ta-8267 tha: strengthening integrated water ......the objective of the ta 8267 tha: strengthening...

TA-8267 THA: STRENGTHENING INTEGRATED WATER AND FLOOD MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION

Mae Ta Sub-basin IWRM Modelling Results Report

March 2015 Prepared for ADB

Prepared by ICEM

Prepared for ADB

Copyright © YEAR ICEM

Suggested citation

More information www.icem.com.au | [email protected] ICEM International Centre for Environmental Management 6A Lane 49, Tô Ngoc Vân Tay Ho, HA NOI, Socialist Republic of Viet Nam

Project Team Meelit Shah, Andrew Mittleman, Jeremy Carew-Reid, Jorma Koponen, Keith Avery Ward, Lindsay Furness, Mai Vinh, Simon Tilleard, Charit Tingsabadh, Chanokporn Prompinchompoo, Sinee Chaungcham, Tawatchai Rattanasorn, Vajirasak Vanijja, Vilas Nitivattananon, Beau Damen

http://www.icem.com.au/

mailto:[email protected]

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................. 1

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 3

TA 8267 THA: Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management Integration ....................... 3

Mae Ta sub-basin modelling ............................................................................................................... 3

MODEL SETUP .............................................................................................................................. 3

IWRM modelling tool description ....................................................................................................... 3

Mae Tae baseline IWRM model setup ................................................................................................ 4

Spatial input data ........................................................................................................................ 4

Hydro-meteorological and flooding input data .......................................................................... 6

Baseline cropping information .................................................................................................... 7

Mae-Ta baseline model results ........................................................................................................... 7

Baseline hydrology ...................................................................................................................... 7

Baseline crop yields ..................................................................................................................... 8

MODEL SCENARIOS ...................................................................................................................... 9

Water management scenarios ............................................................................................................ 9

List of scenarios ........................................................................................................................... 9

Scenario detail: Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year ... 10

Scenario detail: Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for double or triple cropping .................................................................................................................................... 10

Scenario detail: Climate change scenario ................................................................................. 11

Water management scenario results ................................................................................................ 12

Reservoir development with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year ............................ 12

Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for double or triple cropping .............. 13

Irrigation efficiency improvement ............................................................................................ 19

Land use change scenario ......................................................................................................... 22

Climate change scenario ........................................................................................................... 25

ANNEX A: Rice production for baseline compared to single crop supplmentary irrigaton scenario 29

ANNEX B: Crop production for double/triple cropping supplmentary irrigation scenario compared to baseline ................................................................................................................................. 30

AD B | TA-8267 THA Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management Implementation | I C EM Mae Ta Sub -ba s in IWRM Mode l l ing Re su l ts Report

1

KEY FINDINGS Key findings from water management scenario modelling for the Mae Ta basin are outlined below.

Baseline

The baseline simulated basin outflow ranges from 150 ML to 300 ML depending on the hydrological year. For historical conditions (1994-2005) the optimal planting date for rainfed rice is mid-July. The baseline rainfed rice average yield for a planting date of mid-July is between 2 – 3.6 tonnes per ha.

Scenario 1: Three medium scale reservoirs are constructed to provide supplementary irrigation for rice single-cropping

In this scenario, apart from the additional water provided by supplementary irrigation, all other cropping details are kept the same as the baseline. Irrigated areas would only be on existing cropped areas and there would be no expansion of current cropped area.

The construction of three medium scale reservoirs operated for supplementary irrigation of single-cropping rice would increase the annual total rice production in the zones covered by the command areas by an average 2,000 tonnes, a 30% increase in production compared to the rainfed rice baseline.

Analysis of the water volume of Mae Laeng reservoir under this scenario shows that the reservoir is empty or close to empty every dry season. This indicates that the reservoir and command area are well sized for single-cropping but would not be able to support double-cropping.

Scenario 2: Three medium scale reservoirs are constructed to provide supplementary irrigation for rice and maize double or triple-cropping

For this scenario, planting calendars were adjusted to take advantage of the available reservoir water volumes and allow for second or triple cropping. In addition, the planned irrigation command area for Mae Laeng was found to be too large for the planned reservoir volume. Therefore the command area for Mae Laeng was reduced by approximately half compared to the planned area. Irrigated areas would only be on existing cropped areas and there would not be any expansion of current cropped area.

