Assessment of Runoff, Sediment Yield and Assessment of Runoff, Sediment Yield and Nutrient Load on Watershed Using Nutrient Load on Watershed Using

Watershed ModelingWatershed Modeling

Mohammad Sholichin Mohammad Sholichin 1)

Faridah Othman Faridah Othman 2)2)

Shatirah Akib Shatirah Akib 3)3)

1) Lecturer, Water Resources Department, Brawijaya University, Indonesia

PhD Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia;

2) Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia

3) PhD Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia

BackgroundBackground• Increasing population people, wastewater from Increasing population people, wastewater from

industry and fertilizer use for farmer become industry and fertilizer use for farmer become water quality problem in stream. water quality problem in stream.

• Main problem in Upstream Brantas River Basin Main problem in Upstream Brantas River Basin are land erosion, sedimentation and pollutant are land erosion, sedimentation and pollutant load from both agricultural area and load from both agricultural area and residentialresidential

• Propose of watershed modeling (AVSWAT) to Propose of watershed modeling (AVSWAT) to predict water quality by difference predict water quality by difference management practice management practice

The main objective of this research are :The main objective of this research are :• to assessment of runoff, sediment yield to assessment of runoff, sediment yield

and nutrient load at Watershedand nutrient load at Watershed• To identification of potentially source of To identification of potentially source of

sediment and nutrient load on watershed sediment and nutrient load on watershed • to propose the relationship relating to propose the relationship relating

sediment and nutrient loads to sediment and nutrient loads to physiographic and hydrologic properties physiographic and hydrologic properties of the each sub watershed of the each sub watershed

The Case StudyThe Case Study

Upstream Brantas RiverUpstream Brantas RiverUpstream Brantas

Banggo River Basin

Amprong River Basin

Upper Lesti River Basin

Genteng River Basin

Metro River Basin

Manten River Basin

Lower Lesti River Basin

Kedung BantengRiver Basin

Soil Water Assessment Tool Soil Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)(SWAT)

• Uses physically-based input such as soil, weather, Uses physically-based input such as soil, weather, land use, and topographic data to predict the impact land use, and topographic data to predict the impact of land management practice on water, sediment, of land management practice on water, sediment, and agricultural chemical yieldsand agricultural chemical yields

• Continuous Long-term Simulation on daily stepContinuous Long-term Simulation on daily step• Assesses impacts of climate and management on Assesses impacts of climate and management on

yields of water, sediment, and agricultural chemicalsyields of water, sediment, and agricultural chemicals

Processing and Display of AVSWAT Model

Schematic of input and outputs of the AVSWAT model

AVSWAT Routing PhaseAVSWAT Routing Phase• Flow routingFlow routing

- Inputs (runoff, rain, point-source discharge)- Inputs (runoff, rain, point-source discharge)- Outputs (evaporation, transmission, extraction for - Outputs (evaporation, transmission, extraction for

human use)human use)• Sediment routing: deposition, resuspension, Sediment routing: deposition, resuspension,

erosionerosion• Nutrient RoutingNutrient Routing

- Model dissolved and adsorbed nutrients.- Model dissolved and adsorbed nutrients.- In stream kinetics adapted from QUAL2E- In stream kinetics adapted from QUAL2E

1. Land Phase

Phosphorous Cycle

2. Routing Phase

• Period of Calibration: January 1, 1992 – Dec 2002• Period of Validation : Jan 1 2003 – Dec 31 2006• Rainfall/Runoff/Routing: Daily Rain/Curve

Number/Daily• Rainfall Distribution: Normal Skewed• Potential ET Method: Priestley-Taylor method• Channel Water Routing: Muskingum• Channel Degradation: Not Active• Stream Water Quality Processes: Active• Lake Water Quality Processes: Not Active• Printout Frequency: Monthly and Annually

SWAT Setup Preparation

Slope Classification

Slope Down AreaSlope Down Area

Land use Land use MapMap

Soil Type Map

Comparison Observed-Simulated

0

50

100

150

200

250

J

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

year

Dis

char

ge (m

3/se

c)

Observed Simulated

Calibration PeriodCalibration Period

Correlation ValueCorrelation ValueLinier Correlation of Observed - Simulated

y = 1.05x - 9.31R2 = 0.85

0

50

100

150

200

0 50 100 150 200

Observed

Sim

ulat

ed

z

Results1. Land Area Phase

-500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Ban

ggo

Riv

er

Ups

tream

Bra

ntas

Am

pron

g R

iver

Ked

ung

Ban

teng

Met

ro R

iver

Man

ten

Riv

er

Low

er L

esti

Riv

er

Upp

er L

esti

Riv

er

Gen

teng

Riv

er

Basin Name

Rai

nfal

l (m

m) &

Run

off (

mm

)

050100150200250300350400

Bas

in a

rea

(km

2)

Rainfall (mm) Runoff (mm) Area (km2)

Sediment Yield (ton/ha/yr)Sediment Yield (ton/ha/yr)

