Environmental Research Letters
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT • OPEN ACCESS
Contrasting warming and drought in snowmelt-dominated agricultural basins: revealing the role of elevation gradients in regional response to temperature change To cite this article before publication: James Gilbert et al 2018 Environ. Res. Lett. in press https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aacb38
Manuscript version: Accepted Manuscript Accepted Manuscript is “the version of the article accepted for publication including all changes made as a result of the peer review process, and which may also include the addition to the article by IOP Publishing of a header, an article ID, a cover sheet and/or an ‘Accepted Manuscript’ watermark, but excluding any other editing, typesetting or other changes made by IOP Publishing and/or its licensors” This Accepted Manuscript is © 2018 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd.
As the Version of Record of this article is going to be / has been published on a gold open access basis under a CC BY 3.0 licence, this Accepted Manuscript is available for reuse under a CC BY 3.0 licence immediately. Everyone is permitted to use all or part of the original content in this article, provided that they adhere to all the terms of the licence https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/3.0 Although reasonable endeavours have been taken to obtain all necessary permissions from third parties to include their copyrighted content within this article, their full citation and copyright line may not be present in this Accepted Manuscript version. Before using any content from this article, please refer to the Version of Record on IOPscience once published for full citation and copyright details, as permissions may be required. All third party content is fully copyright protected and is not published on a gold open access basis under a CC BY licence, unless that is specifically stated in the figure caption in the Version of Record. View the article online for updates and enhancements.
This content was downloaded from IP address 173.211.114.61 on 08/06/2018 at 18:27
1
Title:
2
Contrasting warming and drought in snowmelt-dominated agricultural basins: revealing the role of elevation gradients in regional response to temperature change
3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
us cri
4
Authors:
James M. Gilbert1,2, Reed M. Maxwell1,2 1 Hydrologic Science and Engineering Program, Geology and Geological Engineering Department, Integrated GroundWater Modeling Center, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado, USA 2 Climate Change Water and Society (CCWAS), Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT), USA
12
an
16
dM
15
pte
14
Corresponding Author: James Gilbert, now at the United States Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado, USA (
[email protected])
ce
13
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 1 of 21
Abstract
18
For snow-dominated basins like the San Joaquin in California, warmer temperatures affect
19
hydrologic processes and stress water resources that support valuable irrigated agriculture and
20
urban populations. Large inter-annual swings in precipitation, seen recently in California,
21
highlight the need to better understand the effects of potential future warming combined with
22
such extreme multi-year precipitation variability. In this study we use an integrated hydrologic
23
model (ParFlow-CLM) to examine the effects of mean annual warming of 2°C and 4°C on
24
hydrologic response over a recent wet-dry cycle (2009-2013). Simulations are performed at a 1
25
km resolution over the San Joaquin basin to assess the hydrologic response that bridges the local
26
and basin scales common to many previous studies of the region. At the basin scale, warmer
27
temperatures reduce San Joaquin River runoff by an amount consistent with the contemporary
28
dry years: for all but the wettest year, an increase in temperature of 4°C reduces simulated runoff
29
to the baseline value of the next driest year simulated. This runoff loss can be attributed to
30
offsetting warming-induced increases in annual evapotranspiration, subsidized in dry years by
31
subsurface storage. Locally, hydrologic response to warming manifests as variation along an
32
elevation gradient. The basin-wide reduction in runoff is the net balance of local increases and
33
reductions that follow a complex function of elevation: negative mean runoff sensitivity can
34
occur at all elevations, yet a positive runoff sensitivity exists for select locations between 2000 m
35
and 3500 m elevation. In contrast, warming increases mean ET at all elevations in the Sierra
36
Nevada, with the highest increase between 1000 m and 3000 m. The average increase in local
37
runoff and ET combine to reduce percolation below the root zone in locations across the Sierra
38
Nevada while shifting event-scale increases in recharge to Central Valley river channels.
39 40 41
ce
42
pte
dM
an
us cri
17
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 2 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
1.
44
California’s San Joaquin River is one of many basins worldwide in which the key source of
45
water supporting extensive urban and agricultural uses—i.e. a seasonal snowpack and mountain
46
runoff—is at significant risk in a warming climate (Mankin et al., 2015). The central role of the
47
San Joaquin River basin’s water supply, and its sensitivity to climate, has motivated a host of
48
studies over the past several decades that have sought to illuminate the connections between
49
warming temperatures and changing hydrology in the basin. In the wake of the significant
50
system-wide stresses induced by the historic drought of 2012-2015 (Dettinger and Anderson,
51
2015; He et al., 2017; Swain et al., 2014) and the extreme wet year that followed in 2017 (Wang
52
et al., 2017), the importance of understanding these connections has received renewed urgency.
