2018
DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12684
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Meeting Water Quality Goals under Climate Change in Chesapeake Bay Watershed, USA

Abstract: Climate change may increase precipitation, temperatures, and pollution loading and necessitate additional measures and costs to achieve water quality goals. We used two climate change models and the mean of the ensemble of seven climate models (Ensemble Mean), a yield prediction model (Soil and Water Assessment Tool‐Variable Source Area), and a farm economic model to estimate how climate change would affect yields and the costs of reducing nitrogen (N) loading in an agricultural subbasin of the Chesapeake Bay.… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Excess N and P lost from agricultural fields contribute to air pollution and to water pollution in rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. Under changing climate conditions, mitigating pollution to large bodies of water is expected to become more challenging due to greater precipitation (Bosch, Wagena, Ross, Collick, & Easton, 2018). Residual end‐of‐season inorganic N is prone to leaching and residual P may be moved into water bodies through soil erosion or tile drains, both of which are increased with greater precipitation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Excess N and P lost from agricultural fields contribute to air pollution and to water pollution in rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. Under changing climate conditions, mitigating pollution to large bodies of water is expected to become more challenging due to greater precipitation (Bosch, Wagena, Ross, Collick, & Easton, 2018). Residual end‐of‐season inorganic N is prone to leaching and residual P may be moved into water bodies through soil erosion or tile drains, both of which are increased with greater precipitation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although dissolved oxygen in Chesapeake Bay has improved, reducing nonpoint pollution from agricultural production remains a significant challenge (Zhang et al 2018, Kleinman et al 2019). Therefore, reducing agricultural nutrient loadings via best management practices remains a major point of interest for water quality in the Chesapeake Bay TMDL (Bosch et al 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…SWAT is a widely used semi-distributed hydrologic watershed quality model that incorporates weather, soil, land cover, and management parameters to quantify the environmental and productivity impacts of various production practices (Arnold et al 2012, Gebremariam et al 2014, Abbaspour et al 2015, Wagena and Easton 2018, Liu et al 2019. SWAT is a process-based model that predicts hydrology, sediment and chemical fluxes using weather, soil, land cover and management data (Arnold et al 1998).…”
Section: Swat/hawqs Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While SWAT provides three options for simulating ET (Hargreaves, Priestly-Taylor, and Penman-Monteith) (Neitsch et al, 2011), only the Penman-Monteith equation (Walter et al, 2001) explicitly accounts for the physiological effects of CO 2 on ET using the method developed by Easterling et al (1992) and Stockle (1992). Even so, CO 2 is often held constant at a baseline value of 330 ppm unless otherwise specified in SWAT (Sun et al, 2013;Panagopoulos et al, 2015;Bosch et al, 2018;Xu et al, 2019). To remedy this issue, a growing number of studies have assessed the effects of increased CO 2 on hydrologic simulations (Jha et al, 2006;Ficklin et al, 2010;Arias et al, 2014;Butcher et al, 2014;Gabriel et al, 2016), while other studies have enabled the Penman-Monteith ET routine to accept dynamic CO 2 time series (Wang et al, 2017) and improved its stomatal conductance and LAI routines to account for different vegetation types (Eckhardt and Ulbrich, 2003;Wu et al, 2012;Luo et al, 2013).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%