Simulating effect of anthropogenic activities and climate variation on Liulin Springs discharge depletion by using the ARIMAX model

Abstract

Based on the groundwater development process, and regional economic and social developing history, we divided the spring hydrological process of the Liulin Springs Basin into two periods: pre‐1973 and post‐1974. In the first period (i.e. 1957–1973), the spring discharge was affected by climate variation alone, and in the second period (i.e. 1974–2009), the spring discharge charge was influenced by both climate variation and human activities. A piecewise analysis strategy was used to differentiate the contribution of anthropogenic activities from climate variation on karst spring discharge depletion in the second period. Then, the ARIMAX model was applied to spring flow time series of the first period to develop a model for the effects of climate variation only. Using this model, we estimated the spring discharge in the second period solely under the influence of climate variation. Based on the water budget, we subtracted observed spring discharge from the estimated spring discharge and acquired the contribution of human activities on spring discharge depletion for the second period. The results of the analysis indicated that the contribution of climate variation to the spring discharge depletion is−0.20 m3/s from 1970s to 2000s. The contribution of anthropogenic activities to the spring flow depletion was −2.56 m3/s in 2000s, which was about 13 times more than that of climate variation. Our analysis further indicates that groundwater exploitation only accounts for 29% of the spring flow depletion due to the effects of human activities. The remaining 71% of the depletion is likely to be caused by other human activities, including dam building, dewatering during coal mining, and deforestation. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Modeling low-flow bedrock springs providing ecological habitats with climate change scenarios

“…These subsurface-focused or integrated (surface and subsurface flow) models can be used to conduct predictive scenarios to determine the effects of climate change, urbanization, or increasing groundwater use on small (and large) springs, which is required to implement mitigation measures to protect ecological habitats. Numerical modeling studies mostly focus on karstic settings in terms of interpretation of spring flow mechanisms using parsimonious lumped-parameter models (Hao et al, 2012;Amoruso et al, 2011;Barrett and Charbeneau, 1997;Bonacci and Bojanic, 1991) distributed and/or lumped parameter equivalent porous media models (Dragoni et al, 2013;Chen et al, 2013;Doummar et al, 2012;Scanlon et al, 2003); and channel flow (Eisenlohr et al, 1997) or purely conduit flow (Halihan and Wicks, 1998) formulations. Equivalent porous media approaches for non-karstic fractured bedrock springs are also reported in the literature (e.g., Farlin et al, 2013;Swanson et al, 2006;Swanson and Bahr, 2004).…”

Hourly and Daily Urban Water Demand Predictions Using a Long Short-Term Memory Based Model

“…Generally, an ARIMA model consists of an autoregressive (AR) model, a difference process that deals with non-stationary data, and a moving average (MA) model, with details presented in Hao et al, (2013).…”

A Comparative Study of VMD-Based Hybrid Forecasting Model for Nonstationary Daily Streamflow Time Series

“…e hyperparameters, i.e., the learning rate (LR), the maximum depth (MD), the maximum features (MF), the minimum sample split (MSS), and the minimum sample leaf (MSL), are searched for using Bayesian optimization based on the Gaussian processes. [58] are linear stochastic models that are obtained by combining the AR and the MA models, and they are used to model the dependent stochastic components of a time series. ARMA models can be written as follows:…”