moscow state university hydrogeology division the impact

THE IMPACT OF MODERN CLIMATE CHANGES ON THE GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IN THE EUROPEAN PART

OF RUSSIA

Prof. S. Grinevskiy, Prof. S. Pozdniakov, Ass. E. Dedulina

Moscow State University

Hydrogeology division

IWRA Online conference-2020

Project supported by Russian Science Foundation No. 16-17-10187

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015

Air

hu

mid

ity,

%

Pre

cip

ita

tio

n, m

m/y

ea

r

Air humidity

Precipitation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015

Air

hu

mid

ity,

%

Pre

cip

ita

tio

n, m

m/y

ea

r

Air humidity

Precipitation

2

4

6

8

10

12

0

1

2

3

4

5

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Tem

pe

ratu

re, o

C

Win

d s

pe

ed

, m/s

Wind speed

Air temperature

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Tem

pe

ratu

re, o

C

Win

d s

pe

ed

, m/s

Wind speed

Air temperature

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015

Air

hu

mid

ity,

%

Pre

cip

ita

tio

n, m

m/y

ea

r

Air humidity

Precipitation

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

0

1

2

3

4

5

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Tem

pe

ratu

re, o

C

Win

d s

pe

ed

, m/s

Wind speed

Air temperature

Grinevskiy, Pozdniakov, Dedulina / IWRA Online conference - 2020

Modern climatic changes in the European Part of Russia (EPR)Meteorological data of more than 20 weather stations from south to north of EPR

Widespread increase in air temperature(to 2 oC) and decrease in wind speed (to1.5 m/s) from 1980

Ambiguous changes inprecipitation and air humidity

Latitudinal changes of precipitation ΔP

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

S N

A predominant increase in annual

precipitation up to 50 mm/year

decrease in winter and summer precipitation;

increased autumn precipitation

South :

increased winter and summer precipitation

decrease in autumn precipitationNorth :

Comparison of mean annual and seasonal values for 1965-1988 и 1989-2018


NorthSouth

mean annual ΔP

mean seasonal ΔP

Different changes of seasonal precipitation in

southern and northern regions

South North

S N

General increase in annual

temperature to 0,5-1,4оС

Maximum increase in winter temperature -

by 1.5 - 3.0°C

Latitudinal changes of air temperature ΔT

Comparison of mean annual and seasonal values for 1965-1988 и 1989-2018


mean annual ΔT

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn

mean seasonal ΔT

Increase in air temperature in all seasons

South North

S N

The predominant decrease in wind

speed by an average of 0,7 m/s

Relatively uniform seasonal decrease in

wind speed by an average of 0.5-1 m/s

Latitudinal changes of wind speed ΔUComparison of mean annual and seasonal values for 1965-1988 и 1989-2018


mean annual ΔUmean seasonal ΔU

Winter

Spring

Summer

Autumn Minor annual and seasonal changes in

air humidity by ±1-3%

Air humidity ΔH

How observed climate change affects groundwater recharge ?

Block 1: Model of surface water and

energy balance – code SurfBal

Research method: - simulation of groundwater recharge processes

Grinevskii, Pozdnyakov (2010) https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807810050040

Grinevskiy et al, (2018) https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-018-1831-1

Pozdniakov et al (2019) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125247


Groundwater recharge model

Block 2:Unsaturated flow model with root

water uptake – code HYDRUS-1D(Šimůnek et al. 2009)

Input Data: daily meteorological data for 1965-2018 ;typical vegetation and soil parameters

Input Data:(results of block 1)

daily seepage to the soil;daily potential evapotranspiration

(FAO Penman-Monteith equation)

Summaryresults:

Processing simulation results to find out change of annual water balance, based on comparing previous (1965-1988) and modern (1989-2018) periods

