logo bangkok, may 2009 water resources management in ba river basin under future development and...

LOGO

Bangkok, May 2009

Water Resources Management in Ba River Basin under Future Development

and Climate Scenarios

Presented by:

Nguyen Thi Thu Ha

Examination Committee: Dr. Mukand S. Babel (Chairperson)

Dr. Roberto S. Clemente Dr. Sylvain Perret

Dr. Sutat Weesakul

Presentation Outline

Statement of the Problem1

Objectives and Scope of the Study2

Methodology3

4 Results

5 Conclusions and Recommendations

Statement of the Problem

Future and Scenarios: Why?-Scenarios: a systematic way of thinking about the futureScenarios: a systematic way of thinking about the future

-To get a better understanding of the possible implications of To get a better understanding of the possible implications of decisions decisions

-To support decision-making processTo support decision-making processBa River Basin: Why?-The largest river basin in the southern region of Central VietnamThe largest river basin in the southern region of Central Vietnam

-Planning and management of water resources are currently done Planning and management of water resources are currently done based on sectoral approaches and administrative boundaries based on sectoral approaches and administrative boundaries

-Future basin development, global warming and its impacts will put Future basin development, global warming and its impacts will put pressure on water and land resources pressure on water and land resources

Rationale-A proper water planning and management will be a major step in achieving A proper water planning and management will be a major step in achieving sustainable development (Bonn, 2001).sustainable development (Bonn, 2001).

-System analysis tools are powerful to evaluate and propose the best water System analysis tools are powerful to evaluate and propose the best water management strategies.management strategies.

- Good water resources management should be based on an understanding of Good water resources management should be based on an understanding of current demand/ supply and an awareness of possible future trends.current demand/ supply and an awareness of possible future trends.

Objectives of the Study

To develop a comprehensive simulation model to assess impacts of current and future basin development, as well as climate change on runoff, demand/ supply for Ba River Basin, Vietnam.

To develop a comprehensive simulation model to assess impacts of current and future basin development, as well as climate change on runoff, demand/ supply for Ba River Basin, Vietnam.

Objective 2To simulate and assess impacts of current and To simulate and assess impacts of current and future basin development on water future basin development on water demand/supply under different demand/supply under different water type yearswater type years aiding for aiding for short-termshort-term WRM&P. WRM&P.

Objective 3

To simulate and assess To simulate and assess climate change impactsclimate change impacts on river runoff, water supply and demand under on river runoff, water supply and demand under currentcurrent and and future basinfuture basin development aiding for development aiding for long-termlong-term WRM&P WRM&P

Objective 1To calibrate and validate a comprehensive To calibrate and validate a comprehensive simulation model of the Ba River Basin System.simulation model of the Ba River Basin System.

Scope of the Study

1. Study area: Ba River Basin

2. Data collection: Hydro-meteorological data, water uses, river network,

water infrastructure and their operations.

3. The Ba river basin system model is developed by coupling NAM and

WEAP

4. Future basin development is based on the regional and sectoral plans

towards 2020

5. Different water years based on frequency analysis are applied for

scenarios of future basin development and water supply priorities for short-

term WRM&P

6. Daily CCCma-CGCM2 rainfall and evaporation SRES-A2 and B2 up to

2100 (from Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis) is used

for study of climate change impacts for long-term WRM&P

Study Area

13,094 Km2

Methodology

Different water patterns

Climate change scenarios

Long-term Water Planning Scenarios

Current and future basin developments

Short-term Water Planning Scenarios

- River flow- Water Shortages or coverage (user satisfaction)- Energy production, Reservoir storages- Environmental flow…

- River flow- Water Shortages or coverage (user satisfaction)- Energy production, Reservoir storages- Environmental flow…

Frequency analysis of inflow

record

The bias corrected CCCma-CGCM2, daily evaporation

and rainfall

Watershed and Stream Delineation

Watershed and Stream Delineation

Data on water uses for all sectors1.Irrigation2.Livestock3.Domestic4.Industry5.Environment

