The Second Symposium 20th Mar 2012 Conflict on Water ResourcesDevelopment between MultipleNations in the Nile River Basin ...
The Second Symposium 20th Mar 2012           Contents1. Background2. Methodology3. Verification4. Assessment of future cli...
Background             3
100                                                                                                                      B...
Uniqueness of this researchTo propose Hybrid of Conflict Analysis and Hydrological Model                  The previous con...
Methodology              6
Procedure                                1. Geographical data                      (altitude, land-cover, routine-network)...
Remote Sensing and GCM                                                                  8(bougria-tif.blogspot.com)   (Cit...
Input data    Product            Parameter         Spatial resolution   Time resolution    SRTM30              Altitude   ...
SiBUC & Hydro-BEAM                     10
Land Scheme Model SiBUC (Simple Biosphere Model including Urban Canopy)                                                   ...
Outputs of SiBUC January (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC February (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC   March   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC   April   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC   May   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC   June   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC   July   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC August   (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC September (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC October (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC November (1998~2002)
Outputs of SiBUC December (1998~2002)
Distributed Runoff Model Hydro-BEAM                                  (Hydrological River Basin Environmental Assessment Mo...
Conflict Analysis                    25
What is “conflict analysis”?  Conflict analysis is an analytical method which is developed            expanding algorithm ...
Algorithm of conflict analysis with example                Stability Table (with third party)        (r: rational, s: sequ...
Algorithm of conflict analysis with example                Stability Table (with third party)        (r: rational, s: sequ...
Verification in the Nile Basin                                 29
Discharge at Aswan High Dam D.S. (m3/s)        12,000                                               11,000                ...
Assessment of future climateby MRI-AGCM and CMIP3                               31
Impact assessment of climate change by MRI-AGCM and CMIP3               GCM* in the world                                 ...
Study of drought year by MRI-AGCM and CMIP3                               Utilization of 24 GCM, 485 yearly samples,      ...
Water Resources Development in the end of 21st century                              34
Setting of scenarios (basic elements)1. 4 players  ① Egypt, ② Sudan&S.Sudan, ③ Ethiopia,  ④ Upstream countries in the Whit...
Water use depending on ratio of expanded irrigation area                                     100                          ...
100                                                                                             Analysis 1Ratio of irrigat...
Analysis 2 ~Visualization of equilibrium points~              Definition of quadrants                         Visualize th...
Analysis 2 ~Visualization of equilibrium points~20 years drought             100 years drought                         Acc...
Analysis 3 ~Refinement~Take off events whose difference between maximum and minimum                      ratio is more tha...
Analysis 3 ~Refinement~           After 70% refinement                                                                    ...
