Sensitivity of discharge projections to potential evapotranspiration estimation in Northern Tunisia

Dakhlaoui, Hamouda; Seibert, Jan; Hakala, Kirsti

doi:10.1007/s10113-020-01615-8

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the use of the Budyko framework highlights moderate-to-important impacts of taking into account CO 2 in PE formulations, how this could reflect on hydrological projections made with rainfall-runoff hydrological models might not be straightforward. The impact of PE formulations on discharge projections is still under debate, some studies pointing to either a low impact (Dakhlaoui et al 2020) or a high impact (Seiller and Anctil 2016). Specifically, the presence of a parameter calibration in most hydrological models might distort the relationship between PE anomalies and runoff anomalies (Oudin et al 2006) and could lead to different results from those simulated with the Budyko framework.…”

Section: Comparing Changes With Previous Model Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evapotranspiration in hydrological models under rising CO2: a jump into the unknown

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many hydrological models use the concept of potential evapotranspiration (PE) to simulate actual evapotranspiration (AE). PE formulations often neglect the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2), which challenges their relevance in a context of climate change and rapid changes in CO2 atmospheric concentrations. In this work, we implement three options from the literature to take into account the effect of CO2 on stomatal resistance in the well-known Penman–Monteith PE formulation. We assess their impact on future runoff using the Budyko framework over France. On the basis of an ensemble of Euro-Cordex climate projections using the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, we show that taking into account CO2 in PE formulations largely reduces PE values but also limits projections of runoff decrease, especially under an emissive scenario, namely, the RCP 8.5, whereas the classic Penman–Monteith formulation yields decreasing runoff projections over most of France, taking into account CO2 yields more contrasting results. Runoff increase becomes likely in the north of France, which is an energy-limited area, with different levels of runoff response produced by the three tested formulations. The results highlight the sensitivity of hydrological projections to the processes represented in the PE formulation.

show abstract

Section: Comparing Changes With Previous Model Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evapotranspiration in hydrological models under rising CO2: a jump into the unknown

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are located in the main hydrographical basins (rivers) of Northern Tunisia: Extreme North, Ichkeul, High Medjerdah and Cap Bon, having a strategic role as a surface water supplier for the country (Ben Fraj et al 2019). The climate of the study catchments could be categorized as semi-arid to humid Mediterranean climate with a warm season (Dakhlaoui et al 2017(Dakhlaoui et al , 2020. The catchment's hydro-climatic characteristics are reported in Figure 1.…”

Section: Study Catchmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the impact of rainfall–runoff model structural uncertainty on the hydrological rating of regional climate model simulations

Dakhlaoui

Djebbi

2021

Journal of Water and Climate Change

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose to evaluate the impact of rainfall–runoff model (RRM) structural uncertainty on climate model evaluation, performed within a process-oriented framework using the RRM. Structural uncertainty is assessed with an ensemble approach using three conceptual RRMs (HBV, IHACRES and GR4J). We evaluate daily precipitation and temperature from 11 regional climate models forced by five general circulation models (GCM–RCMs), issued from EURO-CORDEX. The assessment was performed over the reference period (1970–2000) for five catchments situated in northern Tunisia. Seventeen discharge performance indexes were used to explore the representation of hydrological processes. The three RRMs performed well over the reference period, with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency values ranging from 0.70 to 0.90 and bias close to 0%. The ranking of GCM–RCMs according to hydrological performance indexes is more meaningful before the bias correction, which considerably reduces the differences between GCM- and RCM-driven hydrological simulations. Our results illustrate a strong similarity between the different RRMs in terms of raw GCM–RCM performances over the reference period for the majority of performance indexes, in spite of their different model structures. This proves that the structural uncertainty induced by RRMs does not affect GCM–RCM evaluation and ranking, which contributes to consolidate the RRM as a standard tool for climate model evaluation.

show abstract

“…The regional pattern changes in annual runoff obtained in this study are, however, in agreement with previous studies (Donnelly et al 2017;Dayon et al 2018) that used more complex hydrological models: a pronounced decline in mean streamflow in the southern part of While the use of the Budyko framework highlights moderate-to-important impacts of taking into account CO2 in PE formulations, how this could reflect on hydrological projections made with rainfall-runoff hydrological models might not be straightforward. The impact of PE formulations on discharge projections is still under debate, some studies pointing to either a low impact (Dakhlaoui et al 2020) or a high impact (Seiller and Anctil 2016). Specifically, the presence of a parameter calibration in most hydrological models might distort the relationship between PE anomalies and runoff anomalies (Oudin et al 2006) and could lead to different results from those simulated with the Budyko framework.…”

Section: Comparing Changes With Previous Model Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaporation in Hydrological Models Under Rising CO2: A Jump into The Unknown

Lemaitre-Basset

Oudin

Thirel

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many hydrological models use the concept of potential evaporation (PE) to simulate actual evaporation. PE formulations often neglect the effect of carbon dioxide (CO2), which challenges their relevance in a context of climate change and rapid changes in CO2 atmospheric concentrations. In this work, we implement three options from the literature to take into account the effect of CO2 on stomatal resistance in the well-known Penman–Monteith PE formulation. We assess their impact on future runoff using the Budyko framework over France. On the basis of an ensemble of Euro-Cordex climate projections using the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, we show that taking into account CO2 in PE formulations largely reduces PE values but also limits projections of runoff decrease, especially under an emissive scenario, namely, the RCP 8.5. Whereas the classic Penman–Monteith formulation yields decreasing runoff projections over most of France, taking into account CO2 yields more contrasting results. Runoff increase becomes likely in the north of France, which is an energy-limited area, with different levels of runoff response produced by the three tested formulations. The results highlight the sensitivity of hydrological projections to the processes represented in the PE formulation.

show abstract

Sensitivity of discharge projections to potential evapotranspiration estimation in Northern Tunisia

Cited by 19 publications

References 51 publications

Evapotranspiration in hydrological models under rising CO2: a jump into the unknown

Evapotranspiration in hydrological models under rising CO2: a jump into the unknown

Evaluating the impact of rainfall–runoff model structural uncertainty on the hydrological rating of regional climate model simulations

Evaporation in Hydrological Models Under Rising CO2: A Jump into The Unknown

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About