deliverable 2 - impreximprex.eu › system › files › generated › files › resource ›...

Deliverable 2.1

IMPREX has received funding under the European Union HORIZON 2020

Grant agreement number 641811

2

Deliverable 2.1

3

Deliverable 2.1

Sectoral summary of climate vulnerability

and practice of risk management



4

Dissemination level of this document

X PU Public

PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the European Commission Services)

RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the European Commission Services)

CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the European Commission Services)

Versioning and Contribution History

Version Date Modified by Modification reasons

v.01 09/08/2016 Felicity Liggins First draft

v.02 26/10/2016 Felicity Liggins & partners Draft for circulation to partners

v.03 1/11/2016 Bart van den Hurk First review

v.04 08/12/2016 Felicity Liggins & partners Second draft sent to partners for modification

v.05 31/01/2017 Felicity Liggins & partners Final report for submission

v.06 20/06/2017 Felicity Liggins, Hans de

Moel, Janet Wijngaard &

partners

Resubmission following reviewer comments

Deliverable Sectoral summary of climate vulnerability and practice of risk management

Related Work Package: 2

Deliverable lead: Met Office

Author(s): Felicity Liggins, Hans de Moel, Janet Wijngaard plus project partners from WPs 7-12

Contact for queries [email protected]

Grant Agreement Number: 641811

Instrument: HORIZON 2020

Start date of the project: 01.10.2015

Duration of the project: 48 months

Website: www.imprex.eu

Abstract

There is a clear and urgent need for “actionable research” to guide decision-making with water-related sectors. We do not only want to know what’s going on with our climate, we also need to know how to respond and act. This document (D2.1) is a summary report highlighting the specific climate vulnerabilities, sensitivities and risk management practices of the stakeholders involved in IMPREX Work Packages 7-12.

http://www.imprex.eu/

5

Deliverable 2.1

Table of contents

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 7

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 11

1.1. Project background ............................................................................................................................. 11

1.2. Our sectors .......................................................................................................................................... 11

1.3. Choosing and engaging with our users and stakeholders ................................................................... 11

1.4. Our case studies .................................................................................................................................. 12

1.5. Next steps ............................................................................................................................................ 12

2. Flood inundation prediction and risk assessments (WP7) .................................................................. 17

2.1. Sectoral background ............................................................................................................................ 17

2.2. Headline findings ................................................................................................................................. 19

2.3. Reflections on the findings .................................................................................................................. 22

3. Hydropower (WP8) .............................................................................................................................. 23




4. Transport (WP9) .................................................................................................................................. 27




5. Urban water (WP10) ........................................................................................................................... 34




6. Agriculture and droughts (WP11) ....................................................................................................... 40




7. Water economy (WP12) ...................................................................................................................... 51




8. Next steps ............................................................................................................................................ 54

8.1. Risk Outlook (WP14) ............................................................................................................................ 54

8.2. Integration (WP13) .............................................................................................................................. 54

8.3. Links outside IMPREX .......................................................................................................................... 55



6

7

Deliverable 2.1

Executive Summary

Recent extreme hydrological events demonstrate the vulnerability of European society to water-related natural hazards, and climate change will ensure that interest in understanding and managing the changing risk of extreme events remains high. Future hydrological extremes may be very different from today’s reality. Changed predictability or characteristics of water-related extremes will have important implications on the water sector and the design of water management practices. There is a clear and urgent need for “actionable research” to guide decisions. We do not only want to know what’s going on with our climate, we also need to know how to respond and act.

In this context, IMPREX is designed to support the reduction of Europe’s vulnerability to hydrological extremes through improved understanding of the intensity and frequency of future events. Enhancing our forecasting capability will increase the resilience of the European society as a whole, while reducing costs for strategic sectors and regions.

IMPREX is built upon a strong team of experts from public and private sectors as well as universities and research institutes with complementary skills and experiences. The direct involvement of a broad range of users from key economic sectors will ensure the relevance of the project outputs.

This document (D2.1) is a summary report highlighting the specific climate vulnerabilities, sensitivities and risk management practices of the users involved in Work Packages 7-12. These work packages are:

WP7 – Flood inundation prediction and risk assessments

WP8 – Hydropower

WP9 – Transport

WP10 – Urban water

WP11 – Agriculture and droughts

WP12 – (transnational) Water economy

Each work package has been coordinated by an IMPREX project partner. To help build the evidence base for improved prediction and communication of hydrological extremes, workshops and interviews have been held with users. This evidence provided a basis for this summary report. Please see each chapter for sector-specific information, with selected, non-exhaustive key findings below:

Flood inundation prediction and risk assessments

WP7 is tackling a highly complex topic with a wide range of users and stakeholders. It is evident that the flood risk management sector is already a highly developed user of short term weather services but that there is a strong appetite for longer-term, seasonal and beyond, products and services. Through co-development of services, useful and usable information and tools will be created by IMPREX which are of interest to the wider flood risk management communities. Case studies in this work package include the Dutch water boards, the river Rhine, the UK’s Thames Basin and the Bisagno Basin in Italy.

Hydropower

Within WP8 four hydropower operators in France (EDF), Italy (A2A), Spain (Iberdrola) and Sweden (Vattenfall) were consulted in order to cover the broad spectrum of weather and climate services providers, water resources researchers, and European energy production companies. It is clear that the hydropower sector is a well-developed user of weather and climate services. It is a sector using forecasts of multiple variables across timescales and, depending on the size of the company, using this information to feed into the forecasting of energy production, demand and price. However, although the use of such services is widespread, there is scope to better tailor the forecast products to the needs of the user. Two areas for development are: (a) enhancing the forecasting of extreme events (e.g. high



8

resolution extreme precipitation) and (b) extending the forecast lead time. There are also key questions to be asked when considering the integration of existing and new services into the activities of the sector as they are unlikely to adopt new working practices without clear benefits.

Transport

WP9’s study area covers the large inland waterways and the corresponding hydrological catchments of the River Rhine, the River Danube and River Elbe. The analysis shows that improved hydrological forecasts are an essential prerequisite to increase the efficiency of inland waterways transport and to stimulate the use of the free capacity inland navigation. Two main areas for navigation-related forecast development within IMPREX are: (a) improvement of existing forecast products, especially by a dynamic quantification of forecast uncertainties and (b) the need for completely new forecast products tailored for the sector offering additional forecast lead-time from the medium-range up to the seasonal scale. As in the hydropower sector, the appropriate design and complexity of new forecast products is related to the company size.

Urban water

For most of the water systems studied, a sudden increase of turbidity due to heavy rainfall events is the main challenge for the water treatment plant managers. Forecast of river water quality for the next hours and days are the most important pieces of information to operate the treatment plant efficiently, but also weekly and seasonal forecasts are mentioned as being relevant for all the climatic events considered. A coupled water quality / water management modelling approach appears necessary to simulate and anticipate drought impacts and develop preventive actions at the river basin scale. This work package’s case studies are focused on the Llobregat and Segura river basins in Spain.

Agriculture and droughts

As with the other sectors, WP11 is tackling a highly complex topic with a wide range of users and stakeholders. The aim of this work package is to develop new, or better utilise existing methodologies and tools to learn from historic drought events and to better anticipate future events. It is evident that the agriculture sector is an under-developed user of weather and climate services, especially on the seasonal timescale. Through co-development of services, useful and usable information and tools will be created by IMPREX, which will be of interest to the wider agriculture and drought management communities. The case studies in this work package are diverse, including the Segura and Júcar river basins in Spain, Lake Como in Italy, Messara Valley in Crete and finally an investigation focused on the Netherlands.

Water economy

Water, like energy, is a key input into any economy. With variations in water availability and quality from country to country, water is a local issue. At the same time, international trade in goods to meet the needs of the world’s populations makes water a global, collective resource. Knowledge about the virtual-water flows entering and leaving a region will cast a new light on water dependencies of a region’s economy and its susceptibilities outside its borders. The European economy is dependent on water resources elsewhere in the world. This report maps the current vulnerabilities of European economy in terms of water scarcity and drought occurrence.

This document is developed as part of the IMPREX (IMproving PRedictions and management of

hydrological EXtremes) project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020

research and innovation programme, under Grant Agreement number 641811.

9

Deliverable 2.1

Glossary

Beneficiaries are stakeholders who could directly or indirectly benefit from the outputs of the project. Be aware that EC uses the same word to identify the project partners with the main responsibility for a specific project action, deliverable or milestone.

Potential users are organisations not involved in IMPREX that could possibly benefit from using the products that IMPREX will develop, for example the risk outlook. Examples of these are flood forecasting centres, hydropower organisations and water supply companies that are not currently ‘users’.

Project partners are the organisations which have signed the consortium agreement of IMPREX.

Users are organisations involved in IMPREX that will benefit from using the products that IMPREX will develop, for example the risk outlook. Users are generally not project partners. Their engagement and involvement in the project will be co-designed by WP2 and the case study leaders (WP7-12) and will be managed by WP2.

Stakeholders are people who are interested in IMPREX, or might communicate this interest during the life of the project. Their engagement and involvement in the project will be designed and managed by WP2, which will also focus on further identifying specific sub- audiences (e.g. academia, decision-makers, policy-makers, funders, contingency planners, general public) within this wide category.



10

11

Deliverable 2.1

1. Introduction

1.1. Project background

Recent extreme hydrological events demonstrate the vulnerability of European society to water-related natural hazards, and climate change will ensure that interest in understanding and managing the changing risk of extreme events remains high.

Future hydrological extremes may be very different from today’s reality. Changed predictability or characteristics of water-related extremes will have important implications on the water sector and the design of water management practices. There is a clear and urgent need for “actionable research” to guide decisions. We do not only want to know what’s going on with our climate, we also need to know how to respond and act.

In this context, IMPREX is designed to support the reduction of Europe’s vulnerability to hydrological extremes through improved understanding of the intensity and frequency of future disrupting events. Enhancing our forecasting capability will increase the resilience of the European society as a whole, while reducing costs for strategic sectors and regions.

IMPREX is built upon a strong team of experts from public and private sectors as well as universities and research institutes with complementary skills and experiences. The direct involvement of a broad range of users from key economic sectors will ensure the relevance of the project outputs.

1.2. Our sectors

This document (D2.1) is a summary report highlighting the specific climate vulnerabilities, sensitivities and risk management practices of the users involved in Work Packages 7-12. These work packages are as follows:

WP7 – Flood inundation prediction and risk assessments

WP8 – Hydropower

WP9 – Transport

WP10 – Urban water

WP11 – Agriculture and droughts

WP12 – Water economy

Each work package has been coordinated by an IMPREX project partner. As well as producing a sectoral overview, each WP contains one or more case studies and to help build the evidence base for improved prediction and communication of hydrological extremes, workshops and interviews have been held with the users and stakeholders. This evidence has provided the basis for this summary report.

1.3. Choosing and engaging with our users and stakeholders

Engaged users and stakeholders are key to IMPREX’s success. IMPREX will only be successful with the direct involvement of users in the definition, development and evaluation of the weather or climate services that will be developed. As a result, IMPREX has been designed to be ‘bottom-up’ – that is the relationships between the project partners leading the day-to-day work within IMPREX and the ultimate end-users of the project’s outputs are the bedrock of the project and take a leading role in shaping the



12

project’s outputs. It is widely acknowledged that creating effective weather and climate services is greatly helped by a mutual trust between the service user and provider, and hence in a time-limited project, IMPREX decided to build on existing relationships between project partners and end-users rather than seeking to develop a suite of new relationships that might take a substantial amount of time to develop into a meaningful and productive partnership. However, when new opportunities have arisen to involve key people or organisations that would add significantly to the project a flexible approach has been taken.

As a collaborative project IMPREX represents a collective of people and organisations characterised by different motivations and agendas. We acknowledged these well-developed relationships between project partners and users and we were keen to enhance these rather than risk damaging them through a heavy-handed approach to engagement. In order to give the project the maximum chance of succeeding we felt it was necessary to define a protocol of interaction between the users and the project partners which could protect existing relationship while at the same time give the European citizen the possibility to learn from this experience and develop a more climate proof society.

So within our Deliverable 2.2, the Stakeholder interaction protocol, we laid out a set of ‘Rules of engagement’ and also recorded explicitly the names of the users and stakeholders involved in the project, whom the point of contact is within the project alongside the protocol for engaging with that particular organisation or individual. This process has enabled a clear delineation of responsibility for interacting with the users and stakeholders, something that has been adhered to throughout the project so far.

It is important to note that this protocol has not precluded interaction or sharing of expertise or resources between WPs. For example, the interview structure developed within WP8 has been adapted by and used within WP11. Sharing best practice in user engagement has been encouraged and will be developed further within the project through increased integration across WPs.

1.4. Our case studies

Within each IMPREX Work Package there are one or more case studies. These case studies are designed to explore in depth the vulnerabilities of the user to hydrological extremes and then propose and deliver new science or services to help make better decisions in managing the response to the extremes. More detail is found in the following chapters, but Table 1 below presents a Work Package 7-11 overview of the organisations involved in the case studies, their aims and the anticipated outcomes. We also present highlights of the provider-user interaction. It should be noted that the approach taken for WP12 – Water economy – is different to WPs 7-11. WP12 considers the global view, assessing the dependencies of Europe’s economy on other parts of the world in terms of water resources and is therefore not included in the table below. Please see section 7 for more details about WP12.

1.5. Next steps

Section 8 within this deliverable explores the next steps for the project. We recognise that within D2.1, each sector has been considered in isolation and that it would benefit the project, alongside the wider climate services and water communities, if a cross-sector analysis was conducted. Such a review will be undertaken as part of WP14 within the development of the risk outlook tool, and further cross WP integration will also take place throughout WP13. Please see section 8 for more details.

13

Deliverable 2.1

Theme Case study User(s) Associated IMPREX partner

Aims Actions and anticipated outcomes

How IMPREX has been engaging with the user(s)

Flooding (WP7)

Thames catchment

Environment Agency

University of Reading

Identifying the impact of meteorological forcing and model errors on hydrological forecasting skill and the skill of forecasting compound flood.

Understanding the effect of the coincidence of peaks, seasonality and antecedent hydrological conditions on flood risk in the Thames river basin.

Liaising via email.