Runoff for sub-basins

Water allocation and planning model (WEAP)Water allocation and planning model (WEAP)

Demand EstimationsWater infrastructures and their operation;

river network (connectivity)

Ba River Basin System ModelBa River Basin System Model

Rainfall-Runoff Model (NAM)

Meteorological data and calibration parameters

Calibration Validation

Methodology (cont’d)

Rainfall – Runoff Model (NAM)To translate rainfall into flow in a To translate rainfall into flow in a river via a set of linked mathematical river via a set of linked mathematical statementsstatements

- Current and future water demand/ Current and future water demand/ supply, water infrastructures’ operations supply, water infrastructures’ operations - Water development and management Water development and management options by means of scenario analysesoptions by means of scenario analyses- WEAP software: water balance WEAP software: water balance accounting; a linear programming (LP) for accounting; a linear programming (LP) for water allocation optimization based on water allocation optimization based on supply priorities.supply priorities.

River Basin Planning Model (WEAP)

System ConfigurationCalibration and Validation

Monthly Observed vs. simulated runoff at An Khe stationCalibration (2000-2004)

0

50

100

150

200

250

Jan-

00

May

-

Sep

-00

Jan-

01

May

-

Sep

-01

Jan-

02

May

-

Sep

-02

Jan-

03

May

-

Sep

-03

Jan-

04

May

-

Sep

-04

Time

Q (m

3/s

)

Qobs Qsim

r2 0.91

NSI (%) 78.2

VE (%) 14.3

Monthly observed vs. simulated runoff at Cung Son stationCalibration (2000-2004)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Jan-

00

May

-

Sep

-00

Jan-

01

May

-

Sep

-01

Jan-

02

May

-

Sep

-02

Jan-

03

May

-

Sep

-03

Jan-

04

May

-

Sep

-04

Time

Q (m

3/s

)

Qobs Qsim

Monthly Observed and simulated runoff at An Khe station Validation (2005 - 2007)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Jan-

05

Apr

-05

Jul-

05

Oct

-05

Jan-

06

Apr

-06

Jul-

06

Oct

-06

Jan-

07

Apr

-07

Jul-

07

Oct

-07

Time

Q (m

3 /s)

Qobs Qsim

r2 0.96

NSI (%) 87.2

VE (%) 28.2

Monthly observed and simulated runoff at Cung Son station Validation (2005 - 2007)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Jan-

05

Apr

-05

Jul-

05

Oct

-05

Jan-

06

Apr

-06

Jul-

06

Oct

-06

Jan-

07

Apr

-07

Jul-

07

Oct

-07

Time

Q (

m3 /s

)

Qobs Qsim

r2 0.85

NSI (%) 69

VE (%) 18.2

r2 0.91

NSI (%) 86.9

VE (%) 17.3

Monthly observed and simulated runoff at Cung Son station (2005 - 2007)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Jan-

05

Mar

-05

May

-05

Jul-

05

Sep

-05

Nov

-05

Jan-

06

Mar

-06

May

-06

Jul-

06

Sep

-06

Nov

-06

Jan-

07

Mar

-07

May

-07

Jul-

07

Sep

-07

Nov

-07

Time

Q (

m3 /s

)

Qobs Qsim

Scenario DefinitionScenario Description Comment S1 - Real water years (2000 – 2007)

- 2006 for all water demands - Two reservoirs - Water supply priority: + “first come, first served” basis + In a given sub-basin: highest for domestic, followed by industry, hydropower, irrigation and livestock.

Assessment of impacts of Current basin development (existing state of basin management and development)

Scenarios aiding for short-term water management and planning S2 - 4 sub-scenarios following 4 water years: wet, normal, dry and very dry years.