53
Climate change analysis in California—with a traditional focus on the Sierra Nevada as a critical
54
source region—has evolved over the last three decades to quantify hydrologic impacts using a
55
mix of approaches. Coarsely-resolved regional models have been useful in translating projections
56
of future warming into long-term first-order terrestrial impacts like reduced snowpack and earlier
57
melt-out (Gleick and Chalecki, 1999; Hayhoe et al., 2004; Kapnick and Hall, 2011; Lettenmaier
58
and Gan, 1990) that leads to earlier and reduced streamflow (Cayan, 2001; Dettinger et al., 2004;
59
Knowles and Cayan, 2002; Null et al., 2010b; Stewart, 2005; Vicuna et al., 2007; Vicuna and
60
Dracup, 2007). Yet the response to warming temperatures is not uniform: empirical
61
observational approaches (Goulden and Bales, 2014) and models targeted at more detailed
62
hydrology (Godsey et al., 2014; Huntington and Niswonger, 2012; Jepsen et al., 2016;
63
Markovich et al., 2016; Tague and Grant, 2009) indicate that local-scale storage and transmission
64
of water in the subsurface, via impacts to evapotranspiration and baseflows, are key mechanisms
65
controlling hydrologic response to climate across Sierra Nevada landscapes. Further evidence
66
suggests a spatial sensitivity of runoff to temperature that depends on elevation – with co-varying
67
subsurface properties (Jepsen et al., 2016) or vegetation (Goulden and Bales, 2014) implicated to
68
explain this variability. Altogether, these factors suggest that a fully-rendered assessment of
70 71
an
dM
pte
ce
69
Introduction
us cri
43
basin-scale climate change impacts to hydrology should incorporate local scale processes and interactivity (distributed lateral connectivity, spatially-explicit land cover distributions, and subsurface processes) combined with sufficient spatial scope to capture dominant topographic
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 3 of 21
72
patterns and water supply source areas. This approach, however, has not previously been utilized
73
in the San Joaquin basin nor in basins of similar scales.
Consistent with the coarse spatial and process resolution historically employed, much of the
75
previous work to assess potential future climate impacts to hydrology has been framed in the
76
context of long-term, multi-decadal change. Hydrologic impacts of climate warming are often
77
quantified as a difference in average response compared between a reference period and a future
78
period of interest (e.g. Maurer et al., 2010; Null et al., 2010; VanRheenen et al., 2004). Such an
79
approach provides a measure of how long-term average conditions may change under a projected
80
future climate but does little to put the variability of specific contemporary hydroclimatic
81
conditions into the context of a warmer future. Given the range of stresses to California’s water
82
supply system caused by recent drought-flood cycles, an assessment of how such inter-annual
83
precipitation variability translates to hydrologic response in a warmer climate represents an
84
additional path to better understand potential futures in the region.
85
We present a simulation study assessing the impacts of future warming on San Joaquin River
86
basin hydrology. We contrast results of simulations driven by recent historical and uniformly
87
warmed climate forcings while addressing the issues of spatial and process resolution using a
88
high-resolution regional integrated hydrologic model. We show that the effect of projected 4°C
89
warming reduces basin runoff incrementally toward drought conditions; using a common basin
90
index for categorizing water year type (SWRCB, 1995), current “above normal” and “below
91
normal” water years become equivalent to “below normal” and “dry” under warmer
92
temperatures. While runoff decreases basin-wide, we show a distribution of local runoff
93
increases at higher elevations due to snow to rain transitions that are offset by increases in ET at
94
lower elevations. Elevation is a key variable controlling the sensitivity of local hydrologic
95
change that, in turn, makes up basin-wide response to a warmer climate.
98 99 100 101 102
an
dM
pte
97
2. Methods
We study the impact of a uniform temperature shift on the hydrology of the San Joaquin
ce
96
us cri
74
River basin using the fully integrated hydrologic modeling framework ParFlow-CLM (PF.CLM) (Ashby and Falgout, 1996; Jones and Woodward, 2001; Kollet and Maxwell, 2006; Maxwell, 2013; Maxwell and Miller, 2005). The PF.CLM framework provides a globally implicit solution to the three-dimensional form of Richards’ equation (variably-saturated flow) in the subsurface
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 4 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
103
and the kinematic wave approximation to overland flow at the land surface. The coupled CLM
component simulates land surface processes (interception, snowpack, evapotranspiration) and
105
exchanges fluxes with the PF component over a user-defined range of top PF model layers.
106
The San Joaquin Basin Model (SJBM) used in this study is developed on a 1-km lateral
us cri
104
resolution grid with five variable-thickness layers spanning a total terrain-following vertical
108
thickness of 500 m. The model domain covers the entire San Joaquin River drainage above the
109
confluence with the Stanislaus River, including the major tributary watersheds of the Tuolumne
110
and Merced Rivers. Hydraulic and land surface property inputs are defined based on previous
111
studies and datasets. Details on model construction and development and validation are provided
112
in Gilbert and Maxwell (2017). In this study the SJBM is forced with hourly meteorology
113
derived from the 1/16 degree National Land Data Assimilation System, phase-2 product
114
(NLDAS-2) (Xia et al., 2012) and a 4-km resolution dataset developed at Princeton University
115
(Ming Pan, pers comm), mapped to the 1-km model grid for the time period spanning water
116
years 2009 through 2013. This period was chosen because it spans a range of water supply
117
conditions in the basin including the drought of record. Based on San Joaquin Basin Index, a
118
record summarizing annual precipitation and basin water supply (SWRCB, 1995), these years
119
effectively sample historic variability: 2011 and 2013 are in the top and bottom deciles,
120
respectively, of water supply conditions while the other years are distributed between these
121
extremes (Table S1).
dM
122
an
107
We tested the sensitivity of basin hydrology to warming mean temperatures by applying uniform temperature increases of 2°C and 4°C (Plus2 and Plus4, respectively) to the baseline
124
(BL) hourly meteorological forcing for the period spanning water years 2009 to 2013. The 2°C
125
and 4°C increments of warming were chosen based on the range of temperature projections
126
reported for California for the 21st century (Cayan et al., 2008; Hayhoe et al., 2004; Maloney et
127
al., 2013; Pierce et al., 2013) and their use in previous hydrologic studies (Jepsen et al., 2016,
128
Table 1). We assess the hydrologic impacts of warming as the difference between the Plus2 and
129
Plus4 scenarios and the BL scenario. Precipitation inputs are left unchanged in all scenarios in
131 132
ce
130
pte
123
order to isolate the effects of temperature alone. For this study, unperturbed precipitation is justified given uncertainties and comparatively small mean projected precipitation change over the San Joaquin basin (Allen and Luptowitz, 2017; Cayan et al., 2008; Pierce et al., 2013). We
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 5 of 21
133
do not expect that a bulk perturbation of project precipitation change would substantively affect
the outcome of this study, as year-to-year precipitation variability is a dominant factor driving
135
hydrologic response. While we might expect changes in precipitation event characteristics
136
(frequency, intensity, location, and elevation) to affect the results we present, such information
137
was not readily available to inform this study. We develop climate-consistent initial hydrologic
138
conditions by performing iterative one-year simulations for each scenario using the
139
corresponding forcing for water year (WY) 2009 until the beginning-of-year to end-of-year
140
change in root zone moisture falls below 1%, based on guidance from previous studies (Ajami et
141
al., 2014, 2015; Kollet and Maxwell, 2008).