Research presented to Environment Agency at showcase of work.

User workshop planned for Autumn 2017.

Flooding (WP7)

Central European

Rivers

Rijkswaterstaat and four water

boards (NL)

Deltares, GFZ, CIMA, HKV,

IVM

Provide information on actual flooding (instead of discharge), joint probabilities of extreme events and define uncertainty.

Inundation maps for Europe, multi-variate flood damage model, correlation of flood impact with climatological and hydrological indicators and better understanding of joint probabilities.

Project partners have liaised with users by email or in person as and when required. It is likely that a user workshop will happen later in the project.

Flooding (WP7)

Bisagno catchment

ARPAL

Municipality of Genoa

CIMA Improvement of the flash flood forecasting and testing impact estimation in forecast phase.

.

Reforecasting of severe weather events in Bisagno, including loss estimation.

Improved predictability of severe, localised events.

Hydropower (WP8)

South East France

Électricité de France (EDF)

IRSTEA Quantify the economic value of better forecasts on short-to-medium scale.

Improve decision chain and capacity of hydropower systems to cope with extreme hydro events.

Improved forecast quality of economic gains. Identify key aspect of decision chain to improve reservoir management.

Close partnership with EDF forecasting centre through interviews, survey, and face-to-face meetings.



14

Hydropower (WP8)

Umeälven river,

Sweden

Vattenfall AB

Vattenregleringsföretagen AB

(company coordinating

power production and reservoir

management).

SMHI Reducing water loss (amount and size of spill events) through improved hydrometeorological forecasts of IMPREX.

Estimate of the economical value of hydro-meteorological forecasts. Evaluation of IMPREX forecasts and of methods to improve seasons runoff forecasts (including uncertainty).

Long-standing collaboration with SMHI. Case study meetings discussing needs, resources, knowledge and questions to address. On-line survey has been send out and received.

Transport (WP9)

Central European

Rivers

Skippers, logistic managers, transport operators, waterway managers,

transmission grid operators and economists.

BfG Testing and developing monthly to seasonal forecasting products for inland waterway transport (IWT).

Assessment of the potential economic benefit of improved short to medium term forecasts for IWT and a semi-operational forecasting system.

Skill assessment and prototypes of forecast-products tailored to different types of users with lead-times from 10 days up to 3 months for Rhine, Upper Danube and Elbe. Assessment of economic benefit of such products compared to current products.

Stakeholder workshops and bi-lateral stakeholder interviews (face-to-face, telephone).

Urban Water (WP10)

Llobregat and Segura

river basins Spain

Aguas de Terrassa (Llobregat)

Aguas de Murcia (Segura)

CetAqua Co-designing a tool to predict surface water quality and thus improve the water treatment processes

Llobregat: Validation of a tool to predict river water quality in order to adjust water treatment accordingly.

Segura: a standardized methodology for monitoring the algal community and managing eutrophication.

A survey of the 21 drinking water treatment plants supplemented by informal interview and personal communications.

Agriculture & droughts (WP11)

Messara region, Greece

Farmers, Agro-industrial

cooperatives, Agronomists and

management committees, local

Technical University of

Crete

Using the Met Office and ECMWF forecasting systems to provide information on water availability at seasonal time scales to support local water policy decision makers

A tool that will incorporate the updated probabilistic seasonal forecasts and translate them into useful information about the water resources status of the

Semi-structured interviews and in-person communication.

15

Deliverable 2.1

land reclamation organisations and the Directorate of

Water of Crete

in Timpaki and Messara. period ahead.


Segura river basin, Spain

CHS (River Basin Authority Segura)

SCRATS (association of

irrigators)

FutureWater Forecasting water availability several months ahead to support water resources management in the dry and heavily regulated Segura basin.

Testing and demonstrating a seasonal water forecasting system which uses online accessible information.

A water resources accounting and allocation system to study different scenarios (climate change, adaptation measures).

Separate meetings with several officers and heads of CHS and SCRATS to understand their needs.


Central European

Rivers

Dutch Ministry for Infrastructure and Environment, Rijkswaterstaat,

waterboards (and knowledge centre

STOWA) and freshwater supply

programme office.

HKV, Deltares Quantify drought risk and how it is affected by climate change and socio-economic developments

Assess the cost-benefit ratio of measures to prevent water shortage and/or reduce drought impact.

Derive transparent supply levels based on the probability of occurrence and economic impact of water shortage.

To enable the assessment of cost-benefit ratio of measures to reduce drought risk and the impact of climate variability and socio-economic developments.

Meetings with various users (policy makers, local authorities and water users) for selected basins in Netherlands.


Júcar River Basin, Spain

Júcar River Basin District

Partnership (CHJ)

Various others (hydropower,

farmers, urban water supply)

IIAMA - Universidad

Politécnica de Valencia

Offer a better prediction of drought periods and improve methodologies for the definition of drought risk assessment, focused on climate change, for the different water use sectors.

Developing hydrological predictions and assessing economic impacts of droughts in order to anticipate measures for management in the basin. In addition, consideration of possible climate change impacts.

Continuous interaction through meetings and workshops to elicit client needs and discuss interim results and next steps.



16

Hydro-power (WP8)

and


Lake Como (cross-sector)

4 hydropower companies (A2A, Enel, Edipower,

Edison)

The lake operator (Consorzio dell’Adda)

Four irrigation districts

downstream

DEIB, Politecnico di

Milano

Set up a decision model based on stochastic optimization and optimal control tools to benchmark the status quo of the system, assess the operational value of IMPREX forecast products and their derived forms, as well as to explore adaptation measures based on future climate projections.

Quantification of the operational value of weather and climate services across sectors and across temporal scales.

Identification of key measures to mitigate anticipated impact of climate change induced extreme events.

Stakeholder interactions took place in the form of face-to-face meetings and an online survey with the users; which provided a better understanding of the current practices, challenges and interests of the users.

17

Deliverable 2.1

2. Flood inundation prediction and risk assessments (WP7)

2.1. Sectoral background

Decision-makers in both the public and private sectors need accurate information on fluvial flood risks to enable decision-making in the short-term (e.g. flood warnings, evacuation planning, financial liquidity to cover losses) as well as longer-term strategic planning for climate adaptation.

In particular, flood risk assessments are required for civil protection and the private insurance sector. Furthermore, new approaches are needed for assessing correlated risks related to flood occurrence and impacts at local and European scales.

Within IMPREX we develop improved short-to-medium, seasonal and long-term flood risk assessments for fluvial flooding, in close consultation with users of this information. The case studies for this sectoral survey include the Dutch water boards, the River Rhine, the Thames catchment (UK) and the Bisagno catchment (Italy). In addition, an EU-wide analysis will be performed. Within this deliverable, an overview of the case studies is presented.

Development probabilistic flood damage model

With IMPREX a new probabilistic flood damage model is being developed and tested. An improved probabilistic damage model is of interest to stakeholders like governments, insurers and re insurers. This scientific development is not directly being carried out with stakeholders (too early). However, stakeholders will be informed during scientific conferences and IMPREX meetings. The foreseen test areas are the Elbe (Germany), Meuse (The Netherlands, Rhine (Germany) and Eden (UK).

Dutch Case study – Water Boards

The risk of flooding is a major concern for the Dutch water boards. Many water boards don’t suffer from pluvial flooding, but flooding due to a lack of drainage capacity caused by tidal surge or high river levels. The various processes that can lead to high water levels are often assumed to be independent; e.g. high runoff, high discharge, high rainfall and wind-driven events (storm surge). However, the joint probabilities of these events may result into compound flood events, and these various processes must therefore be studied together, in order to arrive at the correct flood probabilities. When the relevant (meteorological) processes are physically not independent, this must be taken into account in deriving the statistics of the resulting high water levels and floods.

For four water boards in The Netherlands, we study in close cooperation with those water boards if and how large these compound flood events are. Key stakeholders for this information are the operational managers of the water boards. We will quantify the size of the coincidence of different mechanisms for current and future climates, indicate what is the added value of the IMPREX approach for dealing with this issue, estimate the uncertainty of the estimates using different model approaches and output available in the IMPREX project, and analyse the communalities and differences between the different location and water board areas.

Dutch Case study – River Rhine Basin

Flood risk is a major concern for the Dutch. The Dutch Ministry of Environment and Infrastructure (WVL) is responsible for the main water network in the Netherlands, which is strongly governed by the water



18

level and discharge prediction at Lobith and St Pieter (Meuse). At the same time they are responsible for quantification of extreme discharge levels (1:10000 year) for design studies that are being carried out routinely in The Netherlands (every 5 to 10 years).

WVL is stakeholder in the IMPREX project. Regular meetings are and will be held with WVL during the IMPREX project. A stakeholder session with both representatives of the operational and policy side of WVL was organized in January 2016 just after the start of IMPREX. This meeting was used to list requirements for improving their operational and policy related models and instruments. The requirements are expressed in scientific challenges in the next section.

WVL is interested in more accurate flow forecast across the flow domain (low flows to floods) for short term. This will be established by introducing and applying data assimilation / better initialisation of their hydrological forecasts. At the same time for policy studies and climate changes analysis there is a need to improve the realism of the hydrological modelling to allow for landuse change scenarios and better take into account changes in potential evaporation. This requires moving from a lumped hydrological model to a distributed model in an open source modelling framework for the Rhine (also for the DA).

The main objective of this case study is to demonstrate the usability and the added value of the developments and improvements by IMPREX for flood forecasting and the derivation of discharge values for high return periods (1:10000) for reducing flood risk.

Italian Case Study – the Bisagno Basin

The Bisagno basin is a small catchment in Northern Italy that crosses the city of Genova in a densely urbanized area. The region is regularly affected by very intense rainfall events (> 100 mm/h and total 300 to 500 mm per event) leading to flash floods, many of which have caused severe damage in recent years (e.g. 1992, 2011, 2014).

IMPREX’s primary stakeholder in the Bisagno Basin is ARPAL (Environmental Protection Agency – Liguria Region), the organisation in charge of producing the weather and flood forecasts and with regional civil protection. A second cooperation is with the Municipality of Genova, the organisation that recorded data on losses during the last major event that affected the city.

In several cases the Quantitative Precipitation Forecast (QPF) is not accurate in terms of total amount or intensities. As an example, the event on 9 October 2014 with very severe rainfall was almost totally missed by operational NWP. This led to one fatality in the city of Genova as well as other significant impacts. IMPREX is seeking to improve these forecasts to help decision-makers manage the risk more effectively in this basin.

UK Case Study – the Thames catchment

The focus for this catchment is on the upstream (non-tidal) Thames river basin in South-East England. This is the most densely populated river basin in the UK and has been subject to four severe flood events since 2003. The most recent was in winter 2013/14 where compound flooding from fluvial (river), pluvial (surface water) and groundwater sources led to widespread transport disruption and significant flooding of properties including local contamination from sewer surcharge. Estimates indicate that more than 200,000 properties in the basin are at risk from a 1:100 year return fluvial flood event.

The main user for the UK case study is the Environment Agency (EA) – a public body (sponsored by UK Government) with the priority and responsibility to manage the risk of flooding. Interaction with the EA is via email exchange with the Thames Flood Modelling and Forecasting Team and (ongoing) face-to-face

19

Deliverable 2.1

meetings. A related user is the Flood Forecasting Centre (FFC) which is a collaboration between the EA and Met Office. The FFC is responsible for forecasting all natural forms of flooding; river, coastal and tidal, surface water and groundwater. We have been invited to visit them at the FFC in Exeter. Their expectations are presented below.

2.2. Headline findings

Dutch Case study – Dutch Water Boards

The main expectation of the four water boards is a quantification of compound flood event processes within their region. Therefore we investigate time series of rainfall measurements within the water boards region, but also in the larger catchment of the Meuse.

Secondly, we derived a 16 member ensemble of 50 years (so in total 800 years) time series from the Regional Atmospheric Climate Model (RACMO) and performed a bias-correction to these time series. The time series of rainfall, evaporation, wind and storm surges represent both the current and future climate.

Finally, we use hydrological models, provided by the water boards, to transfer the meteorological time series into hydrological data to get as close to reality.

We are in close contact with the water boards (on a monthly basis) in order to streamline the process of knowing their needs, benefit from their knowledge of the water system, making use of their models and discuss the results.

Dutch Case study – River Rhine Basin

The headlines findings from the consultation are formulated as scientific, operational and policy related requirements:

An improved hydrological model:

should allow the use of new (and old) data sources (e.g. satellite data like Sentinel mission, groundwater measurements, snow observations) not used or useable in the current model;

should allow to include (new) processes/variables to compare model results with available measurements (e.g. brightness temperature);

should use as much as possible available spatial (observed) data (e.g. land use, DEM, etc.);

ideally links hydrological model parameters and landscape characteristics (e.g. geology, soil type);

allow switching on or off certain hydrological process (e.g. simple groundwater versus using a complex MODFLOW model);

ideally should minimise calibration requirements using state-of-the-art regionalisation techniques;

should beable to handle different temporal and spatial scales (hourly versus 6 hourly or daily, 1km2, 25 km2);

should be benchmarked (versus other models);



20

must be able to verify results against independent measurements (groundwater, snow, gravity, actual evaporation, discharge etc.);

must allow for coupling with water quality and water temperature models (e.g. delwaq);

must show good performance from low flows to high flows. For operational predictions this can probably be reached by introducing data assimilation but for policy related studies this is something that should be kept in mind;

must not increase runtimes too much as maintaining short duration runtimes are important for operational prediction of discharges and inundation and should be considered in the evaluation;.

must allow added value to be shown before improvements can be introduced into the operational or policy instruments;

must facilitate real-time control (e.g including lakes in Switzerland in the model);

must have a calibration forcing dataset. This historic hourly gridded dataset for precipitation, temperature and potential evaporation must be available;

should allow to be used in reforecasting (to benchmark predictive performance against observations) and show improved predictive capability;

should allow forecasters and policy makers to get insight into hydrological stores, climatology and effect of data assimilation;

results should be stored into archive. The calibration forcing datasets should also be stored into the archive;

must be based on improved potential evaporation data or formulation as this is now not well taking into account in the current model (and operational and policy related instruments);

must allow derivation of climate change impacts on discharge return times. The model should be able to handle/support land use change scenarios;

must be linkable (offline and or online) with hydraulic model (Delft 3D FM) to model water levels and inundations;

can be run in parallel for policy related studies;

must quantify effects of uncertainty in model parameters on discharge simulation (for policy/climate change studies); and

must use automatic skill assessment (simulation) to track effects of changes and improvements.

