Implications of projected climate change for groundwater recharge in the western United States

Meixner, Thomas; Manning, Andrew H.; Stonestrom, David A.; Allen, D. M.; Ajami, Hoori; Blasch, Kyle W.; Brookfield, Andrea E.; Castro, Christopher L.; Clark, J. M.; Gochis, David; Flint, Alan L.; Neff, K.; Niraula, Rewati; Rodell, Matthew; Scanlon, Bridget R.; Singha, Kamini; Walvoord, M. A.

doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.12.027

Cited by 358 publications

(271 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

225

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…HPA is divided into Northern (NHP), Central (CHP) and Southern (SHP) regions. Average P in HPA is 522 mm/yr and average recharge is 48 mm/yr (Meixner et al, 2015). In general, average annual P and recharge increase from south to north (Table 2) and occurs predominantly during summer.…”

Section: Vicmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…The literature recharge estimates for the study basins synthesized by Meixner et al (2015) used for evaluating model estimates comes from various sources which used different approaches (observational, environmental tracer analysis, and modeling) for making these estimates. Although not consistent over the basins, these estimates are the best available.…”

Section: Basinwise Literature Estimates Of Rechargementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus to better validate the model results, we further analyzed and compared the recharge at basin scale based on the availability of data in the western US. The literature recharge estimates for the 10 study basins synthesized by Meixner et al (2015) used for evaluating model estimates comes from various sources which used different approaches (observational, environmental tracer analysis, and modeling) for making these estimates, and are the best available estimates. The LSMs ensemble recharge estimates for those 10 basins were comparable with the past literature estimates (R 2 = 0.87, Nash Sutcliffe Efficiency = 0.55).…”

Section: Uncertainty Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Simulated recharge from the LSMs was compared with published recharge estimates from 10 aquifers in the region (Northern Plains, Central High Plains, Southern High Plains, San Pedro, Death Valley, Salt Lake Valley, Central Valley, Columbia Plateau, Spokane Valley, and Williston, Fig. 1) synthesized by Meixner et al (2015). These aquifers represent a broad sample of variability in climatological, geological, and hydrological characteristics along with anthropogenic pressures like groundwater pumping on the aquifers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing potential recharge estimates from three Land Surface Models across the western US

Niraula

Meixner

Ajami

et al. 2017

Journal of Hydrology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tGroundwater is a major source of water in the western US. However, there are limited recharge estimates in this region due to the complexity of recharge processes and the challenge of direct observations. Land surface Models (LSMs) could be a valuable tool for estimating current recharge and projecting changes due to future climate change. In this study, simulations of three LSMs (Noah, Mosaic and VIC) obtained from the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS-2) are used to estimate potential recharge in the western US. Modeled recharge was compared with published recharge estimates for several aquifers in the region. Annual recharge to precipitation ratios across the study basins varied from 0.01% to 15% for Mosaic, 3.2% to 42% for Noah, and 6.7% to 31.8% for VIC simulations. Mosaic consistently underestimates recharge across all basins. Noah captures recharge reasonably well in wetter basins, but overestimates it in drier basins. VIC slightly overestimates recharge in drier basins and slightly underestimates it for wetter basins. While the average annual recharge values vary among the models, the models were consistent in identifying high and low recharge areas in the region. Models agree in seasonality of recharge occurring dominantly during the spring across the region. Overall, our results highlight that LSMs have the potential to capture the spatial and temporal patterns as well as seasonality of recharge at large scales. Therefore, LSMs (specifically VIC and Noah) can be used as a tool for estimating future recharge in data limited regions.

show abstract

Section: Vicmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Basinwise Literature Estimates Of Rechargementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Uncertainty Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparing potential recharge estimates from three Land Surface Models across the western US

Niraula

Meixner

Ajami

et al. 2017

Journal of Hydrology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aquifer systems Thomas Meixner (2016) carried out a study for analysing the implications of projected climate change for groundwater recharge in the western United States, in which an analysis is presented by synthesizing existing studies and applying current knowledge of recharge processes. In this study, available climate-change projections were analysed to determine likely changes in temperature and precipitation in the sub-regions containing eight representative aquifers.…”

Section: Integrated Landscape Hydrology Model (Ilhm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainties and Challenges in Distribution of Groundwater Recharge in Climate Change Scenario

Patil¹,

Agrawal²

2017

International Conference on Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Groundwater use is of fundamental importance to meet the rapid expanding urban, industrial, and agricultural water requirements throughout the world and also in India. To quantify the distribution of groundwater recharge is a prerequisite for efficient and sustainable groundwater resource management in the arid and semi arid regions. Groundwater recharge in these regions shows variability, as per the assessment carried out by using various methods such as Soil Water Balance (SWB) analysis, Integrated Landscape Hydrology Model (ILHM), Water Table Fluctuations (WTF), Isotopic Tracers methods -Chloride Mass Balance, Carbon-14,etc, WetSpass model, SWAT-MODFLOW model, Empirical method, Numerical Modelling, etc. The interaction of soil, climate, slope, geology, geomorphology, land use land cover, rainfall, drainage pattern and other methods used for recharge determines the recharge process. The study reveals that the reasons causing this variability are ranging from uncertainties in recharge influencing factors to change in climatic conditions. The study also shows that the uncertainties in distribution of groundwater recharge occur differently in different regions, due to the impact of various factors such as change in climatic conditions, land use, soil types, etc. In conclusion, it can be stated that realistic estimation of recharge depends mainly on identifying prominent features influencing recharge for a certain region and probable flow mechanism for targeted aquifer, multiple dependent models / approaches may be applied for estimation of recharge and output may be compared to actual field conditions.

show abstract

Changes in groundwater recharge under projected climate in the upper Colorado River basin

Tillman

Gangopadhyay

Pruitt

2016

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding groundwater‐budget components, particularly groundwater recharge, is important to sustainably manage both groundwater and surface water supplies in the Colorado River basin now and in the future. This study quantifies projected changes in upper Colorado River basin (UCRB) groundwater recharge from recent historical (1950–2015) through future (2016–2099) time periods, using a distributed‐parameter groundwater recharge model with downscaled climate data from 97 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 climate projections. Simulated future groundwater recharge in the UCRB is generally expected to be greater than the historical average in most decades. Increases in groundwater recharge in the UCRB are a consequence of projected increases in precipitation, offsetting reductions in recharge that would result from projected increased temperatures.

show abstract

Implications of projected climate change for groundwater recharge in the western United States

Cited by 358 publications

References 70 publications

Comparing potential recharge estimates from three Land Surface Models across the western US

Comparing potential recharge estimates from three Land Surface Models across the western US

Uncertainties and Challenges in Distribution of Groundwater Recharge in Climate Change Scenario

Changes in groundwater recharge under projected climate in the upper Colorado River basin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About