Projected changes in climate and river discharge in the Chaobai River Basin under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming

doi:10.12006/j.issn.1673-1719.2017.089

Abstract

Abstract:

The Chaobai River Basin, which provides majority freshwater for Beijing City, is an important guarantee to water safety in Beijing. So it is of vital importance to assess the future change in discharge in the Chaobai River Basin under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming. In this study, the hydrological responses to climate forcing under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming in the Chaobai River Basin were studied using hydrological model SWAT driven by five general circulation models (GCMs) under three Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). The uncertainties of projected impacts from GCMs structure and RCPs scenarios were estimated and compared quantitatively further. The results indicated that: (1) The simulation results of SWAT model have good agreement with discharge observations in both calibration and validation period, it is feasible to apply the SWAT model to estimate the impacts of climate change. (2) The mean annual temperature and precipitation of the Chaobai River Basin will increase under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming. The mean annual discharge will increase slightly under 1.5℃ global warming and be more concentrated in summer and early autumn. When under 2.0℃ global warming, the mean annual runoff will rise by more than 30%. However projected mean proportion of monthly to annual discharge will decrease in the peak season (July and August) of water usage, which will have impact on water resource management and control. (3) Extreme monthly and annual discharge will increase dramatically under global warming, especially in 2.0℃warming. As a result, the risk of flooding will grow and lead to more pressure on flood mitigation. (4) It is proved that there are more uncertainties in above results under 2.0℃ global warming than under 1.5℃ global warming. Uncertainties in projections of discharge are greater compared with those in precipitation projections. Under both 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming, uncertainties in the projections of all indicators from GCMs structure are larger than those from RCPs scenarios.

Key words: The Chaobai River Basin, SWAT, GCMs, RCPs, Discharge, Projection

Ying HAO,Jing-Jin MA,Jing-Jing AN,Yuan WANG,Hong-Mei XU. Projected changes in climate and river discharge in the Chaobai River Basin under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming[J]. Climate Change Research, 2018, 14(3): 237-246.

Figures/Tables 9

Fig. 1 Overview map of the Chaobai River Basin (CRB) DEM(shade), hydrological gauges, spatial distribution of meteorological stations and grid notes of WATCH climate forcing

Table 1 The statistical results of objective functions during calibration and validation in the CRB

Fig. 2 Observed and simulated monthly discharge during calibration period (1961-1990) and validation period (1991-2001) at Xiahui station (a) and Zhangjiafen station (b)

Table 2 The projected change in annual average temperature in the CRB under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming

Fig. 3 The projected change in annual precipitation in the CRB under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming (a) mean value of three RCPs,(b) mean value of five GCMs

Fig. 4 Percentage change in annual mean discharge under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming in Chao River and Bai River (a) mean value of three RCPs (b) mean value of five GCMs

Fig. 5 Change in seasonal distribution under 1.5℃ global warming for Chao River and Bai River

Fig. 6 The same as Fig. 5 but under 2.0℃ global warming

Fig. 7 Percentage change in Q5 under 1.5℃ and 2.0℃ global warming in Chao River and Bai River (a) mean value of three RCPs,(b) mean value of five GCMs

