ClimateChange Assessment Guide.pdf - University of Waterloo

More documents

Recommendations

Info

E-6Guide for Assessment of Hydrological Effects of Climate Change in OntarioFigure 1-3: Municipal water supply wells within Subwatershed 19. The Clean Water Act was introduced by the Province of Ontario in its First Reading on December 5, 2005 and itreceived Royal Assent on October 19, 2006. On July 3, 2007 the Act and its five regulations came into effect. Theintent of this Legislation is to ensure communities are able to protect their municipal drinking water supplies throughthe development of collaborative, locally driven, science-based source water protection plans. Communities willidentify potential risks to local water supply sources and will take action to reduce or eliminate these risks.Municipalities, conservation authorities, property owners, farmers, industry, community groups, and the public willwork together to meet these common goals.In addition to the development of a subwatershed-based water budget, the Clean Water Act requires the completionof a Subwatershed Stress Assessment to estimate potential hydrological stress. This assessment estimates apercent water demand for each subwatershed by calculating the ratio of estimated water demands to availablesurface and groundwater supply and then assigns a level of stress to the watershed based on the percent waterdemand. The Stress Assessment is a three-tiered process whereby subwatershed areas identified to have higherwater demands are studied in greater detail than those subwatersheds that have lower water demand.A Tier Three Water Budget and Local Area Risk Assessment are required to estimate the likelihood that municipalitieswill be able to meet planned water demands. A Tier Three Assessment is conducted on all municipal water supplieslocated in subwatersheds that were classified in the Tier Two Assessment as having a moderate or significantpotential for stress. The Tier Three Assessment uses refined surface and/or groundwater flow models, and involves amuch more detailed study of the available groundwater or surface water sources.
Appendix E E-7Subwatershed 19 Case StudyThe Ministry of Environment (MOE, 2009) has published the technical rules which provide instructions on completinga Tier Two Subwatershed Stress Assessment and a Tier Three Local Area Risk Assessment. In addition, theProvince (MOE, 2007) developed the Provincial Guidance Module 7 Water Budget and Water Quantity RiskAssessment which provides further instruction on how to complete a Subwatershed Stress Assessment. As outlinedin Guidance Module 7, the stress assessment determines the level of potential stress in each assessment area orsubwatershed by using the percent water demand calculations and the potential stress thresholds for both surfacewater and groundwater.At present, the Technical Rules do not require that Tier Two and Tier Three Assessments include climate changeimpact evaluations; however, the assessments should identify and document any observed climate trends in awatershed or subwatershed and also document any past climate change assessments completed in the area.Credit Valley Conservation (CVC) completed a Tier Two Water Budget and Subwatershed Stress Assessment(AquaResource, 2008) following the methodologies outlined in the Technical Rules and Guidance Module 7. TheTier Two Assessment estimated the groundwater percent water demand for Subwatershed 19 to be 14%. As thispercent water demand is above the Provincial threshold of 10%, Subwatershed 19 is classified as having a“Moderate” potential for stress (see Section 7.1). Municipal water supplies for the Towns of Orangeville, Mono, andAmaranth are located within Subwatershed 19, and the majority of the Town of Orangeville’s groundwater suppliesare located within this subwatershed. As a result, the Town was required to complete a Tier Three Assessment underthe Water Budget Framework. As of spring 2010, this study has not yet been completed. However, detailedcontinuous streamflow and groundwater flow models have been developed as part of this study and those models areused as part of this assessment. The primary purpose of this Case Study is to determine how climate change affects the hydrologic system and waterbalance of Subwatershed 19 in the Credit River Watershed. More specifically, from a Drinking Water SourceProtection perspective and in response to Ontario’s Clean Water Act, this study aims to evaluate the risks of municipalwater supply shortages in the future, in the communities partly or wholly within Subwatershed 19 (i.e., the Towns