This long list of user requirements will guide the efforts of IMPREX. It is clear that it will not be possible to facilitate all these requirements but we will work with the users to prioritise, identify quick wins and manage expectations.

Italian Case Study – the Bisagno Basin

The main expectations of the users are:

Improving the flood forecast using accurate and multi-model (if possible high resolution) meteorological and hydrological predictions.

o Reforecasts of the most severe events that affected Bisagno catchment

21

Deliverable 2.1

o Improvements in the predictability of severe, highly localized events

Testing the impacts (losses...) estimation during the forecast phase.

The users are interested in what can be learned from these simulations about the risks, and to receive support in analysing the events and their predictability. Of particular interest is the analysis of loss and damage and exploring the possibility of utilising information from impact forecasts in determining optimal thresholds for actions when using probabilistic information. It is important for the user(s) to understand how multi-model multi-resolution ensemble information can be managed and interpreted in a way that maintains its integrity while providing actionable information.

A further area for exploration is how and when to provide flood warnings and updates (using statistical framing), particularly in a densely populated and economically important area where false alarms have significant economic and resources costs, while missing alerts can result in loss of human life as well as in enhanced damages.

UK Case Study – the Thames catchment

A key priority of the Environment Agency is to manage the risk of flooding from main rivers, estuaries and the sea. Its focus is on flood response up to 7 to 10 days in advance of a potential flood event. It provides a local picture of the potential likelihood of flooding in England and issues flood warnings to the local community where needed.

The EA delivers a wider scale strategic overview which includes a daily flood guidance statement shared with the responder community e.g. emergency services, police forces, county councils. If required, this strategic overview can go up to Government level (e.g. the COBRA emergency council) to facilitate high level planning and to ensure timely movement of temporary flood barrier equipment in preparation for floods.

Currently the EA uses real time flood warning using UK Met Office precipitation data (short and long range Numerical Weather Predictions [NWP]) averaged over the sub-catchments of the Thames basin and run through hydrological models (Thames Catchment Model [TCM] and the Probability Distributed Model [PDM]). The output runoff is routed down the river using a hydraulic model.

The Delft-FEWS platform is used to produce forecasts, and these are updated using the observed river levels (from their network of 400 river level gauges in the Thames river basin) and visualising the data (i.e. plots and maps).

Seasonal (or long-range) forecasting seeks to provide useful information about the potential for flood events which might be expected in the coming months (based on information provided by long-range meteorological forecasts). In the South East UK, forecast skill results largely from the hydrogeological memory of antecedent conditions and persistence of initial flows. Catchments in the Thames basin have a permeable geology with flow regimes dominated by slowly-released groundwater. During the autumn and winter months, these groundwater stores slowly replenish and soil wetness increases making the Thames basin susceptible to winter flood events from both fluvial and groundwater sources. Being able to identify the factors that may lead to the occurrence of high streamflow concurrent with high groundwater and soil moisture up to several months in advance is therefore of key interest.

Environment Agency interaction:

Seasonal forecasting of flood events does not currently fall within the remit of the EA’s focus (short and medium range flood response). However, the EA recognises that the Thames is sensitive to flooding on seasonal timescales due to changes in meteorological conditions and also operational response i.e., the



22

Thames is heavily used for abstraction and drinking water purposes. From the EA’s perspective, the detection of a potential flood signal weeks or months in advance could provide a head’s up and highlight ‘areas to watch’ as the seasons change.

Seasonal forecasts are not currently used by the EA for flood action due to their ‘uncertainty’. However, the EA are interested in results that could add value to their current understanding of the modelling processes, catchment responses and river level predictability in the Thames river basin. Additionally, any results that could provide positive changes to their current operational forecasting techniques are valuable.

Based on this, the EA has shown particular interest in the following areas of research:

• Understanding the effect of the coincidence of peaks between the tributaries of the Thames river basin on the river level prediction downstream.

• Increased understanding of the heterogeneity in the sub-catchments’ responses to rainfall events. Specifically, is it possible to identify ‘key’ catchments which, if wet in tandem, will pose the greatest flood risk or not be a problem at all?

• At the moment, no observed soil moisture and evaporation data are used for river level modelling. Research on the effect of integrating antecedent hydrological conditions knowledge to the modelling by using soil moisture and/or evaporation observed data, would be an interesting research topic.

• Increased knowledge on the seasonality of the sub-catchments’ hydrological responses would be of great value.

As the main stakeholder, the EA is actively involved by providing us with licensed observation data from the Thames, access to recent publications and regular emails to find out how the project is progressing and to offer their support where it is required. Given the lack of knowledge about seasonality / hydrological differences in the sub-catchments of the basin, they acknowledge that any published / written information, maps, and numerical values (particularly relating to soil moisture and evaporation) would be beneficial.

Flood Forecasting Centre interaction:

More recently, the UK Government has requested that the Flood Forecasting Centre (FFC) set up an operational 30-day flood outlook. The FFC approached us as they are interested in information about forecasting skill and predictability at monthly – seasonal timescales. We have been invited to visit them in order to discuss what we’re doing and how our work could tie in with their plans.

2.3. Reflections on the findings

WP7 is tackling a highly complex topic with a wide range of users and stakeholders. The aim of this work package is to develop short-to-medium, seasonal and long-term improved flood risk assessments for fluvial flooding, in close consultation with stakeholders who need flood risk and damage information. In considering the evidence from the IMPREX interviews and ongoing survey alongside the sectoral expertise of the project partners, it is evident that the flood risk management sector is already a highly developed user of short term weather services but that there is a strong appetite for longer-term, seasonal and beyond, products and services. Through co-development of services, useful and usable information and tools will be created by IMPREX which are of interest to the wider flood risk management communities.

23

Deliverable 2.1

3. Hydropower (WP8)


For a comprehensive sectoral review relating to the transport sector, please see Deliverable 8.3, on which the following is based.

Predictions in hydroelectricity systems aim to help managers to optimize energy production and the economic value of water resources, as well as seeking to guarantee the safety of people and ensure dam security against extreme events. In a society moving towards a low-carbon economy, hydropower (HP) has the advantage of being a renewable source of energy that can be stored and reallocated in space and time, accommodating the more temporally variable supply from some other renewable energy sources and better handle the natural variability of hydro-meteorological hazards and the occurrence of extreme events and/or peak demands. HP water reservoirs may also be operated for multiple and, possibly, conflicting purposes: not only for energy production, but also for domestic and agriculture water supply, environment protection, tourism, flood protection, etc.

Hydropower companies therefore need accurate and reliable forecasts over a range of space and time scales (similar to some of the other sectors being considered within IMPREX, particularly the flood risk community). WP8 was designed to analyse how the hydropower sector can benefit from better hydro-meteorological predictions and improved reservoir management strategies, building on the work of WPs 3 and 4. As part of this, WP8 conducted a review of existing knowledge and needs of the HP sector to better understand the hydro-meteorological impacts on both energy production (operation systems) and consumption.

Four HP operators in France (EDF), Italy (A2A), Spain (Iberdrola) and Sweden (Vattenfall) were consulted in order to cover the broad spectrum of potential collaborations between weather and climate services providers, water resources researchers, and European energy production companies.

To do this, face-to-face interviews were undertaken, the results supported by the findings from an online structured questionnaire targeted at both the organisations involved in IMPREX and also those potential users from HP companies not directly involved in the project. A total of 11 responses were collectes, which means the findings are not an extensive review of the sector, but rather a sample of detailed views from selected HP experts.

As part of the stakeholder engagement, three distinct roles within HP companies were identified and targeted:

Energy trading operators are mainly concerned with selling or buying shares of energy at a given price to make a profit. This is a complex task, especially when dealing with renewable energies since their production is closely related to the natural variability of the hydro-climatic conditions where the power facilities are installed. The energy trading operator has to anticipate the expected energy production and demand, as well as the elasticity of the energy price in the market. To this end, they often deal with decisions for the short term (i.e. next 24 hours) to the medium term (i.e. weekly to monthly time horizons). Reliable weather and climate (W&C) services are valuable pieces of information to assist them in maximizing the profit.

Reservoir operators involved in the infrastructure and plant operations. Their primary duties are to perform a variety of technical tasks related to the regulation of the flow of water from the dam and through the turbines to meet the power generation requested by the energy trading office. Despite the existence of general operating rules, the reservoir operator is given a certain degree of freedom and is expected to make optimal decisions. These are usually done on a daily or sub-daily basis and may result from a trade-off among multiple conflicting objectives.



24

Reservoir operation decisions are generally supported by a comprehensive set of information across different time scales, particularly on the reservoir inflows and weather conditions. Accurate W&C information may therefore better inform the operators in their decisions and improve their performance.

Hydrologists are involved in the collection and quality control of real-time data and weather forecasts, the assessment of the main variables of the water cycle and of the real-time flow conditions, the production of in-house streamflow or dam inflow forecasts using hydrological and hydraulic models, the communication of the forecasts to its users in the company and the provision of technical support to decision-makers in the operation and, potentially, also in the trading departments. Engineers in the hydrological officers generally have to take decisions at the level of the forecasts to communicate to in-house users. These decisions mainly concern the level of confidence in the forecasts or the severity of a critical extreme situation (e.g., flood or drought). Due to the nature of their scientific and natural system modelling background, hydrologists from hydropower companies are stakeholders that appreciate the current and potential quality of W&C services. They are usually keen on having forecast information across different lead-times and, depending on their decision contexts, they use different sources of W&C information as input to their modelling framework. They usually also have in-depth understanding about the limits of the current forecast products and the uncertainties involved in the modelling process.


Unsurprisingly, precipitation and temperature forecasts are the most used variables today, while forecasts for solar radiation tends to be the least used one.

Most users opt for precipitation and temperature forecasts on an ‘hourly’ resolution, while the spatial resolution that is more often chosen is smaller than 25 km.

Generally, the forecasts are used a couple of days in advance for general planning and then the forecasts are revisited potentially multiple times per day to help make day-to-day decisions as well as assisting decision making during emergency situations.

The use of climate projections and wind forecasts differs significantly across respondents, with the temporal resolution varying from hourly to monthly scales, and the spatial resolution varying from less than 1 km to more than 50 km.

It is worth mentioning that some respondents also pointed out other forecast information they used, such as snow melt, upstream releases and streamflow.

Those users paying for the W&C service they use in their decision making rate the quality of the product more highly than those obtaining the forecasts from a free, public source.

Most of the respondents work with forecasts quantitatively, either as direct input to a decision support system or as input to a hydrological model for streamflow predictions. Weather forecasts are also used for triggering emergency operations, the communication of flood alerts and planning infrastructure maintenance.

Considering the variables that are not routinely provided with an existing W&C service, respondents expressed a high interest in the provision of the following variables:

o Streamflow forecast (9/11 respondents) o Short-range precipitation forecast (8/11) o Energy prices forecast (6/11) o Flood forecast: (6/11) o Forecast from different meteorological centres: (6/11) o Sub-seasonal to seasonal streamflow forecasts: (6/11) o Sub-seasonal to seasonal climate forecasts: (6/11)

25

Deliverable 2.1

There was little or no interest expressed in the following variables: o Heatwave forecast o Meteorological drought indices o Decadal climate predictions o Energy price forecast o Energy demand forecast

Respondents expressed high levels of interest in the following improvements to the forecast information:

o Better forecasts of weather extremes (8/11) o Better streamflow forecasts (7/11) o Weather forecasts for longer lead times (6 /11) o Better probabilistic forecasts (5/11)

Moderate importance is given to the improvement towards having more weather forecast scenarios. Low levels of interest are more often seen on improvements towards: more scenarios of hydrological forecasts, better river level forecasts and higher spatial resolution of weather forecasts.

Considering an ‘ideal’ forecast, the ideal spatial resolution of the weather forecasts that was chosen by the highest number of respondents (5/11) was ‘about 10 by 10 km’. The ideal temporal resolution was chosen to be the ‘hourly’ resolution by 7 out of 11 respondents, and the ideal lead time more often chosen (4/11 respondents) was ‘a couple of days’.


In considering the evidence from the IMPREX interviews and survey alongside the sectoral expertise of the project partners, it is evident that the hydropower sector is already a well-developed user of weather and climate services. It is a sector using forecasts of multiple variables across timescales and, depending on the size of the company, using this information to feed into the forecasting of energy production, demand and price. However, although the use of W&C services is widespread within the HP sector, there is scope to better tailor the forecast products to the needs of the user. Two areas for development identified during the survey are: i) enhancing the forecasting of extreme events (high resolution extreme precipitation for example) and ii) extending the forecast lead time.

The ability of a HP company to utilise a new service, or even their initial appetite to receive one, appears to be partially dependent on their size. Larger companies tend to have in-house expertise and although receptive to new products, especially those exploiting the seamless nature of weather and climate services, such sophisticated organisation generally seek ‘raw data’ rather than derived products, hence the low interest in variables such as streamflow (something that many of the larger organisations can already predict well) but greater interest in the input variables, such as high resolution precipitation.

Identification of other potential W&C services is to be encouraged within IMPREX. However, there are of course challenges. The results from the survey question exploring an ‘ideal forecast’ highlights the issue of users only considering extensions to the products they are already familiar with. Although it is possible that users are receiving the best products to enable them to make decisions, it is likely that there are developments to the existing W&C services, or brand new services, which may only emerge when such services are co-designed with the producers of the services alongside the users. A relevant and interesting outcome of WP8, and one undoubtedly applicable across other sectors, is that new services can sometimes bring new working environments (informatics/model development and calibration/data retrieval) that do not align to in-house systems or ways of working of the user. Such incompatibilities will hinder the uptake of new services unless significant benefits to using the new services are identified. Such concerns highlight the need for users and producers to work alongside each



26

other in the design and development of weather and climate services, while acknowledging that creating multidisciplinary teams, perhaps including IT companies or SMEs, might add value and expertise to the design and delivery process.

