A simple procedure for the assessment of hydropeaking flow alterations applied to several European streams

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mauro Carolli ; Davide Vanzo ; Annunziato Siviglia ; Guido Zolezzi…
• 关键词：Regulated rivers ; Subdaily flow regime alterations ; Hydrological indicators ; Thresholds
• 刊名：Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：October 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：77
• 期：4
• 页码：639-653
• 全文大小：1,235 KB
• 参考文献：Bevelhimer MS, McManamay RA, O鈥機onnor B (2014) Characterizing sub-daily flow regimes: implications of hydrologic resolution on ecohydrology studies. River Res Appl. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媟ra.鈥?781
  Bruno MC, Maiolini B, Carolli M, Silveri L (2009) Impact of hydropeaking on hyporheic invertebrates in an Alpine stream (Trentino, Italy). Ann Limnol Int J Lim 45(3):157鈥?70. doi:10.鈥?051/鈥媗imn/鈥?009018 CrossRef
  Bruno MC, Maiolini B, Carolli M, Silveri L (2010) Short time-scale impacts of hydropeaking on benthic invertebrates in an Alpine stream (Trentino, Italy). Limnologica 40(4):281鈥?90. doi:10.鈥?016/鈥媕.鈥媗imno.鈥?009.鈥?1.鈥?12 CrossRef
  Bunt C, Cooke S, Katopodis C, Mckinley R (1999) Movement and summer habitat of brown trout (Salmo trutta) below a pulsed discharge hydroelectric generating station. Regul River 15(5):395鈥?03CrossRef
  European Parliament, Council of the European Union (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Off J Eur Commun Eur Comm Bruss Luxemb 327:1鈥?2
  Fette M, Weber C, Peter A, Wehrli B (2007) Hydropower production and river rehabilitation: a case study on an alpine river. Environ Model Assess 12(4):257鈥?67. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠10666-006-9061-7 CrossRef
  FOEN (2011) Water protection legislation. Federal office for the environment, CH-3003, Bern, Switzerland
  Hauer C, Schober B, Habersack H (2013) Impact analysis of river morphology and roughness variability on hydropeaking based on numerical modelling. Hydrol Process 27(15):2209鈥?224. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媓yp.鈥?519 CrossRef
  Jones N (2013) Spatial patterns of benthic invertebrates in regulated and natural rivers. River Res Appl 29(3):343鈥?51. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媟ra.鈥?601 CrossRef
  Jordan F (2007) Mod猫le de pr茅vision et de gestion des crues: optimisation des op茅rations des am茅nagements hydro茅lectriques 脿 accumulation pour la r茅duction des d茅bits de crue. Th猫se No 3711 de l鈥橢cole polytechnique f茅d茅rale de Lausanne, Switzerland (also published as Communication No 29 of the Laboratory of Hydraulic Constructions, ISSN 16611179). Ecole polytechnique f茅d茅rale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
  Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F (2006) World Map of the K枚ppen鈥揋eiger climate classification updated. Meteorol Z 15(3):259鈥?63. doi:10.鈥?127/鈥?941-2948/鈥?006/鈥?130 CrossRef
  Lundquist J, Cayan D (2002) Seasonal and spatial patterns in diurnal cycles in streamflow in the western United States. J Hydrometeorol 3(5):591鈥?03CrossRef
  Meile T, Boillat JL, Schleiss aJ (2011) Hydropeaking indicators for characterization of the Upper-Rhone River in Switzerland. Aquat Sci 73(1):171鈥?82. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠00027-010-0154-7 CrossRef
  Olje- og energidepartementet (2012) Retningslinjer for revisjon av konsesjonsvilkr for vassdragsreguleringer (English: Guidelines for revision of hydropower licenses). Technical report, Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy
  Poff NL, Zimmerman JKH (2010) Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: a literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows. Freshw Biol 55(1):194鈥?05. doi:10.鈥?111/鈥媕.鈥?365-2427.鈥?009.鈥?2272.鈥媥 CrossRef
  Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Brian D, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC, Richter BD (1997) A paradigm for river conservation and restoration. Bioscience 47(11):769鈥?84CrossRef
  Richter B, Baumgartner J, Powell J, Braun D (1996) A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conserv Biol 10(4):1163鈥?174. doi:10.鈥?046/鈥媕.鈥?523-1739.鈥?996.鈥?0041163.鈥媥 CrossRef
  Rinaldi M, Surian N, Comiti F, Bussettini M (2013) A method for the assessment and analysis of the hydromorphological condition of Italian streams: the Morphological Quality Index (MQI). Geomorphology 180鈥?81:96鈥?08. doi:10.鈥?016/鈥媕.鈥媑eomorph.鈥?012.鈥?9.鈥?09 CrossRef
  Sauterleute J, Charmasson J (2014) A computational tool for the characterisation of rapid fluctuations in flow and stage in rivers caused by hydropeaking. Environ Model Softw 55:266鈥?78. doi:10.鈥?016/鈥媕.鈥媏nvsoft.鈥?014.鈥?2.鈥?04 CrossRef
  Scruton D, Ollerhead L, Clarke K, Pennell C, Alfredsen K, Harby A, Kelley D (2003) The behavioural response of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) to experimental hydropeaking on a Newfoundland (Canada) river. River Res Appl 19(5鈥?):577鈥?87. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媟ra.鈥?33 CrossRef
  Shuster WD, Zhang Y, Roy AH, Daniel FB, Troyer M (2008) Characterizing storm hyrograph rise and fall dynamics with stream stage data. J Am Water Resour Assoc 44(6):1431鈥?440. doi:10.鈥?111/鈥媕.鈥?752-1688.鈥?008.鈥?0249.鈥媥 CrossRef
  Tuhtan J, Noack M, Wieprecht S (2012) Estimating stranding risk due to hydropeaking for juvenile European grayling considering river morphology. KSCE J Civ Eng 16(2):197鈥?06. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠12205-012-0002-5 CrossRef
  Tukey J (1977) Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley Publishing company, Reading
  Valentin S, Lauters F, Sabaton C, Breil P, Souchon Y (1996) Modelling temporal variations of physical habitat for brown trout (Salmo trutta) in hydropeaking conditions. Regul River 12(2鈥?):317鈥?30CrossRef
  Young PS, Cech JJ, Thompson LC (2011) Hydropower-related pulsed-flow impacts on stream fishes: a brief review, conceptual model, knowledge gaps, and research needs. Rev Fish Biol Fish 21(4):713鈥?31. doi:10.鈥?007/鈥媠11160-011-9211-0 CrossRef
  Zimmerman J, Letcher B (2010) Determining the effects of dams on subdaily variation in river flows at a wholebasin scale. River Res Appl 26:1246鈥?260. doi:10.鈥?002/鈥媟ra CrossRef
  Zolezzi G, Bellin A, Bruno MC, Maiolini B, Siviglia A (2009) Assessing hydrological alterations at multiple temporal scales: Adige River. Italy. Water Resour Res 45(12):W12421. doi:10.鈥?029/鈥?008WR007266
  