The construction of three medium scale reservoirs in the basin operated for rice/maize double and triple-cropping would reduce flood peaks by up to 10m3/s and reduce the annual outflow of the basin by 50 Mm3/year. The reservoirs, especially Mae Tae, would dramatically reduce sediment outflow from the basin by up to 55,000 tonnes a year. This may causing starving of sediment in the river channel downstream which could lead to increased channel erosion.

The Mae Laeng reservoir has the largest crop command area and is located upstream with a relatively small inflow. Crop yields for the reservoir could reach up to 6 tonnes per ha of maize in the dry season and 3 tonnes per hectare of rice in the wet season. On average the annual production of rice in the command area (including irrigation and rainfed rice) would not change, with some years showing minor increases in production and some years showing minor decreases. This is because the rice crop is planted earlier than optimal, to allow time for additional crops. The reservoir would allow for an average 2,290 tonnes per year production of maize. Despite the significant reduction in command area compared to that planned, the reservoir is still not well sized for the command area, on average it would empty at least once every two years. The sedimentation rate of the Mae Laeng reservoir is low, totaling less than 1% of the reservoir volume over 10 years.

The Mae Tae reservoir is located on a large tributary and has a relatively small command area. It therefore has an abundance of water compared to the irrigation demand and could support rice triple-cropping. Crop yields for this reservoir could reach up to 3.5 tonnes per ha of rice in the early dry season, almost 4 tonnes per hectare of rice during the late dry season and more than 4 tonnes


2

per hectare of rice in the wet season. Rice production in the command area would increase by an average 3,500 tonnes per year compared to the baseline. The Mae Ta reservoir has a high sedimentation rate, culminating to over 300ML during the 10 years of the simulation. This is equal to 4% of the total reservoir capacity.

The Huay Mae Suag reservoir has a small inflow compared to the design volume and command area. Despite the reduction in command area compared to that planned, the reservoir is not well sized for the command area and on average would empty once every 1.5 years. Despite the insufficient reservoir volume, crop yields for the reservoir could reach up to 7 tonnes per ha of maize in the dry season and 4 tonnes per hectare of rice in the wet season. On average the annual production of rice in the command area would increase by 500 tonnes but may also decrease in some years. Maize production would average 1,130 tonnes per year. The sedimentation rate of the Huay Mae Suag is low, totaling less than 1% of the reservoir volume over 10 years.

Scenario 3: Irrigation losses are eliminated by improving irrigation efficiency

With major improvements in irrigation efficiency, significantly more water would be stored in Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag reservoirs. This would lead to crop yield improvements of 0.2 to 2 tonnes per ha for the Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag command areas compared to Scenario 2.

Scenario 4: 16,460 ha of the upper Mae Tae basin forest area is degraded

Degradation of the upper Mae-Ta watershed would lead to an increase in the basin outflow

throughout the year including up to a 5 m3/s increase during flood peaks. Sediment outflow from

the basin would substantially increase by up to two times in the wet season. This may cause

sediment aggradation downstream which can smother fish habitat and cause increased flooding.

Sedimentation of the Mae Tae reservoir over the 10 year simulation period would double to over

700ML (or 8% of the total reservoir capacity).

Scenario 5: Climate change increases rainfall during the wet season, decreases rainfall during the dry season and increases temperatures

Under the climate change scenario there will be a slight decrease in flows throughout the year. This

is due to increased evapotranspiration because of higher temperatures. There will be only a minor

impact on erosion and sediment outflow from the basin.

Earlier maturation of crops will lead to decreased yields of up to 1 tonne per ha during the wet

(rice) and dry (maize) seasons compared to Scenario 2. The increased evaporation and

transpiration, decreased maturing time and increased (wet season) and decreased (dry season)

rainfall will slightly decrease irrigation use in the basin. There will be only minor changes in the

volume of water stored in the reservoirs.

Flooding

Flooding maps available from GISTDA were checked to assess flood levels in Mae-Ta basin. It was

found that significant flooding does not occur in the basin. According to GISTDA flood maps,

between 2005 to 2012 the only year that flooding occurred was in 2005, and this was only very

limited flooding. Consequently no flood simulation has been conducted for the basin.