ofOrangeville, Mono and Caledon and the Townships of East Garafraxa and Amaranth) and the sensitivities in thesystem that lead to change.Secondary purposes of the study are to support public education and inform other types of studies routinelyconducted by the CVC (i.e., fisheries management, terrestrial management, water quality, etc.). The water resource quantity issues in Subwatershed 19 include the following:• Availability and reliability of groundwater based municipal water supplies in the future;• Baseflow-low flow concerns from a fisheries and wastewater assimilation perspective; and• High flow and peak flow concerns from a flood risk and instream erosion perspective.The Town of Orangeville currently maintains nine municipal wells, most of which are located within Subwatershed 19.The Town of Mono operates four municipal supply wells. Average annual water demand for the Towns of Orangevilleand Mono is approximately 9,500 m 3 /d. The Province has included the Towns within area affected by the ‘Places toGrow’ legislation, and therefore, has encouraged the municipalities to plan for high populations and populationdensities. An increase in the population in the area would require drawing on additional groundwater supplies as wellas ensuring that existing groundwater supplies would be available in the future.Fisheries habitat exists throughout the subwatershed; they are found mostly in the northeast portion of thesubwatershed, except in the ephemeral streams. Local water quality and hydrology generally support a healthy
Page 3:
Guide for Assessment of HydrologicE
Page 7 and 8:
Executive SummaryExecutive Summaryi
Page 9 and 10:
Executive Summaryv2007c). The magni
Page 11 and 12:
Executive Summaryviiwatering needs
Page 13 and 14:
Executive SummaryixSummary GCM cont
Page 15 and 16:
Executive SummaryxiStep-by-step Gui
Page 17 and 18:
Table of ContentsTable of Contentsx
Page 19 and 20:
Table of Contentsxv6.5.7 Compare Al
Page 21:
Executive SummaryxviiTable 6.6 Scen
Page 24 and 25:
Guide for Assessment of Hydrologic
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
555
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 49 and 50:
Estimating Future Local Climates4.
Page 51 and 52:
Estimating Future Local Climates29c
Page 53 and 54:
Estimating Future Local Climates31
Page 55 and 56:
Estimating Future Local Climates33
Page 57 and 58:
Hydrological Impacts5. Hydrologic I
Page 59 and 60:
Hydrological Impacts375.1.2 Toronto
Page 61 and 62:
Hydrological Impacts39frequency of
Page 63 and 64:
Hydrological Impacts41for clouds to
Page 65 and 66:
Hydrological Impacts43mid-winter me
Page 67 and 68:
Hydrological Impacts45reduce the st
Page 69 and 70:
Climate Change Assessment6. Climate
Page 71 and 72:
Climate Change Assessment49• Plan
Page 73 and 74:
Climate Change Assessment51This app
Page 75 and 76:
Climate Change Assessment53inflow/o
Page 77 and 78:
Climate Change Assessment55As the c
Page 79 and 80:
Climate Change Assessment57Guidance
Page 81 and 82:
Climate Change Assessment59Further,
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Climate Change Assessment63Table 6.
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Climate Change Assessment67The mean
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Climate Change Assessment71Figure 6
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Climate Change Assessment776.4.4 De
Page 101 and 102:
Climate Change Assessment79change f
Page 103 and 104:
Climate Change Assessment81referenc
Page 105 and 106:
Climate Change Assessment83• Sele
Page 107 and 108:
Climate Change Assessment854. STMND
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Climate Change Assessment89When com
Page 113 and 114:
Climate Change Assessment91charts i
Page 115 and 116:
Climate Change Assessment93With cli
Page 117:
Climate Change Assessment956.7.2 Fu
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131: Guide for Assessment of Hydrologic
Page 137 and 138: Appendix A A-1Watershed and Receivi
Page 139: Appendix A A-3Watershed and Receivi
Page 143 and 144: Appendix B B-1GCM Modelling GroupsT
Page 145: Appendix CGCM-Based Change FieldAss
Page 148 and 149: C-2Guide for Assessment of Hydrolog
Page 156 and 157: C-10Guide for Assessment of Hydrolo
Page 169: Appendix DRCM and GCM Data Conversi
Page 172 and 173: D-2Guide for Assessment of Hydrolog
Page 175 and 176: Appendix E E-1Subwatershed 19 Case
Page 179: Appendix E E-5Subwatershed 19 Case
Page 231:
Appendix E E-57Subwatershed 19 Case
show all

ClimateChange Assessment Guide.pdf - University of Waterloo

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?