142
us cri
134
The SJBM simulates land surface energy and water fluxes, overland flow, streamflow, and subsurface (soil and groundwater) flow and storage change for every 1-km2 cell in the model
144
domain. These simulated hydrologic components are consistent with the available observed
145
hydrology for the 2009-2013 period. Comparisons of simulated results to naturalized stream flow
146
(Figure S1), remote sensing-derived ET (Figures S2), estimated snowpack (Figure S3), and
147
terrestrial water storage (Figure S4) show that the model captures both seasonal patterns and
148
inter-annual variability well as conditions transition from average and wet (2009-2011) into the
149
first years of the drought (2012-2013). We note that the system simulated in this study does not
150
include the effects of water management activities, instead depicting a naturalized or unimpacted
151
hydrology. While this complicates comparison to observations affected by water management,
152
the simulation of unimpacted hydrology is directly relevant to water management policies that
153
rely on unimpaired benchmarks (e.g., State Water Resources Control Board, 2016).
dM
154
an
143
A comparison of the BL scenario with the Plus2 and Plus4 scenarios reveals a range of basinwide hydrologic responses that are, in general, consistent with previous studies in the region.
156
Impacts of warming, relative to the BL scenario, are apparent in reduced peak basin snow water
157
equivalent (SWE) volume and earlier melt-out (Figure S5-A,B), a redistribution of basin runoff
158
that includes consistently reduced spring flows and occasional increased late fall and winter
159
event flows (Figure S5-C,D), and a change in basin total ET weighted heavily towards winter
161 162 163
ce
160
pte
155
and spring increases with minor late summer and fall decreases (Figure S5-E,F).
3. Results & Analysis
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 6 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
164
3.1. Annual and Basin Scale
165 166
The magnitude of basin response to warming depends broadly on the amount of precipitation received, as illustrated in Figure S5. Annual total basin precipitation for the simulation period is
168
shown in Figure 1-A, with the PRISM 30-year climatologic mean shown for reference (Daly,
169
2008; PRISM Climate Group and Oregon State University, 2015). The dependence of annual
170
basin runoff, ET, and subsurface storage on precipitation and temperature perturbation is
171
summarized in plots B-D in Figure 1. While precipitation is a primary control on basin-wide
172
runoff, ET, and storage change, the mean temperature acts as an important secondary control on
173
hydrologic partitioning. Warming by 2°C and 4°C reduces runoff in each year (Figure 1-B),
174
although the incremental reduction in flow is greater for the BL to Plus2 case (compared to
175
difference between the Plus2 to the Plus4 cases) as well as in wetter years. Importantly, a
176
comparison between years and temperature perturbations shows that, for all but the wettest year,
177
an increase in temperature of 4°C reduces streamflow sufficiently to be equivalent to the next
178
driest year simulated. For example, the annual runoff simulated for the Plus4 scenario for water
179
year 2010 is 14 cm, approximately equal to the runoff for water year 2009 in the BL scenario (13
180
cm), a year which received 15 cm less precipitation.
an
dM
181
us cri
167
As the complementary outflow to runoff, annual basin ET increases with both precipitation (due to the higher wet-season ET response) and increasing temperature, with
183
greatest sensitivity to the first 2°C incremental warming (Figure 1-C). Consequently, a between-
184
year comparison of annual ET values reveals that a 4°C increase in temperature increases ET
185
towards equivalence with the next wettest year simulated, with the exception of WY 2013. The
186
apparent outlier ET response for WY2012 demonstrates the carryover impact of subsurface
187
storage (Figure 1-D) in supporting dry year ET, and to a lesser extent, runoff: combined basin ET
188
and runoff outflows are more than 125% of precipitation in WY2012 and more than 105% in
189
WY2013. Notably, these impacts are relatively constant across each temperature scenario as
190
temperature perturbations have only minor effects on annual storage changes across the San
192 193 194
ce
191
pte
182
Joaquin River basin. While absolute soil and subsurface storage amounts differ among the scenarios, the consistency in inter-annual storage change suggests that the impact of warming is largely isolated to surface processes: at the basin scale, increases in ET are supported by water that would otherwise have contributed to runoff, rather than impacting the net aggregate
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 7 of 21
195
infiltration.
196
The plots in Figure 1-E and 1-F show the relative partitioning of precipitation into basin total runoff and ET. Points for each year fall on a line of constant precipitation and the slope of the
198
line reflects the proportion of precipitation that goes to ET compared to runoff. We include the
199
effect of storage change in Figure 1-F, which aligns the points for WY2012 more consistently
200
with the known precipitation gradient and ensures the lines passing through the points for each
201
year have x and y intercepts at that year’s precipitation value. We note that the nonlinear
202
relationship between runoff and ET varies as a function of temperature (Figure 1-E) but
203
conforms to a more consistent shape when storage change is considered in the partitioning.