ΔP = ΔETR + ΔS + ΔW ± ΔVPrecipitation Evapotraspiration Surface

runoffchange in Water

storage

Groundwater recharge

Δ – difference between 1965-1988 and

1989-2018

Calculation the upper boundary flow and energy condition for HYDRUS 1D taking into account the snow accumulation and melting and freezing-thawing of the soil

surface runoff actual evaporation and transpiration groundwater recharge

https://doi.org/10.1134/S0097807810050040

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-018-1831-1

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125247

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3

36

2

Surf

ace

runo

ff,

mm

/dec

Days

South (Voronezh)

1965-1988

1989-2018

Surface runoff ΔS

Simulation results: modern climatic changes of water balance


-20

-10

0

10

20

30

45 50 55 60 65

ΔS,

mm

/yea

r

Latitude, deg

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Latitudinal changes of annual surface runoff ΔSfor different landscapes

Different changes of annual runoff in southern and northern

regions: increase in the north, decrease in the south

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

ΔS,

mm

/yea

r

ΔP, mm/year

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

The best correlation between changes of surface runoff ΔS

and precipitation ΔP

0

10

20

30

40

1

20

39

58

77

96

11

5

13

4

15

3

17

2

19

1

21

0

22

9

24

8

26

7

28

6

30

5

32

4

34

3

36

2

Surf

ace

ru

no

ff,

mm

/de

c

Days

North (Bologoe)

1965-1988

1989-2018

Comparison of mean intra-annual surface

runoff

General degradation of thawed flood runoff

Increased winter runoff due to thaws

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

45 50 55 60 65

ΔET

, mm

/yea

r

Latitude, deg

meadow, loam meadow, sand

forest, loam forest, sand

Evapotranspiration ΔET= ΔE+ΔTR



Latitudinal changes of annual evapotranspiration ΔET for different landscapes

Irregular changes of annual

evapotranspiration:

increase in the north and south and

decrease in the central part

Сomplex and opposite impact:

an increase in precipitation and temperature

leads to an increase of transpiration

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0

ΔE,

mm

/yea

r

ΔU, m/s

meadow

forest

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

ΔTR

, m

m/y

ea

r

ΔP, mm/year

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Correlation between changes of transpiration ΔTR

and precipitation ΔP

Correlation between reduction in evaporation ΔE and

wind speed decreasing ΔU

a decrease in wind speed leads to a decrease in

evaporation

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

45 50 55 60 65

ΔW

, m

m/y

ear

Latitude, deg

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Groundwater recharge ΔW



Latitudinal changes of annual groundwater recharge ΔW

for different landscapes

No changes of groundwater recharge in the south and

increase by 20-60 mm/year (up to 50%) in the north

-20

0

20

40

60

-0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20

ΔW

, mm

/yea

r

Change of aridity index Δ(P/ETP)

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Correlation between changes of recharge ΔW

and aridity index Δ(P / ETP)

-20

0

20

40

60

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80

ΔW

, mm

/yea

r

Change of winter-spring precipitation, mm

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Correlation between changes of recharge ΔW

and winter-spring precipitation

-20

0

20

40

60

-10 0 10 20 30

ΔW

, m

m/y

ear

Decrease in freezing depth, cm

meadow, loam

meadow, sand

forest, loam

forest, sand

Correlation between recharge change ΔW

and soil freezing depth decreasing

Conclusions


2. Climatic changes in winter have a major impact on the increase in

groundwater recharge - an increase in winter temperature and precipitation

leads to an increase in moisture absorption during periods of winter thaws

when there is no evapotranspiration

Despite a significant increase in air temperature, simulated groundwater

recharge in the southern regions did not change, but even increased in the

central and northern regions of European Part of Russia

There are two main reasons of this phenomena:

1. Despite an increase in air temperature, there was no significant

increase in evapotranspiration, since the increase in air temperature

is compensated by a decrease in wind speed

Analysis and understanding of the modern climatic changes impact on the

processes of water balance transformation in the critical zone make it possible

to predict them more confidently in the future

Thank you for attentionProject supported by Russian Science Foundation No. 16-17-10187


moscow state university hydrogeology division the impact

Documents