Recharge on Non-irrigated Land Mike McVay 06/24/2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
C2 NWS Snow Model. C2 Snow Model Terms  SWE - Snow water equivalent  AESC - Areal extent of snow cover  Heat Deficit - Energy required to bring the.
Advertisements

1 Recharge on Non-irrigated Lands ESHMC 8 January 2008 B. Contor.
Preliminary Design of Water Balance Covers: A Method from the ACAP Data Set William H. Albright, PhD Desert Research Institute Reno, Nevada USA
Line Efficiency     Percentage Month Today’s Date
Engineering Hydrology (ECIV 4323)
Estimation of areal recharge for the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer J.R. Bartolino U.S. Geological Survey Idaho Water Science Center SVRP Aquifer.
Refine and Adjust the Design Parameters. © Irrigation Association Performance of Sprinkler Devices Depends on Soil type and slope Climatic conditions.
Unit Number Oct 2011 Nov 2011 Dec 2011 Jan 2012 Feb 2012 Mar 2012 Apr 2012 May 2012 Jun 2012 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sep (3/4 Unit) 7 8 Units.
HOW TO MAKE A CLIMATE GRAPH CLIMATE GRAPHING ASSIGNMENT PT.2.
Soil and the Hydrologic Cycle Read Ch 6 Brady and Weil Quiz 6 on Monday, Oct. 15.
Chapter 5 Forecasting. What is Forecasting Forecasting is the scientific methodology for predicting what will happen in the future based on the data in.
ESHMC Meeting 6 May 2008 Stacey Taylor. Overview Model river representation in ESPAM 1 What data is available to make changes for the new stress periods.
Ordinary Kriging Process in ArcGIS
TVA Generates Power and sends it down Transmission Lines to Newport Utilities Distribution Substations TVA Newport Utilities Substations Distributes the.
Crops to be Irrigated Factors for consideration
1 Presented by Bryce Contor University of Idaho Idaho Water Resources Research Institute Spokane Valley - Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer Study Human Water Use.
1 LGM-Dairy: A Cost Comparison With Bundled Options.
Spatial Interpolation of monthly precipitation by Kriging method
OUTFLOW COMPONENTS. Evapotranspiration (EVAP) l Evapotranspiration is the result of surface water and soil evaporation and transpiration from the plants.
Return Flows Discussion Continued ESHMC Meeting 6 May 2008 Stacey Taylor.
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION.
Western States Remote Sensing of ET Workshop Boise, 12 October 2011 METRIC TM Consumptive use from energy balance (METRIC) and conventional estimates for.
CE 424 HYDROLOGY 1 Instructor: Dr. Saleh A. AlHassoun.
Integrating Spatial Information for Community-Based Management of a Hillside Watershed J.C. Luijten 1, E.B. Knapp 2, J.W. Jones 1 1 University of Florida,
The water climate balance of the soil is the sum of the amount of water that gets in and out of a given area in a given time period. The input of water.
1 Recharge on Non-irrigated Lands ESHMC Meeting January 2009 W. Schreuder & B. Contor.
May 03, UFE ANALYSIS Old – New Model Comparison Compiled by the Load Profiling Group ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation May 03, 2007.
Non Leap YearLeap Year DateDay NumberMod 7Day NumberMod 7 13-Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
Water Every Drop Counts!. Earth’s Water Supply 2 Groups of Fresh Water 1.) Surface (above ground) 2.) Ground (below the ground surface)
Surface Water Applied Hydrology. Surface Water Source of Streamflow Streamflow Characteristics Travel Time and Stream Networks.
Using the Trapezoidal Model to Derate NW Hydro Capacity Resource Adequacy Technical Committee July 25, 2007 Portland, Oregon.
Four files erik_a2_stockholm_temp Erik simulation scenario A2 until 2100 erik_a2_stockholm_prec Erik simulation scenario A2 until.
Sanitary Engineering Lecture 4
River Stage and Bottom Elevation
Jan 2016 Solar Lunar Data.
Klamath ADR Hydrology Report
Learning objectives To understand the water balance
COSMO Priority Project ”Quantitative Precipitation Forecasts”
Hydrologic Cycle (Water Cycle)
Q1 Jan Feb Mar ENTER TEXT HERE Notes
Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall
Constructing Climate Graphs
Mammoth Caves National Park, Kentucky
2017 Jan Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
Gantt Chart Enter Year Here Activities Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
CORPUS CHRISTI CATHOLIC COLLEGE – GEOGRAPHY DEPARTMENT
Calendar Year 2009 Insure Oklahoma Total & Projected Enrollment
Jan Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
Hydrology CIVL341.
2009 TIMELINE PROJECT PLANNING 12 Months Example text Jan Feb March
HOW TO DRAW CLIMATE GRAPHS
Electricity Cost and Use – FY 2016 and FY 2017
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Operations Management Dr. Ron Lembke
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Hydrology CIVL341 Introduction
Operations Management Dr. Ron Lembke
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Objective - To make a line graph.
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Engineering Hydrology (ECIV 4323)
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
Presentation transcript:

Recharge on Non-irrigated Land Mike McVay 06/24/2010

Our Process for Estimating Recharge. Our process for estimating recharge on non-irrigated land is to use ET Idaho data from 45 weather stations to calculate the amount of recharge based on precipitation, root zone moisture and soil type. Then we utilize semi-log kriging to interpolate the recharge data across the model domain.

Interpolation – Data Transformation Both Willem and I are employing semi-log kriging to interpolate the data. This involves a semi-log transform of the data in which values below a threshold are transformed logarithmically and those values above the threshold are transformed linearly. Transformation of data is necessary to avoid negative extrapolated values. Semi-log transformation employed. Prevents extrapolation of “small” numbers to negative values while maintaining linear behavior of “large” numbers. Threshold (α) of

Interpolation - Kriging I have employed Geostatistical Analyst in ArcMap to Krige, Willem has written code. Ordinary Kriging – No trend in data, so no drift has been incorporated for interpolation. No nugget has been employed. Linear Variogram Model – Few data points over a large area precludes fitting a variogram model to data. Geostatistical Analyst does not support Linear Variogram, so a Spherical model has been employed with a very large range. Sites with no data have been ignored during Kriging.

Interpolation Comparison I have randomly chosen 30 month/soil-type combinations to compare interpolation results. My comparison of the results indicates that the Kriging methods that Willem and I have employed are very similar (see table on next slide).

Stress Period/Soil Type McVay Sum (ft) Schreuder Sum (ft) Diff (%McVay Sum) Abs Diff (%McVay Sum) Dec 2001 Lava % Nov 1984 Thin % Dec 1998 Thin % May 1980 Thin % Jan 1982 Lava % Dec 2004 Lava % May 1993 Lava % Sep 1993 Thick % Sep 1997 Thin % Aug 1999 Thin % Sep 1994 Thick % Aug 1989 Thick % Jun 2003 Thin % Feb 1990 Lava % Oct 2002 Thick % Sep 1994 Lava % Jul 1995 Thick % Oct 2008 Lava % Apr 1982 Thin % May 2008 Lava % Apr 1994 Lava % Jan 1995 Thick % Oct 1984 Thick % Mar 1988 Thick % Oct 1999 Lava % Jun 1986 Lava % Mar 1997 Thick % Dec 1995 Thick % Jan 1992 Thin % Absolute Value Average 0.55%

Some figures to assess agreement between Kriging Efforts

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder 38.76

McVay Schreuder 76.26

McVay Schreuder 84.09

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder 34.10

McVay Schreuder 73.73

McVay Schreuder 43.29

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder 22.74

McVay Schreuder 67.09

McVay Schreuder 67.98

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder 59.89

McVay Schreuder 65.10

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder 49.62

McVay Schreuder 27.79

McVay Schreuder

McVay Schreuder

Calculating Recharge

Our Process for Calculating Recharge. We calculate the amount of recharge at each of the 45 weather stations using ET Idaho precipitation (P), root-zone moisture (P_rz) data. Recharge = P – P_rz We represent recharge for the three general soil types of Thick Soil, Thin Soil and Lava Rock using the ET Idaho root-zone moisture data for Sage Brush and Dormant Turf covers. To represent recharge on the various soil types we use: 1.Precipitation – Sage Brush Root-zone Moisture to represent Thick Soil. 2.Precipitation – Dormant Turf Root-zone Moisture to represent Thin Soil. 3.Precipitation – (2/3*Dormant Turf Root-zone Moisture) to represent Lava Rock.