27

Deliverable 2.1

4. Transport (WP9)


For a comprehensive sectoral review relating to the transport sector, please see Deliverable 9.1, on which the following is based.

The European inland waterways offer a more than 40,000 km network of canals, rivers and lakes connecting cities and industrial regions across the continent. The European waterway network is particularly dense in the north-western part of the continent where the large waterways (especially Rhine, Danube, Elbe) in combination with their tributaries and canals enables inland shipping to reach many destinations and, for example, to travel from the North Sea to the Black Sea.

As IWT is suitable in particular for all kinds of mass goods, most volumes carried consist of traditional bulk goods like ores, coke, cole and crude petroleum, but also agribulk and refined products, mainly from the chemical industry. Together these goods constitute a share of approximately two thirds of the total IWT transport volume. Since the economic crisis the container business is a growing market on the Rhine and elsewhere, with the exception of the Upper Danube, Elbe and Odra (INE 2015). Except for agribulk all of the main types of goods transported by IWT are represented by at least one stakeholder in WP 9 of IMPREX.

Compared to other transport modes the low cost criterion is quite important for inland navigation. As IWT cannot match other system characteristics of road or rail transport (speed, flexibility, direct accessibility from starting to arrival point and in some cases reliability) these disadvantages must be reasonably compensated by carrying large quantities at low transport prices per tonne or per unit. Furthermore, the aforementioned limitations in flexibility must be counterbalanced by organisational measures, like RIS, in order to increase safety and efficiency of water-borne transportation and to better integrate IWT in multi-modal logistic processes.

The organisational structure of the IWT sector – and therefore the users of hydrological and respectively climate services – is heterogeneous with a high number of different players with different objectives and technical background. Traditionally, especially in Western Europe, there are a high number of owner-operators, which means skipper owning their barge and operating it themselves. These skippers restrict themselves to the operational functions at the ship level. At the fleet level many small and medium sized companies operate by connecting the transport operators or large forwarding companies with the owner operators. Large forwarding companies operate at the logistics level, and sometimes at fleet level as well, because they might operate an own fleet. The number of shipping companies operating at all three levels is rather limited. This splitting up in many separate organisations and companies results in strong internal competition with each other and in a very heterogeneous group of forecast users related to IWT (PINE 2004).

Similar to other modes of transportation Inland Waterway Transport (IWT) depends on many external factors. Besides the socio-political situation, IWT is particularly affected by a number of natural environmental conditions. Research has suggested that the main hydrological hazards concerning IWT in Europe are low stream flows, floods and river ice. Further influences are fog and wind, but they don’t constitute a significant obstacle to IWT: most vessels are equipped with radar so they are able to navigate even by reduced visibility and normally vessels are sufficiently stable in order to cope with strong winds.

River ice primarily occurs in waterways with low or nearly no flow velocities (particularly canals and impounded rivers) and in areas with low air temperature over longer periods. Besides blocking the waterway and interrupting its trafficability, ice can damage vessels and harm transport infrastructure.



28

Therefore river ice forecasts, indicating affected stretches as well as estimating ice thickness, are a valuable information in order to coordinate the operation of icebreakers (e.g. pooling the vessels at hot-spots), trying to clear the waterway as long as possible, as well as to take into account limitations of waterway availability (e.g. shifting transport to another mode). However, for much of Europe this hazard is only relevant for a limited period of the year, unlike the other hydrological hazards experienced year-round.

Floods affect rivers, regulated as well as free flowing, whereas they are normally not relevant for canals due to the lack of natural inflows. Restrictions related to floods depend on the absolute water height as above a given level, river traffic has either its speed restricted or is halted altogether. This is because high water levels can both damage river infrastructure and also result in navigation challenges (high flow velocities reducing the manoeuvrability of vessels or high water levels reducing bridge clearance heights).

Restrictions caused by low stream flows / droughts occur in all free flowing waterways, as flow rates and water-levels are directly correlated and the inter-annual flow regime leads to corresponding water-level conditions. In canals and impounded rivers the water-level is determined artificially and therefore just indirectly affected by hydro-meteorological drivers. Here, water-levels might be affected during low flows when the operation rules of the canal / weirs don’t longer allow for abstraction or retention of water. Unlike floods, there is no threshold beyond which navigation is prohibited due to low stream flows. It is the responsibility of each vessel’s skipper to decide whether it is possible to travel within a given section of the waterway despite the reduced water depth. So, it’s an individual evaluation of risk (in terms of safety and cost-effectiveness of the transport) given the intensity of the low flow situation, the ship as well as the cargo type and the destination of the transport. Low water-levels reduce the cargo-carrying capacity of inland waterway vessels and thereby increases costs per transport unit (Euro per ton). Also travel-times (due to speed reduction in order to minimize the dynamic sinkage of the vessels) and fuel consumption (due to increased power demand in shallow waters and extended travel times) are affected by low flows. At the same time the danger of ship-grounding or ship-to-ship collisions increases due to reduced depth and width of the fairway. As low flow situations occur more often than floods and as they are relatively long lasting (weeks or even months), they are regarded as the major threat to the reliability of IWT.

However, not only do these extreme events have an adverse impact on IWT, the general water-level affects the operational efficiency indirectly through the transport costs. The transport costs of an inland vessel are sensitive to the water-level, because the latter affects the water-depth, which again affects:

the possible amount of cargo,

the speed and

the fuel consumption.

The more cargo a vessel is carrying the higher its draught and therefore to avoid grounding a specific water-level offering the relevant depth is required. The water-level is primarily a load-limiting factor. But furthermore the water-level and respectively the water-depth have influence on the vessels fuel consumption and the speed, too. There is a physical dependence between the propulsion power required to reach a certain speed and the relation of water-depth and ship’s draught. In general a vessel could drive faster with the same propulsion power in deep water than in shallow areas. This leads to a decrease in travel time (the goods arrive faster at their destination) and the fuel consumption is lower (due to a lower operation period of the engines). The so-called power-speed-profiles are definable for each specific vessel type characterized by its size, the hull shape and the propulsion unit. Of course, due to the commercial nature of the IWT sector, carriers look to minimise costs associated with low flow

29

Deliverable 2.1

episodes through the imposition of a low flow surcharge, administered through long-term contracts between carrier and consignor based on climatology.

Currently the hydrological (or more in general climate) information tailored to IWT is provided via River Information Services (RIS), which are offered to the public at no charge. This integration into RIS is essential, because hydrology / climate is only one driver influencing water-borne transportation, but there are many others, like the current traffic situation, the occupation of locks and berths, the allocation of crane capacities in the harbors etc. Therefore only the combination of fairway and traffic information with hydrological data and forecasts can significantly improve safety and traffic management of IWT and will support an efficient transport management, e.g. a reliable voyage planning or fleet management. Large industrial firms and large forwarding companies sometimes have some kind of in-house climate service. This means that specialists on meteorology, climatology or hydrology are working in these companies compiling the relevant data and information for their company and creating very specific decision support products. Nevertheless they use the different RIS, but they often combine the information available there with additional data, e.g. meteorological forecasts. So, larger companies have the capacity to invest in improved climate services, while small enterprises or owner operators don’t have. The latter depend on current RIS and that these systems offer up-to-date and reliable information.

Within IMPREX WP9 evaluates how improved hydro-meteorological and hydrological forecast products increase operating efficiency and strategic management of the European transportation sector with special focus on IWT. The works focus on waterlevel and flow forecasts with special focus on low flow situations and navigation relevant high flow thresholds as these are the main hydro-meteorological threats for IWT. Forecasts of ice conditions for canals and impounded river stretches in winter time are also important, but there are already operational services available. With the experiences of IMPREX, i.e. with probabilistic forecasts, these services could be further developed in further Research & Development activities. As with the other work packages, WP9 examines real-life situations in order to better understand the vulnerabilities of the sector. WP9’s study area covers the large inland waterways and the corresponding hydrological catchments of the River Rhine (one of the world’s most important IWT routes carrying approximately two-thirds of Europe’s IWT volume), the River Danube (up to gauge Nagymaros in Hungary) and the River Elbe. These catchments cover a major part of Central Europe and are situated in different hydro-climatic regimes (moderate maritime to the north, high mountain to the south and dry continental to the east). Furthermore the flow regimes present in the study area are characterised by an interplay of nival (snow-driven) and pluvial (rain-driven) regimes.

Detailed characterisations of these European waterways, including flow regimes, typical make-up of cargo and reference water levels (and associated policies) can be seen in IMPREX Deliverable 9.1.

In order to cope with this variety of users, we identified different groups of users with similar interests regarding climate services as part of the data gathering. All in all we identified six relevant stakeholder types with distinct roles within the transport sector:

• The skipper is responsible for the save execution of the particular transport. Therefore it is the skipper (and not a logistic manager) who has to account for the maximum load to be carried in the end. The skipper also has to decide if e.g. lighterage is necessary to pass a specific stretch of the waterway. Skippers are usually keen on having real-time information on the measured water-levels along their route as well as short-term (several days ahead) forecast information on a regular basis for relevant (load-determine) gauges. On the River Rhine, for example, it takes 3 to 4 days to pass the main bottleneck between St. Goar and Mainz when starting at the port of Rotterdam. The majority of skipper has a multi-year experience on the behaviour of the river they are sailing on and they usually combine their subjective assessment with the “official” water-level forecast. Based on their experiences they



30

know that hydrological forecasts (even on the short-term) are uncertain, but correct understanding and use of explicitly communicated forecast uncertainty would require explanation / training in most cases.

Within IMPREX this user group is represented by Koninklijke BLN-Schuttevaer, a sectoral organization of IWT in the Netherlands.

• Logistic managers are mainly concerned with trading capacities of transporting at a given supply and demand to make profit. They usually work for bigger logistic companies which focus on water-bound transport, but usually offer the whole transportation chain (including also other transport modes, e.g. road). This task, especially the integration of waterway transport into multi-modal transportation chains, is quite complex as a lot of influencing variables (one of these variables is the expected water-level situation along the waterways) have to be taken into account. Therefore water-level forecasts are intensively used in the day-to-day business. Although there is also a short-term trade of shipping space, the main interest of the logistic manager is the medium-range (several weeks ahead) and the monthly to seasonal time-scale as their more strategical decisions require longer lead-times than those of a skipper. The earlier and the more accurate the logistic manager could anticipate the hydrological situation, the better his decisions would be. Typical decisions of the logistic manager are the determination of the timing of transports to minimize costs or to handle extremely heavy / large goods or to deliver goods arriving via maritime vessels in an optimal way (timing, costs). Logistic managers have a general understanding of forecast uncertainties and they are well-trained to take risk-based decisions. This user group is represented by the logistic companies Haeger & Schmidt, Imperial Shipping Services GmbH, Hartree Partners, LP and M. Zietzschmann GmbH & Co. KG.

• Transport operators (at a factory) are the counterpart of the logistic managers as they book shipping space in order to supply raw material necessary for the factory (or power plant) to produce goods (or energy) as well as to transmit the final products. Taking into account the available storage capacity the primary duty of the transport operator is to avoid reduction of the manufacturing process due to insufficient raw material feed or spilling over of warehouses and to minimize transport costs at the same time. The typical lead-times required by transport operators are the medium-range up to the monthly time-scale in order to shift cargo from shipping to another mean of transportation in case of low flows, to build up stocks (e.g. refineries) or to hire additional storage space for industrial goods (interim storage facility). Large factories sometime employ hydrologists / meteorologists in order to produce, communicate or optimize tailored in-house forecasts. But despite of those hydrologists the transport operators have a sound understanding of the system and the related uncertainties and as the logistic managers they are well-trained to take risk-based decisions. This user group is represented by the energy companies Grosskraftwerk Mannheim AG and Energie Baden-Württemberg AG EnBW, as well as by the chemical company BASF SE.

• Waterway managers are responsible for the regulation and preservation of waterways and therefore for the ease and safety of the waterway transport. They continuously monitor the riverbed by bathymetric surveys to get an overview about the problematic areas and operate continuous water level measurement gauges. Based on the bathymetric surveys measures for the maintenance of the fairway are planned and dredging as well as adjustment of the fairway is executed. Usually dredging measures are operated by external companies based on long-term contracts. Overall information about the fairway conditions and restrictions and forecasts about the expected water levels in the next days are provided via River Information Services RIS. To optimally plan bathymetric surveys waterlevel forecasts with a lead time of 4 to 7 days are used by the waterway managers at the moment. Shallow areas in morphological active sections of the river are highly dependent on the flow conditions. High flows could reallocate sediments and reduce the shallow sections due to the high flow velocities. Medium-term and monthly forecasts could be highly valuable to effectively plan and allocate dredging measures and resources or even to avoid dredging measures when high flows are expected in the next month. In the

31

Deliverable 2.1

case of restrictions due to natural conservation issues, as it is e.g. in the case of Port of Hamburg, forecasts with lead times > 1 month are of high importance to optimally plan the dredging resources and authorized dredging volumes. Waterway managers know there system very well and have a general understanding of forecast uncertainties. This user group is represented by the Water and Shipping Administration WSV responsible for the waterway management and maintenance in Germany, the Federal Ministry of Transportation and Digital Infrastructure BMVI, Rijkswaterstaat responsible for the waterway management and maintenance in the Netherlands, and the Hamburg Port Authority responsible for the management and maintenance of the Port of Hamburg.

• Transmission grid operators are responsible for operating, maintaining, planning and expanding the electric transmission network. They maintain the balance between power generation and consumption within their control area. A fast response to incidents that threaten the network’s stability, and to supply/demand imbalances, is essential. One method of preventing critical situations within the grid is re-dispatch: rapidly adapting the scheduled output of power plants in line with current demand to prevent overloads. To achieve this goal transmission grid operators collaborate with power plant operators, other transmission grid operators and other market participants to stabilise the transmission network. Transmission grid operators use control energy to offset any deviations from the agreed power supply. This control power capacity has to be available at any time. In the case of long-lasting low flow events with reduced inland waterway transport the available coal storage of power plants could become critical, as it was e.g. the case during the low flow event 2015. Water level measurements and forecasts are used to monitor the situation and in extreme cases to plan and execute measures to guarantee control energy capacity. Long-term forecasts could be used as a pre-alert system to prevent critical situations due to extreme low flow situations. Transmission grid operators normally don’t have a hydrological background, so any forecast information has to be tailored and interpreted to be useful to their decision making. This user group is represented by TransnetBW GmbH the operator of the electricity transmission grid in the German state of Baden-Württemberg.