Conclusion1. Hybrid of Conflict Analysis and Hydrological Model is   proposed and applied to the whole Nile River Basin   ...
Database of JE-HydroNet                          43
Database of JE-HydroNet (tentative)
Database of JE-HydroNet (tentative)Summary of database1. Purposes (1) To introduce JE-HydroNet project to the public (2) T...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Masahiroabe..Nile .River basin Crisis

636 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
636
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Masahiroabe..Nile .River basin Crisis

  1. 1. The Second Symposium 20th Mar 2012 Conflict on Water ResourcesDevelopment between MultipleNations in the Nile River Basin ○ Masahiro ABE1, Kenji TANAKA2, Toshiharu KOJIRI2, Toshio HAMAGUCHI2 , and Tetsuya SUMI2 1Dept. of Urban Management, Kyoto University 2Water resources Research Center, DPRI, Kyoto University 1
  2. 2. The Second Symposium 20th Mar 2012 Contents1. Background2. Methodology3. Verification4. Assessment of future climate5. Water Resources Development6. Conclusion7. Database 2
  3. 3. Background 3
  4. 4. 100 Background and purpose Brundi Ethiopia (Irrigated area) / (Irrigation potential) (%) 90 Egypt Eritoria 80 Kenya Rwanda 70 Sudan and S.Sudan Tanzania Uganda 601. The Nile River crosses borders among 11 countries. 50 40 Dependency30ratio in Egypt is 96.9% 20 100 Dependency ratio of total renewal water resources (%) 10 96.92. Observed discharge to Aswan High Dam is 72(Gt/year), 0 80 1900 77.3 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Agricultural water use in Egypt is 59(Gt/year) 60 40.93. According to aquastat (FAO), irrigated area has been 40 33.1 increased since 1980. In the end of 21st century, water 20 demand is supposed to be more8.2 than supply 10.1 0 0 0 0 Tanza… D.R.C… Ethiopia Uganda Brundi Sudan Egypt Kenya RwandaIdentifying water shortage problem in the Nile and trying to solve it
  5. 5. Uniqueness of this researchTo propose Hybrid of Conflict Analysis and Hydrological Model The previous conflict analysis This methodPreference From knowledge and Based on output of hydrological model inorder assumption of researcher each scenarioCommon Capable to make sure the consequence logically in the case when subjectsadvantage make decision based on rational standard.Disadvantage Results are strongly Capable to analyze with repeatability andof the previous influenced by qualitative quantitative discussion due to objective& uniqueness expression decision making of preference orderConclusion part Qualitative discussion Qualitative and quantitative discussion For contribution to decision making in international river basin management
  6. 6. Methodology 6
  7. 7. Procedure 1. Geographical data (altitude, land-cover, routine-network)2. Meteorological data 3. GCM output 4. Set scenarios Input GPCC, GSMaP etc MRI-AGCM Irrigated area (1981-2004) (2075-2099) (2075-2099) Bias Collection SiBUC & Hydro-BEAM Simulation Discharge Runoff Runoff (1981-2004) (Scenario #1) (Scenario #n) Output Calibration Observed discharge data (1998-2002) Conflict Analysis Discussion
  8. 8. Remote Sensing and GCM 8(bougria-tif.blogspot.com) (Citation: Japan Meteorological Agency)
  9. 9. Input data Product Parameter Spatial resolution Time resolution SRTM30 Altitude 30 seconds - GLCC ver.2 land cover 30 seconds - ECOCLIMAP Soil 30 seconds -SPOTVEGETATION NDVI 30 seconds - GPCC Precipitation 1.0 degree Monthly 0.1 degree & GSMaP Precipitation Hourly 0.25 degree Temperature, H08 0.5 degree Daily Radiation, Humidity Wind speed, Air 1.1 degreeJRA25 Reanalysis 6 hours pressure (horizontal) MRI-AGCM Meteorological 7 0.1875 degree Hourly & 3 hours (Japan) parameters (20km)
  10. 10. SiBUC & Hydro-BEAM 10
