Evaluation of Climate Change Impacts on Surface Runoff and Groundwater Using HadGEM2 Climatological Model (Case Study: Hashtgerd)

آب و خاک

Article 9, Volume 32, Issue 2 - Serial Number 58, May 2018, Pages 433-446   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v32i2.67160

Authors

fatemeh sadat Mortazavi Zadeh^{* 1}; Masoud Godarzi²

¹Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University

²Forest and Rangeland Research Institute, Tehran

Abstract

Introduction: After the industrialization period, when humankind was able to multiply the speed and quantity of its production, the planet faced a new crisis, although this crisis was less known until the late 20th century. From the last years of the 20th century, the term of change has been added to the scientific literature of the world. The main reasons are the change in the phenomenon of blockage of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of the planet. In this research, while introducing CMIP models under RCP scenarios, modeling of groundwater fluctuations using the MODFLOW numerical code is dominated by GMS software. The LarsWG software was used for statistical exponential measurements. Groundwater changes in the study area (Hashtgerd) are of great importance to the people of this region due to the proximity of the area to Tehran and the availability of horticultural products. The main objective of this research is to investigate the future fluctuations of groundwater in Hashtgerd plain over the next period from 2015 to 2040 using the HADGEM2 model under two scenarios RCP2.6 and RCP8.5. Innovations of this scheme include the use of the HadGEM2 climatic model to investigate the variation of underground water fluctuations.
Materials and Methods: In order to study and model the aquifer using the finite difference method and the Modflow model, the first step in the spatial division of the study area into a square or rectangular cell or network. Therefore, using topographic maps 1: 25000 of the Army Mapping Organization, the topographic layer was extracted and digitally extracted. Based on the 14 piezometers in the aquifer area, the potential lines were plotted and entered into the model as the initial staging level. In order to determine the thickness of the saturation layer, based on the geophysics in the aquifer, the bedrock was also introduced into the model network. In addition, to accurately evaluate the design of the network and its cells in the aquifer area, the hydrodynamic, feeding and evacuation characteristics of the aquifer within a cell are assumed the same. It is necessary to select smaller dimensions in areas where hydrological and hydrodynamic characteristics of the aquifer are significant at low distances, or that parts of the aquifer are studied for specific cases. Otherwise, it is not necessary to reduce the size of the cells. According to aquifer conditions, cells with 500 * 500 square meters area were selected. Calibration and verification were used in two steady state (one year data) and non-residual (full statistical period), each used for estimation of hydraulic conduction values and storage factor.
Results and Discussion: After calibration of the groundwater model in steady state, the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer in different locations is in the range of 0.5 to 19 meters. In order to run the model in an unstable state, time intervals must be defined for the model. The time interval in modeling is defined in terms of both the stress period and the time step which must be defined before the definition of other parameters such as power and discharge conditions in unstable conditions. In the Hashtgerd plain, the length of the one-month stress period and the monthly measurements of the water level in piezometers, the time step were also selected for a month. Therefore, in order to simulate the groundwater flow, the study area for the unstable state was defined from October 2007 to late December 2013 for six years and three months for the model and the conceptual model was changed from unstable to unstable state. Therefore, data on surface water in rivers, the feeding of rainfall and return water from wells, pumping rates from wells, hydraulic load of boundary conditions, and groundwater surface data in piezometers were introduced monthly into a conceptual model. In addition, in an unstable state, the specific discharge parameter must be defined for the model. After implementation of the model in unstable conditions, special discharge rates were optimized. The amount of specially tailored discharge in the study area varies from 0.001 to 0.27. It should be noted that at this stage, the resource and expenditure statistics of 2008 were used. After constructing groundwater and surface water models for the base period, maintaining the existing coefficients and parameters, changing the rainfall and temperature values for the future period, first, the amount of surface water flow changes for the future period and then using the amount of nutrition The groundwater entered the model. Future modeling showed that surface runoff variations would be about 7 percent lower for RCP 2.5 and 19 percent for the RCP scenario of 8.5. Nutrition also includes nutrition from the rainfall. For the upcoming period, changes in land use and land use counts are considered constant. With rainfall changes under the two scenarios, the aquifer is projected to drop by about 12 m by 2040 for the RCP scenario of 2.6 and for the RCP scenario of 8.5 by 18 m.
Conclusions: After simulating the meteorological component by the HadGEM2 model introduced in AR5 using LarsWG software and applying future changes in rainfall and temperature on the IHACRES model and ModFlow model under GMS software for the two scenarios RCP2.6 and RCP 8.5, respectively. Due to the temperature rise of 1.8 ° C in the worst case and different rainfall variations in different months, it was found that runoff would be about 15% for the first scenario and 20% for the second scenario. The same factors are because the level of penetration into groundwater through snow melting as well as precipitation along with surface runoff is one of the important factors in feeding to the aquifer. Given the constant maintenance of groundwater withdrawals in the coming years, it was found that the aquifer will drop by about 12 m for the scenario RCP 2.6 by 2040, and for the RCP 8.5 scenario, it will drop by 18 m.