204
us cri
197
The results shown in Figure 1 summarize a comparison of how warming and drought impact hydrology. While runoff response is more strongly driven by precipitation, warming has an
206
influence that can approach that of drought: a 4°C warming reduces runoff by an amount ranging
207
from 2.2 cm to 7.8 cm over the basin while the baseline reduction in runoff in the driest year
208
(2013) relative to an average year (2010) is 10.2 cm.
an
205
209 211
3.2. Local scale variability and elevation control These aggregate changes can be considered the net effect of a range of local impacts
dM
210
distributed across the basin. The SJBM simulations suggest that local variations in runoff, ET,
213
and recharge are key explanatory component processes. First, consider that the shift toward more
214
frequent rain-on-snow or rain-on-bare ground events that accompanies rising temperatures may
215
change when and where runoff is generated. As rain becomes the dominant precipitation phase,
216
runoff may be generated more frequently in time but exist for shorter periods that more closely
217
mimics the precipitation time. It follows that runoff variability in space and time would tend to
218
increase because, without the slow-release store of snowpack, sustaining runoff depends more
219
directly on precipitation event duration and upstream contributing area. This effect is enhanced
220
by the fact that much of the conversion from snow to rain happens at the upper reaches of
221
watersheds like the San Joaquin, reducing the support of runoff from upstream contributions.
223 224 225
We examine spatial runoff response for each temperature scenario using simulated surface
ce
222
pte
212
pressure as a measure of distributed runoff production. Pressures above zero in the top layer of the model indicate formation of overland flow subject to subsequent routing across the land surface. The dominant response to warming is a reduction in mean runoff generation, but areas
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 8 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
226
of increased runoff production are distributed throughout the Sierra Nevada portion of the model
227
domain. Figure 2-A summarizes this distribution of differential runoff generation as a function of
elevation through the use of a two-dimensional histogram of mean surface pressure sensitivity,
229
defined as the difference in simulation mean surface pressure between the warming (Plus2,
230
Plus4) and baseline (BL) scenarios divided by the BL values calculated at each model cell
231
(lighter colors reflect higher frequency and the color scale is logarithmic for clarity). The
232
histogram shows that runoff sensitivity to warming depends on elevation in two distinct ways.
233
First, reductions in runoff occur at all elevations but with decreasing sensitivity as elevation
234
increases. Second, there is a superimposed pattern of runoff generation that increases with
235
warming that occurs within the 1000-3500 m elevation band, with the highest positive
236
sensitivities concentrated in the 2000-2500 m range for both the Plus2 and Plus4 scenarios. We
237
conceptualize the region above approximately 2000 m as one where warming induces the biggest
238
transition in snow-rain dynamics yielding more frequent local runoff generation. Below this
239
2000 m elevation, warming-driven increases in ET and less frequent snow cover reduce the
240
potential for increased runoff.
an
us cri
228
The spatial plot in Figure 2-B shows the temporally averaged surface pressure across the
242
five-year simulation period for the BL scenario. Darker shading (deeper mean surface ponding)
243
delineates the channel network of the main drainages in the San Joaquin basin while the lighter
244
shading (note the logarithmic color scale) indicates much of the catchment generates
245
comparatively less mean runoff, either in amount or frequency. A 2°C warming over the five-
246
year simulation shifts the intensity of runoff generation and transmission across the catchment:
247
Figure 2-B shows that mean surface pressures in scattered areas across the Sierras increase by as
248
much as 50% under the Plus2 scenario relative to the baseline condition, while tending to
249
decrease by similar proportions in channels and lower elevation zones in the foothills and the
250
Central Valley. Spatial patterns of surface pressure increases and decreases are similar in the
251
Plus4 scenario (not shown) but include more intense losses in the foothills and portions of the
252
Central Valley.
254 255 256 257
pte
The plot in Figure 2-C places the simulated runoff changes in the context of the historical
ce
253
dM
241
runoff record. The plot compares the temperature-sensitivity of simulated runoff (black triangles and line) against observational equivalents derived from streamflow data as select gage locations (red circles and line) within the headwaters of the San Joaquin and its tributaries. The gage stations were selected for unmanaged or minimally-managed watersheds within the model
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 9 of 21
258
domain that had at least 20 years of measurement record. The annual (by water year) measured
streamflow was normalized against the sum of the annual PRISM precipitation (Daly, 2008;
260
PRISM Climate Group and Oregon State University, 2015) for the upstream contributing area to
261
yield a time series of runoff ratios at each gage location. We then calculated an annual fraction
262
change in runoff ratio at a station (red circles in Figure 2-C) as the difference in runoff ratio for a
263
given year from the long-term mean divided by that mean. Data for each station are plotted as a
264
function of the mean elevation of the contributing area above the gage location. The
265
corresponding simulated comparison values were calculated in the same way, but using the
266
NLDAS-2 meteorologic forcing in place of the PRISM data. For consistency with the
267
observation calculations, we concatenated the simulated BL and Plus2 annual runoff ratio time
268
series (creating a 10-year series), then subtracted from and subsequently divided by the extended
269
time series mean from each year’s simulated value to yield 10 estimates of the fraction change in
270
runoff ratio.
an
271
us cri
259
Despite the differences between the observations and simulated streamflow datasets—i.e. greater number of observational years sampled, different (and less controlled) hydrologic
273
conditions in the observational record—the plot in Figure 2-C shows good agreement between
274
simulated and measured runoff response in San Joaquin River headwaters. Because each gage
275
location measures an integration of upstream processes, one would not expect to recreate the full
276
distribution shown in Figure 2-A. Yet, the correspondence between observed and simulated
277
changes in runoff ratio as a function of annual temperature variability suggests the SJBM
278
captures the sensitivity of runoff generation processes with reasonable fidelity.
