Water Resources Research · 2020 · 68 citations · 50 references
Natural ResourcesHydrologyWater Resources ManagementHydrologic ModelingReservoir SimulationWater Resources EngineeringInflow ForecastingReservoir ForecastingReservoir Inflow ForecastingReservoir ManagementReservoir OperationStreamflow PredictionDamsReservoir Flow SimulationReservoir Inflow Forecast UncertaintyReservoir Release Decision RulesReservoir Release PoliciesReservoir-based ReleaseSeasonal Inflow ForecastingStreamflow Modeling
Large-scale hydrological and water resource models increasingly study water scarcity vulnerability, but their generic reservoir release schemes often miss the operational nuances of individual dams. The study evaluates whether dam‑specific empirical release‑availability functions can enhance LHM simulation performance, noting that addressing LHM flow biases is essential to realize this potential. The authors compare seasonally varying, linear piecewise release functions based on storage and forecasted inflow to a generic scheme across 36 Columbia River Basin reservoirs. Empirical release functions better match observed releases, especially during drought, and adding forecasts improves performance, but when applied to biased LHM streamflows, forecast‑based policies can degrade simulation accuracy by amplifying bias.
Abstract Large‐scale hydrological and water resource models (LHMs) are used increasingly to study the vulnerability of human systems to water scarcity. These models rely on generic reservoir release schemes that often fail to capture the nuances of operations at individual dams. Here we assess whether empirically derived release‐availability functions tailored to individual dams could improve the simulation performance of an LHM. Seasonally varying, linear piecewise relations that specify water release as a function of prevailing storage levels and forecasted future inflow are compared to a common generic scheme for 36 key reservoirs of the Columbia River Basin. When forced with observed inflows, the empirical approach captures observed release decisions better than the generic scheme—including under conditions of drought. The inclusion of seasonally varying inflow forecasts used by reservoir operators adds further improvement. When exposed to biases and errors inherent in the LHM, data‐driven policies fail to offer a robust improvement; inclusion of forecasts deteriorates LHM reservoir simulation performance in some cases. We perform sensitivity analysis to explain this result, finding that the bias inherent in LHM streamflow is amplified by a reservoir model that relies on forecasts. To harness the potential of interpretable, data‐driven reservoir operating schemes, research must address LHM flow biases arising from inaccuracies in climate input, runoff generation, flow routing, and water withdrawal and consumption data.
50