References

[1]	IPCC. Climate change 2013:the physical science basis [J]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013
[2]	Jiang T, Chen Y Q, Xu C Y , et al. Comparison of hydrological impacts of climate change simulated by six hydrological models in the Dongjiang Basin, South China[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2007,336(3/4):316-333
[3]	Xu Z X, Zhao F F, Li J Y . Response of streamflow to climate change in the headwater catchment of the Yellow River Basin[J]. Quaternary International, 2009,208(1/2):62-75
[4]	袁飞, 谢正辉, 任正良 , 等. 气候变化对海河流域水文特征的影响[J]. 水利学报, 2005,36(3):1-7
[5]	张建云, 王国庆 . 气候变化对水文水资源影响研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007
[6]	贾仰文, 高辉, 牛存稳 , 等. 气候变化对黄河源区径流过程的影响[J]. 水利学报, 2008,39(1):52-58
[7]	Xu C X, Widén E, Halldin S . Modeling hydrological consequences of climate change: progress and challenges[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 2005,22(6):789-797
[8]	Gourley J J, Vieux B E . A method for identifying sources of model uncertainty in rainfall-runoff simulations[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2006,327:68-80
[9]	Minville M, Brissette F, Leconte R . Uncertainty of the impact of climate change on the hydrology of a Nordic watershed[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2008,358:70-83
[10]	于磊, 顾鎏, 李建新 , 等. 基于SWAT模型的中尺度流域气候变化水文响应研究[J]. 水土保持通报, 2008,28(4):152-154
[11]	张建云, 王国庆 . 气候变化对水文水资源影响研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007: 80-95
[12]	Wang S. McGrath R, Semmler T, et al. The impact of the climate change on discharge of Suir River Catchment (Ireland) under different climate scenarios[J]. Natural Hazards Earth System Sciences, 2006,6:387-395
[13]	李志, 刘文兆, 张勋昌 , 等. 未来气候变化对黄土高原黑河流域水资源的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2009,29(7):3456-3464
[14]	姚文艺, 徐宗学, 王云璋 . 气候变化背景下黄河流域径流变化情势分析[J]. 气象与环境科学, 2009,32(2):1-6
[15]	Bates B C, Kundzewicz Z W, Wu S , et al. Climate change and water [R].Technical paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Secretariat, 2008: 210
[16]	Su B D, Huang J L, Zeng XF , et al. Impact of climate change on streamflow in the upper Yangtze River Basin[J]. Climatic Change, 2016: 1-14
[17]	肖恒, 陆桂华, 吴志勇 , 等. 珠江流域未来30年洪水对气候变化的响应[J]. 水利学报, 2013,44(12):1409-1419
[18]	杨赤, 刘志雨, 李洋 . 淮河流域水文极值预测模型研究[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2015,11(1):22-30
[19]	夏军, 李璐, 严茂超 , 等. 气候变化对密云水库水资源的影响及其适应性管理对策[J]. 气候变化研究进展, 2008,4(6):319-323
[20]	FAO/IIASA/ISRIC/ISS-CAS/JRC. Harmonized world soil database (version 1.0) [R]. FAO, Rome, Italy and IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, 2008
[21]	Weedon G P, Gomes S, Viterbo P , et al. Creation of the WATCH forcing data and its use to assess global and regional reference crop evaporation over land during the twentieth century[J]. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 2011 ( 12):823-848
[22]	McWeeney C F, Jones R G . How representative is the spread of climate projections from the 5 CMIP5 GCMs used in ISI-MIP?[J]. Climate Services, 2016,1:24-29
[23]	Hempel S, Frieler K, Warszawski L , et al. A trend-preserving bias correction: the ISIMIP approach[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2013,9(4):49-92
[24]	Vetter V, Huang S, Aich V , et al. Multi-model climate impact assessment and intercomparison for three large-scale river basins on three continents[J]. Earth System Dynamics, 2015 ( 6):17-43
[25]	Warszawski L, Frieler K, Huber V , et al. The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Inter-comparison Project (ISI-MIP): project framework[J]. PNAS, 2014,111(9):3228-3232. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1312330110
[26]	Arnold J G, Srinivasan R, Muttiah R S , et al. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment (part I): model development[J]. Journal of American Water Resources Association, 1998,34(1):73-89
[27]	Neitsch S L, Arnold L G, Kiniry J R , et al. Soil and water assessment tool[M]. Theoretical documentation version 2000, College Station: Texas Water Resources Institute, 2002
[28]	Arnold J G, Fohrer, N, SWAT 2000: Current capabilities and research opportunities in applied watershed modeling[J]. Hydrological Processes, 2005,19(3):563-572
[29]	Penman H L . Evaporation: an introductory survey[J]. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, 1956,4:7-29
[30]	USDA-Soil Conservation Service . National engineering handbook, hydrology section 4[J]. Chapters 4-10, Washington, DC, 1972
[31]	Cunge J A . On the subject of a flood propagation method (Muskingum method)[J] . Hydraulics Research, 1969,7(2):205-230
[32]	李子君, 李秀彬 . 潮白河上游1961—2005年径流变化趋势及原因分析[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2008,30(2):82-87
[33]	赵阳, 余新晓, 郑江坤 , 等. 气候和土地利用变化对潮白河流域径流变化的定量影响[J]. 农业工程学报, 2012,28(22):252-260