279
dM
272
The coexistence of increased runoff at locations within the 1000-3000 m elevation band and decreased runoff at lower elevations indicates that enhanced high-elevation runoff is lost as it
281
concentrates from the landscape toward streams and rivers. Simulation results show that ET
282
driven by warmer temperatures is the dominant mechanism for removing this additional runoff.
283
The plots in Figure 3 show the ET difference from the BL scenario, averaged by elevation (lines)
284
with one standard deviation shown (shading), in the Sierra Nevada portion of the San Joaquin
286 287 288
ce
285
pte
280
River basin for the Plus2 and Plus4 scenarios as a function of elevation and water year (color). Elevation-averaged ET increases across all elevations and for all water years, although the amount of increase tends to be highest in the 1000-3000 m elevation range, coincident with the elevation range of simulated runoff increases. The sensitivity of ET in this elevation range
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 10 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
289
suggests a negative feedback mechanism: the warming that drives more frequent snowmelt or a
snow-to-rain transition and subsequent increases in landscape runoff generation also facilitates a
291
compensatory increase in potential ET that effectively limits propagation of runoff farther
292
downstream.
us cri
290
A consequence of increased runoff and increased ET under warmer conditions is that less
294
water is available to be partitioned to deep subsurface infiltration. One metric of recharge that
295
can be extracted from the simulation results is the change in average vertical flux across the
296
lowest two model layers under saturated conditions between the baseline and two temperature
297
change scenarios. The change in the temporal average of this flux at each cell provides a measure
298
of how both soil column moisture (tendency toward saturation) and the direction of flow
299
(downward being recharge below the root zone, upward being discharge to support runoff or ET)
300
are affected by warming temperatures and the associated ET and runoff changes. The plots in
301
Figure 4 show that the shift in runoff and ET under the Plus2 and Plus4 scenarios is
302
accompanied by a reduction in mean downward flux across much of the model domain - i.e. a
303
reduction in saturated recharge or an increase in saturated discharge. Figures 4-A and 4-B show
304
that saturated recharge is reduced extensively across the Sierra Nevada, with the intensity of the
305
reduction greater in the Plus4 scenario. Local reductions (increases) in recharge (discharge) flux
306
can exceed 15 cm over the simulation period (~3 cm yr-1), though these are interspersed with
307
more modest average recharge reductions and even some local recharge increases. In the Central
308
Valley, the balance of changes is dominated by an increase (decrease) in saturated recharge
309
(discharge) along many segments of the San Joaquin River and its tributaries. This increase is
310
driven by steeper vertical gradients in the stream and river channels that arise from a mix of
311
lower near-channel water tables and deeper channel flow (higher pressure head) that
312
accompanies increased fall and winter event streamflow (Figure S1) in the Plus2 and Plus4
313
scenarios.
pte
dM
an
293
The plot of San Joaquin River basin total net saturated recharge is shown in Figure 4-C for
315
each of the temperature scenarios. Here positive values represent net recharge (vertical flow to
316 317 318 319
ce
314
the lowest model layer) and negative values represent net discharge (vertical flow out of the lowest model layer). The time series shows that the basin is characterized by a predominant net discharge of groundwater punctuated by focused saturated recharge events. These net recharge events tend to occur in late spring and early summer under the baseline scenario (even then only
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 11 of 21
320
occurring during the two wettest years simulated), with local snowmelt and elevated river flows
driving the recharge in the mountains and Central Valley, respectively. In contrast, the higher
322
fraction of precipitation falling as rain in the warmer Plus2 and Plus 4 scenarios leads to more
323
immediate fall and early winter runoff at the expense of building the snowpack (Figure S5). The
324
increased fall runoff supports more intense focused recharge events in the valley streams while
325
the lower snowpack water content reduces both late spring diffuse recharge across the Sierra
326
Nevada as well as focused recharge through spring snowmelt flows in the Central Valley.
327
Furthermore, the time series in Figure 4-C indicates that temperature increases change the timing
328
of groundwater discharge: peak upward flow of groundwater is dampened and shifted earlier
329
with successive increases in temperature, regardless of how much precipitation was received.
us cri
321
330
4. Summary and Implications
an
331
Our simulations demonstrate the complex spatiotemporal response of a large mountainous
333
watershed to climate warming in the context of a recent wet-dry cycle. From the perspective of
334
basin-scale runoff, recent dry years in the San Joaquin basin can be viewed as a proxy for
335
the effect of future warming – increasing temperatures during “average” precipitation
336
years reduces runoff towards levels historically categorized as drought (as defined by
337
common water year indices (SWRCB, 1995)). Over the five years simulated, this runoff
338
effect was equivalent to the loss of approximately 15 cm of precipitation each year when
339
the temperature was raised 4 °C. Furthermore, the high spatiotemporal and process resolution
340
of the SJBM reveals how smaller scale processes and their interactions contribute to these
341
changes. Importantly, the response of different hydrologic processes to spatially uniform
342
warming is itself not spatially uniform – the aggregate response depends on the connection of
343
snowpack, runoff, ET, and subsurface storage changes that vary across the landscape. This
344
finding is not exclusive to the Sierra Nevada – the local-scale and elevation-dependent warming
345
effects illustrated in this study are relevant to understanding hydrologic change in similar regions
346
around the world (e.g. Meng et al., 2016; Vicuña et al., 2011).
