Wetland Model in an Earth Systems Modeling Framework for Regional Environmental Policy Analysis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Wetland Model in an Earth Systems Modeling Framework for Regional Environmental Policy Analysis By Sirein Salah Awadalla B.A., Physics Smith College, 2006 Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division and the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Technology and Policy And Master of Science in Civil Engineering At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June, 2011 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author Engineering Systems Division May 6, 2011 Certified by Kenneth Strzepek Research Scientist at the Center for Global Change Science, MIT Thesis Supervisor Certified by Ruben Juanes Professor of Hydrology Internal Advisor Accepted by Heidi M. Nepf Chair, Departmental Committee for Graduate Students Accepted by Dava Newman Director of Technology and Policy 2 Wetland Model in an Earth Systems Modeling Framework for Regional Environmental Policy Analysis By Sirein S. Awadalla Submitted to the Engineering Systems Division on May 6, 2011 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Technology and Policy and Master of Science in Civil Engineering Abstract The objective of this research is to investigate incorporating a wetland component into a land energy and water fluxes model, the Community Land Model (CLM). CLM is the land fluxes component of the Integrated Global Systems Model (IGSM), a framework that simulates the relationship of physical systems to climate variations. Wetlands play an important role in the storage and regulation of the global water budget so including them in a land water cycle model is found to be necessary in balancing the regional water budgets of simulated river basins. This research focuses on modeling broad hydrological characteristics of wetlands (and lakes) into CLM. CLM’s wetland component is reconstructed to reflect a more realistic wetland water budget; it allows for the exchange of water with CLM’s river routing component; it allows for varying the storage of wetlands; it allows for calculating discharge from wetlands based on the physics of these ecosystems; and allows the surface water extent of wetlands to vary, a characteristic important to ecological behavior of wetlands and management of wetland ecosystems. The research then implements the modified version of the model for the Sudd wetland, in South Sudan, as it relates to its larger river system, the White Nile. Projects designed to better manage this wetland, such as diverting its inflow to reduce the amount of water consumed by evaporation, are currently under review by its various stakeholders. This diversion stands to change the area of the Sudd, which has direct implications on the ecological and social services derived from the wetland locally. The modified CLM is thus used to provide a better understanding of the science of this management option, and furthers the discussion on the benefits or drawbacks to diversion. Thus, using area as a proxy for environmental impact, what are the environmental, economic and social risks associated with diverting water from inflow into the Sudd? The new wetland component’s performance is evaluated against existing observed and modeled data on Sudd hydrology and compared to existing models of the Sudd. The research finds that the potential benefits of diversion cannot be said to unequivocally better the larger system of the White Nile. Thesis Supervisor: Kenneth Strzepek Title: Research Scientist at the Center for Global Change Science, MIT 3 Acknowledgements I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my advisor Kenneth Strzepek, whose patience, teaching, and encouragement have really made my MIT experience fruitful. A very special and heartfelt thank you goes to Adam Schlosser; his reading of this document, being there while I struggled through this whole process, his wonderful advice, that spanned everything from efficient ways of programming in Fortran, to how to think (calmly) about future plans; and always making sure that I don’t leave the office until I’ve understood something new…between Ken and Adam, I really became a hydrologist. And I am very grateful to you both! I would also like to thank Professor Ruben Juanes for supporting me in the Civil Engineering Department and being there whenever I needed him. The International Water Management Institute hosted me, and allowed me to obtain very valuable data to this work, and for that I would like to extend my gratitude. Particularly, Professor Yasir Mohamed’s guidance during those months is very much appreciated. I would also like to thank my family, without which I could not have completed this work. And finally, and certainly not least, I want to thank my friends who were there for me in this entire process, and never left my side: Diana, Mark, Mohamed and Abdelkhalig…you guys are the best! And I would like to dedicate this work to the memory of John Garang de Mabior, who saw so much potential in Sudan and inspired us all to do the same! 4 CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction and Motivation .......................................................................................................... 11 1.1 Problem Statement ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.2 Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 14 2.0 Overview of Wetland Hydrology ..................................................................................................... 16 2.1 Wetland Ecosystems ................................................................................................................... 16 2.1.1 Wetlands under a Changing Climate ................................................................................... 17 3.0 Model Background .......................................................................................................................... 21 3.1 The Community Land Model ....................................................................................................... 23 3.1.1 CLM Lake and Wetland Water Balance ............................................................................... 25 3.1.2 CLM Runoff.......................................................................................................................... 27 3.1.3 River Transport Model ........................................................................................................ 31 3.1.4 General Assessment of CLM Hydrology .............................................................................. 33 4.0 Methodology: The Modified CLM‐LW ............................................................................................ 39 4.1 Lake/Wetland Components in RTM ............................................................................................ 39 4.1.1 CLM Grid Cell and Land Unit Structure ............................................................................... 40 4.1.2 Lake and Wetland Evaporation ........................................................................................... 41 4.1.3 Lake and Wetland Clusters.................................................................................................. 42 4.1.4 Lake and Wetland Equations .............................................................................................. 45 5.0 The White Nile as a Case Study ....................................................................................................... 47 5.1 Nile Basin ..................................................................................................................................... 47 5.3 Hydrology of White Nile Basin .................................................................................................... 51 5.3.1 Equatorial Lakes .................................................................................................................. 51 5.3.2 Bahr El Ghazal ..................................................................................................................... 52 5.3.3 Machar Marshes and Sobat basin ....................................................................................... 52 5.4 Sudd Wetland Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 56 5.4.1 Topography and Vegetation ............................................................................................... 57 5.4.2 Precipitation and Meteorological Characteristics ............................................................... 60 5.4.3 Inflow from L. Albert and Torrent Flow .............................................................................. 61 5.4.4 Outflow: Difference of Malakal and Hillet Doleib ............................................................... 64 5.4.5 Evaporation of Sudd ............................................................................................................ 64 5.4.6 Delineating area of the Sudd .............................................................................................. 69 5 5.4.7 Hydrological model of the Sudd .......................................................................................... 74 5.4.8 Recent Field Studies on southern area of the Sudd Basin .................................................. 76 5.4.9 Hydro‐Climatology of the Sudd ..........................................................................................