3

INTRODUCTION

TA 8267 THA: Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management Integration The objective of the TA 8267 THA: Strengthening Integrated Water and Flood Management

Integration project is to reduce loss and damage from flood in Thailand through improved decision-

making processes for integrated water resources, flood and drought management. The TA is using

the Yom River basin and Mae Ta sub-basin as case studies for improved participation processes and

education on integrated water resource management (IWRM) principles.

The objective of the modelling component of the project is to support water management planning

in the Yom River Basin and Mae Ta sub-basin. This is achieved by demonstrating and building

capacity in the use of integrated watershed modelling to assess the hydrological impacts of water

resource management options.

Mae Ta sub-basin modell ing The objective of the Mae Ta sub-basin modelling, and this report, is to provide a basis for sector

analysis of water resources management scenarios. The modelling is designed to demonstrate how

climate change and hydrological modelling can provide information on water management scenarios

and inform water management planning. The results described in this report will be used by the

sector teams to analyse impacts on their sector under each water management scenario.

This modelling report describes the setup of the Mae Ta sub-basin model, outlines the set of water

management scenarios identified by the TA team in consultation with government agencies and

provides a summary of the key modelling results for the Mae Ta sub-basin.

MODEL SETUP

IWRM modell ing tool description The IWRM model is a physically based hydrological model that enables users to test the hydrological

impact of different water resource management development in the context of a whole basin. The

IWRM model consists of four main components including i) rainfall runoff; ii) river hydrology and

hydraulics; iii) reservoir operations; and iv) agro-economic parameters. Each component is flexible

so that management scenarios can be incorporated into the model and assessed. A detailed

description of the selection of the IWRM model for use in the TA is provided in the TA Inception

Report. A detailed description of the model computation methods and model equations can be

found in the IWRM model manual1.

1 Koponen, J., Lauri, H., Veijalainen, N., and Sarkkula, J. (2010) HBV and IWRM Watershed Modelling User Guide, MRC Information and Knowledge management Programme, DMS – Detailed Modelling Support for the MRC Project, Available at: http://www.eia.fi/index.php/support/download.


4

Mae Tae baseline IWRM model setup

Spatial input data

The Mae Tae model has been extracted from the broader Yom Basin model developed as part of TA

8267. Model resolution is 400 m which results in 3360 active grid cells. This is a very modest grid cell

count. However, as the modelling study is for basin level planning the 400 m resolution has been

deemed sufficient.

The model grid consists of topographic (DEM), land use, soil class and soil depth layers. River data

layers are generated based on the DEM. The model layers are presented in Figure 1 - Figure 3.

Figure 1. Mae Tae model topographic grid and comparison of model river channels (blue lines) with mapped channels (red lines). For clarity not all model river channels are shown.


5

Figure 2. Mae Tae baseline land use (left) and planned reservoirs and irrigation areas (right figure).

Figure 3. Mae Tae baseline soil classes (left) and test soil depths (right figure). In the final simulations effective soil depths are calibrated and the soil depth layer is not utilised.


6

Hydro-meteorological and flooding input data

There are no temperature or precipitation stations located in the Mae-Ta sub-basin. Therefore

temperature and precipitation were interpolated from nearby stations. Analysis of the precipitation

data shows that the quality of the rainfall data deteriorates in later years (Figure 4). Average wet

season rainfall is 5.7 mm/d and dry season is 1.2 – 1.3 mm/d depending on the location.

Interpolated average wet season daily maximum temperature is presented in Figure 5.

No hydrological measurements were available for the Mae Ta sub-basin, therefore the calibrated

parameter values for the broader Yom Basin model were used.

Figure 4. Cumulative rainfall for the Mae Tae stations.

Figure 5. Average wet season daily maximum temperatures.

Flooding maps available from GISTDA were checked to assess flood levels in Mae-Ta basin. It was

found that significant flooding does not occur in the basin. According to GISTDA flood maps,

between 2005 to 2012 the only year that flooding occurred was in 2005, and this was only very

limited flooding. Consequently no flood simulation has been conducted for the basin.