348 349 350
pte
ce
347
dM
332
These results highlight two key considerations for land and water resource management in
the San Joaquin River basin. First, assuming a warmer future climate yields precipitation comparable to historic levels, the frequency of basin runoff supply shortages appears likely to increase while surplus years will be fewer and less intense. Second, the spatially-distributed
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 12 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
351
nature of hydrologic response to warming calls for more targeted local management and
adaptation actions that coordinate with larger basin goals. This presents a challenge and
353
opportunity for the numerous local, state, and federal agencies with jurisdictional boundaries
354
spread and fragmented across the San Joaquin basin (Hanak et al., 2011).
355
us cri
352
An important assumption underlying the simulations in this study is that vegetation
distribution does not change in response to warming (i.e. between simulation scenarios). Such
357
warming-induced vegetation shifts have been implicated in projected ET-driven reductions to
358
runoff (Goulden and Bales, 2014), but other evidence suggests climate warming may be a more
359
dominant driver of hydrologic change in mountain systems (Pribulick et al., 2016). Our results
360
indicate that vegetation expansion or redistribution is not a prerequisite for enhanced high-
361
elevation ET and reduced runoff under warming – but the extent to which dynamic vegetation
362
amplifies or modifies the climate impact at the basin scale remains an important topic for
363
continuing research.
364
an
356
The results of this study have implications for groundwater within and beyond the Sierra Nevada. Results of previous studies in the Sierra Nevada suggest that water that percolates past
366
the surface soils and nominal ‘root zone’ is an important reservoir for maintaining summer
367
baseflows in streams (Godsey et al., 2014) and for supporting deeper-rooted vegetation (Bales et
368
al., 2011). Our simulations show that warming temperatures tend to reduce the saturated recharge
369
below the root zone in the Sierra Nevada, preferentially partitioning water toward runoff and ET
370
losses at the land surface compared to a scenario without warming. This in turn has the potential
371
to reduce groundwater contributions that support summer streamflow (with concomitant impacts
372
to stream temperatures) and exacerbate temperature-driven tree mortality effects (van Mantgem
373
and Stephenson, 2007). These impacts propagate to the Central Valley– the simulations indicate
374
that, absent water management activities, the increased and shorter-duration fall and early winter
375
runoff events in the Sierra Nevada lead to event-scale increases in recharge, with much of this
376
occurring in stream channels in the Central Valley. This suggests an increasingly important role
377
for basin water managers and management infrastructure in mitigating the warming-driven
379 380
pte
ce
378
dM
365
reductions in runoff by capturing this water for future use in traditional surface reservoirs or through managed recharge on the valley floor.
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 13 of 21
386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414
us cri
385
Bales, R. C., Hopmans, J. W., O’Geen, A. T., Meadows, M., Hartsough, P. C., Kirchner, P., Hunsaker, C. T. and Beaudette, D.: Soil Moisture Response to Snowmelt and Rainfall in a Sierra Nevada Mixed-Conifer Forest, Vadose Zone J., 10(3), 786–799, doi:10.2136/vzj2011.0001, 2011. Berghuijs, W. R., Woods, R. A. and Hrachowitz, M.: A precipitation shift from snow towards rain leads to a decrease in streamflow, Nat. Clim. Change, 4(7), 583–586, doi:10.1038/nclimate2246, 2014. California Data Exchange Center: California Data Exchange Center, Full Nat. Flow Rep. [online] Available from: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/rpts_archived1/FNF (Accessed 20 July 2015), 2015.
an
384
Ashby, S. F. and Falgout, R. D.: A parallel multigrid preconditioned conjugate gradient algorithm for groundwater flow simulations, Nucl. Sci. Eng., 124(1), 145–159, 1996.
Cayan, D. R., Maurer, E. P., Dettinger, M. D., Tyree, M. and Hayhoe, K.: Climate change scenarios for the California region, Clim. Change, 87(1), 21–42, doi:10.1007/s10584-0079377-6, 2008.
dM
383
Allen, R. J. and Luptowitz, R.: El Niño-like teleconnection increases California precipitation in response to warming, Nat. Commun., 8, 16055, doi:10.1038/ncomms16055, 2017.
Dettinger, M. D. and Anderson, M. L.: Storage in California’s Reservois and Snowpack in this Time of Drought, San Franc. Estuary Watershed Sci., 13(2), doi:10.15447/sfews.2015v13iss2art1, 2015. Gilbert, J. M. and Maxwell, R. M.: Examining regional groundwater–surface water dynamics using an integrated hydrologic model of the San Joaquin River basin, Hydrol Earth Syst Sci, 21(2), 923–947, doi:10.5194/hess-21-923-2017, 2017. Godsey, S. E., Kirchner, J. W. and Tague, C. L.: Effects of changes in winter snowpacks on summer low flows: case studies in the Sierra Nevada, California, USA, Hydrol. Process., 28(19), 5048–5064, doi:10.1002/hyp.9943, 2014.
pte
382
Goulden, M. L. and Bales, R. C.: Mountain runoff vulnerability to increased evapotranspiration with vegetation expansion, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 111(39), 14071– 14075, doi:10.1073/pnas.1319316111, 2014. Hanak, E., Lund, J., Dinar, A., Gray, B., Howitt, R., Mount, J., Moyle, P. and Thompson, B. “Buzz”: Managing California’s water: from conflict to reconciliation, Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA., 2011.
ce
381
Hayhoe, K., Cayan, D., Field, C. B., Frumhoff, P. C., Maurer, E. P., Miller, N. L., Moser, S. C., Schneider, S. H., Cahill, K. N., Cleland, E. E., Dale, L., Drapek, R., Hanemann, R. M., Kalkstein, L. S., Lenihan, J., Lunch, C. K., Neilson, R. P., Sheridan, S. C. and Verville, J. H.: Emissions
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
415
Page 14 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450
us cri
420
Huntington, J. L. and Niswonger, R. G.: Role of surface-water and groundwater interactions on projected summertime streamflow in snow dominated regions: An integrated modeling approach, Water Resour. Res. - WATER RESOUR RES, 48, doi:10.1029/2012WR012319, 2012. Jepsen, S. M., Harmon, T. C., Meadows, M. W. and Hunsaker, C. T.: Hydrogeologic influence on changes in snowmelt runoff with climate warming: Numerical experiments on a midelevation catchment in the Sierra Nevada, USA, J. Hydrol., 533, 332–342, doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.12.010, 2016.
an
419
He, M., Russo, M. and Anderson, M.: Hydroclimatic Characteristics of the 2012–2015 California Drought from an Operational Perspective, Climate, 5(1), 5, doi:10.3390/cli5010005, 2017.
