1. Hanoi, January 29 th 2015 RODOLFO SONCINI-SESSA DEI – Politecnico di Milano IMRR Project 14 – First policy design results INTEGRATED AND SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT OF RED-THAI BINH RIVER SYSTEM IN A CHANGING CLIMATE

2. The policy design GA

3. The Design Problem (It)(It) scenario (I t, θ) scenario

4. Design scenario: DS1 20 years of regular flows (1/5/1990 - 30/4/2010) 19 years - 5 extreme flood years (red) -5 extreme drought years (yellow) -9 normal years interposed (blue) regular indicators extreme indicators J F, J H, J S J eF, J eS

5. Extreme events

6. Design scenario Extreme years

7. Water supply From IMRR wiki website:IMRR wiki website 7 i ws:3 JSJS

8. Flood control From IMRR wiki website:IMRR wiki website i Fl:1 8 JFJF

9. Hydropower From IMRR wiki website:IMRR wiki website: i HP:1 JHJH

10. Pareto front Extreme floods JSJS JHJH JFJF J eF

11. Pareto front Extreme floods JHJH JFJF J eF

12. Pareto front Extreme floods JSJS JFJF J eF

13. Pareto front Extreme floods JSJS JHJH J eF

14. BAU alternative The historical behavior (releases and levels) are evaluated in the design condition: 1. the river incision is assumed to be the one of 2010 for all the period 1990-2010; 2. the hydropower demand is the one of 2010; 3. the water supply demand is the one of 2010; 4. Van Coc operating rule is the present one 5. Hoa Binh reservoir only is assumed to be active (Thac Ba data are available from 2002 only!) Then the BAU evaluation does not exactly reflect what happened in the past!

15. Duong/Hong ratio

16. Pareto front (Scenario DS1, 2.5 M policy evaluations) * JSJS JHJH JFJF

17. * JHJH JFJF

18. JFJF J eF * ?

19. Alternative Indicator Percentual deficit [%] Percentual deficit of HBinh [%] Hist. HP of Hoa Binh Historical period -> 2 Power plants only!

20. Pareto front (Scenario DS1, 2.5 M policy evaluations) 0.299 * JHJH JFJF

21. Hoa Binh release Turbine capacity

22. Pareto front (Scenario DS1, 2.5 M policy evaluations) 0.215 0.299 Historical production * * -75 % -83 % JFJF

23. Pareto front (Scenario DS1, 2.5 M policy evaluations) * -75 % -98 % JSJS JFJF

24. Pareto front (Scenario DS1, 2.5 M policy evaluations) 0.215 * -83 % -98 % JHJH * JSJS

25. Parallel coordinates plot A1156 Hist. Natural

26. Alternative A1156 - design Ha Noi (1990-2010) 11.5 First alarm

27. Alternative A1156 – design Son La (1990-2010)

28. Alternative A1156 – design Hoa Binh (1990-2010)

29. Alternative A1156 – design Tuyen Quang (1990-2010) The irrigation is supplied by Tuyen Quang reservoir mainly, since the production on Hoa Binh is more valuable: higher head

30. Design + validation scenario Extreme years Validation

31. Alternative A1156 - validation Son La (2011-2013) 2012

32. Alternative A1156 - validation Hoa Binh (2011-2013) 2012

33. Alternative A1156 - validation Tuyen Quang (2011-2013) 2012

34. Design + validation scenario Extreme years Validation

35. Son La inflow 2010 2012

36. Son La storage 2010 2012

37. Hoa Binh inflow 2010 2012

38. Hoa Binh decision 2010 2012

39. Tuyen Quang inflow 2010 2012

40. Tuyen Quang storage 2010 2012

41. Storage space

42. Trajectories of A1156 in the storage space

45. Design scenario: DS1 20 years of regular flows (1/5/1990 - 30/4/2010) 19 years - 5 extreme flood years (red) -5 extreme drought years (yellow) -9 normal years interposed (blue) regular indicators extreme indicators J F, J H, J S J eF, J eS DS2 23 years of regular flows (1/5/1990 - 30/4/2013)

