4.5 Article

A quantitative approach for hydrological drought characterization in southwestern China using GRACE

Journal

HYDROGEOLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 893-903

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10040-015-1362-y

Keywords

GRACE; Non-seasonal water storage deficit; Drought; China; Satellite imagery

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [41274032, 41474018]
  2. National 973 Project China [2013CB733301, 2013CB733302]
  3. Basic Research Foundation of the Key Laboratory of Geospace Environment and Geodesy of Ministry of Education, Wuhan University [14-02-04]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A quantitative approach for hydrological drought characterization, based on non-seasonal water storage deficit data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite mission, is assessed. Non-seasonal storage deficit is the negative terrestrial water storage after deducting trend, acceleration and seasonal signals, and it is designated as a drought event when it persists for three or more continuous months. The non-seasonal water storage deficit is used for measuring the hydrological drought in southwestern China. It is found that this storage-deficit method clearly identifies hydrological drought onset, end and duration, and quantifies instantaneous severity, peak drought magnitude, and time to recovery. Moreover, it is found that severe droughts have frequently struck southwestern China in the past several decades, among which, the drought of 2011-2012 was the most severe; the duration was 10 months, the severity was -208.92 km(3)/month, and the time to recovery was 17 months. These results compare well with the National Climate Center of China drought databases, which signifies that the GRACE-based non-seasonal water storage deficit has a quantitative effect on hydrological drought characterization and provides an effective tool for researching droughts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available