Bow River Live Simulation Summary Report December 2011 This report was prepared by WaterSMART Solutions Ltd. (WaterSMART) and Alberta Innovates – Energy and Environment Solutions. It may be freely downloaded from the Alberta WaterPortal at: http://www.albertawater.com. Alberta Environment and Water has provided to Alberta WaterSMART a licence to use the data required to prepare this report for the purpose of conducting research and public dissemination on a non-commercial basis. Alberta Environment and Water data is co-mingled with other data and, as a result, it is not possible to separate Alberta Environment and Water data from other data. Therefore, Alberta Environment and Water requires the following copyright and disclaimer as it relates to its data contained herein. The statements below apply only to the data provided by Alberta Environment and Water to prepare this report, not to other aspects of the report. Copyright and Terms of Use This material, including copyright and marks under the Trade-marks Act (Canada), is owned by the Government of Alberta and protected by law. Permission Statement This material may be used, reproduced, stored or transmitted for non-commercial purposes. However, Crown copyright is to be acknowledged. We ask that: Users exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; Alberta Environment and Water be identified as the source; and The reproduction is not represented as an official version of the materials reproduced, nor as having been made, in affiliation with or with the endorsement of Alberta Environment and Water. If it is to be used, reproduced, stored or transmitted for commercial purposes, arrange first for consent by contacting: Alberta Environment and Water: Environmental Modeling Team Leader at (403) 297-6565 Disclaimer Information in this report is provided solely for the user’s information and, while thought to be accurate, is provided strictly “as is” and without warranty of any kind. The Crown, its agents, employees or contractors will not be liable to you for any damages, direct or indirect, or lost profits arising out of your use of information provided in this report. Acknowledgements As was the case with the Bow River Project, participants gave generously of their time and expertise for the purpose of testing their earlier recommendations in a live Simulation. They are listed in Appendix A. Agencies and organizations that funded the live Simulation are also gratefully acknowledged. Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.0 Background on the Bow River Project ................................................................................ 3 2.0 Bow River Simulation Objectives ....................................................................................... 4 3.0 Simulation Rules and Roles ................................................................................................. 4 4.0 Simulation Recap ................................................................................................................. 5 5.0 Simulation Results ............................................................................................................... 9 5.1 Comparison of Performance Measures .......................................................................... 10 5.2 Potential Refinements .................................................................................................... 14 6.0 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 15 Appendix A: Bow River Simulation Participants ..................................................................... 16 Appendix B: Two Water Bank Approaches ............................................................................. 17 Appendix C: Acronyms, Abbreviations and Conversion Factors............................................. 20 Tables and Figures Table 1. Performance Measures ...................................................................................................... 5 Figure 1. Flows at Bassano ........................................................................................................... 10 Figure 2. Shortages in the System................................................................................................. 11 Figure 3. Flow in the Kananaskis River........................................................................................ 12 Figure 4. Water Bank Storage ....................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5. Water Bank Approach 1 ................................................................................................ 17 Figure 6. Water Bank Approach 2 ................................................................................................ 18 Figure 7. Benefits of Water Bank Approach 2 at Bassano ........................................................... 19 1 Bow River Live Simulation Report, December 2011 Executive Summary In 2010, a diverse group of water users and managers in the Bow River basin proposed a different way of managing the river system that would make water available to existing and future users when and where it is needed most. One outcome of their work was the Bow River Operational Model (BROM). In 2011, the same group of individuals met again to test the impacts of their recommendations through a live simulation (the Simulation) using the BROM. This Simulation enabled participants to perform a realistic test of existing operations and to see the real-time operational impacts of their management choices. The Simulation exercise enabled stakeholders to better understand the type and range of discussions that are needed to make decisions about managing the river. It confirmed a number of the key recommendations put forward through the Bow River Project to improve aquatic health and to make effective use of a water bank to manage the timing of downstream flows. In essence, the Simulation confirmed that the Bow River system can and should be managed differently to foster innovation and achieve many economic, environmental and social goals throughout the Bow basin. Participants concluded that the BROM is a realistic model and a valuable tool for understanding the river system and exploring changes and potential opportunities to manage the system better. Additional refinements and improvements to the BROM were identified and proposed as a result of the Simulation. 2 Bow River Live Simulation Report, December 2011 1.0 Background on the Bow River Project For the past 100 years, the flow of the Bow River has been controlled by dams and reservoirs and by the operating rules established by the owners of these facilities. Since 1911, TransAlta Utilities (TAU) has been the main influence on the on-stream storage and release of water in the river and its tributaries. Since the early 1900s, water diversions and off-stream storage in support of irrigated agriculture and municipalities have also affected the flow and timing of water in the Bow River basin. The fact that the timing and flow rate of the Bow River are already being managed offers a unique strategic opportunity to change the way decisions are made and make water available for environmental purposes as well as to users when and where it is needed most. In 2010, the Bow River Project Research Consortium was established to explore options for re- managing the Bow River system from headwaters to confluence, in an integrated manner that considers all users, interests and values.1 Participants worked with an interactive, hydrologic simulation model to develop plausible and achievable scenarios for protecting the health of the river throughout the basin while also meeting the needs of water users. A major outcome of the Bow River Project (BRP) was the fully functioning, data-loaded Bow River Operational Model (BROM). In addition, participants gained valuable collaborative experience as they worked with the model. Nine principles guided the BRP: 1. Causing no significant, measurable environmental harm. 2. Assuming Bow River basin remains closed to new licences. 3. Respecting TransAlta’s reputation as an environmentally responsible and proactive corporation. 4. Compensating TransAlta for the cost of providing benefits to other parties. 5. Meeting Alberta’s annual apportionment commitments to Saskatchewan. 6. Maintaining minimum flow requirements for municipalities. 7. Supporting the long term population/economic growth forecasts. 8. Meeting long-term forecast needs of the Siksika First Nation. 9. Respecting Alberta’s water licensing priority system. The BRP concluded that the Bow River system can and should be managed differently to achieve many economic, environmental and social goals throughout the basin, and that the changes required could be implemented for relatively modest cost. The BRP created four alternative scenarios, one of which became the “preferred” scenario for managing the river system. This preferred scenario involved stabilizing Lower Kananaskis Lake and Kananaskis River, establishing a water bank capable of managing 60,000 acre-feet in a different manner, and raising the priority of the environmental flows throughout the river, as represented by the flow at Bassano; all scenarios are described in more detail in the original BRP report. Due to the short time frame for the BRP and the