7

Baseline cropping information The baseline setup for single-crop rainfed rice paddy is as follows:

Planted area of 10,170 ha

Wet season planting day in mid-June (optimized to utilize rainfall)

No losses other than seepage and evaporation

Soil fertility stress 30 %.

The rainfed rice planting day was optimized in respect to average yield. The optimal date was found to be 195, which equates to mid-July.

Mae-Ta baseline model results

Baseline hydrology

The Mae Ta Basin simulated outflow is presented in Figure 6. Anecdotal estimates for annual flow

are around 129 ML but no recorded estimates could be found. Model simulations give larger values

between 150 ML and 300 ML depending on the hydrological year (see Figure 13). This discrepancy

can be further investigated if reliable estimates of the basin outflow can be found.

Figure 6. Mae Tae Basin simulated daily discharge.


8

Baseline crop yields

The average rainfed rice yield for a planting date of mid-July is between 2 – 3.6 tonnes per ha, with a

basin average of 2.55 tonnes per ha (Figure 7). The largest yields are close to the main rivers.

Figure 7. Average rainfed rice yield (left) for planting day 195 (mid-July)


9

MODEL SCENARIOS

Water management scenarios

List of scenarios Four management scenarios have tested as outlined below:

1. Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year: In this scenario three reservoirs are constructed for irrigation water supply. Supplementary irrigation is provided for only one crop a year (i.e. supports single-cropping only). Further details for this scenario are provided below.

2. Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for double or triple cropping: In this scenario three reservoirs are constructed for irrigation water supply. Supplementary irrigation is provided for two or three crops a year (i.e. supports double or triple-cropping). Further details for this scenario are provided below.

3. Irrigation water saving: In this scenario the three reservoirs are constructed for double or triple-cropping and 30% irrigation losses are eliminated. Seepage and evaporation from the irrigated paddies is still included in the scenario.

4. Land degradation: In this scenario 16,460 ha of the upper Mae Tae basin forest area is degraded to shrub and grassland (Figure 8).

5. Climate change: Climate change increases rainfall during the wet season, decreases rainfall during the dry season and increases temperatures. More details for the climate change scenario are provided below.

Figure 8. Degraded area (grey) in the land use scenario.


10

Scenario detail: Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year

In this scenario three reservoirs are constructed and supplementary irrigation provided for single-

cropping. The three reservoirs include: i) Mae Laeng with 11.5 million m3 volume and 1,250 ha

effective command area; ii) Mae Tae with 7.36 million m3 volume and 400 ha effective command

area; and Huay Mae Suag with 6.16 million m3 volume and 605 ha effective command area. An 18%

environmental flow has been forced for each reservoir. The environmental flow is defined as the

forced release of a minimum percentage of incoming flow to ensure that river flows are maintained.

Rainfed rice crop was included on 7,900 ha outside of the irrigation command areas.

Apart from the additional water provided by supplementary irrigation, all other cropping details are kept the same as the baseline including:

Single-cropping;

Wet season planting day in mid-June;

No losses other than seepage and evaporation; and

Soil fertility stress of 30 %.

Scenario detail: Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for double or triple cropping

In this scenario the three reservoirs are constructed and supplementary irrigation provided for

double or triple-cropping. The same three reservoirs are used as described in the section above. An

18% environmental flow has been forced for each reservoir. It has been assumed that 30% of the

irrigation water is lost (i.e. 30% of the water is not returned to the river). It has been assumed that

Mae Laeng soil is less fertile so 40% soil stress is applied to the Mae Laeng command area, and 30%

soil stress applied in the other areas. The reservoirs are operated based on crop irrigation demand

and providing all irrigation water required if available (excluding the environmental flow allowance).

For this scenario planting calendars were adjusted to take advantage of the available reservoir water

volumes but not fully optimized in terms of water utilization, costs or benefits. Two crops were used

for Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag:

1. Wet season rice, planting date May 30th

2. Early dry season maize, planting date September 27th.

Mae Tae has more water available and therefore triple rice cropping were used:

1. Wet season rice, planting date May 30th

2. Early dry season rice, planting date September 27th

3. Late dry season rice, planting date February 4th

Note that changing the wet season planting date (i.e. not mid-June as used in the baseline) means

that the planting is not undertaken at the optimal time for wet season rainfall. Therefore the wet

season rice yields for this scenario may decrease compared to the wet season rice yields of the

baseline. Although the wet season yields may decrease compared to the baseline, the total annual

yields will be greater due to the introduction of a second and third crop.