• 作者单位：Mauro Carolli (1)
  Davide Vanzo (1)
  Annunziato Siviglia (2)
  Guido Zolezzi (1)
  Maria Cristina Bruno (3)
  Knut Alfredsen (4)
  
  1. Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanic Engineering, University of Trento, Via Mesiano 77, Trento, Italy
  2. Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH, Z眉rich, Wolfgang-Pauli-Str. 27, Z眉rich, Switzerland
  3. Fondazione Edmund Mach, Research and Innovation Centre, Via E. Mach 1, San Michele all鈥?Adige, TN, Italy
  4. Department of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491, Trondheim, Norway
  
• 刊物类别：Biomedical and Life Sciences
• 刊物主题：Life Sciences
  Ecology
  Oceanography
  Life Sciences
  
• 出版者：Birkh盲user Basel
• ISSN：1420-9055

文摘

Release of water from storage hydropower plants generates rapid flow and stage fluctuations (hydropeaking) in the receiving water bodies at a variety of sub-daily time-scales. In this paper we present an approach to quantify such variations, which is easy to apply, requires stream flow data at a readily available resolution, and allows for the comparison of hydropeaking flow alteration amongst several gauged stations. Hydropeaking flow alteration is quantified by adopting a rigorous statistical approach and using two indicators related to flow magnitude and rate of change. We utilised a comprehensive stream-flow dataset of 105 gauging stations from Italy, Switzerland and Norway to develop our method. Firstly, we used a GIS approach to objectively assign the stations to one of two groups: gauges with an upstream water release from hydropower plants (peaked group) and without upstream releases (unpeaked group). Secondly, we used the datasets of the unpeaked group to calculate one threshold for each of the two indicators. Thresholds defined three different classes: absent or low pressure, medium, and high pressure, and all stations were classified according to these pressure levels. Thirdly, we showed that the thresholds can change, depending on the country dataset, the year chosen for the analysis, the number of gauging stations, and the temporal resolution of the dataset, but the outcome of the classification remains the same. Hence, the classification method we propose can be considered very robust since it is almost insensitive to the hydropeaking thresholds variability. Therefore, the method is broadly applicable to procedures for the evaluation of flow regime alterations and classification of river hydromorphological quality, and may help to guide river restoration actions. Keywords Regulated rivers Subdaily flow regime alterations Hydrological indicators Thresholds