northern mountain hydrology and climate change · 2011. 9. 11. · yukon river upscaling yukon...

NORTHERN MOUNTAIN

HYDROLOGY AND CLIMATE

CHANGE

JR Janowicz, M Allchin, SK Carey, RJ Granger, NR

Hedstrom, JW Pomeroy, WL Quinton, O Semanova

IP3 Final Meeting – Saskatoon, SK – September 7 – 9, 2011

IP3 - OBJECTIVES

• PROCESS

– Summarize work carried out at Wolf Creek

• PARMERTIZATION

– Discuss recent modelling initiatives

• PREDICTION

– Document changes in Yukon hydrologic response to climate warming over the last 3 decades

WOLF CREEK - PROCESS•Established 1992 for Hydrologic Model

Development / Calibration Purposes

•Variable snow storage,

redistribution, melt

•Cold soils affecting ET

•Frozen soil infiltration

•Variable permafrost distribution

•Thick organic layers affecting

runoff

•Seasonality of energy inputs

•Poorly defined drainage areas

WOLF CREEK - PROCESS

•IP3 – (CFCAS)

Funding (other

funding)

•Developed into an

Integrated Study of

Hydrometeorological

Processes and Climate

Research

PROCESS STUDIES

Snowpack Accumulation,

Redistribution and Melt is Variable

•Blowing snow transports 80

% from alpine

•Forest sublimation accounts

for 60 % of snowfall

•Snowmelt is 300 % faster in

the alpine than forest

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

SW

E (

mm

)

Shrub Tundra

Alpine

Shrub Tundra 87 111 134 139 179 216 168

Alpine 65 77 35 74 83 29

1994 1995 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001

PROCESS STUDIES

Evapotranspiration is 150 % Higher in Forest Compared to Alpine

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

18-Apr 23-Apr 28-Apr 03-May 08-May 13-May

Cu

mu

lati

ve N

et

Sh

ort

wave M

J Tall Buried

Short

Tall

Sub Tall

Sub Tall Buried

PARAMERIAZATION

Hydrometeorological Process Algorithms

Developed / Advanced / Tested

•Blowing snow

•Sublimation

•Interception

•Radiation

•Evapotranspiration

•Infiltration

•Snowmelt

•Runoff

wIsp zSW )1(6.0

44.0

0

45.0

64.192.2

015.273

15.273)1( t

TSSCINF I

I

COLD REGIONS

HYDROLOGICAL MODEL

Basin

Climate Data

HRU Climate

Data:Obs

Interception:

Intcp

Snowmelt:

Ebsm

Shortwave Radiaiton:

Global

Net

Radiation:Netall

Evaporation:

Evap

Albedo:

Snow

Albedo

Snow

Transport:

PBSM

Soil Moisture:

Smbal

Basin

Data

Runoff:

Srunoff

Infiltration:

Crack

Net

Radiation:Net_rn

Routing:

Route

evap

runoff

soil gw

soil ssr

snowinfil

intercp evap

infil

SWE

snowmelt

net rain

Sunshine Hours:

Calsun

SWE

net snow

net snow

SunMax

QdroD

QdroD

Cumnet

SunMax

meltflag

Kstorage

Lag

whereto

order

inflow

outflow

basinflow

basingw

Sublimation:

BrushSubl

SWE

Summer

Infiltration:

GreenAmptInfiltration:

Fozen

Snowmelt:

KevinFrostdepth

OR

OR

OR

COLD REGIONS HYDROLOGICAL MODEL

(CRHM)

PREDICTION

ANVIL RANGE MINING CORPORATION

FARO MINE COMPLEX

•SRK Consulting

Ltd

•Deloite & Touche

•Could we

Transfer Wolf

Creek Findings to

Faro Waste Rock

Dumps to Develop

a Water Balance?

INVESTIGATION OF ANVIL RANGE MINING

CORPORATION (FARO) WASTE DUMP

WATER BALANCE

Objective: Estimate Waste Rock Dump Recharge Determining Contaminant Seepage

– Co-Investigators: Raoul Granger & Newell Hedstrom (NWRI)

• 4 Year Study

– Year 1: Develop Water Balance using Transposed Met Data

– Year 2: Develop Water Balance using Site Meteorological Data

– Year 3: Develop Estimates for Ave, Dry, Wet Scenario

– Year 4: Apply Previous Work to Trial Covers

Met Stations

Snow Surveys

Infiltration

Studies

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Sieve Size (mm)

% P

assin

gV 3

V 2

V 1A1

V 5F

V 1R

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.01 0.1 1 10 100

Sieve Size (mm)

% P

assin

g

G 3

G 2

G MS

G 2A1

G 1A1

Material

Characterization

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

5/8/05 5/28/05 6/17/05 7/7/05 7/27/05 8/16/05 9/5/05 9/25/05

Evap

ora

tio

n (

mm

)

Flat

North

South

East

West

Bubble

CUMULATIVE EVAPORATION

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

8/1/04 11/9/04 2/17/05 5/28/05 9/5/05 12/14/05

Ru

no

ff (

mm

)