• Economists are e.g. working for the central commissions of navigation to promote inland waterway transport. They observe and monitor the market and the general economic situation of inland waterway transport. They provide outlooks about the future development of transported goods. In case of the CCNR (Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine) this activity has become part of a much wider project for observation of the market, carried out in partnership with the European Commission. As expected future flow conditions, which influences the consumer demand of transport volumes as well as the cargo rates / prices, observed climatology is considered in these outlooks at the moment. Medium-term to seasonal flow forecast products have great potential to improve the expected flow evolution and therefore the predicted transport volumes within the outlook. Economists normally don’t have a hydrological background, so any forecast information has to be tailored and interpreted to be useful to their decision making. This user group is represented by the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine.


The key requirements of means of transportation are a high degree of reliability and availability. Although all means of transportation could be affected by hydro-meteorological extremes (e.g. roads or train lines might be inundated due to floods or blocked by landslides triggered by intense rainfall, heavy wind gusts could affect air traffic etc.) the vulnerability of IWT shows a particular close interaction to hydro-meteorological impacts, not solely on extremes. To better understand the vulnerabilities and current risk management practices, , and user requirements on new forecast products, a first WP9 Stakeholder-Workshop was held on 11th April 2016 in Koblenz. The following topics have been discussed at the workshop: 1) current use of climate services, 2) decisions supported by current forecast



32

products and possible future forecast products offering extended lead times, 3) optimal forecast products to support decisions, 4) vulnerability to hydro-meteorological extremes. Additionally non-structured interviews with most of the IMPREX stakeholders not present at the first stakeholder workshop about the same topics have been conducted by WP9 partners. In total 14 stakeholders have been involved in the workshop and interviews. User needs were captured by a group model building exercise in which all relevant stakeholders participated and provided their common view of the problems that navigation is having and the ones that might have in the future. The mental models of the stakeholders, as extracted in the group model exercise will be translated into system dynamics models and the qualitative system-model will quantified stepwise. To do so, individual interviews with stakeholders will be conducted, to integrate their knowledge and expertise in the co-production of the model. In the further IMPREX WP9 stakeholder involvement process new forecast products will be provided pre-operationally to the users, at least for the duration of IMPREX. Feedback about the new products will be collected from the users (interviews in person, by phone). The forecast products will be adapted based on this feedback. Outcomes of this process will be presented at public workshops and user-specific meetings.

Originally navigation-related forecasts have been developed in order to primarily support the individual skipper who aims at maximizing the load of an upcoming trip. Therefore the current lead-times of one to several days usually comply with the travel time of the vessels to pass the main bottlenecks of a waterway leaving the loading port. Those forecasts are used to optimize the load before starting in order to avoid as much as possible that cargo capacity is wasted as well as that the vessel is overloaded. In the latter case the skipper has to wait on the way until water-levels improve or he has to dump cargo leading to additional costs (due to unloading, stocking, further transport via truck or rail etc.).

Current water level forecasts for the study areas generally range from 3-6 day lead time, allowing short-term operational decision making and such forecasts remain vital to the industry. Most forecasts are deterministic, apart from examples from Hungary and Austria, limiting the estimation of forecast uncertainty and putting the onus onto the user to make their own estimation based on their experience and knowledge. Evidence from the user interaction suggests that better quantification and communication of the uncertainties associated with the forecast product would be welcomed.

Furthermore, longer term forecasts (weeks to months ahead) are not currently available although such forecasts would be highly valued as an input to supporting more strategic decision making (for example, moving freight from IWT to railway, requiring planning of at least one month).

Evidence from the user engagement suggests that for all users / applications (except in the ‘reduction of dredge operations’) a forecast of water level is required, rather than flow rate. Forecasting such a parameter is highly dependent on the morphology of the water body and not just the hydro-meteorological conditions, and presents some considerably challenges to the provider of the forecast, particularly when it comes to producing hindcasts. Nearly all users of IWT-related forecasts, across all timescales, are highly interested in medium- to low-flow (hence water-level) conditions, with moderate interest in when a flood might occur and how long any restrictions on shipping might last.


The analysis presented in IMPREX-deliverable 9.1 clearly indicates that improved hydrological forecasts are an essential prerequisite to increase the efficiency of IWT and to stimulate the use of the free capacity of inland navigation. In light of continuing transport growth within the European Union there is a need to release the already overloaded road and railway networks and to strengthen IWT as a safe and environment-friendly mode of transportation. Besides a good waterway infrastructure an optimized and anticipatory handling of the dominant natural / hydrological impacts (primarily low flows) on inland navigation is required.

33

Deliverable 2.1

On the one hand it’s necessary to have a good understanding of the characteristics (and bottlenecks) of the waterways alongside the genesis and impacts of past extreme events. On the other hand the close interaction with the different stakeholders is the only way to identify short-comings of current navigation-related forecast products and to define potential attributes of future forecasting products in order to mitigate vulnerability of IWT due to hydro-meteorological impacts. Two main areas for navigation-related forecast development within IMPREX became obvious: (a) improvement of existing forecast products, especially by a dynamic quantification of forecast uncertainties and (b) the need for completely new forecast products tailored for IWT offering additional forecast lead-time from the medium-range up to the seasonal scale. As in the hydropower sector, the appropriate design and complexity of new forecast products is related to the company size. While larger companies often have access to an in-house expert tailoring meteorological and/or hydrological information relevant for the specific use, smaller companies or single user normally don’t have such a special background. Therefore the latter ones require more pre-processed products offering reduced complexity and / or some kind of support to interpret the forecast information correctly. Furthermore the transport sector is quite heterogeneous, as six different user-types have been identified, using forecast information differently / for different purposes. There’s no one-product-fits-all in the IWT sector.

All in all, any technical development of navigation-related forecasts aspired in IMPREX should necessarily be accompanied by a flexible, user-oriented “post-processing” in order to generate not only skilful but useful forecasts.

References

Buck Consultants International, ProgTrans, VBD European Development Centre for Inland and Coastal Navigation & Via Donau (2004): Prospects of Inland Navigation within the Enlarged Europe (PINE). Final Concise Report

INE (2015): Annual Report 2015 -Shaping policy for more & better waterway transport, Inland Navigation Europe, Brussels, Belgium, www.inlandnavigation.eu/media/67058/INE-Annual-Report-2015.pdf



34

5. Urban water (WP10)


Urban water supply in Europe is very vulnerable to extreme weather events and their evolution over the long term. These events impact on the fresh water quality and quantity, challenging treatment capacity, safety of drinking-water and reliability of supply.

Some major threats to the urban water sector in Europe are the occurrence of droughts, which induce low river flow and high concentration of pollutants, intense rainfall events, which cause high levels of turbidity protecting microorganisms from disinfection effects, and rising temperatures, which reduce dissolved oxygen and increase the probability of development of communities of cyanobacteria releasing toxins into the water.

This WP is exploring solutions to manage better the risks raised by those hazards. WP10 has consulted with drinking-water suppliers to gain a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing this sector. Cetaqua and UPV have performed a survey to treatment plant managers that complement information that is being gathered via interview, review of grey literature, press release and academic papers.


Detailed information about climate vulnerability and risk management practices for specific drinking-water supply systems has been gathered. The information concerns the WP10 case studies, but also other drinking-water supply systems in Spain and other domains.

Water is treated differently depending on the quality of the water that enters the Drinking Water Treatment Plant (DWTP). Water abstractions consist of taking water from surface water (rivers, artificial reservoirs, lakes) or groundwater (aquifers). Since groundwater generally responds slower than surface water systems [1], hydrological extreme events have a slower impact on groundwater than on surface water and its treatment requires less rectification. In contrast, hydrological extreme events have a much quicker and important impact on surface water thus its treatment requires much more adjustment. In Spain, 69% of the annual freshwater abstraction for public water supply is from surface water; a similar situation is encountered in Portugal (64%) while other countries have a lower percentage of abstraction from surface water such as France (36%) or Germany (30%)[2].

To ensure the safety and security of urban water, it is important to adapt the treatment proactively depending on the raw water quality at different timescales: hours (modify doses of chemicals), days (ensure sufficient chemicals in stock and prepare the treatment chain), months (plan maintenance periods), decades (adapt infrastructure to possible changes).

In order to know the impacts of changes in raw water quality and the forecast needs for plant operators, a survey was sent to several DWTPs in Spain. This complements the information gathered in the two case studies of WP 10, Llobregat basin and Segura basin, both located on the Mediterranean coast.

The case study of the Segura basin (La Contraparada treatment plant) is representative of the management practices implemented for dealing with extreme rainfall in the water treatment plants situated in Southern Europe. In such cases, just after a heavy rainfall occurs, water turbidity and concentration in organic matters increase. In view of that increase, the plant managers increase the doses of coagulants and flocculants, and enhance the cleaning of filters (granular activated carbon (GAC) filters). This requires short term forecast (24 hours ahead) to better adjust the doses of reagents to be used and increase the monitoring frequency pro-actively; and there is a need for medium term forecast (1 day to 7 days) to modify the water intakes and increase the control of the raw water resources (e.g.

35

Deliverable 2.1

algal communities in the entrance reservoir).

The case study of the Llobregat basin is representative of the drought management practices in the large water systems situated in Southern Europe. During a drought water discharge is reduced, and the water conductivity generally increases (as the concentration of ions increases, for example due to less dilution of waste water treatment plant effluents) to a level for which the treatment becomes very challenging and the use of alternative water resources (groundwater) becomes appropriate. In this case, there is a need for long term forecasts (seasonal to decadal) to optimize the management of the full system to drought events. Several studies have been done in collaboration with the local River Basin Agency (ACA, the Catalan Water Agency) to analyze the effects of water management scenarios on water quality variables, and especially during drought conditions. One of the most recent studies [3] shows that a coupled approach water quality / water management model is necessary to simulate and anticipate drought impacts and develop preventive actions at the river basin scale. These actions would directly benefit to urban water supply. As an example, improving Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTPs) would reduce the nutrient concentrations in the lower reaches of the basin, thus the drinking treatment plant can apply easier and cheaper treatments [3].

Regarding the survey done in Spain, we obtained responses from 21 DWTPs, 2 of which are located in the south, 4 on the Mediterranean coast and 15 in the central and northern area of Spain. The responses show that 20 DWTPs were affected by extreme weather and climatic events (heavy rainfall, droughts and heat waves - none by cold waves). A total of 56 impacts of extreme weather and climatic events on water quality parameters were mentioned in the survey. Table 1 shows the impact of different extreme weather conditions on water quality parameters. It is observed that heavy rainfall is the climatic event that most affects water quality parameters. Turbidity is the water quality parameter most affected by heavy rainfall, followed by aluminium in suspension, iron & manganese, microbiological parameters, pH and colour. Droughts are reported to affect water quality parameters as well. Conductivity is the water quality parameter most affected by droughts, followed by iron & manganese, organic matter, pH, odour, nitrates, taste, sulphate and turbidity. Finally, heat waves are impacting on quality parameters, particularly odour and taste.

Table 2 shows water quality parameters that are impacted and necessary treatments carried out on the water quality parameters affected by climatic events. Turbidity is the water quality parameter most affected by climatic events, followed by organic matter, iron & manganese, conductivity, odour, aluminium suspension and pH, microbiological parameters and taste, colour, nitrates and sulphates. Most of water quality parameters are treated by an increase of reagents.

Table 3 represents the most useful forecasts for each climatic event:

For the climactic event heavy rainfall the most useful weather forecast would be a very short range weather forecast (1-12h), followed by daily (12-24h) and weekly (24h-7d) forecast ranges. The short-term predictions are useful because it allows DWTPs to capture and produce more water in the hours before the storm, and to close the plant during the time interval of heavy rainfall. During the rainy season the inflow of water can be effectively minimized with good forecasts, to prevent clogging of sand and carbon filters and dosing the minimum amount of reagents to avoid the formation of disinfection by-products, for example trihalomethanes.

For the climatic event drought the most useful forecast range is at the daily time scale, followed by weekly seasonal weather forecast (1-3months). During droughts restrictions on the uptake of surface water apply, so operators of DWTPs need to know if they need to collect water from other sources. A daily prediction will help them to produce more water during periods before water restrictions.



36

Table 1. Impact of extreme weather conditions on water quality parameters

Extreme weather and climatic events analyzed (that produce one or more impacts on water quality parameters)

Number of DWTPs affected by climate event /21

% of DWTPs impacted (over 21 DWTPs)

Water quality parameters impacted (Number of time the parameters has been cited over a total of 56 impacts cited)

Heavy rainfall 16 76%

Turbidity (15), Organic matter (6), Aluminum suspension (3), Iron and manganese (3), Microbiological parameters (2), pH (1), Color (1)

Drought 15 71%

Conductivity (5), Iron and manganese (5),Organic matter (4), pH (2), Odor (2), Nitrates (1), Taste (1), Sulphate (1), Turbidity (1)

Heat wave 2 9% Odor (2), Taste (1)

Table 2. Water quality parameters impacted and treatments carried out on the water quality parameters

Water quality parameters

impacted (which determine what

type of treatments have to be carried

out at DWTP)

Number of times that the water

quality parameters

is mentioned

% of the DWTPs

impacted (over 21 DWTPs)

Necessary treatment (number of time the treatment has been cited over a total of 56

impacts cited)

Turbidity 16 71%

Increase of reagents (5), Increase of reagents & Increase filter washing frequency (9), Increase of reagents, increase filter washing frequency and stop DWTP (1), Increase of reagents, increase filter washing frequency and send raw water to sewage system until the episode ends (1)

Organic matter 10 43%

Increase of reagents (7), Increase of reagents & activated carbon dosage (1), Increase of reagents & wash filters (1), Increase of reagents &stop DWTP if there is not water demand (1)

Iron & manganese 8 19% Increase of reagents (6), Increase of reagents & start ozonation (2)

37

Deliverable 2.1

Water quality parameters

impacted (which determine what

type of treatments have to be carried

out at DWTP)

Number of times that the water

quality parameters

is mentioned

% of the DWTPs

impacted (over 21 DWTPs)

Necessary treatment (number of time the treatment has been cited over a total of 56

impacts cited)

Conductivity 5 23,8% Nothing can be done (5)

Odour 4 19,0%

Activated carbon dosage (2), Dilute with groundwater to avoid reaching critical value (1), Increase of reagents & Increase filter washing frequency (1)

Aluminium suspension

3 4,8% Increase filter washing frequency (2), Increase filter washing frequency & stop DWTP if there is not water demand (1)

pH 3 14,3% Increase of reagents (2), Use of pH corrector (1)

Microbiological parameters

2 9,5% Increase of reagents (2)

Taste 2 9,5% Activated carbon dosage (1), Increase of reagents & Increase filter washing frequency (1)

Colour 1 4,8% Increase of reagents (1)

Nitrates 1 4,8% Dilute with surface water to avoid reaching critical value (1)

Sulphates 1 4,8% Nothing can be done (1)

For the climatic event heat wave a daily forecast would be the most useful, followed by weekly and seasonal weather forecasts. During heat waves the demand of water by the population increases considerably, so DWTPs will need to treat more water during the period before the heat wave, since it is necessary to maintain a minimum level in the water distribution tanks so that the population does not run out of water.