What is P_rz? “P_rz – Precipitation residing in the root zone. P_rz is the amount of gross reported precipitation that infiltrates into the soil (i.e., less any runoff) and that remains in the root zone for consumption by evaporation or transpiration. P_rz is computed as: P – Runoff – DPerc where: P is gross precipitation Runoff is estimated surface runoff Dperc is deep percolation of any precipitation below the max root zone for the land-use condition.” Note: Definition from “Evaporation and Consumptive Irrigation Water Requirements for Idaho.” Allen and Robinson, Note: All values are in units of [L/T] which are multiplied by the number of days in each month.

Our Proxy for Recharge. Our proxy for recharge is calculated as: Recharge = P – P_rz P-(P – Runoff – Dperc) Runoff + Dperc Recharge = Runoff + Dperc where: Recharge is recharge to the aquifer P is gross precipitation P_rz is precipitation residing in root zone Runoff is estimated surface runoff Dperc is deep percolation of any precipitation below the max root zone for the land-use condition. We assume that all runoff will eventually percolate via ponding or stream leakage to become recharge.

Root Zone Precipitation Runoff P_rz Dperc Recharge = P – P_rz P-(P – Runoff – Dperc) Runoff + Dperc Recharge = Runoff + Dperc

Three scenarios are present in the data from ET Idaho that confound our process for estimating recharge. Recharge = P – P_rz Runoff + Dperc There are three scenarios in the ET Idaho data that we need to address. 1.Precipitation residing in root zone is negative. i.Typically occurs during dry periods. ii.P – (-P_rz) results in abnormally large amount of recharge. 2.Precipitation residing in root zone is greater than gross precipitation. i.Typically occurs during non-summer months (one in July) – only 15 occurrences. ii. Difference is always 0.01 mm/day. iii. P – P_rz results in negative recharge value. 3.Dormant Turf precipitation residing in root zone is greater than that of Sage Brush. i.Occurs in 31% of data. ii.Does not appear to be seasonal. iii.P – P_rz results in more recharge on Thick Soils than on Thin Soils and Lava.

Scenario 1 – Root Zone Moisture is negative Our work-around for moving forward is to consider this a soil moisture “deficit” and set recharge to be zero. P_rz = P – Runoff – Dperc Negative values should not occur, based on mass balance. American Falls August 1981: P – P_rz Sage = 0.07 – (-2.06) = 2.13

Our work-around for moving forward is to compute recharge as the absolute difference. P_rz = P – Runoff – Dperc P_rz > P should not occur, based on mass balance. Scenario 2 – Root Zone Moisture is greater than precipitation Swan Valley March 1985: P – Prz Sage = 0.80 – 0.81 = -0.01

No work-around for moving forward has been employed. Performing the P – P_rz calculation results in more recharge from Thick Soil than from Thin Soil and Lava. Previous work has demonstrated that recharge from precipitation is partly a function of soil texture and depth, and the general relationships between the soil types represented on the ESPA are that recharge from Lava > Thin Soil > Thick Soil (Contor, 2004; Garabedian, 1992). Scenario 3 – Dormant Turf P_rz is greater than Sage Brush P_rz Blackfoot

Recharge Calculation Summary Both Willem and I are using the same methodology in calculating recharge. There are three scenarios that confound our recharge proxy process. Precipitation residing in root zone is negative. Precipitation residing in root zone is greater than gross precipitation. Dormant Turf precipitation residing in root zone is greater than that of Sage Brush. We have employed two temporary work-around solutions to move forward with interpolation. Precipitation residing in root zone is negative. Work-around: Recharge = Zero. Precipitation residing in root zone is greater than gross precipitation. Work-around: Recharge = 0.01 mm/day. Dormant Turf precipitation residing in root zone is greater than that of Sage Brush. Work- around: None. Formal solutions should be pursued by the committee once Dr. Allen has had a chance to look at the data.

Any Questions?