Energy budget considerations for hydro-climatic impact assessment in Great Lakes watersheds |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Civil and Environmental Engineering, Michigan Technological University, 1400 Townsend Dr., Houghton, MI 49931, USA;2. Physical Scientist, NOAA/Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA;1. Aquatic Animal Health Program, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA;2. Department of Natural Resources, Bruckner Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA;3. U.S. Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, Seattle, WA 98115, USA;1. Ecological Modelling Laboratory, Department of Physical & Environmental Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M1C 1A4, Canada;2. Aquatic Ecosystem Management Research Division, Water Science and Technology Directorate, Science and Technology Branch, National Water Research Institute, Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario, L7R 4A6, Canada;3. Great Lakes Unit, Water Monitoring & Reporting Section, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch, Toronto, Ontario, M9P 3V6, Canada;1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Toronto Scarborough, 1265 Military Trail, Toronto, Ontario M1C-1A4, Canada;2. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, Ontario L7R 4A6, Canada;3. Thousand Islands National Park, 2 County Rd. 5, Mallorytown, Ontario K0E 1R0, Canada;4. USGS Great Lakes Science Center, Tunison Laboratory of Aquatic Science, 3075 Gracie Road, Cortland, NY 13045-9457, USA;5. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 317 Washington St., Watertown, NY 13601, USA;1. Large Lakes Research Station, 9311 Groh Road, Grosse Ile, MI 48138, USA;2. Z-Tech Corporation, ICF Company, Large Lakes Research Station, 9311 Groh Road, Grosse Ile, MI 48138, USA;3. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, Duluth, Large Lakes and Rivers Forecasting Research Branch, Large Lakes Research Station, 9311 Groh Road, Grosse Ile, MI 48138, USA;1. University of Guelph, Department of Integrative Biology, Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1;2. Centre for Northern Forest Ecosystem Research, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Lakehead University, 955 Oliver Rd., Thunder Bay, ON, Canada, P7B 5E1 |
| |
| Abstract: | Given the large share of the water budget contributed by evapotranspiration (ET), accurately estimating ET is critical for hydro-climate change studies. Routinely, hydrologic models use temperature proxy relationships to estimate potential evapotranspiration (PET) when forced using GCM/RCM projections of precipitation and temperature. A limitation of this approach is that the temperature proxy relationships do not account for the conservation of energy needed to estimate ET consistently in climate change scenarios. In particular, PET methods using temperature as a proxy fail to account for the negative feedback of ET on surface temperature. Using several GCM projections and a hydrologic model developed for the Great Lakes basin watersheds, the NOAA Large Basin Runoff Model (LBRM), the importance of maintaining a consistent energy budget in hydrologic and climate models is demonstrated by comparing runoff projections from temperature proxy and energy conservation methods. Differences in hydrologic responses are related to watershed characteristics, hydrologic model parameters and climate variables. It is shown that the temperature proxy approach consistently leads to prediction of relatively large and potentially unrealistic reductions in runoff. Therefore, hydrologic projections adhering to energy conservation principles are recommended for use in climate change impact studies. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
