University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Civil and Environmental Engineering Masters Projects 9-2011 Sub-Daily Multi-Objective Models for Optimizing Hydropower in the Deerfield River Kelcy Adamec Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cee_ewre Part of the Environmental Engineering Commons Adamec, Kelcy, "Sub-Daily Multi-Objective Models for Optimizing Hydropower in the Deerfield River" (2011). Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Masters Projects. 44. https://doi.org/10.7275/9DD1-VT19 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Civil and Environmental Engineering at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Environmental & Water Resources Engineering Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SUB-DAILY MULTI-OBJECTIVE MODELS FOR OPTIMIZING HYDROPOWER IN THE DEERFIELD RIVER A Project Presented by Kelcy Adamec Master of Science in Environmental Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 September 2011 SUB-DAILY MULTI-OBJECTIVE MODELS FOR OPTIMIZlNG HYDROPOWER IN THE DEERFIELD RIVER A Masters Project Presented by Kelcy Adamec Approved as to style and content by: !>~~· Graduate Program Director Civil and Enviro=tal · eering Department Adamec3 Acknowledgements This project was part of the Connecticut River Watershed Project, a joint partnership of The Nature Conservancy and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This project would not have been possible without funding from The Nature Conservancy. I have had the good fortune to work closely with three faculty members on this project I am especially grateful for my advisor, Dr. David Ahlfeld, for his invaluable guidance. I would also like to thank the other professors involved with the project, Dr. Richard Palmer and Dr. Casey Brown. Thank you to my fellow graduate students involved with the Connecticut River Watershed Project, Brian Pitta, Scott Steinschneider, Jessica Pica, and Sarah Whateley and to Dr. Austin Polebitski. I have learned a great deal working with the team. Finally, to my family and friends, thank you for your encouragement and support. Adamec4 Contents 1 Optimization Modeling in the Deerfield Watershed .................................................... 8 1.1 Project Overview ................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Optimization Modeling ......................................................................................... 9 1.2.1 Linear Progrannning ..................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Model Limitations ......................................................................................... 10 1.3 Literature Review ................................................................................................ 11 1.3.1 Optimization .................................................................................................. 11 1.3.2 Hydropower and Sub-Daily Time Steps ....................................................... 12 1.3.3 Environmental Impact ................................................................................... 13 1.4 The Deerfield Watershed..................................................................................... 15 2 The Structure and Necessity of a Sub-Daily Model.. ................................................. 18 2.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Background ......................................................................................................... 19 2.3 Deerfield River Optimization Model .................................................................. 20 2.3.1 Normalizing Objective Function Components .............................................. 24 2.3.2 Model Run Information ................................................................................. 26 2.3.3 Data Input for the Optimization Model... ...................................................... 27 2.4 Model Validation ................................................................................................. 32 2.4.1 Sub-Daily Model Verification ....................................................................... 36 Adamec5 2.5 Results ................................................................................................................. 37 2.5.1 Hydropower Optimization ............................................................................. 37 2.5.2 Impact ofTime step on Model Run Time ..................................................... 43 2.6 Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 44 2.7 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................. 45 2.8 References ........................................................................................................... 45 3 Sub-Daily Modeling ofEnviromnental Targets ......................................................... 48 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 48 3.1.1 Flashiness ...................................................................................................... 49 3.2 Methods ............................................................................................................... 51 3 .2.1 Deerfield River Optimization Model ............................................................ 51 3.2.2 Flashiness Flow ............................................................................................. 53 3.2.3 Model Runs ................................................................................................... 55 3.3 Results ................................................................................................................. 56 3.3.1 Flashiness Control ......................................................................................... 56 3.3.2 Hydropower ................................................................................................... 60 3.4 Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 62 3.5 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................. 63 3.6 References ........................................................................................................... 63 4 References .................................................................................................................. 65 Adamec6 5 Appendices ................................................................................................................. 68 5.1 Appendix A: Dam Operation .............................................................................. 68 5.1.1 SomersetDam ............................................................................................... 68 5.1.2 Searsburg Dam .............................................................................................. 69 5.1.3 Harriman Dam ............................................................................................... 69 5.1.4 Sherman Dam ................................................................................................ 70 5.1.5 Number Five .................................................................................................. 72 5.1.6 Fife Brook/Bear Swamp ................................................................................ 72 5.1.7 Number Four ................................................................................................. 73 5.1.8 Number 1bree ............................................................................................... 73 5.1.9 Gardners Falls ............................................................................................... 74 5.1.10 Number Two ............................................................................................... 74 5.2 Appendix B: Deerfield Model Base Case Equations and Variables ................... 75 5.2.1 Base Case Equations ..................................................................................... 75 5.2.2 Variable Guide .............................................................................................. 76 5.3 Appendix C: Time Step Model Changes ............................................................ 78 5.4 Appendix D: Travel Time in Stream Channels ................................................... 79 5.5 Appendix E: Expected Sub-Daily Results .......................................................... 81 5.6 Appendix F: Sub-Daily Model Results ............................................................... 83 5.7 Appendix G: LINGO Model Code for Hydropower Optimization ..................... 93 Adamec? 5.8 Appendix H: LINGO Model Code for Flashiness ............................................ 104 5.9 Appendix I: SimulationModeling..................................................................... 116 5.9.1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 116 5.9.2 Model Physics ............................................................................................