38

Table 3. Most useful weather/climate forecasts for each climatic event

Extreme weather and climatic events analysed

FORECAST PERIOD – first priority (number of time the forecast period has been cited over total cited)

FORECAST PERIOD – second priority (number of time the forecast period has been cited over total cited)

FORECAST PERIOD – third priority (number of time the forecast period has been cited over total cited)

Heavy rainfall 1-12h (22), 12-24h (6), 24h-7d (3)

12-24h (18), 24h-7d (9) 24h-7d (15), 1-3m (6)

Drought 1-12h (1), 12-24h (12), 24h-7d (2), 1-3m (6), 30 years and over (1)

12-24h (1), 24h-7d (11), 1-3m (4)

1-3m (11), 30 years and over (1)

Heat wave 12-24h (2), 30 years and over (1)

24h-7d (2) 1-3m (2)

As a summary, the scheme below describes the climate vulnerability and risk management practices of urban water treatment plants situated in Southern Europe. It is structured following a DPSIR1 approach: climate is considered as a key Driver (at different timescale) that generates Pressure on the basin, modifying the State of the water quality and thus having some Impacts on the water treatment that justify the development of water quality prediction as one element of Response to limit the impacts.

1 DIPSR = Driving forces; Pressures; States; Impacts; Responses

39

Deliverable 2.1

Regarding the sensitivity and exposure, the cost of different treatments and adaptation measures is being gathered in the case studies. As shown in the survey results, a principal concern of water treatment plant managers in this area is the management of high turbidity events.


For most of the water systems studied, it the sudden increase of turbidity due to heavy rainfall events is the main challenge for the treatment plant managers. Forecast of river water quality for the next hours and days are the most important pieces of information to operate the treatment plant efficiently, but also weekly and seasonal forecasts are mentioned as being relevant for all the climatic events considered.

Since the survey gathers the views of the treatment plant managers (responsible of producing “tap water” with the current infrastructures), the results concern operational issues with a short-term perspective. The need of long-term information is more obvious for planning issues (design of treatment plants) but has not been gathered in this survey. Depending on the infrastructure's lifespan, the rate and magnitude of the change of water quality, this information can be relevant for water plant operators. In general, operation and planning will both benefit from the anticipated information provided by the water quality forecast with a daily up to decadal forecast period.

Forecast of heavy rainfall and erosion of river bed and basin slopes is one of the priorities to be covered in the project. Adequate hydrological models (e.g. considering erosion processes) or statistical models would be necessary to perform those simulations.

Impact of cold waves are not significant and don’t need to be studied in the project.

Impact of heat waves are also linked to changes in water demand which calls for a combined approach (forecast of water quality and water demand).

A coupled water quality / water management modelling approach appears necessary to simulate and anticipate drought impacts and develop preventive actions at the river basin scale. This was demonstrated in the Llobregat River basin [3] and would be necessary in Mediterranean basins with limited natural flow in summer and therefore highly impacted by water management decisions (minimum reservoir release, WWTP performance, flow connections in the system).

REFERENCES

[1] M. T. Dokulil, “Impact of climate warming on European inland waters,” Inl. Waters, vol. 4, pp. 27–40, 2013.

[2] EUROSTAT, “Annual freshwater abstraction by source and sector - Eurostat.” [Online]. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-datasets/-/env_wat_abs. [Accessed: 29-Dec-2016].

[3] A. Momblanch, J. Paredes-Arquiola, A. Munné, A. Manzano, J. Arnau, and J. Andreu, “Managing water quality under drought conditions in the Llobregat River Basin.,” Sci. Total Environ., 2015.



40

6. Agriculture and droughts (WP11)


A major threat to the agricultural sector in Europe is the potential for an increased occurrence of droughts, affecting the local and regional food security and economies. It is often assumed that the agricultural sector, water managers and other decision makers could benefit from climatological and hydrological outlooks to better anticipate drought conditions and take preventative actions to reduce the negative impacts. However, the use of operational forecasts and projections is still limited due to a number of factors.

As with other IMPREX work packages, WP11 has consulted with stakeholders to gain a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing this sector. The consultation was extended by means of a survey, building on experience in WP8 (Hydropower). This survey was not foreseen in the DoW but was carried out as an additional activity to make sure that the outcomes of the stakeholder consultation were better comparable among each other. The survey focused on the Mediterranean case study basins in the IMPREX project (two in Spain, one in Greece and one in Italy). Results of this survey are presented here.

A major distinction needs to be made between rainfed and irrigated agriculture when it comes to droughts. Rainfed agriculture depends directly on climate conditions (rainfall, temperature, etc), which means that seasonal climate forecasts can be principally useful for decision on whether to crop or not. For irrigated agriculture, the added value of seasonal forecasts is more complex: the performance of this sector depends in a more indirect way of the climate, as a major share of the water used is taken from off-site sources (groundwater, rivers, reservoirs, etc). In this case, seasonal forecasts of water availability from these sources can be useful for decisions on whether to crop or not, but also on water allocation among the different users in the basin and on water releases from reservoirs. Planning and timing of water allocation can be informed by these seasonal forecasts and thus reduce the risks of demand exceeding supplies.

Thus, while the usefulness of seasonal forecasting for rainfed agriculture is rather straightforward, for irrigated this is much more complex, requiring hydrological modelling and tools that actually allow a decision maker to assess the impact of the decisions on water allocation over the following months. Especially for potential end-users in the irrigated agricultural sector, it is important to assess the needs in terms of seasonal forecasting. The stakeholder consultation in IMPREX focuses for this reason principally on the irrigated sector.

The survey results are complemented using information gathered from meetings with stakeholders and representatives from the case study organisations. The following summary is based on the findings of these user engagement activities. They are based around the case studies of:



Lake Como, Italy

Messara Valley, Crete

Netherlands

Stakeholder survey

The stakeholder survey yielded responses from 21 experts in the field, coming from various organisations. As explained in the introduction, this survey focuses on irrigated agriculture, as their

41

Deliverable 2.1

needs for climate services are dependent on a wider range factors: not only those that are affected directly by the climate but also factors that determine water availability on the seasonal or climate scale. For the purpose of the analysis, these organisations were classified in 3 categories: (1) irrigators and irrigators´ associations, (2) water authorities and partnerships responsible for water allocation decisions, and (3) agricultural research and extension support. The respondents were well distributed among these 3 categories. In this deliverable, only a short summary is given of the outcomes. The full survey analysis is reported in deliverable D11.1.

Most of the respondents indicated that they are currently using weather and climate (W&C) services already. It appeared that currently most respondents use W&C services for irrigation water management. They were asked what type of information they currently use, and what their expectations are on improved products. The following was observed:

Lead-time: currently, most respondents use forecasts with a lead-time of a couple of days. Part of the respondents indicated that they would like to see this increased to a couple of weeks or a couple of months, especially for the water authorities.

Temporal resolution: currently most of the respondents use services with a daily resolution. There seems to be interest in more services with a monthly resolution, especially for the water authorities. Researchers also indicated their interest in hourly resolution, for anticipating to extreme rainfall and hail events.

The shift in interest towards more long-range and seasonal W&C services indicates that the sector wants to integrate this information for seasonal planning of resources and operations. The type of information that is of interest is principally precipitation, but also temperature (heat waves) and other variables relevant for the estimation of irrigation water requirements.

The respondents indicated their interest in the type of information they would like to see in future improved W&C services. A wide range of options were available, targeted to the agricultural sector (crop yield forecast, soil moisture, etc). Figure 1 shows the outcomes.

Figure 1. Interest in forecast information, per group

Not used Little interested Very interested Highly interested No opinion

Irrigators Water authorities

Nr. of respondents

Agricultural research

Storm forecast

Flood forecast

Short-range

precipitation forecastMedium-range

precipitation forecastShort-range

temperature forecastMedium-range

temperature forecast

Heat wave forecast

Crop yield forecast

Frost yield forecast

Soil moisture yield forecast

Meteorological

drought index

Climate risk index

Sub-seasonal to seasonal

climate forecasts

Decadal climate

projection

0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6



42

In general, all listed forecast information received varying degrees of interests (from ‘little interested’ to ‘Highly interested’). Some patterns can be observed per group:

- Irrigators are interested especially in short-range precipitation forecasts, but also forecasts on heat waves. They indicate to have little interest in decadal climate projections.

- The water authorities instead, show similar interests as the irrigators, but are also interested in drought indices, long-term forecasts as well as the climatic projections.

- Agricultural researchers that in the Mediterranean area often support the sector by providing extension support, indicate similar interests as the irrigators, but also include drought indices, seasonal and climate projections.

Overall, the survey showed that the three groups have quite different interests. As can be expected, the closer the stakeholder is to day-to-day operational activities, the shorter the forecast period regularly considered. This means there is interest in short-range forecasts for precipitation but also other parameters for irrigation water requirements. Many climate services that forecast water requirements on the short-term exist already, after decades of research in this field.

Stakeholders that are involved in decisions on water allocations among different competing users indicate they would like to see improved weekly to seasonal forecasts. For these stakeholders, a clear shift between current use and expectations was seen, concerning lead-time and temporal resolution (seasonal). Clearly there is scope for IMPREX to respond to these needs. Predictions on the climate scale were only of interested to researchers in the agricultural sciences.

The following sections describe more specific outcomes of the direct consultations with stakeholders in the different case study basins.

Segura River Basin, Spain

The Segura River Basin (south-eastern Spain) has the lowest percentage of renewable water resources of Spain and water resources are highly regulated. The main water demand comes from agriculture which covers more than 43% of the basin area, of which one-third is brought under irrigation.

There are two stakeholders in the basins that are critical for decisions on water allocations, especially during drought periods: The River Basin Authority (Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura - CHS) and an organization that represents the interests of all irrigators´ associations that rely on the water transfer from the Tagus river (Sindicato Central de Regantes del Acueducto Tajo Segura - SCRATS).

The River Basin Authority deals with most of the tasks related to water resources management in the basin. CHS is in charge of most of the water-related infrastructure and distribution of the water resources, including those received from the external inter-basin water transfers (from the Upper Tagus and Negratín).

SCRATS is a consortium of 80 irrigation communities that rely fully or partly on the Tajo-Segura water transfer. These communities are located in Alicante and Murcia, as well as the eastern part of Almeria. The main mission of this organisation is to ensure the consolidation and defence of the transfer for their member irrigation associations.

The problems of water scarcity and droughts are recurrent and persistent in the basin, affecting the economy of the region and generating conflicts among users. CHS as the managing authority has a key role in taking action, anticipating and informing about drought periods. During drought periods, CHS has

43

Deliverable 2.1

to take decisions on the use of alternative water resources, as groundwater and desalinization, and their allocation across the basin taking into account water rights, actual water requirements and environmental commitments. How to act during drought periods is stipulated in a Drought Action Plan (2007). The plan has the following objectives:

• Drought monitoring using different indicators based on measurements and current status.

• Identification of measures, depending on the severity of the drought.

• Define how and by whom measures need to be implemented.

SCRATS administers the water transfer decisions by the Comisión Central de Explotación of the Tajo-Segura Transfer, and distributes the irrigation volumes periodically to each of the member Irrigators´ Communities. During drought periods it lobbies for emergency measures (groundwater) and negotiates on alternative sources (e.g. desalinisation).

There is thus a strategic interest for both organizations to anticipate to drought events and stakeholder consultations have demonstrated they are very much interest in improved seasonal forecasts in the IMPREX project.


Jucar River Basin District (JRBD) is located in the east of the Iberian Peninsula and is composed of nine water exploitation systems that flow into the Mediterranean Sea. It is characterised by a semi-arid climate and high hydrological variability (autumn floods, low flows in summer…) leading to recurrent multiannual droughts and water quality issues.

In principle, the basin has enough reservoir storage capacity to deal with multiannual drought periods. Still, water availability in some cases is not sufficient to meet full water demand, so it is necessary to reduce water demand and consumption to avoid major damages.

Water consumption and the allocation of water resources during drought periods are regulated by the Special Drought Plan (PES). The drought mitigation measures in this PES depend on a number of drought indices. Severe issues of water scarcity in this basin have forced water managers to develop a system of indicators, which allows them to apply the correct measures based on levels of risk that correspond with the adoption of strategic, tactic or emergency measures in order to reduce or avoid drought impacts.

The Júcar River Basin District Partnership (CHJ) is interested in the predictability of droughts and their impacts. So, its participation in this project is expected to offer a better uptake of drought predictions and the improvement of the methodologies for the definition of drought risk assessment, focused on climate change, for the different water use sectors.

There are two types of irrigators: the ‘traditional’ farmers with small crops or citrus or rice, and ‘modern’ farmers with big plots of cereal, alfalfa, or vineyard. An unreliable source of water can have severe impacts on their yields. Also several big cities and many small towns in the basin require high supply reliability and water quality. Considering hydropower, power companies need to guarantee their production to serve electricity peaks and water resource for evaporation losses. Finally, environmental requirements need support to achieve the good status of water bodies.

In short, a wide range of stakeholders in this basin need better information on water availability in order to take decisions on: crops selection (farmers); investments on new water resources (urban supply); planning of operations (hydropower).