- 2020 water demands. - Instream flow requirements (IFR) are proposed at 5 locations. - Additional infrastructure: 4 more reservoirs; 2 inter-basin transfer links. - Priorities: similarly to the scenario S1 and + 4 new reservoirs are operated based on only hydropower requirements without their downstream water uses, + 2 transfer links are also operated without consideration of downstream water uses

Impacts of Future basin development under operations of water infrastructures and water allocation do not take into account downstream water uses

S3 Based on the scenario S2, except for introduction of water allocation priorities: - First to all domestic demand sites (highest priority) - Second to all industrial water uses. - Third to all hydropower generations, irrigation, livestock water uses and environmental flow requirements at all sites. - Inter-basin water transfer links are set priority 4 - Filling reservoirs are set priority 5 (lowest priority)

Impacts of Future basin development under operations of water infrastructures and water allocation take into account downstream water uses.

S4 Based on the scenario S3 but irrigation efficiency is increased by 25% Scenarios providing the aiding visions for long-term water management and planning

S5 Based on the scenario S1 but water years are replaced by predicted runoffs in 2000s, 2025s, 2050s and 2095s based on projected daily CCCma-CGCM2 rainfall and evaporation for two IPCC emission scenarios of SRES-A2 and SRES-B2

Impacts of climate change under current basin development.

S6 Based on the scenario S3 but water years are replaced by predicted runoffs in 2000s, 2025s, 2050s and 2095s based on projected daily CCCma-CGCM2 rainfall and evaporation for two IPCC emission scenarios of SRES-A2 and SRES-B2.

Impacts of climate change under future basin development and introduction of water allocation priorities.

S1: Reference Scenario (Current Situation)Unmet demand

Monthly unmmet demand for the whole basin (Scenario S1)

020406080

100120140160180

Jan-

00

May

-00

Sep

-00

Jan-

01

May

-01

Sep

-01

Jan-

02

May

-02

Sep

-02

Jan-

03

May

-03

Sep

-03

Jan-

04

May

-04

Sep

-04

Jan-

05

May

-05

Sep

-05

Jan-

06

May

-06

Sep

-06

Jan-

07

May

-07

Sep

-07

Time

Un

met

dem

and

(10

6m

3)

Monthly unmet demands by irrigation demand sites (Scenario S1)

0

20

4060

80

100

120140

160

180

Jan-

00

May

-00

Sep-

00

Jan-

01

May

-01

Sep-

01

Jan-

02

May

-02

Sep-

02

Jan-

03

May

-03

Sep-

03

Jan-

04

May

-04

Sep-

04

Jan-

05

May

-05

Sep-

05

Jan-

06

May

-06

Sep-

06

Jan-

07

May

-07

Sep-

07

Time

Un

me

t d

em

an

d (

10

6 m3 )

IRR 6 TYA IRR 7 TYA IRR 12 KRH IRR 13 KRH IRR 1 BAK IRR 2 BAK

S1: Reference Scenario (Current Situation)Reservoir Storage and Hydropower

Simulation of hydropower generation of IAYUN HA and Song Hinh reservoir (S1)

0

100

200

300

400

500

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Year

Hyd

rop

ow

er

Gen

erat

ion

(G

Wh

/yea

r)

Simulated Hydropower Generation of IAYUN Ha Simulated Hydropower Generation of Song Hinh

Target average annual energy of IAYUN Ha Target average annual energy of Song Hinh

Monthly storage volume for Song Hinh reservoir (S1)

050

100150200250300350400450

Jan-

00

Jul-0

0

Jan-

01

Jul-0

1

Jan-

02

Jul-0

2

Jan-

03

Jul-0

3

Jan-

04

Jul-0

4

Jan-

05

Jul-0

5

Jan-

06

Jul-0

6

Jan-

07

Jul-0

7

Time

Sto

rag

e (1

06m

3)

Simulated Song Hinh Song Hinh upper rule curve

Song Hinh low er rule curve

Monthly storage for IAYUN HA reservoir (S1)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan-