The planned irrigation command areas were found to be too large for the volume of water captured

in the reservoirs, particularly the Mae Laeng. Therefore the command areas were modified based on


11

modelled water availability. The planned and modified irrigation command areas are provided in

Table 1. Rainfed rice crop was included on 7,900 ha outside of the irrigation command areas. In

addition 752 ha of rainfed rice was included within the planned Mae Laeng irrigation area, to make

up for the reduction in command area size.

Table 1. Planned versus modified irrigation command areas

Reservoir Planned irrigation command area (rai) Modified command area (rai)

Mae Laeng 1,360 wet season, 320 ha dry season 544 ha wet season, 408 ha dry

season

Mae Tae 400 ha both wet and dry seasons 400 ha both wet and dry seasons

Huay Mae Suag 608 ha for both wet and dry seasons 608 ha for wet season, 182 ha dry

season

Scenario detail: Climate change scenario

Climate change impacts have been assessed by incorporating projected changes in precipitation and

temperature for 2050. The projected changes for 2050 assume the worst case scenario outlined by

IPCC regional scatter diagrams for South-East Asia2. The regional scatter diagrams are based on four

emissions scenarios (A1FI, A2, B1 and B2) and seven GCMs (CCSRNIES, CSIRO, Mk2, CGCM2,

ECHAM4/OPYC3, HadCM3 and NCAR DOE PCM). The worst case scenario has been taken as the

largest projected increase in rainfall during the wet season, largest projected decrease in rainfall

during the dry season and the year-round largest projected increase in temperature. The details of

the climate change scenario are outlined in Table 2.

Table 2. Climate change scenario

Parameter IPCC range in projected changes2 Change to be incorporated into climate change scenario

Precipitation March to May change of -10% to +10%

June to August change of -10% to +5%

September to November change of -10% to +4%

December to February change of -10% to +13%

March to May decrease of 10%

June to August increase of 5%

September to November increase of 5%

December to February decrease of 10%

Temperature Year round increase of 1 to 3 ⁰C Year round increase of 3 ⁰C

2 Available at http://www.ipcc-data.org/syn/tar_scatter/regional_galleries/region_plots24/index.html


12

Water management scenario r esults

Reservoir development with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year Comparison of Figure 9 (baseline) and Figure 10 (single crop supplementary irrigation) shows that providing supplementary irrigation to rice single-cropping of the three command areas would increase the annual total rice production in these areas by an average 2,000 tonnes per year, a 30% increase in production for the command areas. Tabulation of the results, showing the change in crop production by command area, is provided in Annex A.

Figure 9. Annual total rice production for baseline scenario (rainfed only) in Mae Laeng, Mae Tae and Huay Mae Suag planned command areas (cumulative). Note that the results are cumulative. Thus Mae Laeng line is sum of outside areas and Mae Laeng command area; Mae Tae is the sum of Mae Ta command area, Mae Laeng command area and outside areas.

Figure 10. Annual total rice production for single-cropping supplementary irrigation scenario. Note that the results are cumulative. Thus Mae Laeng line is sum of outside areas and Mae Laeng command area; Mae Tae is the sum of Mae Ta command area, Mae Laeng command area and outside areas. Outside planned command areas is rainfed rice, the remainder is irrigated rice.

Analysis of the water volume of Mae Laeng reservoir shows that the reservoir is empty or close to

empty every dry season (Figure 11). This indicates that the reservoir and command area are well

sized for single-cropping but would not be able to support double-cropping within the command


13

area. If double cropping is to be implemented the command area size would need to be reduced to

ensure there is sufficient water for multiple crops each year.