  11. 11. Land Scheme Model SiBUC (Simple Biosphere Model including Urban Canopy) (Tanaka, K., 2004) Categorize land surface into green, urban, and water body and calculate water balance, radiation balance, and energy balance. Boundary conditions are 7 meteorological elements and 16 parameters are calculated every 1 hour Boundary Condition: Tm em um FL,m(0) Ft,d(0) P Zm (Reference Height) McTbr Mbr Tc Water level Canopy Tbw Urban Canopy Mg Tg Mug Tug Ground Twb W1 Surface Layer Stage1 Stage2 Stage3 Stage4 Stage5 Urban Ground Tdw Tdg W2 Root Zone Irrigation Maximum water level Minimum water level Tdu Water Drainage Optimal water level Present water level Body W3 Recharge Zone Precipitation Schematic image of SiBUC Scheme of irrigation in SiBUC Capable to estimate irrigated water requirement seasonally 11
  12. 12. Outputs of SiBUC January (1998~2002)
  13. 13. Outputs of SiBUC February (1998~2002)
  14. 14. Outputs of SiBUC March (1998~2002)
  15. 15. Outputs of SiBUC April (1998~2002)
  16. 16. Outputs of SiBUC May (1998~2002)
  17. 17. Outputs of SiBUC June (1998~2002)
  18. 18. Outputs of SiBUC July (1998~2002)
  19. 19. Outputs of SiBUC August (1998~2002)
  20. 20. Outputs of SiBUC September (1998~2002)
  21. 21. Outputs of SiBUC October (1998~2002)
  22. 22. Outputs of SiBUC November (1998~2002)
  23. 23. Outputs of SiBUC December (1998~2002)
  24. 24. Distributed Runoff Model Hydro-BEAM (Hydrological River Basin Environmental Assessment Model) Nile delta (Kojiri, T., 2006)Convert outputs of SiBUC to Hydro-BEAM. Flow direction is determined by Altitude. Aswan Khartoum Atbara Calculate discharge Sennar Kinematic wave model Roseires Surface runoff Bahr El-Ghazal Sobat Infiltration Bahr El-Jabal Lake Victoria Sub-surface runoff Linear storage model Schematic image of Hydro-BEAM
  25. 25. Conflict Analysis 25
  26. 26. What is “conflict analysis”? Conflict analysis is an analytical method which is developed expanding algorithm of metagame theory* Fraser and Hipel (1979)Conflict analysis consists of three elements… Howard (1971)1. (Player) subject to play game2. (Option) choice of player3. (Preference) priority of option Results show what kinds of events are possible to occur. 26
  27. 27. Algorithm of conflict analysis with example Stability Table (with third party) (r: rational, s: sequential stability, u: unstable)Egypt × × E × E × × × × × × × × × × STARTTotal stability r r r r r u u u u u u u u u uPlayers stability 3 6 9 12 15 2 5 8 11 14 1 4 7 10 13 UI from NO outcome q for q is rational for A (r)Preference vector 3 6 9 12 15 3 6 9 12 15 player A? YESUnilateral improvement 2 5 8 11 14 UI for B NO from A’s UI? q is unstable for A (u)Ethiopia YESPlayers stability r r r u u u r r r u u u u u u All UIs (Check for for B preferred to simultaneous stability)Preference vector 7 8 9 4 5 6 13 14 15 1 2 3 10 11 12 q by A? YES NOUnilateral improvement 7 8 9 7 8 9 13 14 15 Another UI q is sequentially from q for A? stable for A (s) 4 5 6 YES NOOthersPlayers stability r r r r r r u u u u u u r r r A(B): Player A(B) END q: EventPreference vector 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UI: Unilateral ImprovementUnilateral improvement 10 11 12 13 14 15 27
  28. 28. Algorithm of conflict analysis with example Stability Table (with third party) (r: rational, s: sequential stability, u: unstable)Egypt × × E × E × × × × × × × × × ×Total stability r r r r r u u u u u u u u u uPlayers stability 3 6 9 12 15 2 5 8 11 14 1 4 7 10 13Preference vector 3 6 9 12 15 3 6 9 12 15Unilateral improvement 2 5 8 11 14EthiopiaPlayers stability r r r u u u r r r u u u u u uPreference vector 7 8 9 4 5 6 13 14 15 1 2 3 10 11 12Unilateral improvement 7 8 9 7 8 9 13 14 15 4 5 6OthersPlayers stability r r r r r r u u u u u u r r rPreference vector 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Unilateral improvement 10 11 12 13 14 15 Coding for automatic analysis 28