00

Jul-0

0

Jan-

01

Jul-0

1

Jan-

02

Jul-0

2

Jan-

03

Jul-0

3

Jan-

04

Jul-0

4

Jan-

05

Jul-0

5

Jan-

06

Jul-0

6

Jan-

07

Jul-0

7

Time

Sto

rag

e (1

06m

3)

Simulated IAYUN HA IAyun Ha upper rule curve

IAyun Ha low er rule curve

S2 and S3: Impact of future basin development Without (S2) and with (S3) introduction of water supply priorities

Impact on water unmet demand for all sectors and irrigation sitesMonthly water unmet demand for all demand sites during the dry year

(S2 vs. S3)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Month

Un

met

dem

an

d

(106

m3) S2-3 Dry Year

S3-3 Dry Year

Unmet demand of irrigation sites during the dry year (S2 vs. S3)

050

100150200250300350

IRR

1 B

AK

IRR

2 B

AK

IRR

3 N

AK

IRR

4 N

AK

IRR

5 T

YA

IRR

6 T

YA

IRR

7 T

YA

IRR

8 A

PA

IRR

9 A

PA

IRR

10 A

PA

IRR

11 K

PA

IRR

12 K

RH

IRR

13 K

RH

IRR

14 B

AH

IRR

15 S

OH

IRR

16 S

OH

IRR

17 T

DC

IRR

18 H

DC

IRR

19 H

DC

Irrigation demand sites from upstream to downstream

Un

me

t d

em

an

d &

WR

(106 m

3 /ye

ar)

S2-3 Dry Year undmet demand S3-3 Dry Year unmet demand Water requirement 2020s

S2 and S3: Impact of future basin development Without (S2) and With (S3) introduction of water supply priorities

Impact on inter-basin transfer link and instream flow requirementWater Transfer Coverage to the Kone river during

the dry year (S2 vs. S3)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugMonth

Co

vera

ge (

%)

S2-3 Dry Year S3-3 Dry year

Water Transfer Coverage to the Ban Thach river during the dry year (S2 vs. S3)

0

20

40

60

80

100


Co

vera

ge

(%)

S2-3 Dry Year S3-3 Dry year

Instream flow requirement coverage during the dry year for scenario S2

0

20

40

60

80

100

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

Month

Co

vera

ge (

%)

IFR 1 IFR 2 IFR 3 IFR 4 IFR 5


0

20

40

60

80

100


Month

Cov

erag

e (%

)


S2 and S3: Impact of future basin development Without (S2) and With (S3) introduction of water supply priorities (cont’d)

Impact on hydropower production and reservoir storage

Simulated and Target Hydroelectricity Generation of reservoirs (S2 vs. S3)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

IAYUN HA Song Hinh Ka Nak An Khe Ba Ha Krong Hnang

Reservoir

En

erg

y (

GW

h/y

ea

r)

S2-3 Dry Year S3-3 Dry Year Tagert yearly energy

Monthly Storage Volume of An Khe Reservoir (S2 vs. S3)

9

11

13

15

17


Month

Sto

rag

e (1

06 m

3 )

S2-3 Dry Year S3-3 Dry Year Top of conservation Top of inactive

S3 and S4: Impact of future basin development No improvement (S3) and increase of irrigation efficiency (S4)

Impact on water unmet demand for all sectors and irrigation sites

Monthly water unmet demand for all demand sites during the dry year (S3 vs. S4)

0

50

100

150

200

250


Month

Un

met

dem

and

(106

m3) S3-3 Dry Year

S4-3 Dry Year

Unmet demand of irrigation sites during the dry year (S3 vs. S4)

0

50

100

150

200

IRR

1 B

AK

IRR

2 B

AK

IRR

3 N

AK

IRR

4 N

AK

IRR

5 T

YA

IRR

6 T

YA

IRR

7 T

YA

IRR

8 A

PA

IRR

9 A

PA

IRR

10

AP

A

IRR

11

KP

A

IRR

12

KR

H

IRR

13

KR

H

IRR

14

BA

H

IRR

15

SO

H

IRR

16

SO

H

IRR

17

TD

C

IRR

18

HD

C

IRR

19

HD

C

Irrigation demand sites from upstream to downstream

Un

met

dem

an

d

(106

m3/y

ear)