Figure 11. Mae Laeng reservoir water volume for the reservoir development with supplementary irrigation for one crop a year scenario

Reservoir construction with supplementary irrigation for double or triple cropping

The construction of three medium scale irrigation reservoirs reduces basin outflow throughout the

year. The reduction is more pronounced during the wet season and flood peaks (Figure 12). The

reduction in flood peaks can reach up to 10 m3/s, as illustrated for 1994 in Figure 12. The reservoirs

also reduce the total annual outflow of the basin by around 50Mm3 (Figure 13)

Figure 12. Basin outflow with and without irrigation for baseline compared to Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping


14

Figure 13. Mae Tae Basin simulated annual outflow volume for baseline compared to Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping

Reservoir water volumes reflect water availability from inflows and water outflow to meet irrigation

demand and environmental flows. The reservoir volumes for the three reservoirs are provided in

Figure 14 - Figure 16. Mae Laeng has the largest crop command area and is located upstream. It

therefore has the least available water and longest dry-out periods (six times in the 10 year

simulation period). The Mae Tae reservoir is located on the Nam Mae Tae main tributary and has a

relatively small command area. It therefore has an abundance of water compared to the irrigation

demand. Huay Mae Suag also often dries out, including 15 times in the 10 year simulation period.

Figure 14. Mae Laeng reservoir water volumes for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping


15

Figure 15. Mae Tae reservoir water volumes for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping

Figure 16. Huay Mae Suag reservoir water volumes for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping


16

The spatially averaged crop yields for the command area of each reservoir are presented in Figure 17

- Figure 19 . Due to the supplementary irrigation provided by the reservoirs, the yields are consistent

between years except for the very dry years. Figure 20 shows the average rice yield for agricultural

areas outside of the reservoir command areas. These areas do not receive the supplementary

irrigation, therefore only have one crop per year, and therefore have much lower and inconsistent

yields.

Figure 17. Mae Laeng average crop yield per hectare for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping. Lower (in general) wet season yields are rice and early dry season yields are maize.

Figure 18. Mae Tae triple rice crop yields per hectare for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping


17

Figure 19. Huay Mae Suag average crop yield per hectare for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping. Lower (in general) wet season yields are rice and early dry season yields are maize.

Figure 20. Rainfed rice crop yields per hectare (average over the cropping area) for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping

Use of the three reservoirs to provide supplementary irrigation for double and triple-cropping would

increase total rice production for the basin and also allow a crop of maize every year. Total annual

production of rice for the basin could reach up to 40,000 tonnes (

Figure 21), including a 4,000 tonnes increase in annual rice production in the three command areas.

Most of this increased rice production would come from the Mae Ta command area which would

see an increase of 3,500 tonnes of rice per year. The results for Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag are

mixed, some years will see minor increases in rice production whilst some will see minor decreases

in rice production. The mixed results for the Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag reservoirs is because

the rice crop is planted earlier than optimal, to allow time for a second crop. The reservoirs would

also enable supplementary irrigation for dry season maize production of up to 3,500 tonnes a year

(Figure 22) and averaging 3,425 tonnes per year. A tabulation of the results by command area is

provided in Annex B.


18

Figure 21. Paddy rice production for Scenario 2, three reservoir construction and operation for double and triple cropping. Note that the results are cumulative. Thus Mae Laeng line is sum of otuside areas and Mae Laeng command area; Mae Tae is the sum of Mae Ta command area, Mae Laeng command area and outside areas. Mae Laeng command area production includes irrigated and rainfed rice production within the command area.

Figure 22. Maize annual production

Reservoir sedimentation is presented in

Figure 23. The Mae Ta reservoir shows a significantly faster rate of sedimentation. Over the 10 years

of simulation the reservoir will receive 300 ML of sedimentation, or 4% of total reservoir volume.

Basin annual sediment outflow with and without the reservoirs is provided in Figure 24. The

reservoirs, especially Mae Tae, reduce sediment outflow by up to 55,000 tonnes a year.


19

Figure 23. Reservoir sedimentation volumes for Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping

Figure 24. Basin sediment annual outflow for baseline versus Scenario 2, three reservoirs operated for double or triple cropping

Irrigation efficiency improvement

Irrigation efficiency improvements of 30% would have limited impact on the basin outflow (as shown in in


20

Figure 25). The efficiency improvements would lead to significantly more water being stored in Mae

Laeng and Huay Mae Suag reservoirs compared to Scenario 2 (Figure 26 and Figure 27). This

additional water would lead to crop yield improvements of up to 1 tonnes per ha in the dry season

for the Mae Laeng and Huay Mae Suag command areas compared to Scenario 2 (Figure 29 and

Figure 30).