Jones, J. E. and Woodward, C. S.: Newton–Krylov-multigrid solvers for large-scale, highly heterogeneous, variably saturated flow problems, Adv. Water Resour., 24(7), 763–774, doi:10.1016/S0309-1708(00)00075-0, 2001. Kollet, S. J. and Maxwell, R. M.: Integrated surface–groundwater flow modeling: A freesurface overland flow boundary condition in a parallel groundwater flow model, Adv. Water Resour., 29(7), 945–958, doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2005.08.006, 2006.
dM
418
pathways, climate change, and impacts on California, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 101(34), 12422–12427, doi:10.1073/pnas.0404500101, 2004.
Landerer, F. W. and Swenson, S. C.: Accuracy of scaled GRACE terrestrial water storage estimates, Water Resour. Res., 48(4), W04531, doi:10.1029/2011WR011453, 2012. Maloney, E. D., Camargo, S. J., Chang, E., Colle, B., Fu, R., Geil, K. L., Hu, Q., Jiang, X., Johnson, N., Karnauskas, K. B., Kinter, J., Kirtman, B., Kumar, S., Langenbrunner, B., Lombardo, K., Long, L. N., Mariotti, A., Meyerson, J. E., Mo, K. C., Neelin, J. D., Pan, Z., Seager, R., Serra, Y., Seth, A., Sheffield, J., Stroeve, J., Thibeault, J., Xie, S.-P., Wang, C., Wyman, B. and Zhao, M.: North American Climate in CMIP5 Experiments: Part III: Assessment of Twenty-FirstCentury Projections*, J. Clim., 27(6), 2230–2270, doi:10.1175/JCLI-D-13-00273.1, 2013.
pte
417
Mankin, J. S., Viviroli, D., Singh, D., Hoekstra, A. Y. and Diffenbaugh, N. S.: The potential for snow to supply human water demand in the present and future, Environ. Res. Lett., 10(11), 114016, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/11/114016, 2015. van Mantgem, P. J. and Stephenson, N. L.: Apparent climatically induced increase of tree mortality rates in a temperate forest, Ecol. Lett., 10(10), 909–916, doi:10.1111/j.14610248.2007.01080.x, 2007.
ce
416
Markovich, K. H., Maxwell, R. M. and Fogg, G. E.: Hydrogeological response to climate change in alpine hillslopes, Hydrol. Process., n/a-n/a, doi:10.1002/hyp.10851, 2016.
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 15 of 21
456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484
Maxwell, R. M.: A terrain-following grid transform and preconditioner for parallel, largescale, integrated hydrologic modeling, Adv. Water Resour., 53, 109–117, doi:10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.10.001, 2013.
us cri
455
Maxwell, R. M. and Miller, N. L.: Development of a Coupled Land Surface and Groundwater Model, J. Hydrometeorol., 6(3), 233–247, doi:10.1175/JHM422.1, 2005. Meng, F., Su, F., Yang, D., Tong, K. and Hao, Z.: Impacts of recent climate change on the hydrology in the source region of the Yellow River basin, J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud., 6, 66–81, doi:10.1016/j.ejrh.2016.03.003, 2016.
Mu, Q., Heinsch, F. A., Zhao, M. and Running, S. W.: Development of a global evapotranspiration algorithm based on MODIS and global meteorology data, Remote Sens. Environ., 111(4), 519–536, doi:10.1016/j.rse.2007.04.015, 2007.
an
454
Mu, Q., Zhao, M. and Running, S. W.: Improvements to a MODIS global terrestrial evapotranspiration algorithm, Remote Sens. Environ., 115(8), 1781–1800, doi:10.1016/j.rse.2011.02.019, 2011.
dM
453
Maurer, E. P., Brekke, L. D. and Pruitt, T.: Contrasting Lumped and Distributed Hydrology Models for Estimating Climate Change Impacts on California Watersheds, JAWRA J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 46(5), 1024–1035, doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00473.x, 2010.
Mu, Q., Zhao, M. and Running, S.: MODIS Global Evapotranspiration Project (MOD16), [online] Available from: http://www.ntsg.umt.edu/project/mod16 (Accessed 1 September 2015), 2015. National Operational Hydrologic Remote Sensing Center: Snow Data Assimilation System (SNODAS) Data Products at NSIDC, , doi:10.7265/N5TB14TC, 2004. Null, S. E., Viers, J. H. and Mount, J. F.: Hydrologic Response and Watershed Sensitivity to Climate Warming in California’s Sierra Nevada, PLOS ONE, 5(4), e9932, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009932, 2010.
pte
452
Pierce, D. W., Das, T., Cayan, D. R., Maurer, E. P., Miller, N. L., Bao, Y., Kanamitsu, M., Yoshimura, K., Snyder, M. A., Sloan, L. C., Franco, G. and Tyree, M.: Probabilistic estimates of future changes in California temperature and precipitation using statistical and dynamical downscaling, Clim. Dyn., 40(3–4), 839–856, doi:10.1007/s00382-012-1337-9, 2013. Pribulick, C. E., Foster, L. M., Bearup, L. A., Navarre-Sitchler, A. K., Williams, K. H., Carroll, R. W. H. and Maxwell, R. M.: Contrasting the hydrologic response due to land cover and climate change in a mountain headwaters system, Ecohydrology, 9(8), 1431–1438, doi:10.1002/eco.1779, 2016.