44

Lake Como

The Lake Como river basin is located in the Italian Southern Alps, featuring one large regulated lake (active capacity 247 Mm3), many hydropower reservoirs (overall capacity around 545 Mm3) and an extensive cultivated area in the lower part (1,320 km2), where water demanding maize is the most widely grown and productive crop (52% of the area and 1.5 Mton/year). The hydrological regime is a typical Alpine one, with snowmelt from May-July being the most important component of the seasonal storage. The lake goes through the first draw-down cycle in the summer to provide adequate supply to agriculture for the peak demand period, which may, however, impair the hydropower sectors which exploit the accumulated volume in the following fall and winter, when the production is more valuable. This results into a conflict between farmers and hydropower companies.

Historically, the water abundance from upstream release benefitted the crop production in the lower agricultural area, and drought is rather a secondary concern. The absence of a sophisticated drought monitoring/forecast system results from such relax of the vigilance about severe droughts, which have, however, been observed more frequently in recent years. During the extremely dry summers of 2003 and 2005, the regional authority forced the hydropower companies to release water in summer to support agriculture, causing huge economic losses despite of being of very little benefit to the farmers.

As a consequence, farmer stakeholders have expressed an increasing interest for a drought monitoring system that inform them about the development of drought events, with possibility of drought forecast to further enable their adaptation to take proactive measures. In addition, for the pervasive drought the establishment of such system will also benefit the regulation of the reservoirs upstream, and will create more effective synergy of adaptation between the demand (farmers) and the supply sides (hydropower and lake operator).


The Messara valley encompasses an area of 400 km2 located in the central-south area of Crete, Greece. About 250km2 of the total valley area are cultivated and the remaining area (higher grounds) is used for livestock.

The growth of agriculture in Messara plain has strong impact on the water resources and ecosystem services of the area by substantially increasing of water demand. The economy of the region is based on agriculture with intensive cultivation mainly olive trees, grapes, citrus, and vegetables in green-houses. The overexploitation of the aquifer has reduced water availability as groundwater is a major resource for irrigation. Soil degradation and salinization are also important issues of the wider area.

Greenhouse cultivation is based on intensive farming practices and is less affected by weather variability. The rest of the cultivations (mainly olive trees and grapes) are partly irrigated and more exposed to weather extremes (floods and droughts). Thus agricultural treatment for greenhouses is based on standard procedures while for the rest cultivations is closer connected to the “evolution” of the weather during the growing season.

It is hard to distinguish the roles of the roles of the potential users because most of the interviewees have a dual or triple role. For example, the chairperson of Local Organization of Land Degradation (LOLR) council was also a professional agronomist and a farmer. Nevertheless, a categorization of the most important roles for the Messara site is: (a) the farmers cultivating olive trees, grapes, citrus, and vegetables mainly in green-houses, (b) Agro-industrial cooperatives providing services to farmers mostly involved in product/commodity exploitation, (c) agronomists and management committees (e.g. for the local dam) providing consultation to farmers, (d) Local Organizations of Land Reclamation that are

45

Deliverable 2.1

responsible for the distribution, the pricing of the water and the maintenance of the irrigation network and (e) the Directorate of Water of the Decentralized Administration of Crete is the main instrument of policy development and application in the Region of Crete according to the European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Α general conclusion that could be drawn is the involvement of a large number of actors in the management of water resources.

Netherlands

As part of IMPREX a consortium of the Dutch research institute Deltares and the Dutch water management consultant HKV will design and build a tool to support quantitative risk-informed decision-making for fresh water management in the Netherlands. Since drought risk is the interaction of the natural drought hazard and its impacts on society and the environment, the drought risk assessment method considers both the probability of drought-related hazard events, as well as their possible socio-economic and environmental consequences per end-user/sectors. The drought risk assessment method can be used to: (1) quantify drought risk and how it is affected by climate change and socio-economic developments, and (2) assess the cost-benefit ratio of measures to prevent water shortage and/or reduce drought impact, i.e. to reduce drought risk to an acceptable level.

In 2016 the potential of a drought risk assessment method has been demonstrated using case studies in the Netherlands: a controlled regional polder system (Amsterdam-Rhine canal & North Sea canal) and a natural regional polder system (Berkel system). In both case studies a number of end-users/sectors are considered, i.e. agriculture, industry, energy, drinking water, navigation and nature. Special attention is paid to (1) extreme event characterisation (since historical observations are often too short to capture low-probability drought events) , (2) impact modelling (including economic analysis, integrating hydrology and impact modelling) and (3) combining hazard and impact in a probabilistic way and express results in terms of risks. The result of the case studies is a risk profile for each end-user/sector and a total risk profile (considering the combined risks of several end-users/sectors). This risk profile will be derived for the current water management practice, as well as a drought risk reduction measure. By doing so, the cost-benefit ratio of the measure can be assessed (costs versus drought risk reduction).

With regard to fresh water allocation, the Dutch Delta Programme (programme for future drought and water scarcity) stated that supplying water of sufficient quality is a shared responsibility that requires cohesive efforts among users in the main and regional water system. Stakeholders include national and local authorities and water end-users such as agriculture, industry, energy, drinking water, navigation and nature.

Water is currently allocated according to a prearranged ranking system (a water hierarchy scheme based on a list of priorities), when water availability drops below a critical low level. The national and local authorities and water users involved agreed that the water availability and, where relevant, the water quality should be as transparent and predictable as possible under normal, dry and extremely dry conditions. They therefore introduced the concept of ”water supply service levels”, which should describe water availability and quality that can be delivered with a certain return period, for all regions and all relevant water users in the Netherlands. The service levels form an addition to the present policy and should be decided on by 2021. The drought risk profiles (derived from the probability of drought-related hazard events and its economic consequences) that form the output of the application of the risk based approach will provide decision support for the decision on water supply levels by the Delta Programme.




46


The planning department of CHS and SCRATS are key end-users of the developments in IMPREX for the Segura case study. Currently, both organisations lack a tool that provides predictions on the seasonal timescale, several months ahead (although SCRATS does use a basic regression-based system, regarded not wholly satisfactory for making longer-term forecasts). In spite of the potential opportunities such tools bring for forecasting the availability of water resources at the basin scale, CHS has not invested so far in this, as, to their knowledge, weather models do not provide reliable predictions for this area. Also, they lack budget and capacity to actually integrate this type of tools in their day-to-day management.

There is a Drought Action Plan that stipulates a set of actions for drought mitigation depending on reservoir-level-based drought indices. Seasonal forecasts of these indices are not thought to be relevant in the current management context. However, CHS recognises that water users, mainly farmers, are increasingly demanding a seasonal outlook of the total of water resources available for meeting water irrigation requirements. So far these are provided based on rough assumptions but IMPREX is an opportunity to evaluate the possibility of using climate and hydrologic forecasts for this purpose. In this regard, CHS indicated that it is interested in a simple indicator able to quantify how likely it is that over the next months whether the drought situation will improve or not, to some certain level.

On the seasonal timescale, both organisations would like information on streamflow / reservoir inflow in the headwaters, and reservoir storage, to be able to anticipate better certain measures. They indicated they would also like to have predictions up to one year ahead, as that is the most relevant scale for taking decisions in advance, given all necessary negotiations and political issues.

In terms of delivery mechanisms for these forecasts and helping to build trust in them, CHS suggested that “narratives” might be a useful development – going back to a certain drought event, and using hindcasts show them the added value of the information they could have had if the system would be in place by that time. IMPREX will examine this opportunity alongside comparing seasonal forecast output to the existing regression-based system of SCRATS.


In the Júcar River Basin, several types of decisions can be improved if more reliable forecasts come available at short, medium and long terms (including climate change):

At short term (daily, weekly), each user is interested in precipitation, temperature, and forecasts of other meteorological variables to assess irrigation water requirements. Also, the Júcar River Basin Partnership (CHJ) (of which stakeholders are partners, and participate in the decision making) is interested in this type of forecasts, to take short-term decisions on how much water to allocate and the sources of water that will be mobilized.

At medium term (monthly, seasonal, annual), during drought periods, CHJ is interested in precipitation to assess the risks associated with droughts, and the effectiveness of the measures to reduce vulnerability. Since the members of this organization participate in this decision process, they are also interested in these forecasts.

At long term (decadal, climate change), CHJ is interested in precipitation and temperature in order to estimate future demands to design the basin plans and adopt measures that guarantee sustainability. Again, since stakeholders are part of the bodies in which the decisions are taken, they are also interested in these forecasts, especially water users, since these predictions will influence the water allocated to them during the irrigation season.

As an example, we here describe a “persona” with the following profile: an agricultural engineer hired

47

Deliverable 2.1

by an irrigators’ association that needs the short term forecasts to advise its farmers about water needs of the crops, in order to irrigate in the following days. He or she also needs to know and understand the medium term forecasts for decisions about type of crops to grow in the season, and also when he/she is advising the person representing the association (usually the president) in the bodies where water allocation for the season is taken, and the long term forecasts when advising that person in the bodies which produce the River Basin Plans every 6 years.

Critical decisions during drought episodes include the distribution of resources or the supply to demands, the resolution of conflicts due to water uses and avoiding the impact of the resources allocation to the environment.

On one hand, irrigators require seasonal water resources forecasts and urban users demand real time water quantity, quality and biological monitoring. On the other hand, the hydropower sector needs short time water resources forecasts and for environmental procedures is needed data about water quantity, quality and biological indicators monitoring.

Improved hydrological predictions should allow a better anticipation of specific drought-measures and assessment of the economic impacts of droughts in the water uses and supplies of the region. These decisions are based on a system of indicators that conforms the Status Index used in the Special Drought Plan (PES). This is a system of spatially distributed control points in the area of the river basin that collects information about reservoir storages, groundwater piezometric levels, streamflows, reservoir inflows and precipitation. Then, this index informs the level of risk and the measures to apply, which are divided on strategic, tactic or emergency measures.

With the improved IMPREX predictions, the goal is to generate new flows with different climate change scenarios and models for a better knowledge of the impact of climate change in the water management of the basin, and possible adaptation measures.

Lake Como

A decision model based on stochastic optimization and optimal control tools will be set up by integrating the following three main components, which have been developed, calibrated, and validated in collaboration with the stakeholders during previous projects and are being updated and adapted for the specific IMPREX goals:

Catchment model – a physically-based, fully distributed TOPKAPI-ETH hydrological model, working on a regular grid (250x250 m), which simulates the hydrological processes in the lake catchment and also accounts for the presence of reservoirs and river diversions (for details, see Anghileri et al., 2016).

Lake Como model – the lake dynamics is described by a mass-balance equation assuming a modelling and decision-making time step of 24 hours, where the lake releases depend on the lake operating policy (i.e., a mathematical function mapping the current system conditions, such as the day of the year and the lake level, into release decisions). According to the daily time step, the Adda River can be described by a plug-flow model to simulate the routing of the lake releases from the lake outlet to the intake of the irrigation canals. This diversion of the water from the Adda River into the irrigation canal is regulated by the water rights of the agricultural districts (Giuliani et al., 2016).

Agricultural districts model - the dynamic processes internal to the irrigation districts are described by three distinct modules devoted to specific tasks: i) a distributed-parameter water



48

balance module that simulates water sources, conveyance, distribution, and soil-crop water balance (Facchi et al., 2004); ii) a heat unit module that simulates the sequence of growth stages as a function of the temperature (Neitsch et al., 2011); iii) a crop yield module that estimates the optimal and actual yields, accounting for the effects of stresses due to insufficient water supply that may have occurred during the agricultural season (Steduto et al., 2009). The water balance module partitions the irrigation district with a regular mesh of cells with a side length of 250 m, which allows the representation of the space variability of crops, soil types, meteorological inputs, and irrigation distribution.

The integrated model will be first used to benchmark the status quo of the system. Then, we plan to use it for assessing the operational value of IMPREX forecast products and their derived forms (e.g., drought index and low frequency signals). Also, drought indices as they are used in Spain will be subject of study in this integrated model built from existing tools tailored to this case study. Finally, different adaptation measures will be explored based on future climate projections, making use of previous studies by the IMPREX partners in the Spanish case study basins.

The two main expected results are

1. Quantification of the operational value of weather and climate services across sectors and across temporal scales;

2. A set of recommendation for stakeholder and decision maker on the measures to be enforced to better adapt to climate change and extreme events.

Farmer consortia are interested in both extreme drought or precipitation events to support the management the canals network for irrigation supply and flood buffering. In the absence of storage capacity, short-term precipitation forecasts are generally sufficient for flood management, while the consortia do not use forecasts for drought management but would be interested in considering them in the future. Droughts are not yet perceived as a major problem and tend not to be on the operators’ agendas.


Findings from interactions with the users and stakeholders reveal:

Weather observations are the data that are most often used followed by short term (1-5 days) weather predictions and observational averages (these are long terms averages of specific meteorological parameters in this region).

Rainfall and temperature are the most “popular” parameters most commonly used. Reservoir and groundwater level (being the main sources for irrigation) are also important indicators of water availability.

According to the responders the reliability and the skill of the current weather forecasts is an issue. Some of them have developed their own local forecasts based on proxies. For example, when the forecast of the "X" website is rainfall and winds are from the north, the forecast is always wrong (never rains). In other words, stakeholders put some faith in the forecasts but have combined that with their own experience to make them useful. It will be necessary to capture that local knowledge and co-design the forecasting system together with the end-user. To further explore this, a workshop will be organised to introduce stakeholders to the range of skilful products already available, as well as introducing the participants to some of the outcomes of IMPREX (e.g. relevant seasonal forecasts).

49

Deliverable 2.1

Regarding the provision of hydrological data there is an issue with the spatial resolution but also with the fact that there is no official agency responsible for collecting and quality controlling the local hydro-meteorological data in a systematic way. Thus, the interest of the increase of the observational coverage was high.

The increase in the skill of short range weather predictions was also of great interest to the responders.

Although long range and seasonal/annual predictions are not used, there was a strong interest for this type of information.

Although key agricultural weather/hydrological parameters (e.g. soil moisture, drought indices, evapotranspiration) are not locally monitored, gauged and used, from the majority of the responders, there was an increased interest, if such data were available.