  29. 29. Verification in the Nile Basin 29
  30. 30. Discharge at Aswan High Dam D.S. (m3/s) 12,000 11,000 0 Error bar means max and min 12,000 11,000 0 Simulation_mean value Discharge at Atbara D.S. (m3/s) 10,000 100 10,000 Simulation_mean 100 Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) Observation_max 9,000 9,000 Observation_max Observation_mean Observation_mean 8,000 200 8,000 200 Observation_min Observation_min 7,000 7,000 6,000 300 6,000 300 5,000 5,000 4,000 400 4,000 400 3,000 3,000 2,000 500 2,000 500 1,000 Aswan D.S. 1,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 600 Atbara 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 600 12,000 0 12,000 0 Aswan U.S. Discharge at Aswan High Dam U.S. (m3/s) 11,000 11,000 Discharge at Sennar Dam D.S. (m3/s) Simulation_mean 10,000 100 10,000 Simulation_mean 100 Observation_max Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) 9,000 Observation_mean 9,000 Observation_max 8,000 Observation_min 200 8,000 Observation_mean 200 7,000 7,000 Observation_min 6,000 300 6,000 300 5,000 Sennar 5,000 4,000 400 4,000 400 3,000 3,000 2,000 500 2,000 500 1,000 1,000 0 600 0 600 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 12,000 0 Discharge at Roseires Dam D.S. (m 3/s) 11,000 Roseires 10,000 100 12,000 0 Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) 9,000 Simulation_mean Discharge at Owen Falls Dam D.S. (m3/s) 11,000 8,000 Observation_max 200 10,000 100 Observation_mean Rainfall at the basin (mm/month) 7,000 9,000 Observation_min 6,000 300 8,000 200 Simulation_mean 5,000 7,000 Observation_max 4,000 400 6,000 300 Observation_mean 3,000 5,000 Observation_min 2,000 500 4,000 400 1,000 3,000 0 600 2,000 500 Owen Falls Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1,000 0 600 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Error is around less than 10 %
  31. 31. Assessment of future climateby MRI-AGCM and CMIP3 31
  32. 32. Impact assessment of climate change by MRI-AGCM and CMIP3 GCM* in the world (2075~2099)/(2003~1979) Ave. Monthlymulti-model A1B DJFNumber Model Name Resl. x Resl. y Country 1 BCC-CM1 192 96 China 2 BCCR-BCM2.0 128 64 Norway 3 CCSM3 256 128 USA 4 CGCM3.1(T47) 96 48 Canada 5 CGCM3.1(T63) 128 64 Canada 6 CNRM-CM3 128 64 France 7 CSIRO-Mk3.0 192 96 Australia 8 CSIRO-Mk3.5 192 96 Australia 9 ECHAM5/MPI-OM 192 96 Germany 10 ECHO-G 96 48 Germany/Korea 11 FGOALS-g1.0 128 60 China 12 GFDL-CM2.0 144 90 USA 13 GFDL-CM2.1 144 90 USA [-] 14 GISS-AOM 90 (Citation: IPCCUSA WG1) 60 AR4 15 GISS-EH 72 46 USA (2075~2099)–(2003~1979) Ave. Monthly 16 GISS-ER 72 46 USA 17 INGV-SXG 320 160 Italy 18 INM-CM3.0 72 45 Russia 19 IPSL-CM4 96 72 France 20 MIROC3.2(hires) 320 160 Japan 21 MIROC3.2(medres) 128 64 Japan 22 MRI-CGCM2.3.2 128 64 Japan 23 PCM 128 64 USA 24 UKMO-HadCM3 96 73 UK 25 UKMO-HadGEM1 192 145 UK 26 MRI-AGCM3.1S 1920 960 Japan 27 MRI-AGCM3.2S 1920 960 Japan *GCM: Global Climate Model (Citation: IPCC AR4 WG1) [℃]
  33. 33. Study of drought year by MRI-AGCM and CMIP3 Utilization of 24 GCM, 485 yearly samples, by MRI-AGCM(2075-2099) and CMIP3(2080-2099) 600 500 Table. Drought year (yr) in the Nile BasinPrecipitation (mm/year) Drought year Precipitation (mm/year) Total Runoff (Gt/year) 400 Average 369.3 207.3 300 precipitation 5yr drought 340.9 188.6 200 10yr drought 329.2 180.8 20yr drought 317.0 172.8 100 50yr drought 305.9 165.4 100yr drought 294.2 157.7 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 Input of conflict analysis Ave. 平均降水量 precipitation 10yr 50yr 10年渇水 50年渇水 5年渇水 5yr drought 20年渇水 20yr drought 100年渇水 100yr drought
  34. 34. Water Resources Development in the end of 21st century 34