Figure 25. Basin outflow compared in the lossless and 30% loss scenarios.

Figure 26. Mae Laeng reservoir volume for no loss and 30% loss scenarios.


21

Figure 27. Mae Tae reservoir volume for no loss and 30% loss scenarios

Figure 28. Huay Mae Suag reservoir volume for no loss and 30% loss scenarios


22

Figure 29. Mae Laeng crop yields for no loss and 30% loss scenarios

Figure 30. Huay Mae Suag average crop yields for no loss and 30% loss scenarios.

Land use change scenario

Degradation of the upper Mae-Ta watershed would lead to an increase in the basin outflow

throughout the year and particularly during flood peaks (Figure 31). Sediment outflow from the

basin would also substantially increase by up to two times in the wet season (Figure 32). Compared

to Scenario 2, sedimentation of the planned reservoirs would occur at a much faster rate (Figure 33

and Figure 34). For example the sedimentation of the Mae Tae reservoir over the 10 year simulation

period would double to over 700ML (or 8% of the total reservoir capacity). In reality the degradation

of 16,460 ha of the upper Mae Tae basin forest area is an extreme case. The scenario is unlikely to


23

occur but is useful to illustrate the potential major impacts of land degradation on sediment loads in

the river and sedimentation of reservoirs.

Figure 31. Basin outflow for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the land use change scenario

Figure 32. Basin sediment outflow for baseline versus the land use change scenario


24

Figure 33. Mae Laeng reservoir sedimentation for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the land use change scenario

Figure 34. Mae Tae reservoir sedimentation for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the land use change scenario


25

Climate change scenario The following results can be interpreted from the climate change scenario:

There will be a slight decrease in flows throughout the year (Figure 35). This is due to increased evapotranspiration because of higher temperatures;

There will be only a minor impact on erosion and sediment outflow from the basin (Figure 36);

Maize transpiration increases more clearly than rice (Figure 37). The plants mature earlier which leads to decreased yields of up to 1 tonne per ha during the wet (rice) and dry (maize) seasons compared to Scenario 2 (Figure 38);

The increased evaporation and transpiration, decreased maturing time and increased (wet season) and decreased (dry season) rainfall will slightly decrease irrigation use compared to Scenario 2 (Figure 39); and

There will be only minor changes in the volume of water stored in the reservoirs compared to Scenario 2 (Figure 40).

The chosen climate change scenario is too simplistic. It does not reflect increases in climate extremes such as floods and droughts which are expected to increase. Increasing climate extremes would cause major hydrological changes, increase occurrence of flood and drought, increase erosion in the watershed and stress crops leading to lower yields. It is recommended that a more detailed climate change analysis is conducted to understand in more detail the potential effects of climate change in the basin.

Figure 35. Climate change impact on basin outflow for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario


26

Figure 36. Climate change impact on the basin sediment outflow for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario

Figure 37. Mae Laeng rice (in wet season, shown on the left of the graph) and maize (in dry season, shown on the right of the graph) water use for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario. Water use represents evapotranspiration.


27

Figure 38. Mae Laeng rice (lower values) and maize (higher values) yields for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario

Figure 39. Mae Laeng cumulative irrigation use for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario


28

Figure 40. Mae Laeng irrigation reservoir water volume for Scenario 2 (labelled baseline) versus the climate change scenario


29

ANNEX A: RICE PRODUCTION FOR BASELINE COMPARED TO SINGLE CROP SUPPLMENTARY IRRIGATON SCENARIO

Parameter Rice Production (tonnes/year)

Scenario Baseline (no supplementary irrigation – i.e.

all rice is rainfed) Single-cropping supplementary irrigation (i.e.