Flat

North

South

East

West

Bubble

CUMULATIVE RUNOFF

•Infiltration

45-55%

precipitation

•Surface

runoff 15%

precipitation

Evaporation

30-40%

precipitation

RESULTS

YUKON RIVER UPSCALING

Yukon River at Eagle,

345 000 km2

Wolf Creek

Research Basin,

195 km2

Granger

watershed,

8 km2

*

*

•Environment Canada

•USGS

•Yukon Water Resources

•University of Saskatchewan

•State Hydrologistical Institute –

St Petersburg

RUNOFF MODELLING - GRANGER

WATERSHED – 1999 -2001

1999

2000 2001

NS

1999 0.93

2000 0.73

2001 0.79

WOLF CREEK – CLIMATE

WARMING LINKAGES•Climate Change Issues

Priority

•Strong GY Support

• 2007 /2009 Major Flooding

•Linked to Climate

Change

•Wolf Creek Climate Change

Research (Process, CRHM

Modelling)

CLIMATE WARMING IMPACTS

PERMAFROST REGIME TRENDS

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)Winter Low Flows

Klondike R ab Bonanza Cr

Rengleng R at Dempster Hwy

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)


ON HYDROLOGIC RESPONSE

Mean Annual Maximum Flow – Peel River above Canyon Creek

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)

RIVER ICE REGIME TRENDS

300

320

340

360

380

400

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Fre

eze-u

p D

ate

s (

Ju

lian

Day)

Freeze-up Timing

Yukon River at Whitehorse (1902-1993)

•Freeze-up timing delayed approximately 30 days since

1902


110

120

130

140

150

1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010

Bre

ak-u

p D

ate

s (

Ju

lian

Day)

Break-up Timing

Yukon River at Dawson (1896-2011)

•Break-up Timing Advanced 6 days per century


2002/03 Mid-Winter Klondike

River Ice Jam and Flooding

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

De

gre

e D

ay

s F

ros

t (

oc

)

Dawson City Winter

Temperatures 1902 - 2005

2002/03 warmest winter

Klondike River Ice Jam - 2003


313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020B

reak-u

p E

levati

on

(m

)

Break-up Severity

Yukon River at Dawson Annual

Maximum Break-up Elevation

(1896 - 2011)Dawson - 1979



Increasing Peak Flows Due to

Melting Glaciers

Atlin River nr Atlin

100

150

200

250

300

350

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)



MARSH LAKE ANNUAL

MAXIMUM STAGE 1950 – 2011

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Sta

ge (

m)



Mean Annual Maximum Discharge

Takhini River near Whitehorse

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)



Mean Annual Maximum Discharge

White River at Alaska Highway

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Dis

ch

arg

e (

m3/s

)



Mean Annual Maximum Flow – Donjek River below White River

Hydrometric

Station Locations

and Permafrost

Zones

WATERSHED PARAMETERS

Station Name Drainage Area Record

Glacier

Area

Mean Annual

Temp

(km2) Period (%) (oC)

Atlin River nr Atlin 6810 1950-08 12.7 -0.6

Wann River nr Atlin 269 1956-93 19.7 -0.5

Fantail R at Outlet Fantail Lk 717 1956-93 33.2 -2.0

Lindeman Creek nr Bennett 240 1954-93 14.6 -1.7

Marsh Lake nr Whitehorse 19400 1950-09 8.3 -1.5

Takhini R nr Whitehorse 6930 1949-08 5.1 -3.0

Duke River nr Mouth 631 1981-08 9.5 -4.9

Kluane R at Mouth Kluane Lk 4950 1952-95 6.0 -5.7

Donjek River bl Kluane R 12400 1979-94 21.8 -8.3

White R at Alaska Hwy 6240 1975-08 38.6 -8.7

Tatshenshini R at Dalton Post 1750 1989-08 7.0 -2.5

Alsek R ab Bates R 16200 1975-08 21.0 -3.5

Alsek R nr Yakatat 28000 1993-08 31.9 -2.4

CONCLUSIONSPERMAFROST DEGRADING

•Permafrost

Degrading?

•Greater

Groundwater

Contributions

to Baseflow

•Some Peak

Flows

Decreasing

SUMMARY

• RIVER ICE TRENDS

• Freeze-up Timing Delayed

30 Days

• Break-up Timing

Advanced 6-day/century

•More Frequent Occurrence Mid-winter

Break-up

•Greater Frequency Ice Jam Flooding

•Greater Severity Ice Jam Flooding

CONCLUSIONSGLACIERS MELTING

•Peak Flows

not Consistant

•Peak Flows

Increasing /

Decreasing

CONCLUSIONS GLACIERS MELTING

Glacierized Regions –

Little Permafrost•Peak Flows Increasing Due to

Glacier Melt

Glacierized Regions –

Greater Permafrost•Peak Flows Decreasing Due to

Longer Pathways to Stream

Channel

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• Robert Stillwell, Jessica Boucher, Colin

Abbot Carried out Hydrometeorological

Data Analyses

• Holly Goulding - Teleconnections

• IP3 – CFCAS (Canadian Foundation

Climate and Atmospheric Sciences)

Provided Travel / Field Work Funding

THANK YOU!

northern mountain hydrology and climate change · 2011. 9. 11. · yukon river upscaling yukon...

Documents