ALBERT

Description: Projecting how future climatic change might impact streamflow is an important challenge for hydrologic science. The common approach to solve this problem is by forcing a hydrologic model, calibrated on historical data or using a priori parameter estimates, with future scenarios of precipitation and temperature. However, several recent studies suggest that the climatic regime of the calibration period is reflected in the resulting parameter estimates and model performance can be negatively impacted if the climate for which projections are made is significantly different from that during calibration. So how can we calibrate a hydrologic model for historically unobserved climatic conditions? To address this issue, we propose a new trading-space-for-time framework that utilizes the similarity between the predictions under change (PUC) and predictions in ungauged basins (PUB) problems. In this new framework we first regionalize climate dependent streamflow characteristics using 394 US watersheds. We then assume that this spatial relationship between climate and streamflow characteristics is similar to the one we would observe between climate and streamflow over long time periods at a single location. This assumption is what we refer to as trading-space-for-time. Therefore, we change the limits for extrapolation to future climatic situations from the restricted locally observed historical variability to the variability observed across all watersheds used to derive the regression relationships. A typical watershed model is subsequently calibrated (conditioned) on the predicted signatures for any future climate scenario to account for the impact of climate on model parameters within a Bayesian framework. As a result, we can obtain ensemble predictions of continuous streamflow at both gauged and ungauged locations. The new method is tested in five US watersheds located in historically different climates using synthetic climate scenarios generated by increasing mean temperature by up to 8 °C and changing mean precipitation by −30% to +40% from their historical values. Depending on the aridity of the watershed, streamflow projections using adjusted parameters became significantly different from those using historically calibrated parameters if precipitation change exceeded −10% or +20%. In general, the trading-space-for-time approach resulted in a stronger watershed response to climate change for both high and low flow conditions.

Description: Understanding the implications of potential future climatic conditions for hydrologic services and hazards is a crucial and current science question. The common approach to this problem is to force a hydrologic model, calibrated on historical data or using a priori parameter estimates, with future scenarios of precipitation and temperature. Recent studies suggest that the climatic regime of the calibration period is reflected in the resulting parameter estimates and that the model performance can be negatively impacted if the climate for which projections are made is significantly different from that during calibration. We address this issue by introducing a framework for probabilistic streamflow predictions in a changing climate wherein we quantify the impact of climate on model parameters. The strategy extends a regionalization approach (used for predictions in ungauged basins) by trading space-for-time to account for potential parameter variability in a future climate that is beyond the historically observed one. The developed methodology was tested in five US watersheds located in dry to wet climates using synthetic climate scenarios generated by increasing the historical mean temperature from 0 to 8 °C and by changing historical mean precipitation from −30 % to +40 % of the historical values. Validation on historical data shows that changed parameters perform better if future streamflow differs from historical by more than 25 %. We found that the thresholds of climate change after which the streamflow projections using adjusted parameters were significantly different from those using fixed parameters were 0 to 2 °C for temperature change and −10 % to 20 % for precipitation change depending upon the aridity of the watershed. Adjusted parameter sets simulate a more extreme watershed response for both high and low flows.

Description: This study tested four sensitivity analysis methods: (1) local analysis using parameter estimation software (PEST), (2) regional sensitivity analysis (RSA), (3) analysis of variance (ANOVA), and (4) Sobol's method to identify sensitivity tools that will advance our understanding of lumped hydrologic models for the purposes of model improvement, calibration efficiency and improved measurement schemes. The methods' relative efficiencies and effectiveness have been analyzed and compared. These four sensitivity methods were applied to the lumped Sacramento soil moisture accounting model (SAC-SMA) coupled with SNOW-17. Results from this study characterize model sensitivities for two medium sized watersheds within the Juniata River Basin in Pennsylvania, USA. Comparative results for the 4 sensitivity methods are presented for a 3-year time series with 1 h, 6 h, and 24 h time intervals. The results of this study show that model parameter sensitivities are heavily impacted by the choice of analysis method as well as the model time interval. Differences between the two adjacent watersheds also suggest strong influences of local physical characteristics on the sensitivity methods' results. This study also contributes a comprehensive assessment of the repeatability, robustness, efficiency, and ease-of-implementation of the four sensitivity methods. Overall ANOVA and Sobol's method were shown to be superior to RSA and PEST. Relative to one another, ANOVA has reduced computational requirements and Sobol's method yielded more robust sensitivity rankings.

Description: This study seeks to identify sensitivity tools that will advance our understanding of lumped hydrologic models for the purposes of model improvement, calibration efficiency and improved measurement schemes. Four sensitivity analysis methods were tested: (1) local analysis using parameter estimation software (PEST), (2) regional sensitivity analysis (RSA), (3) analysis of variance (ANOVA), and (4) Sobol's method. The methods' relative efficiencies and effectiveness have been analyzed and compared. These four sensitivity methods were applied to the lumped Sacramento soil moisture accounting model (SAC-SMA) coupled with SNOW-17. Results from this study characterize model sensitivities for two medium sized watersheds within the Juniata River Basin in Pennsylvania, USA. Comparative results for the 4 sensitivity methods are presented for a 3-year time series with 1 h, 6 h, and 24 h time intervals. The results of this study show that model parameter sensitivities are heavily impacted by the choice of analysis method as well as the model time interval. Differences between the two adjacent watersheds also suggest strong influences of local physical characteristics on the sensitivity methods' results. This study also contributes a comprehensive assessment of the repeatability, robustness, efficiency, and ease-of-implementation of the four sensitivity methods. Overall ANOVA and Sobol's method were shown to be superior to RSA and PEST. Relative to one another, ANOVA has reduced computational requirements and Sobol's method yielded more robust sensitivity rankings.