Demonstration of available weather/climate/hydrological sources of information is of crucial importance in order to reduce the lack of awareness.

Netherlands

Given the context described earlier, the aim is to test a methodology and develop a tool that determines supply levels based on the probability of occurrence and economic impact of water shortage that is transparent for all water users in the regional water systems and the main water system. This should enable the assessment of cost-benefit ratio of measures to reduce drought risk (prevent water shortage and/or mitigate drought damage) and a better understanding of how climate variability and socio-economic developments relate to drought risk.

To be able to model the interaction of the natural drought hazard and its impacts on society and the environment, the drought risk assessment method considers both the probability of drought-related hazard events, as well as their possible socio-economic and environmental consequences per end-users/sectors.

In each case study the probability of water availability is combined with a physical dose-effect relationship (e.g. between water availability, water demand and impact on a sector) and in turn with an economic damage function (translating the physical effect of water shortage into a welfare effect). This will then results in a risk curve (cumulative distribution function of the economic damage). Information is required about water demand (demand, season), critical threshold levels when water shortage (damage) occurs, economic damage function, etc.

Preliminary results from the case studies showed that the physical processes within the hydrological model are sufficiently representative. Human interference and water management practices were not well enough included in the hydrological model for the controlled regional polder system Amsterdam-Rhine canal & North Sea canal. In addition the interaction between the surface and ground water systems was not properly modelled for the natural regional polder system Berkel. Stakeholder involvement turned out to be of utmost importance when making a proper translation from drought events into its economic consequences.

Future work will focus on the performance of the hydrological model and the processes that should be described by these models, as well as the translation from water shortages into economic impacts. In particular we will focus on how stakeholder’s can benefit for the outcomes of a risk based approach when considering specific drought-risk reduction measures. More focus will also be on how information can be of use to in decision making about water supply service levels by the Dutch Delta programme.



50


As with the other sectors, WP11 is tackling a highly complex topic with a wide range of users and stakeholders. The aim of this work package is to develop new, or already existing, methodologies and tools that may be applied in various case studies to learn from historic drought events and to better anticipate future events. In considering the evidence from the IMPREX interviews and survey alongside the sectoral expertise of the project partners, it is evident that the agriculture sector is an under-developed user of weather and climate services, especially on the seasonal timescale. Through co-development of services, useful and usable information and tools will be created by IMPREX which will be of interest to the wider agriculture and drought management communities.

References:

Anghileri, D., Giudici, F., Castelletti, A., Burlando, P., 2016. Advancing reservoir operation description in

physically based hydrological models. In EGU General Assembly, Vienna (Austria).

Giuliani, M., Li, Y., Castelletti, A. and Gandolfi, C.: A coupled human-natural systems analysis of irrigated

agriculture under changing climate, Water Resour. Res., 52(9), 6928–6947, doi:10.1002/2016WR019363,

2016.

Facchi, A., Gandolfi, C., Ortuani, B., Maggi, D., 2005. Simulation supported scenario analysis for water

resources planning: a case study in Northern Italy. Water Sci. Technol. 51, 11–18

Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Williams, J.R., 2011. Soil and water assessment tool theoretical

documentation version 2009. Texas Water Resources Institute

Steduto, P., Hsiao, T.C., Raes, D., Fereres, E., 2009. AquaCrop—The FAO crop model to simulate yield

response to water: I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agron. J. 101, 426–437.

51

Deliverable 2.1

7. Water economy (WP12)


The following is a summary of D12.1. For more detailed information, please refer to D12.1. It should be recognised that WP12 is very different from the preceding WPs 7-11. It is taking a global view on a challenge and opportunity facing Europe.

Water, like energy, is a key input into any economy. With variations in water availability and quality from country to country, water is a local issue. At the same time, international trade in goods to meet the needs of the world’s populations makes water a global, collective resource. International trade in commodities implies long-distance transfers of water in virtual form, where virtual water is understood as the volume of water that has been used to produce a commodity and that is thus virtually embedded in it. Knowledge about the virtual-water flows entering and leaving a region will cast a new light on the meaning of water dependencies of a region’s economy and its susceptibilities outside its borders.

The European economy is dependent on water resources elsewhere in the world. Many of the goods consumed in the European Union are not produced domestically, but abroad. Some goods, in particular agriculture-based products, require a lot of water during production. These water-intensive production processes are vulnerable to the availability of water at the various locations where the production processes take place. The vulnerabilities may result from a range of factors from reduced river flows, lowered lake levels and declined ground water tables to increased salt intrusion in coastal areas, pollution of freshwater bodies, droughts and changing climate. This report maps the current vulnerabilities of European economy in terms of water scarcity and drought occurrence.

We have used the water footprint, which is a measure of the appropriation of freshwater resources for human activities, and is comprised of three components – green, blue and grey. Green water footprint is water from precipitation that is stored in the root zone of the soil and evaporated, transpired or incorporated by plants. It is particularly relevant for agricultural, horticultural and forestry products. Blue water footprint is water that has been sourced from surface or groundwater resources and is either evaporated, incorporated into a product or taken from one body of water and returned to another, or returned at a different time. Irrigated agriculture, industry and domestic water use can each have a blue water footprint. The grey water footprint is the amount of water required to assimilate pollutants such that ambient water quality standards are maintained.


In order to assess the vulnerabilities of the European economy to stresses on external water resources, we first quantified the current water footprint of production and consumption in Europe. The water footprint of production is the amount of local water resources that are used to produce goods and services within the EU. This includes the water footprint of agriculture, industry and domestic water use and tells us the total volume of water and assimilation capacity consumed within the borders of the EU. The water footprint of consumption is the amount of water used to produce all the goods and services that are consumed by the people living in the EU. This water footprint may be partly inside the region and partly in other countries, depending on whether the products are locally produced or imported. When products are imported from another region, the amount of water consumed in producing those products are considered virtual water import. The virtual water import was calculated for the EU and we identified key products – those making up the largest virtual water inflows to the EU – separately for green, blue and grey water footprints. After mapping the commodities, their virtual water import volumes and origin of production locations, we assessed water scarcity and drought severity in each commodity production location to identify key hotspots for European economy. Coupling this with the



52

water footprint enabled us to map the EU’s external water dependencies and to identify when and where vulnerabilities may lie, in terms of blue water scarcity and drought.

The water footprint of production and consumption of Europe and virtual water flows are calculated for the period of 2006-2013 both for individual years and as an average. The water footprint of production and consumption of EU for this period are 519 km3 and 708 km3 per year on average, respectively. The water footprint of consumption Europe has been significantly externalised to other parts of the world; around 46% of Europe’s water footprint of consumption lies outside the region for the period 2006-2013.

Crop products are the largest share of the virtual water import to the EU (72%) followed by industrial products (22%) and animal products (6%). Soybean products account for 27% of the total green virtual water import to the EU. Cocoa products (19%), coffee products (14%), oil palm products (9%) and animal products (8%) all have a significant share in the green virtual water import. The blue water footprint of products imported by the EU is 15 km3/year. Approximately 32% of this blue water footprint is due to industrial products. Other products with a significant share in the blue virtual water imports are rice (9%), sugar cane (7%), cotton (7%), almonds (4%), pistachios (3%), animal products (3%), grapes & wine (3%) and soybean products (3%). The grey water footprint of imported products is 80 km3/year. Industrial products are the largest share of the grey water footprint (88%), followed by coffee products (2%), oil palm (1%), almonds (1%), pulses (1%), maize (1%), soybean (1%), beans (1%) and tobacco and products (1%).

The majority of the total virtual water imports to the EU originate from Brazil (15%), Ukraine (12%), Argentina (8%), Indonesia (6%), Ivory Coast (6%), Russia (5%), USA (4%), Ghana (3%), China (3%), India (3%) and Malaysia (3%). USA (17%), India (9%), Pakistan (8%), Turkey (6%), Egypt (6%), Iran (4%) and South Africa (4%) are the largest blue virtual water exporters to the EU related to crop products, accounting for 53% of the blue virtual water import.

Overall, the European economy is 41% dependent on external green water resources, which is categorized as “moderate dependency”. Soybean, pistachios, cotton, sorghum, avocado, hazelnuts and rice are some products that the European economy has high dependency on external green water resources. Absolute dependency on external green water resources, for products which are not grown in Europe, exists for products such as coffee, cocoa, oil palm, coconuts, tropical fruits, vanilla, sugar cane and tea. The dependency of the European economy to external blue water resources (surface and groundwater) is only 30% and considered as “low dependency”. This dependency is 39% with respect to the industrial products and is significantly larger for some crops such as sugar cane, coffee, dates, tea, vanilla, which have absolute dependency, pistachios, banana, tobacco, avocados, which have very high dependency and almonds, hazelnuts and soybean, which have high dependency.

Key products are identified separately for the green and blue virtual imports in order to assesses vulnerabilities due to drought (green component) and water scarcity (blue component). Soybean, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, sunflower, maize and olives are selected as key products from the perspective of green virtual water import and represent around 83% of the total green virtual water import to the EU. Soybean is the crop with the largest virtual water import volume to the EU with imports coming from Argentina, Brazil and USA. Europe relies on soybean import to meet demand for meat and dairy products. Soybean is little grown in the EU relative to European demand and its cultivation has important economic and political implications. Around 99.5% of the green virtual water import to the EU related to soybean comes from locations with low drought risk, thus the vulnerability level is categorized as “low”. Similar to soybean, vulnerability level of more than 90% of the green virtual water import related to other key products are determined as “low”. Olives are sourced from locations with a moderate vulnerability level, mainly located in Tunisia.

53

Deliverable 2.1

The key products for blue virtual water import are rice, sugar cane, cotton, almonds, pistachios, grapes and soybean, which represents 54% of the total crop related blue virtual water import to the EU. These key products are sourced from areas under significant or severe water scarcity, thus making the majority of blue water imports highly vulnerable. Ninety-one percent of the blue virtual water for almonds imported to the EU is categorized as highly vulnerable. Similarly, a high percentage of blue virtual water imported to the EU related to the other key products is coming from areas under significant or severe water scarcity: pistachios (87%), grapes (74%), rice (70%), cotton (70%) and sugar cane (56%).


The results presented in this report will form the baseline for the next phase of the project. This will focus on the assessment of how different economic sectors in Europe will be affected due to dependencies on imports and water resources in other regions under climate change and hydrological extremes. The next step in this assessment will be to first understand how Europe’s water demand will vary under different climate conditions and the impacts of climate change on exporting regions’ water resources considering the increased variability in demand and production. This will then be used to elaborate the effects that different economic sectors like the agricultural, food industry or livestock sectors in Europe may face due to dependencies on imports and water resources in other regions under climate change and hydrological extremes. The proposed vulnerability framework will align with the outcomes of task 6.e.5 and be informed by the information developed in WP3 and WP4 to evaluate the water footprint of consumption in Europe. This will help governments, European policies at all levels and companies in their mid- and long-term planning for sustainable development in light of climate change, population growth and increased demand for products and services.



54

8. Next steps

Sections 2-7 have presented an overview of the vulnerabilities, sensitivities and risk management

practices of the users involved in the different sectors considered in IMPREX (Work Packages 7-12). In

this report, each sector has been considered in isolation as the identification of user needs and

opportunities on how IMPREX can support those needs started with a bottom-up approach. However,

we recognize that it would benefit the project, alongside the wider climate services and water

communities, if a cross-sector analysis was conducted. Such a review will be undertaken as part of WP14

within the development of the risk outlook tool, and further cross WP integration will also take place

throughout WP13. We are also aware of the implications of our findings outside the project, so will be

seeking to make relevant links with policy, particularly related to European strategic agendas. IMPREX as

a whole will continuously scan ongoing policy review processes and prepare targeted input/

recommendations in the form of, for example, policy briefs, contributions to stakeholder consultations

and meetings with EU officers.

8.1. Risk Outlook (WP14)

A major deliverable within Work Package 14 is the risk outlook tool. Within the Description of Work, the tool is described as ‘a semi-operational tool able to inform decision makers about the likelihood of occurrence of high risk hydrological events in the forthcoming months’. In the first 18 months of IMPREX, project partners have met both in person and virtually a number of times to define the scope and design of this tool. It is acknowledged that the landscape of online outlook tools within the hydrometeorology sector has evolved since the project was conceived. Because of this, the partners within IMPREX are keen to ensure the risk outlook tool adds value to the field, explores ways of communicating skill and uncertainty of the forecasts and also looks to localise the information, demonstrating how the advances in the science can be of benefit to decision makers. Further details on the risk outlook tool will be presented in relevant supporting information, but in relation to D2.1, it will be important to conduct a cross-sector, cross-user analysis and prioritization of the findings to date as part of the development of the risk outlook tool. This process will identify the commonalities in user needs across sectors and also highlight the differences and potential conflicts. It will steer what’s presented within the risk outlook tool in the interface and also the presentation of selected case studies within the tool.

8.2. Integration (WP13)

Within the IMPREX project, Work Package 13 will integrate the experience and information gathered in

WP7-12 and create science-based risk reduction and adaptation strategies. To facilitate this interaction,

stakeholder meetings are held, for instance with the Jucar basin and Central European transport

stakeholders (i.e. WP 9 and WP11). Building on such meetings, interdisciplinary knowledge will be

integrated and condensed into a model that can be used to support science-based user decision making.

Unlike the physical models, such a decision support model starts from the decision-making process in

which the physical processes are integrated (in contrast to modelling chains that start from the physical

processes). As such, findings of D2.1 and our developing understanding of user needs is an important

source of information for this integrated modelling.

55

Deliverable 2.1

8.3. Links outside IMPREX

The field of climate services for the water sector is rapidly developing. Since IMPREX was first planned, a

number of new initiatives and products have begun or have been developed, and as a project we are

keen not to reinvent what has been or is being done; rather we want to add value to existing services or

projects. Consequently we are seeking to liaise with complementary projects, for example the

Copernicus Sectoral Information System project EDgE, to identify similarities and differences between

our projects and to see where IMPREX can add significant value. Through the work of IMPREX, we will

also be seeking to make the findings of our case studies and user engagement policy-relevant where

appropriate.



56

REPORT ENDS

deliverable 2 - impreximprex.eu › system › files › generated › files › resource ›...

Documents