- 20 40 60 80 100

Banggo River

Upstream Brantas

Amprong River

Kedung Banteng

Metro River

Manten River

Lower Lesti River

Upper Lesti River

Genteng River

Bas

in N

ame

Sediment Yields (ton/ha)

Sediment Yield (ton/ha/yr)Sediment Yield (ton/ha/yr)

> 1.741.74 – 4.534.53 – 7.887.88 – 27.3327.33 – 85.95

Upper Lesti River Basin

Amprong River Basin

Organic N (kg N/ha)Organic N (kg N/ha)

- 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Banggo River

Upstream Brantas

Amprong River

Kedung Banteng

Metro River

Manten River

Lower Lesti River

Upper Lesti River

Genteng River

Bsi

n N

ame

Organic N (Kg N/ha)

Organic N (kg N/ha)Organic N (kg N/ha)Upstream Brantas

Bango River Basin

Organic P (kg P/ha)Organic P (kg P/ha)

- 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

Banggo River

Upstream Brantas

Amprong River

Kedung Banteng

Metro River

Manten River

Lower Lesti River

Upper Lesti River

Genteng River

Bas

in N

ame

Organic P (kg P/ha)

Organic P (kg P/ha)Organic P (kg P/ha)Bango River Basin

Annual Average Estimates of Sediment Annual Average Estimates of Sediment Yield and Nutrient Load for Each Basin Yield and Nutrient Load for Each Basin

Based on Period 1995 to 2006 Based on Period 1995 to 2006 SimulatedSimulated

2. In Stream

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.0

Ban

ggo

Riv

er

Ups

tream

Bra

ntas

Am

pron

g R

iver

Ked

ung

Ban

teng

Met

ro R

iver

Man

ten

Riv

er

Low

er L

esti

Riv

er

Upp

er L

esti

Riv

er

Gen

teng

Riv

er

Dis

char

ge (m

3/se

c)

-2004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,800

Sed

Con

cent

raui

n m

g/l)

Discharge (m3/sec) Sed concentration (mg/l)

Concentration of Organic N Concentration of Organic N & P& P

- 2 4 6 8 10

Banggo River

Upstream Brantas

Amprong River

Kedung Banteng

Metro River

Manten River

Lower Lesti River

Upper Lesti River

Genteng River

Concentration (mg/l)

Org POrg N

Annual Average Estimates of Nutrient Annual Average Estimates of Nutrient Concentration in outlet stream for Each Concentration in outlet stream for Each

Basin Based on Period 1995 to 2006 Basin Based on Period 1995 to 2006 SimulatedSimulated

Sediment concentration (mg/L)

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

3. In Reservoir

Concentration of N & P

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.6019

93

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Org NOrg P

ConclusionConclusion• Banggo river basin is both highest of rainfall Banggo river basin is both highest of rainfall

2.043 mm and surface runoff 876.67 mm, 2.043 mm and surface runoff 876.67 mm, respectivelyrespectively

• The highest sediment yield is 85,94 The highest sediment yield is 85,94 ton/ha/year in Upper Lesti river basin due to ton/ha/year in Upper Lesti river basin due to maximum erosion rate maximum erosion rate

• The concentration of organic P (range 0,36 – The concentration of organic P (range 0,36 – 0,99 mg/l) in all sub basin is over of the WQ 0,99 mg/l) in all sub basin is over of the WQ standard regulation in C class.standard regulation in C class.

• The concentration of organic N (range 9,34 – The concentration of organic N (range 9,34 – 20,80 mg/l) in all sub basins is lower of the 20,80 mg/l) in all sub basins is lower of the WQ standard regulation in C class.WQ standard regulation in C class.

• The AVSWAT model was successes for The AVSWAT model was successes for assessment of runoff, sediment yield and assessment of runoff, sediment yield and nutrient load in Upper Brantas River Basin nutrient load in Upper Brantas River Basin

SuggestioSuggestionn

• The AVSWAT model would be testing to The AVSWAT model would be testing to another watershed another watershed

• In the next simulation, modification of In the next simulation, modification of difference fertilizer used and management difference fertilizer used and management tillage in agriculture would be done. tillage in agriculture would be done.

• Simulation of SWAT model can also done Simulation of SWAT model can also done which difference of divided of each sub which difference of divided of each sub basin which smaller than 200 km2. basin which smaller than 200 km2.

AcknowledgemenAcknowledgementtWe would like to thank you the We would like to thank you the

following following for making this study possible:for making this study possible:

Brawijaya University, IndonesiaBrawijaya University, IndonesiaUniversity of Malaya, MalaysiaUniversity of Malaya, MalaysiaPerum Jasa Tirta I, Malang, IndonesiaPerum Jasa Tirta I, Malang, IndonesiaDepartment of Agriculture, IndonesiaDepartment of Agriculture, IndonesiaDepartment of Surveying, IndonesiaDepartment of Surveying, Indonesia

Thank Thank youyou