+ All Categories
Home > Documents > The Relationship Between the Low Salinity Zone...

The Relationship Between the Low Salinity Zone...

Date post: 07-Sep-2018
Category:
Upload: hakiet
View: 215 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
24
Michael L. MacWilliams, Ph.D. The Relationship Between the Low Salinity Zone and Delta Outflow Delta Outflows Workshop February 10, 2014
Transcript

Michael L. MacWilliams, Ph.D.

The Relationship Between the Low Salinity Zone and Delta Outflow

Delta Outflows Workshop

February 10, 2014

Outline • Relationship Between X2 and Low Salinity Zone

– Modeling X2 – Low Salinity Zone (LSZ) Modeling

• Relationship Between X2 and Fish Habitat Indices • Estimating Outflow and X2

– Dayflow vs USGS Observations – Surface EC vs Auto-regressive Equations

• Long Term Implications • Conclusions

UnTRIM Bay-Delta Model Used in numerous studies in SF Bay-Delta for CA DWR, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, USBR, and U.S. EPA: • MacWilliams and Cheng 2006; • MacWilliams and Gross 2007, 2010; • MacWilliams et al. 2008, 2009,

2012; • Kimmerer et al. 2013; • Bever and MacWilliams 2013; • MacWilliams and Bever 2013; • MacWilliams et al., in review.

What is X2?

X2 is defined as the position of the 2 psu bottom salinity value, measured along the axis of the estuary in km from the Golden Gate

Jassby et al. (1995)

Low Salinity Zone (LSZ) Area • Calculated from predicted daily-average depth-averaged

salinity in each grid cell. • Total area of region with salinity between 0.5 and 6 psu for

each day.

X2 and LSZ Area: 1994 - 1997

(From: MacWilliams et al., in review)

X2 and LSZ Area: 1994 - 1997

(From: MacWilliams et al., in review)

X2 and LSZ Area: 1994 - 1997

(From: MacWilliams et al., in review)

Low Salinity Zone (LSZ): X2 = 75

(From: MacWilliams et al., in review)

Outline • Relationship Between X2 and Low Salinity Zone

– Modeling X2 – Low Salinity Zone (LSZ) Modeling

• Relationship Between X2 and Fish Habitat Indices • Estimating Outflow and X2

– Dayflow vs USGS Observations – Surface EC vs Auto-regressive Equations

• Long Term Implications • Conclusions

X2 and Salinity Habitat Indices

0.3

1

510

0.3

1

510

40 60 800.3

1

510

40 60 80

A: Northern Anchovy

B: Longfin Smelt

C: Delta Smelt

Habi

tat I

ndex D: American Shad

X2, km

E: Threadfin Shad F: Striped Bass

(From: Kimmerer et al., 2013)

Salin

ity H

abita

t Ind

ex

Outline • Relationship Between X2 and Low Salinity Zone

– Modeling X2 – Low Salinity Zone (LSZ) Modeling

• Relationship Between X2 and Fish Habitat Indices • Estimating Outflow and X2

– Dayflow vs USGS Observations – Surface EC vs Auto-regressive Equations

• Long Term Implications • Conclusions

Modified from: Dayflow 2013 Water Year Comments (http://www.water.ca.gov/dayflow/docs/2013_Comments.pdf)

120000

100000

80000

60000

40000

20000

0

-20000

-40000

-60000

-80000

Net

Del

ta O

utflo

w (c

fs)

Dayflow USGS Observed (note periods of missing data)

Difference (USGS - Dayflow)

Outflow Estimates 10

/01/

2012

11/0

1/20

12

12/0

1/20

12

01/0

1/20

13

02/0

1/20

13

03/0

1/20

13

04/0

1/20

13

05/0

1/20

13

06/0

1/20

13

07/0

1/20

13

08/0

1/20

13

09/0

1/20

13

10/0

1/20

13

1) Direct Observations (USGS Cruises) 2) Using Flow-X2 Auto-Regressive Relationships 3) From Observed Surface Salinity (CX2) 4) Using Hydrodynamic Models

How is X2 Estimated?

