modelling of climate change impacts on river flow regime ... · regime and discharge of danube...
TRANSCRIPT
Modelling of climate change impacts on river flow regime and discharge of Danube River considering water management effects
Judith Stagl
Anastasia Lobanova, Fred Hattermann, Hagen Koch, Shaoshun Huang
18 July 2013 International SWAT Conference, Toulouse, France
Motivation
• Investigate the impacts of climate change on the water regime of the Danube river
• Highly managed watershed
-> Include water management
• Climate change impacts vs. impounding effects of reservoirs
• Application of eco-hydrological Indicators to bridge the gap to biodiveristy
Observed Trends
Climate Projections for Danube basin
Models: ENSEMBLES
2009; 14 GCM/RCMs,
A1B Scenario
Multimodel mean 2021–2050 relative to 1971–2000
Climate Projections for Danube basin
Multimodel mean 2021–2050 relative to 1971–2000
Models: ENSEMBLES
2009; 14 GCM/RCMs,
A1B Scenario
Danube Tributeries
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
2497
2282
2125
1880
1766
1708
1382
1170
1103 69
460
443
215
5
Prut
Siret
Ialomita
Arges
Yantra
Olt
Iskar
Jiu
Timok
Morava (CS)
Tamis/Timis
Sava
Tysa/Tisza/Tisa
Drau/Drava
Sío
Ipel/Ipoly
Hron
Vah
Raab/Rába
Morava/March
Enns
Traun
Inn
Isar
Naab
Lech
Tisza
Sava
Tysa/Tisza
Drava
Inn
Qave/Year [m3/s]
[river km]
Cumulated annual mean discharge
of the Danube river
7 Name, Research Domain
The Danube River – different regimes
Runoff regime (Pardé) for selected gauges in the Danube basin
<100
100
200
300
400
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
>3000
m.a.s.l.
Monthly discharge from 1992-1999
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Novo Selo - downstream
Bazias - upstream
Water management – Iron Gates I and II
• total volume of 3.2 billion m3
• total length of 270 km
• for hydropower generation but also
used for the flow regulation
• Volume < 3% of the average annual flow -> impounding effects minor significant
• -> provide a daily and weekly flow regulation
Danube – outlet Ceatal Izmail Preliminary results
Danube - Selected subbasins
Tisza
Relative Volume Difference: -0.9 %
Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency: 0.62
A. Lobanova
Mures
Relative Volume Difference: 3.9 %
Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency: 0.68
A. Lobanova
Scenarios (ENSEMBLES) – for Mures
A. Lobanova
Models: ENSEMBLES 2009
9 GCM/RCMs, A1B Scenario
Deviations [%] in monthly mean discharge of Mures River compared to 1971-2000
Scenario period 2021-2050 Scenario period 2071-2100
% %
Outlook
• Parametrisation/Calibration for different sub-catchements
• Improvement of storages and routing (adjustment of curve numbers)
• Integration of largest reservoirs
• Evaluation of different climate scenarios ENSEMBLES and also new ones (CORDEX)
• For nature conservation: application of specific eco-hydrological indicators
Thank you for your attention
Danube Canyon Iron Gate