S3-3 Dry Year S4-3 Dry Year


Impact on inter-basin transfer link and instream flow requirementWater Transfer Coverage to the Kone river during

the dry year (S3 vs. S4)

0

20

40

60

80

100


Co

vera

ge

(%)

S3-3 Dry year S4-3 Dry year

Water Transfer Coverage to the Ban Thach river during the dry year (S3 vs. S4)

0

20

40

60

80

100


Co

vera

ge

(%)

S3-3 Dry year S4-3 Dry year


010

20304050

607080

90100


Cov

erag

e (%

)



0102030405060708090

100


Cov

erag

e (%

)



Impact on hydropower production and reservoir storage

Simulated and Target Hydroelectricity Generation of reservoirs (S3 vs. S4)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

IAYUN HA Song Hinh Ka Nak An Khe Ba Ha Krong Hnang

Reservoir

En

erg

y (

GW

h/y

ea

r)

S3-3 Dry Year S4-3 Dry Year Tagert yearly energy

Monthly Storage Volume of An Khe Reservoir (S3 vs. S4)

9

11

13

15

17


Month

Sto

rag

e (1

06 m

3 )

S3-3 Dry Year S4-3 Dry Year Top of conservation Top of inactive

Assessment of Climate Change ImpactsFuture evaporation and rainfall projections

Variations in normailzed dry seasonal rainfal anomalies

-2.0-1.5-1.0-0.50.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.5

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

2095

2100

Year

Nor

mal

ized

rai

nfal

l ano

mal

ies

SRES-A2

2 per. Mov. Avg. (SRES-A2)

Future trend in annual evaporation of SRES-A2

y = 0.5643x + 166.951200

1250

1300

1350

1400

1450

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100Year

Eva

po

rati

on

(m

m)

Scenario A2

Linear (Scenario A2)

Local time series of daily weather up to 2100

CCCma-CGCM2 SRES-A2 and B2

Multiplicative shift method

Future evaporation projections

Future evaporation projections

Future precipitation projections

Future precipitation projections

Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis

Ba River Basin System ModelBa River Basin System Model

Climate Change Impacts on river flow, water deficits, etc.???

Bias correction and validation of predicted daily CGM evap. & rainfall

Mean monthly rainfall of raw CCCma2 and observed one(1985-2007)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMonth

Rai

nfa

ll (m

m)

Observed

Raw SRES-A2

Raw SRES-B2

Mean monthly evaporation of CCCma2 and observed one(1978-2005)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180


Month

Eva

po

rati

on

(m

m)

Observed

Raw SRES-A2

Raw SRES-B2

Mean monthly observed and simulated runoff at Cung Son station(1990-2007)

0

200

400

600

800

1000


Month

Q (

m3 /s

)

Observed Bias corrected SRES-A2 Bias corrected SRES-B2

Raw SRES-A2 Raw SRES-B2

NSI (%) 87.9VE (%) 8r2 0.86

Corrected SRES-A2 vs. Obs

NSI (%) 89.4VE (%) -3r2 0.88

Corrected SRES-B2 vs. Obs.

S5 and S6: CC impact on stream flow (water availability) current (S5) and future (S6) basin development

Change ratio of mean monthly runoff at the Cung Son station between baseline period and 2025s (S5 vs. S6)

-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%


Ch

ang

e ra

tio

(%

)

S5 with SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) S6 with SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030)


-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%


Cha

ng r

atio

(%)



-100%

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%


Ch

ang

e ra

tio

(%

)


Dry Wet Dry Wet

2025s -14% 40% -24% 35%

2050s -39% 18% -39% 9%

2090s -14% -18% -21% -24%

Period Scenario S5 Scenario S6

SRES-A2

S6: CC impact on water deficits Future basin development and introduction of water supply priorities

