Eral Environmental and Socio-Economic Sub-Systems to Different Drought Management Policies
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Alberta A dynamic water balance model for drought management: A case study of the Invitational Drought Tournament by Xuanru Wang A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Water Resources Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering ©Xuanru Wang Fall 2013 Edmonton, Alberta Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Libraries to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only. Where the thesis is converted to, or otherwise made available in digital form, the University of Alberta will advise potential users of the thesis of these terms. The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatsoever without the author's prior written permission. Abstract System dynamics modelling provides an effective approach for water management, as shown in this thesis, using Agriculture Canada’s Invitational Drought Tournament (IDT) as a case study. The objectives of the research are to simulate basin-scale management of the fictitious Western Canadian “Oxbow Basin” and to obtain the responses of several environmental and socio-economic sub-systems to different drought management policies. The model represents five major sub-systems: population, municipal water use, agricultural water use and crop production, land use and water supply. Model use for an Invitational Drought Tournament adequately represented the basin-scale water use system of the Oxbow Basin and the broader consequences of drought policies, according to feedback from Agriculture Canada and student teams of University of Alberta, University of Saskatchewan, University of Regina and University of Manitoba. Model development also helped to identify strengths and limitations of system dynamics models, as applied to basin-scale management. The IDT model was found to be a valuable tool for studying and simulating water management. Acknowledgements I would like to express my special thanks to my supervisor, Dr. Evan Davies for his continuous support, encouragement and patience in my MSc study and research. His guidance helped me through all the time of research and writing of this thesis. I also appreciate the financial support provided by Agriculture and Agri-foods Canada (AAFC), as well as the wonderful opportunity they provided in this project, which also helped me in doing a lot of research. My sincere thanks also go to all my colleagues and the professors of the Water Resources Group, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at University of Alberta for all the knowledge I learned and all the fun we have had. Last but not the least, I would like to thank my parents and my close friends for their support and understanding. They have given me a lot of courage throughout my life. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Drought .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Drought Management ........................................................................................... 3 1.3 Study Background ................................................................................................ 10 1.4 Chapter Overview ................................................................................................ 13 2 SIMULATION MODELLING GAMES AND MANAGEMENT ............................................... 14 2.1 Drought Tournament and Simulation Games ...................................................... 14 2.2 Water Resources Management Models .............................................................. 18 2.2.1 Water resources management models on supply side ............................ 20 2.2.2 Water resources management models on demand side ......................... 24 2.2.3 Water system models ............................................................................... 33 2.3 System Dynamics ................................................................................................. 37 2.3.1 Key Concepts in System Dynamics ........................................................... 40 2.3.2 Model Development with System Dynamics ............................................ 44 2.3.3 System Dynamics Models for Water Management .................................. 45 2.3.4 Comparison of System Dynamics with other modelling approaches ....... 49 3 CASE STUDY: INVITATIONAL DROUGHT TOURNAMENT (IDT) ....................................... 52 3.1 Introduction of Invitational Drought Tournament and the Oxbow Basin ........... 52 3.2 IDT Model Description ......................................................................................... 58 3.2.1 Basin population ....................................................................................... 63 3.2.2 Municipal water use ................................................................................. 68 3.2.3 Agricultural land and water use, and crop production............................. 80 3.2.4 Water for other uses ................................................................................. 96 3.2.5 Water supply ............................................................................................. 97 3.3 Model Validation ................................................................................................. 98 3.3.1 Municipal and agricultural water use ..................................................... 100 3.3.2 Crop yield ................................................................................................ 103 3.3.3 Discussion of validation results .............................................................. 104 3.4 Model Behaviour ............................................................................................... 105 3.4.1 Policy selections and effects for Team A ................................................ 107 3.4.2 Comparison of Team policy selections, Team A versus Team S ............. 114 4 CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 121 4.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 121 4.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 125 5 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 127 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Generalized reservoir/river system models (Adapted from Wurbs, 2005) . 20 Table 2: Observed and predicted water stress in 1985 and 2025 (Butler and Memon, 2006: 3) .............................................................................................................. 25 Table 3: Selected short-term urban water demand modelling approaches (House-Peters and Chang, 2011) ....................................................................... 27 Table 4: Key characteristics of selected urban water modelling approach (House-Peters and Chang, 2011) ....................................................................... 28 Table 5: Drought management options in the IDT (AAFC, 2011) .............................. 56 Table 6: Water requirements for livestock (Ward and McKague, 2007)................... 67 Table 7: Population sector initial settings for the IDT Model .................................... 67 Table 8: Municipal water use inputs to the IDT Model ............................................. 79 Table 9: Agricultural water use inputs to the IDT Model .......................................... 96 Table 10: Municipal water use in the South Saskatchewan Basin in 2005 (Pernitsky and Guy, 2010) ................................................................................................. 101 Table 11: Agricultural water and land use in Canada in 2006 ................................. 102 Table 12: Crop water demand in the Okanagan Basin in 2003 ............................... 104 Table 13: Crop yield in Alberta, Saskatchewan and the IDT Model ........................ 104 Table 14: Policy selections of the University of Alberta Team 1, called “Team A” . 107 Table 15: Changes in budget and expenditures of Team A over the IDT game turns ......................................................................................................................... 114 Table 16: Policy selections of the University of Saskatchewan team, called “Team S” ......................................................................................................................... 115 Table 17: The change of outdoor water use parameter (unit: liters per day)......... 119 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Interrelationships between the four types of droughts (Wilhite, 2007). ..... 3 Figure 2: Sample U.S. drought monitor map (NDMC, 2012) ....................................... 8 Figure 3: Typical North American Household Water Use (EPCOR, 2010) ................. 27 Figure 4: Structure of the IMPACT water model structure (Rosegrant et al., 2008) . 35 Figure 5: Stock and flow diagram – a stock with a single inflow ............................... 41 Figure