46. Pareto front (Scenario DS2, + 0.5 M policy evaluations) JSJS JHJH JFJF

47. JHJH JFJF

48. JSJS JFJF

49. J eF JFJF

50. What about improper behavior?

51. Trajectories of B79 in the storage space

52. Trajectories of A1156 in the storage space

53. Trajectories of B79 in the storage space

54. Further 2.5 M policies evaluations (+13 days) were run to ascertain that nothing better can be obtained. In total 28 days of run for a total of 2.300.000.000 years of evaluation

55. Pareto front (Scenario DS2, + 0.5 + 2.5 policy evaluations) JSJS JHJH JFJF

56. -75% -99 % * JHJH JFJF

57. Pareto front (Scenario DS2, + 0.5 + 2.5 policy evaluations) -75 % -98 % * JSJS JFJF

58. Pareto front (Scenario DS2, + 0.5 + 2.5 policy evaluations) -99 % -98 % * JSJS JHJH

59. Pareto front (Scenario DS2, + 0.5 + 2.5 policy evaluations) J eF JFJF

60. Parallel coordinates plot group C C123 A1154

61. C123: Water level at Ha Noi

62. Parallel coordinates plot group C C123 A1154 C254

63. C254: Water level at Ha Noi

64. C254: Water level at Ha Noi 2000 K scenario

65. 1971 flood and C254

66. 1996 flood and C254

67. C254: Son La storage design scenario

68. C254: Son La storage 2000 years scenario

69. C254: Tuyen Quang storage design scenario

70. C254: Tuyen Quang storage 2000 years scenario

71. Validation of the Extreme Splitting Approach J eF JFJF 2000 years scenario 2K scenario

72. Pareto front group C JSJS JHJH JFJF J eF

73. Pareto front group C JHJH JFJF J eF

74. Pareto front group C JSJS J eF JFJF

75. Pareto front group C JSJS JHJH J eF

76. Pareto front group C J eF JFJF JHJH

77. 1996 flood and C254

78. 1996 Rivers flows

79. 1996 Son La – Hoa Binh storages

80. 1996 Son La – Hoa Binh decision and release

81. 1996 Son La storage and release

82. Next week We will analyze in detail the effects of the policies on the different sectors. We will establish the evaluation criteria of each of them.

83. What next? 1.The information used by the policy is the storages and the time only. What is the advantage of adding other information? E.g. Ha Noi level, the volume stored in the irrigation canal or the current inflows? 2.We have neglected the storage thresholds presently imposed by law. What is the cost and advantage of maintaining them? 3.What is the best form for the policy?

84. Thanks for your attention XIN CẢM ƠN

85. Schedules  Group A: u First trial with random seeds and termination of 1M evaluations using design scenario of 39 years DS1 (from 1/5/1990 – 30/4/2010 and extreme years ) u Validate some good alternatives of group A, ex. A1156 with three years (1/5/2010 – 30/4/2013) adding to the design scenario and 2000 years scenarios.  Group B: u Second trial start from group A and termination after 1.5M evaluations using design scenario of 39 years DS1. u Validate some good alternatives of group B, ex. B094 with three years (1/5/2010 – 30/4/2013) adding to the design scenario and 2000 years scenarios.  Need to add also three years (1/5/2010 – 30/4/2013) to design scenario since this period includes three continuos drought year which not happen in the history.  The optimal population of Group B is reduced by criteria on five objective scales: J F  15,000 ; J eF  300,000; J H  0.6; J S  150; J eS  450. and have 191 alternatives which will be used as the initial population of group C.

86. Schedules  Group C: u Start from reduced final population of Group B (191 alternatives) and stop after 0.5M evaluations using design scenario of 42 years DS2 (from 1/5/1990 – 30/4/2013 and extreme years) u Validate some good alternatives of group C, ex. C with 2000 years scenarios.  Group D: u Continue with the final population of Group C and stop after +1.5 M evaluations using design scenario of 42 years DS2 (from 1/5/1990 – 30/4/2013 and extreme years ) u Validate some good alternatives of group D, with 2000 years scenarios.  Group E: u Continue with the final population of Group D and stop after +1M evaluations using design scenario of 42 years DS2 (from 1/5/1990 – 30/4/2013 and extreme years ) u Validate some good alternatives of group E, with 2000 years scenarios. u In total 5.5 M

87. Threshold violation in the history Illegal violation … … since Ha Noi is below the alarm threshold. Legal gradual level growth

88. Threshold violation in the design Illegal violations … … since Ha Noi is below the alarm threshold. Legal gradual level growth