Mean monthly unmet demand for baseline and projected periods with SRES-A2 for all demand sites of scenario S6

0

50

100

150

200

250


Un

me

t d

em

an

d (

106 m

3 )

Baseline period SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055) SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

Unmet demand of irrigation demand sites for baseline and projected prediods with SRES-A2 for scenario S6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

IRR

1 B

AK

IRR

2 B

AK

IRR

3 N

AK

IRR

4 N

AK

IRR

5 T

YA

IRR

6 T

YA

IRR

7 T

YA

IRR

8 A

PA

IRR

9 A

PA

IRR

10

AP

A

IRR

11

KP

A

IRR

12

KR

H

IRR

13

KR

H

IRR

14

BA

H

IRR

15

SO

H

IRR

16

SO

H

IRR

17

TD

C

IRR

18

HD

C

IRR

19

HD

C

Irrigation demand sties (from upstream to downstream)

Un

me

t d

em

an

d (

106 m

3 )

Baseline period SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055) SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

S6: CC impact on inter-basin transfer and environmental flow Future basin development and introduction of water supply priorities

Water transfer coverage to the Ban Thach river in the predicted periods for SRES-A2 for scenario S6

0

20

40

60

80

100

January February March April May June July August

Month

Co

vera

ge

(%)

SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055)

SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

Water transfer coverage to the Kone river in the predicted periods for SRES-A2 for scenario S6

0

20

4060

80

100

120

January February March April May June July AugustMonth

Co

vera

ge

(%)

SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055)

SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

Instream flow requirement coverage at IFR5 location for predicted periods of SRES-A2 for scenario S6

0

20

40

60

80

100


Month

Co

ve

rag

e (

%)

SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055) SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

S6: CC impact on hydropower and reservoir storage future basin development and introduction of water supply priorities

Mean annual hydroelectricity generation of reservoirs for the projected periods with SRES-A2 for scenario S6

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

IAYUN HA Song Hinh Ka Nak An Khe Ba Ha Krong Hnang Reservoir

En

erg

y (G

Wh

)

SRES-A2-2025s (2020-2030) SRES-A2-2050s (2045-2055) SRES-A2-2095s (2090-2100)

Monthly storage volume of Ba Ha Reservoir for the projected periods with SRES-A2 for scenario S6

150

200

250

300

350

400


Month

Sto

rag

e (

10

6 m3 )

SRES-A2-2025s SRES-A2-2050s SRES-A2-2095s

Top of conservation Top of inactive

Conclusions

A comprehensive system simulation model for Ba River Basin was developed by coupling a rainfall- runoff model (NAM) and a water planning model (WEAP), it is a powerful tool to aid in decision-making in ST and LT water resources planning and management.

Future water infrastructures developed in the basin are very sensitive to water deficits and environmental flows.

Introduction of water supply priorities is useful to assure the equitable allocation proportions between upstream and downstream water users and meet fully for prior water demand sectors (domestic and industrial) in case of water shortages.

Improvement of irrigation efficiency can partially help in reducing water deficits for all water use sectors including environmental flow requirements.

Climate change impacts:- An increasing trend in annual evaporation- Dry seasonal rainfall anomalies are close to or below the equilibrium line- A decrease of runoff in the dry season; an increase of the wet season flow.- More water deficits; reduction in storages of reservoirs and decreases in hydropower

productions at hydropower schemes

Recommendations

Operation rule curves of new reservoirs should be achieved

Feasibility of inter-basin transfer links should be considered in terms of no violations of water demands within basin but also economic, environmental aspects and other benefits for the received basins.

More experiments of GCMs’ outputs should be applied to justify the results

More complex and sophisticated methods should be studied to correct biases and to downscale the GCMs’ outputs into smaller resolutions

LOGO

Bangkok, May 2009

logo bangkok, may 2009 water resources management in ba river basin under future development and...

Documents