mix of irrigated and rainfed rice) Increase

Command Area

Outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng

Mae Ta Huay Mae Suag

Rainfed rice outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng


Outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng

Mae Ta

Huay Mae Suag

1994 22,001 3,487 882 1,171 22,001 4,774 1,514 2,283 - 1,288 632 1,112

1995 24,318 3,854 961 1,349 24,318 4,779 1,519 2,310 - 926 558 961

1996 21,883 3,468 987 1,397 21,883 4,803 1,528 2,330 - 1,335 541 933

1997 27,092 4,293 1,268 1,822 27,092 4,732 1,495 2,293 - 438 226 471

1998 24,009 3,805 1,290 2,221 24,009 4,396 1,508 2,267 - 591 218 45

1999 17,511 2,775 404 585 17,511 4,377 1,505 2,272 - 1,602 1,100 1,687

2000 26,191 4,151 1,374 1,929 26,191 4,762 1,526 2,294 - 611 152 365

2001 26,389 4,182 1,314 1,860 26,389 4,690 1,500 2,269 - 509 186 409

2002 25,843 4,095 1,112 1,536 25,843 4,764 1,523 2,322 - 669 410 786

2003 23,219 3,679 952 1,413 23,219 4,685 1,483 2,264 - 1,006 530 851

2004 28,563 4,526 1,364 2,110 28,563 4,781 1,519 2,336 - 254 156 226

2005 26,104 4,137 1,272 1,806 26,104 4,704 1,493 2,284 - 568 221 478

Average 24,427 3,871 1,099 1,600 24,427 4,687 1,509 2,294 - 817 411 694


30

ANNEX B: CROP PRODUCTION FOR DOUBLE/TRIPLE CROPPING SUPPLMENTARY IRRIGATION SCENARIO COMPARED TO BASELINE

Parameter Rice Production (tonnes/year)

Scenario Baseline (no supplementary irrigation –

i.e. all rainfed rice)

Double/triple-cropping supplementary irrigation (i.e. mix of rainfed and irrigated)

Increase

Command Area

Outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng


Outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng


Outside planned

command areas

Mae Laeng

Mae Ta

Huay Mae Suag Rainfed Irrigated

1994 22,001 3,487 882 1,171 22,001 2,092 1,689 4,680 2,296 - 294 3798 1126

1995 24,318 3,854 961 1,349 24,318 2,312 1,579 4,629 1,861 - 37 3668 512

1996 21,883 3,468 987 1,397 21,883 2,081 1,644 4,748 2,079 - 257 3761 682

1997 27,092 4,293 1,268 1,822 27,092 2,576 737 4,624 1,427 - -980 3356 -395

1998 24,009 3,805 1,290 2,221 24,009 2,283 1,586 4,518 2,189 - 64 3228 -33

1999 17,511 2,775 404 585 17,511 1,665 1,495 4,610 1,243 - 385 4205 659

2000 26,191 4,151 1,374 1,929 26,191 2,490 1,639 4,724 2,256 - -21 3350 327

2001 26,389 4,182 1,314 1,860 26,389 2,509 1,686 4,592 2,313 - 14 3278 453

2002 25,843 4,095 1,112 1,536 25,843 2,457 1,681 4,688 2,246 - 43 3575 709

2003 23,219 3,679 952 1,413 23,219 2,208 1,667 4,567 2,292 - 195 3614 878

2004 28,563 4,526 1,364 2,110 28,563 2,716 1,692 4,623 2,321 - -118 3259 211

2005 26,104 4,137 1,272 1,806 26,104 2,482 1,582 4,687 2,330 - -73 3415 524

Average 24,427 3,871 1,099 1,600 24,427 2,323 1556 4,641 2,071 8 3,542 471


31

Parameter Maize Production (tonnes/year)

Scenario Baseline (no supplementary irrigation)

Double/triple-cropping supplementary irrigation

Command Area Mae Laeng Huay Mae Suag Mae Laeng Huay Mae Suag

1994 NA NA 2,480 1,170

1995 NA NA 2,420 1,130

1996 NA NA 2,480 1,120

1997 NA NA 1,850 1,100

1998 NA NA 2,250 1,050

1999 NA NA 1,850 1,100

2000 NA NA 2,480 1,170

2001 NA NA 2,300 1,100

2002 NA NA 2,420 1,180

2003 NA NA 2,250 1,050

2004 NA NA 2,300 1,200

2005 NA NA 2,420 1,230

Annual average NA NA 2,292 1,133

ta-8267 tha: strengthening integrated water ......the objective of the ta 8267 tha: strengthening...

Documents