Loading…

Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River

As demand for water in the southwestern United States increases and climate change potentially decreases the natural flows in the Colorado River system, there will be increased need to optimize the water supply. Lake Powell is a large reservoir with potentially high loss rates to bank storage and ev...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2013-10, Vol.49 (5), p.1213-1224
Main Author: Myers, Tom
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3
container_end_page 1224
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1213
container_title Journal of the American Water Resources Association
container_volume 49
creator Myers, Tom
description As demand for water in the southwestern United States increases and climate change potentially decreases the natural flows in the Colorado River system, there will be increased need to optimize the water supply. Lake Powell is a large reservoir with potentially high loss rates to bank storage and evaporation. Bank storage is estimated as a residual in the reservoir water balance. Estimates of local inflow contribute uncertainty to estimates of bank storage. Regression analyses of local inflow with gaged tributaries have improved the estimate of local inflow. Using a stochastic estimate of local inflow based on the standard error of the regression estimator and of gross evaporation based on observed variability at Lake Mead, a reservoir water balance was used to estimate that more than 14.8 billion cubic meters (Gm3) has been stored in the banks, with a 90% probability that the value is actually between 11.8 and 18.5 Gm3. Groundwater models developed by others, observed groundwater levels, and simple transmissivity calculations confirm these bank storage estimates. Assuming a constant bank storage fraction for simulations of the future may cause managers to underestimate the actual losses from the reservoir. Updated management regimes which account more accurately for bank storage and evaporation could save water that will otherwise be lost to the banks or evaporation.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jawr.12081
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1642244969</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1529957814</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1u1DAURiNEJUrLhiewhJAQUlrf-H9ZRlCKUhhGg8rOuuM4NNMkHuwMQ9--Sad0wQK8sS2d78jXX5a9BHoC4zpd4y6eQEE1PMkOQYkiB6n10_FMDcu54t-fZc9TWlMKAjQ7zOZlSIkscPCJ1DF0pMQbT-Zh59uWYF-R5bVvIrnoNugGEnpyiT3-8J3vx1tNhmtPZqENEatAFs0vH4-zgxrb5F887EfZtw_vl7OPefnl_GJ2VuaOMwG5kWqlDcJKKS60pI5KxYsC0bGiqpj2KJwBrQXFinsJlXYUwVC2gsLXvGJH2Zu9dxPDz61Pg-2a5MZXY-_DNlmQo45zI83_UVEYI5QGPqKv_kLXYRv7cRALnAOVYMxEvd1TLo6_F31tN7HpMN5aoHbqwU492PseRvj1gxKTw7aO2LsmPSYKpaYpJw723K5p_e0_jPbT2dXijzvfZ5o0-N-PGYw3ViqmhL36fG7LuZ59fTdfWsPuAAfFo7U</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1441061994</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Myers, Tom</creator><creatorcontrib>Myers, Tom</creatorcontrib><description>As demand for water in the southwestern United States increases and climate change potentially decreases the natural flows in the Colorado River system, there will be increased need to optimize the water supply. Lake Powell is a large reservoir with potentially high loss rates to bank storage and evaporation. Bank storage is estimated as a residual in the reservoir water balance. Estimates of local inflow contribute uncertainty to estimates of bank storage. Regression analyses of local inflow with gaged tributaries have improved the estimate of local inflow. Using a stochastic estimate of local inflow based on the standard error of the regression estimator and of gross evaporation based on observed variability at Lake Mead, a reservoir water balance was used to estimate that more than 14.8 billion cubic meters (Gm3) has been stored in the banks, with a 90% probability that the value is actually between 11.8 and 18.5 Gm3. Groundwater models developed by others, observed groundwater levels, and simple transmissivity calculations confirm these bank storage estimates. Assuming a constant bank storage fraction for simulations of the future may cause managers to underestimate the actual losses from the reservoir. Updated management regimes which account more accurately for bank storage and evaporation could save water that will otherwise be lost to the banks or evaporation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1093-474X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1752-1688</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jawr.12081</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JWRAF5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Middleburg, VA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Banks ; Climate change ; Earth sciences ; Earth, ocean, space ; Estimates ; Estimating techniques ; Evaporation ; Exact sciences and technology ; Freshwater ; Groundwater ; Hydrology. Hydrogeology ; Inflow ; Lake Powell ; Lakes ; Management ; Regression analysis ; reservoir bank storage ; reservoir operations simulations ; Reservoirs ; Rivers ; Stochastic models ; surface water/groundwater interactions ; water conservation ; Water resources ; Water supply</subject><ispartof>Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 2013-10, Vol.49 (5), p.1213-1224</ispartof><rights>2013 American Water Resources Association</rights><rights>2014 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Oct 2013</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=27788501$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Myers, Tom</creatorcontrib><title>Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River</title><title>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</title><addtitle>J Am Water Resour Assoc</addtitle><description>As demand for water in the southwestern United States increases and climate change potentially decreases the natural flows in the Colorado River system, there will be increased need to optimize the water supply. Lake Powell is a large reservoir with potentially high loss rates to bank storage and evaporation. Bank storage is estimated as a residual in the reservoir water balance. Estimates of local inflow contribute uncertainty to estimates of bank storage. Regression analyses of local inflow with gaged tributaries have improved the estimate of local inflow. Using a stochastic estimate of local inflow based on the standard error of the regression estimator and of gross evaporation based on observed variability at Lake Mead, a reservoir water balance was used to estimate that more than 14.8 billion cubic meters (Gm3) has been stored in the banks, with a 90% probability that the value is actually between 11.8 and 18.5 Gm3. Groundwater models developed by others, observed groundwater levels, and simple transmissivity calculations confirm these bank storage estimates. Assuming a constant bank storage fraction for simulations of the future may cause managers to underestimate the actual losses from the reservoir. Updated management regimes which account more accurately for bank storage and evaporation could save water that will otherwise be lost to the banks or evaporation.