Modelling of climate change impacts on river flow regime and discharge of Danube River considering water management effects

Judith Stagl

Anastasia Lobanova, Fred Hattermann, Hagen Koch, Shaoshun Huang

18 July 2013 International SWAT Conference, Toulouse, France

Motivation

• Investigate the impacts of climate change on the water regime of the Danube river

• Highly managed watershed

-> Include water management

• Climate change impacts vs. impounding effects of reservoirs

• Application of eco-hydrological Indicators to bridge the gap to biodiveristy

Observed Trends

Climate Projections for Danube basin

Models: ENSEMBLES

2009; 14 GCM/RCMs,

A1B Scenario

Multimodel mean 2021–2050 relative to 1971–2000

Climate Projections for Danube basin

Multimodel mean 2021–2050 relative to 1971–2000

Models: ENSEMBLES

2009; 14 GCM/RCMs,

A1B Scenario

Danube Tributeries

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2497

2282

2125

1880

1766

1708

1382

1170

1103 69

460

443

215

5

Prut

Siret

Ialomita

Arges

Yantra

Olt

Iskar

Jiu

Timok

Morava (CS)

Tamis/Timis

Sava

Tysa/Tisza/Tisa

Drau/Drava

Sío

Ipel/Ipoly

Hron

Vah

Raab/Rába

Morava/March

Enns

Traun

Inn

Isar

Naab

Lech

Tisza

Sava

Tysa/Tisza

Drava

Inn

Qave/Year [m3/s]

[river km]

Cumulated annual mean discharge

of the Danube river

7 Name, Research Domain

The Danube River – different regimes

Runoff regime (Pardé) for selected gauges in the Danube basin

<100

100

200

300

400

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

>3000

m.a.s.l.

Monthly discharge from 1992-1999

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Novo Selo - downstream

Bazias - upstream

Water management – Iron Gates I and II

• total volume of 3.2 billion m3

• total length of 270 km

• for hydropower generation but also

used for the flow regulation

• Volume < 3% of the average annual flow -> impounding effects minor significant

• -> provide a daily and weekly flow regulation

Danube – outlet Ceatal Izmail Preliminary results

Danube - Selected subbasins

Tisza

Relative Volume Difference: -0.9 %

Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency: 0.62

A. Lobanova

Mures

Relative Volume Difference: 3.9 %

Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency: 0.68

A. Lobanova

Scenarios (ENSEMBLES) – for Mures

A. Lobanova

Models: ENSEMBLES 2009

9 GCM/RCMs, A1B Scenario

Deviations [%] in monthly mean discharge of Mures River compared to 1971-2000

Scenario period 2021-2050 Scenario period 2071-2100

% %

Outlook

• Parametrisation/Calibration for different sub-catchements

• Improvement of storages and routing (adjustment of curve numbers)

• Integration of largest reservoirs

• Evaluation of different climate scenarios ENSEMBLES and also new ones (CORDEX)

• For nature conservation: application of specific eco-hydrological indicators

Thank you for your attention

Danube Canyon Iron Gate