A presentation from Scott Meyer P.G. from the Illinois State Water Survey to the BACOG Water Resources Committee on November 11, 2010

1. Scott C. Meyer, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability
Illinois State Water Survey
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

2. Outline
Modeling results
Drawdown in shallow aquifers
Groundwater / surface water interactions
Monitoring
Recommendation from CMAP GO TO 2040 plan
regarding water availability from the Fox River
Climate change
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 2

3. November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 3

4. Hydrogeology
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 4

5. Two Models
Kane County local scale model CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 5

6. Drawdown

7. Simulated Groundwater Withdrawals
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 7

8. Groundwater Withdrawals, NE Illinois (1964-2050)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 8

9. Shallow Groundwater Withdrawals, NE Illinois (1964-2050)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 10

10. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2003)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 12

11. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2050)
Kane County local model
High PumpingHigh Pumping
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 13
Low PumpingLow Pumping

12. Simulated Groundwater Withdrawals
CMAP Model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 14

13. Groundwater Withdrawals, NE Illinois (1964-2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 15

14. Shallow Groundwater Withdrawals, NE Illinois (1964-2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 16

15. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2005)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 17

16. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 18
Baseline scenarioBaseline scenario

17. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 19
MRI scenarioMRI scenario

18. Drawdown (Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 20
LRI scenarioLRI scenario

19. Groundwater / Surface Water Interactions

20. How do groundwater withdrawals
reduce streamflow?
1. Interception of
groundwater that would
otherwise discharge to
streams
2. Inducement of leakage
from stream channels
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 22

21. Natural Groundwater Discharge, Kane County area (1964-2003)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 23
17% reduction17% reduction

22. Natural Groundwater Discharge, Fox River above Algonquin and
Tributaries within Kane County local model domain (1964-2003)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 24
46% reduction46% reduction

23. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2003)
Kane County local model
17% reduction in Kane
County area overall
46% reduction to the Fox
River and tributaries
upstream of Algonquin
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 25

24. Natural Groundwater Discharge, Kane County area (1970-2050)
Kane County local model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 26
20% reduction20% reduction
26% reduction26% reduction
17% reduction17% reduction

25. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2050)
Kane County local model
68% reduction in natural
groundwater discharge to
the Fox River and
tributaries upstream of
Algonquin
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 27
High PumpingHigh Pumping

26. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2050)
Kane County local model
54% reduction in natural
groundwater discharge to
the Fox River and
tributaries upstream of
Algonquin
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 28
Low PumpingLow Pumping

27. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2005)
CMAP model
36% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Flint Creek
11% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Spring
Creek-Fox River
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 30
Flint Cr watershedFlint Cr watershed
Spring Cr watershedSpring Cr watershed

28. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
42% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Flint Creek
18% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Spring
Creek-Fox River
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 31
Baseline scenarioBaseline scenarioFlint Cr watershedFlint Cr watershed
Spring Cr watershedSpring Cr watershed

29. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
50% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Flint Creek
19% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Spring
Creek-Fox River
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 32
MRI scenarioMRI scenarioFlint Cr watershedFlint Cr watershed
Spring Cr watershedSpring Cr watershed

30. Change in Natural Groundwater Discharge
(Predevelopment – 2050)
CMAP model
41% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Flint Creek
14% reduction in
natural groundwater
discharge to Spring
Creek-Fox River
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 33
LRI scenarioLRI scenarioFlint Cr watershedFlint Cr watershed
Spring Cr watershedSpring Cr watershed

31. Natural Groundwater Discharge, Flint Creek Watershed
(1970-2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 34

32. Natural Groundwater Discharge, Spring Creek Watershed
(1970-2050)
CMAP model
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 35

33. Natural Groundwater Discharge
Uncertainty and other issues
Calibration target accuracy
What is base flow during periods of drought?
Effect of unmodeled processes
Effluent
Leaking pipe networks
Climate variability
Evapotranspiration in riparian environments bordering
streams
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 36

35. Monitoring
High-quality data are the foundation of analysis
Greatly reduces uncertainty of analyses
Requires planning
Selection of monitoring well locations and designs
Selection of measurement/logging devices and
frequencies
Recordkeeping issues
Requires a long-term commitment
ISWS is supportive
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 38

36. Groundwater Level Monitoring
Why do it?
Demonstration of change
Model development
Determining
direction/speed of
groundwater movement
Determining rates of
recharge
Determining pump
settings for newly
constructed wells
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 39

37. ISWS Crystal Lake Observation
Well
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 40

38. Other Subjects of Monitoring for
Analysis of Groundwater Systems
Groundwater quality
Streamflow
Total flow
Natural groundwater discharge
Withdrawals
Climate
Precipitation
Evaporation
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 41

39. November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 42

40. Inland Surface Water
Communities that are currently on
groundwater but could potentially
access water supplies from the Fox
and Kankakee Rivers should
explore shifting to those sources.
This recommendation is supported
by findings from studies by the
ISWS showing that the Fox River
has the potential to supply
significant amounts of drinking
water for future growth. (p. 97)
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 43

41. Effect of Effluent on Fox River Low Flow
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 45

42. Effect of Effluent on Fox River Low Flow
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 46

43. November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 47

44. Socioeconomic Storylines
A2: a very heterogeneous world with continuously increasing
global population and regionally oriented economic growth that
is more fragmented and slower than in other storylines.
(Moderately high emissions)
A1B: a future world of very rapid economic growth, global
population that peaks in mid-century and declines thereafter,
and rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies.
Scenario A1B features technological balance across all energy
sources. (Intermediate emissions)
B1: a convergent world with the same global population as in
the A1 storyline but with rapid changes in economic structures
toward a service and information economy, with reductions in
material intensity, and the introduction of clean and resource-
efficient technologies. (Low emissions)
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 48

45. Precipitation
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 49

46. Temperature
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 50

47. Scott C. Meyer, P.G.
Hydrogeologist
Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability
Illinois State Water Survey
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(217) 333-5382
smeyer@illinois.edu
http://www.isws.illinois.edu/
November 10, 2010
BACOG Water Resources Committee
Flint Creek Watershed Partnership 51