2) Using Flow-X2 Auto-Regressive Relationships* • Jassby et al. (1995):

– X2(t)= 8 + 0.945*X2(t-1) – 1.5log(QOUT(t)) • Jassby et al. (1995) as cited by Monismith et al. (2002):

– X2(t)= 10.2 + 0.945*X2(t-1) – 2.3log(QOUT(t)) • Monismith et al. (2002):

– X2(t)= 0.919*X2(t-1) + 13.57(QOUT(t)-0.141) • Gross et al. (2010):

– X2(t)= 0.910*X2(t-1) + 18.90(QOUT(t)-0.182) • MacWilliams et al. (in review):

– X2(t)= α*X2(t-1) + (1- α)*β*(QOUT(t)-0.230) (flow-dependent α) • DAYFLOW:

– X2(t)= 10.16 + 0.945*X2(t-1) – 1.487log(QOUT(t)) • Jassby et al. (1995) and Monismith et al. (2002) assumed that the bed

salinity was 2.0 psu when the surface salinity was equal to 1.76 psu (3.36 mmhos/cm) – Assumes 0.24 psu stratification

How is X2 Estimated?

*As summarized by: Anke Mueller-Solger (2012)

Comparison of X2 Estimates from Auto-regressive Equations

(From: MacWilliams et al., in review)

Autoregressive Equation RMS error [km]

Jassby et. al (1995) 9.22

Monismith et al. (2002) 7.47

Gross et al. (2010) 5.31

Constant-α MacWilliams et al. (in review)

4.17

Variable-α MacWilliams et al. (in review)

3.10

3) Using Observed Surface Salinity (CX2) • Operationally X2 (CX2) is calculated from observed surface EC at

Martinez, Port Chicago, Mallard Island and Collinsville using the equation (Applies only for 56<X2<81): – wEC is the daily-average EC in mmhos/cm of the westerly station – eEC is the daily-average EC in mmhos/cm of the easterly station – wkm is the km from the Golden Gate of the westerly station – ekm is the km from the Golden Gate of the easterly station

• Assumes bed salinity is 2 psu (3.80 mmhos/cm) when surface EC is 2.64 mmhos/cm (1.36 psu). – Assumes 0.64 psu stratification

How is X2 Estimated?

From: http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cgi-progs/stationInfo?station_id=CX2

Surface Salinity vs. Bed Salinity Evaluation of CX2:

Assumes 0.64 psu stratification

Assumption of 0.64 psu stratification (2.64 mmhos/cm surface EC) tends to over predict X2 relative to X2 calculated from PREDICTED bed salinity

Assumption of 0.24 psu stratification (3.37 mmhos/cm surface EC) tends to under predict X2 relative to X2 calculated from OBSERVED bed salinity

Evaluation of Jassby et al. (1995): Assumes 0.24 psu stratification

Outline • Relationship Between X2 and Low Salinity Zone

– Modeling X2 – Low Salinity Zone (LSZ) Modeling

• Relationship Between X2 and Fish Habitat Indices • Estimating Outflow and X2

– Dayflow vs USGS Observations – Surface EC vs Auto-regressive Equations

• Long Term Implications • Conclusions

X2 and LSZ Area: 1990 - 2011

LSZ Area vs. X2

Fall LSZ Area: 1990-2010

Conclusions • Relationship between X2 and the physical size of the Low Salinity

Zone (LSZ) is not monotonic (MacWilliams et al., in review).

• Many fish habitat indices based on salinity are inversely related to X2 but are generally monotonic (Kimmerer et al., 2013).

• Regulations based on either outflow or X2 should incorporate the best available science for estimating or measuring these variables. – Dayflow tends to significantly overestimate outflow during low outflow periods. – Outflow observations subject to data gaps and periods of negative outflow. – X2 estimates based on surface EC (CX2) make use of unrealistic assumptions

about the amount of stratification which significantly affect the accuracy of these X2 estimates.

– Several recent improvements to auto-regressive equations to estimate X2 (e.g., Gross et al., 2010; MacWilliams et al., in review), but these models still do not take into account spring-neap effects and require accurate outflow estimates.

• Outflow management should take into account potential longer-term outcomes. – Long-term trends show a decrease in Fall LSZ area.

Acknowledgments UnTRIM Model:

Vincenzo Casulli

JANET Grid Generator:

Christoph Lippert

LSZ Expertise:

Bruce Herbold (EPA)

Wim Kimmerer (SFSU)

Edward Gross (RMA)

Larry Smith (USGS)

Fred Feyrer (USBR)

Project Funding:

USACE

CA DWR

USBR

IEP/POD Contact info: [email protected]


Recommended