval are introduced to WEAP model, keeping variable of parameter related to water demand volume (based on different percentages of supply) and keeping constant of the parameter related to the volume of inflow to the reservoir. Results show that system EIs in climate change interval will have a disadvantage compared to the baseline. So that, reliability, vulnerability, resiliency and flexibility indexes in climate change interval based on 100% of water supply compared to the baseline will decrease 18%, increase 150%, decrease 33%, and decrease 47%, respectively. These indexes based on 85% of supply compared to the baseline will decrease 12%, increase 75%, decrease 30%, and decrease 39%, respectively. Also, those based on 70% of supply compared to the baseline will decrease 1%, will be without change, decrease 18%, and decrease 18%, respectively. Changes in indexes in future interval indicate the need to manage water resource development projects in the basin.

Keywords

Multi-purpose reservoir Water resource development projects Supply scenarios WEAP model Climate change Efficiency indexes 

References

  1. Ashofteh P-S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Mariño MA (2013) Scenario assessment of streamflow simulation and its transition probability in future periods under climate change. Water Resour Manag 27(1):255–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashofteh P-S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Mariño MA (2014) Discussion of “estimating the effects of climatic variability and human activities on streamflow in the Hutuo River Basin, China”. J Hydrol Eng 19(4):836–836. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000834 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashofteh P-S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Akbari-Alashti H, Mariño MA (2015a) Determination of irrigation allocation policy under climate change by genetic programming. J Irrig Drain Eng 141(4):04014059. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000807 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ashofteh P-S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Loáiciga HA (2015b) Evaluation of climatic-change impacts on multi-objective reservoir operation with multiobjective genetic programming. J Water Resour Plan Manag 141(11):04015030. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ashofteh P-S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Loáiciga HA, Mariño MA (2016) Evaluation of the impacts of climate variability and human activity on streamflow at the basin scale. J Irrig Drain Eng 142(8):04016028. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0001038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Assaf H, Saadeh M (2008) Assessing water quality management options in the upper Litani Basin, Lebanon, using an integrated GIS-based decision support system. Environ Model Softw 23(10–11):1327–1337. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2008.03.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bozorg-Haddad O, Ashofteh P-S, Rasoulzadeh-Gharibdousti S, Mariño MA (2014) Optimization model for design-operation of pumped-storage and hydropower systems. J Energy Eng 140(2):04013016. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EY.1943-7897.0000169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bozorg-Haddad O, Ashofteh P-S, Mariño MA (2015) Levee layouts and design optimization in protection of flood areas. J Irrig Drain Eng 141(8):04015004. doi:10.1061/(ASCE) IR.1943-4774.0000864 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carter TR (2007) General guideline on the use of scenario data for climate impact and adaptation assessment. Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, pp 30–40Google Scholar
  10. Chau KW, Wu CL (2010) A hybrid model coupled with singular spectrum analysis for daily rainfall prediction. J Hydroinf 12(4):458–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen XY, Chau KW, Busari AO (2015) A comparative study of population-based optimization algorithms for downstream river flow forecasting by a hybrid neural network model. Eng Appl Artif Intell 46:258–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Droogers P, Aerts J (2005) Adaptation strategies to climate change and climate variability: a comparative study between seven contrasting river basin. Phys Chem Earth, Parts A/B/C 30(6–7):339–346. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2005.06.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gholami V, Chau KW, Fadaee F, Torkaman J, Ghaffari A (2015) Modeling of groundwater level fluctuations using dendrochronology in alluvial aquifers. J Hydrol 529:1060–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haddad R, Nouiri I, Alshihabi O, Maßmann J, Huber M, Laghouane A, Yahiaoui H, Tarhouni J (2013) A decision support system to manage the groundwater of the Zeuss Koutine aquifer using the WEAP-MODFLOW framework. Water Resour Manag 27(7):1981–2000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hashimoto T, Stedinger JR, Loucks DP (1982) Reliability, resiliency and vulnerability criteria for water resources system performance evaluation. Water Resour Res 18(1):14–20. doi:10.1029/WR018i001p00014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. IPCC-TGCIA (1999) Guidelines on the use of scenario data for climate impact and adaptation assessment. Version 1. Prepared by Carter, T. R., Hulme, M. and Lal, M. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Task Group on Scenarios for Climate Impact Assessment, 69 pGoogle Scholar
  17. IPCC (2011) IPCC Intergovernmental panel on climate change web site: organization page. http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtlm
  18. Jones RN, Page CM (2001) Assessing the risk of climate change on the water resources of the Macquarie River Catchment. In: Ghassemi F, Whetton P, Little R, Littleboy M (eds) Integrating models for natural resources management across disciplines, issues and scales (part 2). Modsim 2001 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation. Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, pp 673–678Google Scholar
  19. Lévite H, Sally H, Cour J (2003) Testing water demand management scenarios in a water-stressed basin in South Africa: application of the WEAP model. Phys Chem Earth, Parts A/B/C 28(20–27):779–786. doi:10.1016/j.pce.2003.08.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li X, Zhao Y, Shi C, Sha J, Wang Z-L, Wang Y (2015) Application of water evaluation and planning (WEAP) model for water resources management strategy estimation in coastal Binhai new area, China. Ocean Coast Manag 106:97–109. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.01.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loucks DP (1997) Quantifying trends in system sustainability. Hydrol Sci J 42(4):513–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moy W-S, Cohon JL, Revelle CS (1986) A programming model for analysis of the reliability, resilience and vulnerability of a water supply reservoir. Water Resour Res 22(4):489–498. doi:10.1029/WR022i004p00489 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Raskin P, Hansen E, Stavisky D, Zhu Z (1992) Simulation of water supply and demand in the Aral sea region. Water Int 17(2):55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith M (1988) Manual for CROPWAT version 5.2. FAO, Rome 45ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Taormina R, Chau K-W (2015) Data-driven input variable selection for rainfall-runoff modeling using binary-coded particle swarm optimization and extreme learning machines. J Hydrol 529(3):1617–1632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Varela-Ortega C, Blanco-Gutiérrez I, Swartz CH, Downing TE (2011) Balancing groundwater conservation and rural livelihoods under water and climate uncertainties: an integrated hydro-economic modelling framework. Glob Environ Chang 21(2):604–619. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang WC, Chau K-W, Xu D-M, Chen X-Y (2015) Improving forecasting accuracy of annual runoff time series using ARIMA based on EEMD decomposition. Water Resour Manag 29(8):2655–2675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wilby RL, Harris I (2006) A framework for assessing uncertainties in climate change impacts: low flow scenarios for the river Thames, U.K. Water Resour Res 42(2):W02419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wu CL, Chau KW, Li YS (2009) Methods to improve neural network performance in daily flows prediction. J Hydrol 372(1–4):80–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yilmaz B, Harmancioglu NB (2010) An indicator based assessment for water resources management in Gediz River basin, Turkey. Water Resour Manag 24(15):4359–4379. doi:10.1007/s11269-010-9663-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of QomQomIran

Personalised recommendations