Collaborative climate impacts work in the Carolinas Greg Carbone Dept. of Geography University of...
-
Upload
leo-simmons -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
1
Transcript of Collaborative climate impacts work in the Carolinas Greg Carbone Dept. of Geography University of...
Collaborative climate impacts work in the Carolinas
Greg CarboneDept. of Geography
University of South [email protected]
Shenandoah Valley Natural Systems Symposium
15 October 2007
The need for greater engagement
• “Another problem that often arises with environmental analysis is a failure to address key decision-relevant questions. … In short, when science is gathered to inform environmental decisions, it is often not the right science.”
Source: Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities (2005:25-26)NRC Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change Center for Economic, Governance, and International Studies
Demand: Can user benefit from research?
Supply:
Is relevant information produced?
Yes
Yes
No
No
Research agendas and user needs poorly matched
Inappropriate research agenda
Users take advantage of relevant research
•Unsophisticated or marginalized users
•Obstacles to use
Sarewitz & Pielke Jr., 2007
• Participatory approach
• Adaptive management: policies as “experiment”
• Science shops/community-based research
• Boundary organizations
The Process of Interaction
McNie, 2007
In a setting with many actors……how does science and application interact?
Complex and varied; common trait: communication
Criteria for Science Shops Clients
• No commercial objectives with their question; research results must become public (or 'the question must be for the common good').
• Clients must be able to use the results of the research to achieve their mission.
• Clients may not have the (full) financial means to acquire their research by other mean.
NOAA’s Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments
• The RISA program supports research that addresses complex climate sensitive issues of concern to decision-makers and policy planners at a regional level.
Carolinas Integrated Sciences and Assessments
MISSIONTo improve the range, quality, relevance, and
accessibility of climate information for decision-making and management of water resources in North and South Carolina
APPROACHInterdisciplinary and iterative approach of
interaction with stakeholders to:
• improve understanding of climate-hydrology processes
• develop analytical approaches that address stakeholders’ information needs;
• assess risks and vulnerability in decision making; and
• find the most effective means of communicating climate science to decision makers.
Catawba-Wateree Project
11 Interconnected Reservoirs
2 states, 14 counties, 30 municipalities
FERC Relicensing
Agencies and Interests in the FERC Relicensing Process
The Licensee
Federal Agencies
State Agencies
Non-Agency Stakeholders
Why FERC?• Our stakeholders think that FERC re-licensing is
the most significant ongoing activity involving state water resources in the Carolinas because– Heightened awareness of potential climate variability
due to recent 4-year drought– First chance to integrate federal water and
environmental laws along some rivers– 30-50 year timeframe for license agreement with
potential for flexibility or periodic adjustment– Emerging pressure on water resources– Relation to economic development initiatives– Virtually all water resources stakeholders participate
in some way
Ad hoc NC/SCwater agreement
FERC relicensingapplication review
0
50
100
150
200
250
% M
ea
n D
isch
arg
e
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
El Nino
SC Drought Act
SC Governor'sWater Law Review
FERC opencomment period
Low-inflow and other studies
Catawba-Wateree Basin
Water Scarcity In the Carolinas
• Economic and population growth are expected to place further pressures on water resource supplies and allocation
• A recent 4-year drought has heightened sensitivity to drought impacts
• Interstate water agreements do not yet exist, but policy makers are aware of the need
• FERC dams control major river basins
Dams and basins managed under Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) licenses
Existing Low Inflow Protocol Tools
• On the Catawba-Wateree, Duke Power uses set management triggers based on streamflow levels
• Streamflow measured at 4 gages with unregulated flow
Relicensing workinggroup participants areaware of the U.S. DroughtMonitor
Stage Storage Index 1 Drought Monitor 2 (3-month average)
Monitored USGS 3 Streamflow Gages
04 90% < SI < TSI
0 ≤ DM
AVG ≤ 85%
1 75% < SI ≤ 90%TSI 1 ≤ DM AVG ≤ 78%
2 57% < SI ≤ 75%TSI 2 ≤ DM AVG ≤ 65%
3 42% < SI ≤ 57%TSI 3 ≤ DM AVG ≤ 55%
4 SI ≤ 42%TSI DM = 4 AVG ≤ 40%
Catawba-Wateree ProjectSummary of LIP Trigger Points
AND
OR
1 Ratio of Remaining Useable Storage to Total Usable Storage
2 3-month numeric average of U.S. Drought Monitor
3 Sum of rolling 6-month average streamflow as percentage of period of record rolling average for same 6-month period
4 Stage 0 is triggered when any 2 of 3 trigger points are reached
Creating the Next Generation Low Inflow Protocol Tools
Stakeholder interests• Better understanding of the range of
variability and associated probabilities• Increasing the spatial resolution of the
drought monitor • Providing the ability for stakeholders to
investigate the way different drought indices represent the sensitivity of their systems – by management unit
Comparison: spatial variabilityJuly 2002
50% PDSI and 50% PHDI
Climate Division 8-digit HUC
County
Exceptional DroughtExtreme DroughtSevere DroughtModerate DroughtAbnormally Dry
Adaptive capacity
– Ongoing learning– Flexibility– Ability to experiment and adopt novel
solutions– Potential to develop generalized responses to
broad challenges
Walker et al., 2002
Adaptive management and the low-inflow protocol
“In order to ensure continuous improvement regarding the LIP and its implementation throughout the term of the New License, the LIP will be re-evaluated and modified periodically. These reevaluations and modifications will be as determined by the Catawba-Wateree Drought Management Advisory Group (CW-DMAG).”
Institutional Adaptation and Drought Management in the Carolinas
How has FERC participation contributed to individual, organizational, and collective efforts to improve drought management?
How, and to what extent, has the capacity to manage and deal with drought improved across North and South Carolina?
Evaluating ENSO Impacts in the Carolinas
• Stakeholders’
perceptions of ENSO
impacts
• Discerning and
communicating
variability of ENSO
expression
FourGlobal Climate Model 2.5ºlat x 3.75ºlon grid
SixRegional Climate Models
50km x 50km grid
Model Coverage Over North and South
Carolina
Climate impacts assessment in the Yadkin Pee Dee watershed using the SWAT and HSPF models
Both models: - simulate stream discharge and water quality in
watersheds- driven by meteorological time series- require geospatial input dataSWAT (Soil and Water Assessment Tool):- daily time step- delineation by homogeneous soil and land use- originally designed to simulate ungaged basinsHSPF (Hydrologic Simulation Program-Fortran):- user defined time step- delineation to desired watershed scale- parameter intensive compared to SWAT