ClimateChange Assessment Guide.pdf - University of Waterloo

More documents

Recommendations

Info

E-52Guide for Assessment of Hydrological Effects of Climate Change in OntarioTable 7-3: Groundwater percent water demand calculation using climate change scenarios. As summarized in Table 7-3, percent water demand for each of the climate scenarios ranges from 11% to 17%(shown in blue and yellow, respectively) compared to 14% (shown in orange) for the current climate (baseline)scenario. These results are illustrated graphically on Figure 7-2 below. As described previously, a subwatershed isclassified as having a moderate potential for hydrologic stress if the percent water demand for groundwater rangesfrom 10% to 20%. The percent water demand estimated for each of the climate change scenarios remains within thisrange and as a result the subwatershed would remain in the moderate stress category for all scenarios.18%16%14%Percent Water Demand - Current Climate12%10%8%6%4%2%0%Current Climate (Base Line)CNRMCM3 - SR-A2FGOALS-g1.0 - SR-B1IPSLCM4 - SR-A2MIROC3.2 hires - SR-A1BMRI CGCM2.3.2a - SR-A1BCSIROMk3 - SR-A2GFDLCM2.1 - SR-B1NCARCCSM3 - SR-A2NCARCCSM3 - SR-A1BCGCM3T47(Run4) - SR-A2CGCM3T47(Run4) - SR-A1BFigure 7-2: Groundwater Percent Water Demand for each Climate Change Scenario.The case study results discussed here apply only to Subwatershed 19 and do not consider impacts from landdevelopment or increased water demands. As documented in CVC’s Tier Two report (CVC, 2009), there are no
Appendix E E-53Subwatershed 19 Case Studypermitted surface water takings in subwatershed 19 and as a result a stress assessment cannot be completed for thesubwatershed. However, the assessment of climate change impacts on a surface water stress assessment would becompleted very similar to the groundwater case, with the surface water supply terms being recalculated for eachclimate change scenario. A Tier Three Water Budget and Local Area Risk Assessment is completed to estimate the likelihood that amunicipality will be able to sustain its planned pumping rates and to identify drinking water threats that may influencethe municipality’s ability to meet its planned pumping rates. A local area water budget must be developed using aLocal Area (Tier Three) Water Budget Model for all Type I, II and III drinking water systems where:1. There have been historical source water issues meeting demand, or2. The Tier Two subwatershed stress level is moderate or significant.A Tier Three water budget uses detailed groundwater and/or surface water numerical models, refined from the TierTwo models whenever possible. These models should be developed with the accuracy and refinement needed toevaluate hydrologic or hydrogeologic conditions directly at a water supply well or intake; be of sufficient spatial scaleto evaluate the potential impacts of increased future water demands on external water quantity receptors such asother water users and the environment; represent a refined conceptual hydrologic or hydrogeologic model; and becalibrated to the best extent possible to represent average typical conditions as well as longer term climatic trends.In a Tier Three Local Area Risk Assessment, the water budget models are used to estimate the likelihood that a wellor surface water intake will be able to pump an allocated pumping rate in response to a series of water demand,climate and land use scenarios. The risk associated with operating a well or intake is ‘significant’ if there are potentialproblems meeting demand under a specific scenario or, by operating the well, there are significant impacts to otherwater uses. The risk of operating a well or intake is moderate if allocated demands can be met but there are potentialimpacts to other users. The risk of operating a well or intake is ‘low’ if planned demands can be met during eachscenario and there are no impacts to other users.In 2006 MNR initiated a Pilot Project for the Tier Three process in Subwatershed 19. This pilot project included thedevelopment of the detailed surface water and groundwater flow models used for this case study.Vulnerable areas, referred to as the WHPA Q1 and WHPA Q2 for groundwater and the IPZ Q for surface water aredelineated as part of the Tier Three process. Examples of these areas for groundwater are shown on Figure 7-3 forthe municipal water supplies in Subwatershed 19. If municipal wells located within this area are found to have asignificant risk, all consumptive water demands within the vulnerable area are classified as significant threats. Theseclassified threats are key deliverables from the Tier Three process.
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:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
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 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
C-10Guide for Assessment of Hydrolo
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
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 225: Appendix E E-51Subwatershed 19 Case
Page 231: Appendix E E-57Subwatershed 19 Case
show all

ClimateChange Assessment Guide.pdf - University of Waterloo

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?