期刊
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
卷 358, 期 1-2, 页码 70-83出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.05.033
关键词
climate change; hydrology; uncertainty; variability; stream flow; snow
资金
- Ouranos Consortium on Regional Climatology and Adaptation to Climate Change
- Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
The impact of climate change on the hydrology of the Chute-du-Diable watershed (Quebec, Canada) is studied by comparing statistics on current and projected future discharge resulting from a wide range of climate change scenarios. The use of 10 equally weighted climate projections from a combination of 5 general circulation models (GCMs) and 2 greenhouse gas emission scenarios (GHGES) allows for the definition of an uncertainty envelope of future hydrologic variables. GCM data is downscaled using the change factor approach for 30-year time slices centered around years 2020, 2050 and 2080. To estimate natural variability, synthetic time series are then computed for each horizon and for each climate change scenario, using a stochastic weather generator (30 series of 30 years), and are entered into a hydrology model. Future hydrological regimes are then compared to the control period (1961-1990) using the annual and seasonal mean discharge, peak discharge and timing of peak discharge criteria. Results indicate a 1-14 degrees C increase in seasonal temperature and a -9 to +55% change in seasonal. precipitation. The largest increases in both temperature and precipitation are observed in the winter and spring seasons. The main hydrologic impact observed is a spring flood appearing 1-5 weeks earlier than usual and a modification of its amplitude from -40 to +25%. Most scenarios suggest increases in the winter, spring and fall discharge, whereas summer is expected to see a decrease in discharge. White there is still a large scatter in projected values, the uncertainty analysis projects a better view of the most probable future hydrologic behaviour of the watershed. Of all, sources of uncertainty considered in this study, the largest comes from the choice of a GCM. Accordingly, all impact studies based on results from only one GCM should be interpreted with caution. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据