background and motivation. enso (el niño southern oscillation) the water year for which the...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
224 views
TRANSCRIPT
Background and Motivation
ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation)ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation)
the water year for which the December to February Sea Surface Temperature in the NINO 3.4 region exceeds 0.5 standard deviations above its long-term (1900-1996) mean value.
ENSO is classified in
three states:
Warm (El Niño)
Neutral
Cool (La Niña)
A Warm ENSO year:
The effects of ENSO on PNW winter climate
Warm ENSO (El Niño) : winters tend to be warmer and drier than average. Cool ENSO (La Niña) : winters tend to be cooler and wetter than average.
Source: Climate Impacts Group website
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs) Bonners Ferry
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t Flo
w (
kcfs
)
Columbia Falls
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
The Dalles
The effects of ENSO on flood risk for Columbia River Basin
- Warm ENSO
- Neutral ENSO
X - Cool ENSO
The effects of ENSO on storage deficits
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mic
a
Arr
ow
Hun
gry
Hor
se
Libb
y
Gra
ndC
oule
e
Dw
orsh
ak
Bro
wnl
ee
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F)
Warm ENSONeutral ENSOCool ENSO
Objective:
Develop ENSO conditioned Flood
Control Curves by Rebalancing Flood
Control and Reservoir Refill
Flood Control Refill
Test Case: The Columbia River Basin
Multi-objective
Reservoir System
Flood Control Hydropower Instream Flow Water Supply Recreation Navigation
The Dalles
Columbia Falls
Bonners Ferry
Method : Optimization – Simulation Method
Optimization Model Develop Optimized Flood
Control Curves
Simulation Model Test and Refine
Proposed Rule Curves
Hydrologic Model Generate Streamflow
for 20th Century
VIC Hydrologic Model
Macroscale Hydrologic Model developed by University of Washington which simulates energy and water balance at large scale at 1/8 degree (Approximately 50 mi2/ Cell)
(Variable Infiltration Capacity Hydrologic Model)
Optimization model developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers
Penalty functions are used to constrain the Columbia River basin system operation
Flood control penalties Flood control penalties Storage penaltiesStorage penalties
HEC-PRM(Hydrologic Engineering Center’s Prescriptive Model)
ColSim
Flood control Hydropower Irrigation Instream flow Navigation Recreation
(Columbia Simulation Model)
Optimization Strategy
Adjust Penalty functions
Classify
Water Years
into Each ENSO
State
Select
Penalty Functions
for Each ENSO State
Generate
Optimized
Flood Rule Curves
for Each ENSO State
Evaluate Flood and
Refill Statistics using
Simulation for Each
ENSO state
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mic
a
Arr
ow
Hun
gry
Hor
se
Libb
y
Gra
ndC
oule
e
Dw
orsh
ak
Bro
wnl
ee
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F)
Warm ENSONeutral ENSOCool ENSO
- Warm ENSO
- Neutral ENSO
X - Cool ENSO
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs) Bonners Ferry
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t Flo
w (
kcfs
)
Columbia Falls
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
The Dalles
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs) Bonners Ferry
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t Flo
w (
kcfs
)
Columbia Falls
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mic
a
Arr
ow
Hun
gry
Hor
se
Libb
y
Gra
ndC
oule
e
Dw
orsh
ak
Bro
wnl
ee
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F)
- Warm ENSO
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
The Dalles
Results
Flood Frequency Analysis at Bonners Ferry
- Current Flood Control Curves
- HEC Flood Control Curves
X - ENSO Flood Control Curves
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Warm ENSO
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Neutral ENSO
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e B
on
ne
rs F
err
y F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Cool ENSO
Flood Frequency Analysis at Columbia Falls
- Current Flood Control Curves
- HEC Flood Control Curves
X - ENSO Flood Control Curves
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Warm ENSO
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Neutral ENSO
10
20
30
40
50
60
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0Th
e C
olu
mb
ia F
alls
Ou
t F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Cool ENSO
Flood Frequency Analysis at The Dalles
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Warm ENSO
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Neutral ENSO
100
200
300
400
500
600
-2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Th
e D
alle
s F
low
(kc
fs)
Extreme Value Type I Distribution Reduced Variate, Y
CurFC HECFC ENSOFC
Cool ENSO
- Current Flood Control Curves
- HEC Flood Control Curves
X - ENSO Flood Control Curves
Storage Deficits
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mica Arrow Grand Coulee Hungry Horse Libby
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F) Cur FC
Hec FC
ENSO FC
Warm ENSO
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mica Arrow Grand Coulee Hungry Horse Libby
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F) Cur FC
Hec FC
ENSO FC
Neutral ENSO
0
500
1,000
1,500
Mica Arrow Grand Coulee Hungry Horse Libby
July
31
Ave
rage
Sto
rage
Def
icit
(KA
F) Cur FC
Hec FC
ENSO FC
Cool ENSO
Flood Control Curves vs. Simulated Storage (a low flow year)
Flood Control Curves vs. Simulated Storage (a high flow year)
Conclusions ENSO conditioned FC rule curves yield lower storage
deficits than Current FC without significantly increasing flood risks
ENSO FC is successfully calibrated using ENSO conditioned flood frequency curves and storage deficit statistics even though each ENSO category has relatively small sample size.
Conclusions ENSO conditioned FC rule curves yield reduced
storage deficits relative to HEC FC
There is no effect of reduced flood space on storage deficits for low flow years because flood control is not the main driver in low flow years.
Conclusions ENSO conditioned FC rule curves yield reduced
storage deficits relative to HEC FC
There is no effect of reduced flood space on storage deficits for low flow years because flood control is not the main driver in low flow years.