  35. 35. Setting of scenarios (basic elements)1. 4 players ① Egypt, ② Sudan&S.Sudan, ③ Ethiopia, ④ Upstream countries in the White Nile2. 11 options Use residual irrigated area on 0%, 10%, … ,100% (11 ways)3. 2 preference orders ① Amount of water use ② Residual amount of water in the Nile River Total scenarios:14641 events 35
  36. 36. Water use depending on ratio of expanded irrigation area 100 Egypt Sudan&S. Sudan Ethi a opi U pstream countri es 90 Calculated water use (Gt/year) 80 算定灌漑水使用量 (Gt/year) 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Ratio of expanded irrigation area (%) 農業開発度(%)Calculate requirement for irrigation by hydrological model outputs. If water use is more than total runoff (supply), the events are unfeasible. 36
  37. 37. 100 Analysis 1Ratio of irrigated water resources development (%) Egypt 90 Sudan&S.Sudan 80 Averaged ratio of expanded irrigated area of equilibriums Ethiopia 70 in eachUpstream countries return period of drought MEAN 60 (Unit: %) 50 5yr drought 10yr drought 20yr drought 50yr drought 100yr drought 40 Egypt 54 60 46 38 51 30 Sudan&S.Sudan 52 57 44 37 47 20 Ethiopia 70 49 40 30 17 Upstream 10 countries 54 52 50 47 46 0 Average 57.5 54.5 45.0 38.0 40.3 0 1 2 5yr 10yr 3 4 5 20yr 50yr 100yr 6 The numbers in table indicate “the average of situation which is possible to occur”. As a result, in the case that all basin countries develop 40% of remained potential field for irrigated area, some discussion will be required on the water allocation for 20 years drought situation.
  38. 38. Analysis 2 ~Visualization of equilibrium points~ Definition of quadrants Visualize the end of vectors1.5 1.5 2 1 1 2 10.5 (Sudan&S.Sudan) (Egypt) 0.5 0 0 -0.5-0.5 3 4 (Upstream -1 -1 (Ethiopia) countries)-1.5 -1.5 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Set 4 axes for each player Unit: ratio of expanded irrigated area
  39. 39. Analysis 2 ~Visualization of equilibrium points~20 years drought 100 years drought According to distribution map, Egyptian side has substantial advantage rapidly, and Ethiopian side has remarkable disadvantage
  40. 40. Analysis 3 ~Refinement~Take off events whose difference between maximum and minimum ratio is more than 70% 20 years drought 100 years drought
  41. 41. Analysis 3 ~Refinement~ After 70% refinement 5yr drought 10yr drought 20yr drought 50yr drought 100yr drought Egypt 66 59 41 30 29 Sudan&S.Sudan 63 56 37 28 25 Ethiopia 62 48 43 34 25 Upstream countries 60 54 45 37 36 Average 62.6 54.6 41.2 32.3 28.8 Ratio of irrigated water resources development (%) 100 100Ratio of irrigated water resources development (%) Egypt Egypt 90 90 Sudan&S.Sudan Sudan&S.Sudan 80 Ethiopia 80 Ethiopia 70 Upstream countries 70 Upstream countries MEAN MEAN 60 60 50 50 40 40 30 30 20 20 10 10 0 0 0 5yr 1 10yr 2 20yr 3 50yr 4 100yr 5 6 0 1 5yr 2 10yr 3 20yr 4 50yr 5 100yr 6
  42. 42. Conclusion1. Hybrid of Conflict Analysis and Hydrological Model is proposed and applied to the whole Nile River Basin for international river management.2. Assessment of future climate is conducted in each sub-basin by MRI-AGCM and CMIP3.3. Plural equilibrium points are analyzed. As a result, in the case of 20 years drought situation, 40% of remained potential field for irrigated area is recommended as the maximum ratio for all basin countries. These recommended ratio depends on cooperative return period of drought. 42
  43. 43. Database of JE-HydroNet 43
  44. 44. Database of JE-HydroNet (tentative)
  45. 45. Database of JE-HydroNet (tentative)Summary of database1. Purposes (1) To introduce JE-HydroNet project to the public (2) To share hydrological information between project members2. Contents (1) Introduction of JE-HydroNet (2) Announcement of next symposium (3) Reports of the previous symposium (4) Download data (only for project members)3. How to manage this website (1) Need to discuss for the near future 45 Thank you for kind attention.

×