Keywords

HadGEM2; Hashtgerd Plain; IHACRES; MODFLOW

References

1- Goodarzi M. 2011. Investigation and evaluation the effects of climate changes on surface runoff (case study: Karkheh Oliya). PhD dissertation, Faculty of Geography, Tabriz University.

2- IPCC-TGCIA. 2014. Guidelines on the use of scenario data for climate impact and adaptation assessment report 5, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, task group on scenarios for climate impact assessment.

3- Karamouz M., RezapourTabari M., Kerachian R., and Zahraie B. 2005. Conjunctive Use of Surface and Groundwater Resources with Emphasis on Water Quality. Water and Environmental Resources Congress, ASCE, Alaska.

4- Karamouz M., Mohammad Rezapour Tabar M., Kerachian R., and Zahraie B .2005. Conjunctive Use of Surface and Groundwater Resources with Emphasis on Water Quality. Water and environmental resources congress, ASCE, Alaska.

5- Kauo-Chin H., Chug-Ho W., Kuan-Chin C., Chien-Tai C., and Kai-Wei M. 2010. Climate-induced hydrological impacts on the groundwater system the pingtung plain, Taiwan.

6- Kay A. L., Jones R. G., and Reynard N. S. 2006. RCM Rainfall for UK floodfrequency estimation. II. Climatechange results. Journal of Hydrology. 318: 163-172.

7- Kidmose J., Refsgaard J. C., Troldborg L., Seaby L. P., and Escrivà M. M. 2013. Climate change impact on groundwater levels: ensemble modelling of extreme values. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1619-1634,

8- Kouhestani N. 2009. The Impact of Climate Change on Groundwater Level (Case Study: Narmab Basin in Golestan Province), National Conference on Water Crisis Management, 12 March, 2009. Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht, Iran.

9- Kokkonen T. S., and Jakeman A. J. 2002. Structural Effects of Landscape and Land Use on Streamflow Response, in: Environmental Foresight and Models: A Manifesto. 22: 303-321.

10- Kokkonen T. S., Jakeman A. J., Young P. C., and Koivusalo H. J. 2003. Predicting daily flows in ungauged catchments: model regionalization from catchment descriptors at the Coweeta Hydrologic Laboratory, North Carolina. Hydrol. Process. 17: 2219-2238.

11- Lee E., Seong C., Kim H., Park S., and Kang M. 2010. Predicting the impacts of climate change on nonpoint source pollutant loads from agricultural small watershed using artificial neural network. J Environ Sca (China). 22: 840-845.

12- Montazeri M., and Fahmi H. 2003. The effect of climate change on water resources of Iran. Third Regional Conference and First National Conference on Climate Change, pp. 289-285.

13- Mshkvaty A. M., Kordjezi M., and Babaiean A. 2010. investigation and evaluation of Lars model in the simulation of meteorological data in Golestan province during the period of 1993-2007. Journal of Applied Research of Geographic Sciences, 16:19, pp. 96-81.

14- Por hemmat F. 2016. Simulation of groundwater flow system in Ravansar-Sanjabi Plain aquifer using GMS software, Tehran Soil and Watershed Management Institute, Final report.

15- Rasmussen P., Sonnenborg T. O., Goncear G., and Hinsby K. 2013. Assessing impacts of climate change, sea level rise, and drainage canals on saltwater intrusion to coastal aquifer hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci, 17, 421-443,

16- Setegn SH.G., Rayner D., Melesse A.M., and Dargahi B. 2011. Impact of climate change on the hydro-climatology of Lake Tana basin, Ethiopia. Journal of Water Resources Research 47. 2011. Pages 113.