ce
451
State Water Resources Control Board: Substitute Environmental Document in Support of Potential Changes to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco BaySacramento/San Joaquin Delta Estuary: San Joaquin River Flows and Southern Delta Water
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
485 486
Page 16 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521
us cri
491
Swain, D., Tsiang, M., Haugen, M., Singh, D., Charland, A., Rajaratnam, B. and Diffenbaugh, N.: The extraordinary California drought of 2013/2014: Character, context, and the role of climate change, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 95(9), S3–S7, 2014. Swenson, S.: GRACE MONTHLY LAND WATER MASS GRIDS NETCDF RELEASE 5.0, , doi:10.5067/TELND-NC005, 2012.
Swenson, S. and Wahr, J.: Post-processing removal of correlated errors in GRACE data, Geophys. Res. Lett., 33(8), doi:10.1029/2005GL025285, 2006.
SWRCB: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacrament-San Joaquin Delta Estuary, State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA. [online] Available from: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/wq_con trol_plans/1995wqcp/docs/1995wqcpb.pdf, 1995.
an
490
Tague, C. and Grant, G. E.: Groundwater dynamics mediate low-flow response to global warming in snow-dominated alpine regions, Water Resour. Res., 45(7), W07421, doi:10.1029/2008WR007179, 2009.
dM
489
Quality, [online] Available from: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/bay_delt a_plan/water_quality_control_planning/2016_sed/index.shtml#sed (Accessed 22 July 2017), 2016.
VanRheenen, N. T., Wood, A. W., Palmer, R. N. and Lettenmaier, D. P.: Potential Implications of PCM Climate Change Scenarios for Sacramento–San Joaquin River Basin Hydrology and Water Resources, Clim. Change, 62(1–3), 257–281, doi:10.1023/B:CLIM.0000013686.97342.55, 2004. Vicuña, S., Garreaud, R. D. and McPhee, J.: Climate change impacts on the hydrology of a snowmelt driven basin in semiarid Chile, Clim. Change, 105(3–4), 469–488, doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9888-4, 2011.
pte
488
Wang, S.-Y. S., Yoon, J.-H., Becker, E. and Gillies, R.: California from drought to deluge, Nat. Clim. Change, 7(7), 465–468, doi:10.1038/nclimate3330, 2017. Xia, Y., Mitchell, K., Ek, M., Sheffield, J., Cosgrove, B., Wood, E., Luo, L., Alonge, C., Wei, H., Meng, J., Livneh, B., Lettenmaier, D., Koren, V., Duan, Q., Mo, K., Fan, Y. and Mocko, D.: Continental-scale water and energy flux analysis and validation for the North American Land Data Assimilation System project phase 2 (NLDAS-2): 1. Intercomparison and application of model products, J. Geophys. Res. Atmospheres, 117(D3), D03109, doi:10.1029/2011JD016048, 2012.
ce
487
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 17 of 21
us cri an dM 524 525 526 527 528
pte
523
Figure 1. Warming shifts runoff response similar to drought in the San Joaquin. A below-average year [60% of historical record is wetter than this year] under warming behaves like a severe drought year. Groundwater recharge is much less sensitive to warming than to drought. Annual total San Joaquin Basin precipitation for 5-year simulation period (A). Relationship between annual precipitation amount and runoff (B), evapotranspiration (ET) (C), and subsurface storage change (D) for each temperature scenario. Relative partitioning of precipitation into ET and runoff for each temperature scenario, without storage change correction (E) and with storage change correction (F). All units are in basin area-averaged depth as meters.
ce
522
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 18 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
529 530
us cri an 535 536 537 538 539 540
dM
534
FIGURE 2. Elevation governs a balance of impacts on streamflow from increased ET and decreased snowpack under warming scenarios. At lower elevations, streamflow decreases are driven by increased ET while at higher elevations runoff increases due to rain-snow transition. This is illustrated in the two-dimensional histogram of sensitivity of average surface pressure (a measure of overland flow generation) as a function of elevation (A) for the Plus2 and Plus4 scenarios and spatially across the domain for the Plus2 scenario only (B). In histogram plot, blue colors denote sensitivity for the Plus2-basline (BL) comparison and red colors the Plus4-BL comparison. The simulated sensitivity of precipitation-normalized runoff to temperature as a function of elevation compares well with available observational records (C).
pte
533
ce
531 532
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 19 of 21
us cri an
dM
541
542 543
546 547
Figure 3. ET changes for all warming scenarios but is dominated by elevation-dependent increase in the Sierra Nevada. The simulated differences in ET with warming are shown as an elevation-average (colored lines) for each water year, with a ±1 standard deviation range shown as shaded areas with the corresponding color. Differences are show relative to the baseline simulation for the Plus2 (left) and the Plus4 scenario (right).
pte
545
ce
544
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 20 of 21
pt
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
us cri an dM 551 552 553 554 555 556
pte
550
Figure 4. Temperature increases shift surface-subsurface exchanges. Difference in mean simulation-period saturated recharge relative to the baseline simulation for the Plus2 (A) and Plus4 (B) simulations. Time series of net San Joaquin River basin saturated recharge (positive) and discharge (negative), in area-averaged rate of m d-1 (C).
ce
548 549
Ac
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - ERL-105107.R2
pt
Page 21 of 21
557