</description><subject>Banks</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Earth sciences</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Estimating techniques</subject><subject>Evaporation</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>Groundwater</subject><subject>Hydrology. Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Inflow</subject><subject>Lake Powell</subject><subject>Lakes</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>reservoir bank storage</subject><subject>reservoir operations simulations</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Rivers</subject><subject>Stochastic models</subject><subject>surface water/groundwater interactions</subject><subject>water conservation</subject><subject>Water resources</subject><subject>Water supply</subject><issn>1093-474X</issn><issn>1752-1688</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkc1u1DAURiNEJUrLhiewhJAQUlrf-H9ZRlCKUhhGg8rOuuM4NNMkHuwMQ9--Sad0wQK8sS2d78jXX5a9BHoC4zpd4y6eQEE1PMkOQYkiB6n10_FMDcu54t-fZc9TWlMKAjQ7zOZlSIkscPCJ1DF0pMQbT-Zh59uWYF-R5bVvIrnoNugGEnpyiT3-8J3vx1tNhmtPZqENEatAFs0vH4-zgxrb5F887EfZtw_vl7OPefnl_GJ2VuaOMwG5kWqlDcJKKS60pI5KxYsC0bGiqpj2KJwBrQXFinsJlXYUwVC2gsLXvGJH2Zu9dxPDz61Pg-2a5MZXY-_DNlmQo45zI83_UVEYI5QGPqKv_kLXYRv7cRALnAOVYMxEvd1TLo6_F31tN7HpMN5aoHbqwU492PseRvj1gxKTw7aO2LsmPSYKpaYpJw723K5p_e0_jPbT2dXijzvfZ5o0-N-PGYw3ViqmhL36fG7LuZ59fTdfWsPuAAfFo7U</recordid><startdate>201310</startdate><enddate>201310</enddate><creator>Myers, Tom</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>American Water Resources Association</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>KL.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201310</creationdate><title>Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River</title><author>Myers, Tom</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Banks</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Earth sciences</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Estimating techniques</topic><topic>Evaporation</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>Groundwater</topic><topic>Hydrology. Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Inflow</topic><topic>Lake Powell</topic><topic>Lakes</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>reservoir bank storage</topic><topic>reservoir operations simulations</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Rivers</topic><topic>Stochastic models</topic><topic>surface water/groundwater interactions</topic><topic>water conservation</topic><topic>Water resources</topic><topic>Water supply</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Myers, Tom</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Myers, Tom</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Water Resources Association</jtitle><addtitle>J Am Water Resour Assoc</addtitle><date>2013-10</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1213</spage><epage>1224</epage><pages>1213-1224</pages><issn>1093-474X</issn><eissn>1752-1688</eissn><coden>JWRAF5</coden><abstract>As demand for water in the southwestern United States increases and climate change potentially decreases the natural flows in the Colorado River system, there will be increased need to optimize the water supply. Lake Powell is a large reservoir with potentially high loss rates to bank storage and evaporation. Bank storage is estimated as a residual in the reservoir water balance. Estimates of local inflow contribute uncertainty to estimates of bank storage. Regression analyses of local inflow with gaged tributaries have improved the estimate of local inflow. Using a stochastic estimate of local inflow based on the standard error of the regression estimator and of gross evaporation based on observed variability at Lake Mead, a reservoir water balance was used to estimate that more than 14.8 billion cubic meters (Gm3) has been stored in the banks, with a 90% probability that the value is actually between 11.8 and 18.5 Gm3. Groundwater models developed by others, observed groundwater levels, and simple transmissivity calculations confirm these bank storage estimates. Assuming a constant bank storage fraction for simulations of the future may cause managers to underestimate the actual losses from the reservoir. Updated management regimes which account more accurately for bank storage and evaporation could save water that will otherwise be lost to the banks or evaporation.</abstract><cop>Middleburg, VA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/jawr.12081</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1093-474X
ispartof Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 2013-10, Vol.49 (5), p.1213-1224
issn 1093-474X
1752-1688
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1642244969
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Banks
Climate change
Earth sciences
Earth, ocean, space
Estimates
Estimating techniques
Evaporation
Exact sciences and technology
Freshwater
Groundwater
Hydrology. Hydrogeology
Inflow
Lake Powell
Lakes
Management
Regression analysis
reservoir bank storage
reservoir operations simulations
Reservoirs
Rivers
Stochastic models
surface water/groundwater interactions
water conservation
Water resources
Water supply
title Loss Rates from Lake Powell and Their Impact on Management of the Colorado River
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T05%3A48%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Loss%20Rates%20from%20Lake%20Powell%20and%20Their%20Impact%20on%20Management%20of%20the%20Colorado%20River&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Water%20Resources%20Association&rft.au=Myers,%20Tom&rft.date=2013-10&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1213&rft.epage=1224&rft.pages=1213-1224&rft.issn=1093-474X&rft.eissn=1752-1688&rft.coden=JWRAF5&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jawr.12081&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1529957814%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4351-967b89a1b7745860c067422aac32dd38ea5c918850ad4e61d8c0a1903b12ef4d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1441061994&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true