Alvarez-Garreton C, Boisier J P, Billi M, Lefort I, Marinao R, Barría P
Center for Climate and Resilience Research CR2, FONDAP 15110009, Santiago, Chile.
Center for Climate and Resilience Research CR2, FONDAP 15110009, Santiago, Chile; Department of Geophysics, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
J Environ Manage. 2023 Feb 15;328:116914. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116914. Epub 2022 Dec 9.
In this work, we propose a new approach to diagnose if a water allocation scheme is compatible with long-term water security at the catchment scale, and suggest steps to achieve such compatibility. We argue that when the remaining flow of a river after upstream withdrawals is not sufficient to safeguarding ecological river functions, the basin is at extreme risk of water scarcity, which indicates that the water management is failing. To test this, we analysed the water scarcity risks and the safeguarded environmental flows (e-flows) in 277 basins across a wide range of hydro-climatic conditions in Chile (17-55°S). For each basin, water scarcity risks were assessed based on water stress indices (WSIs, computed as the ratio of withdrawals to water availability), considering two water-use scenarios: (i) WSI, where total withdrawals correspond to the maximum consumptive water allowed by the law, i.e., where only the e-flows protected by law remain in the river, and (ii) WSI, where total withdrawals correspond to the actual allocated consumptive water uses within the basins. Further, we evaluated the adequacy of the water management system to protect ecological river functions by contrasting the e-flows protected in Chile with those safeguarded in six other countries. The water allocation system in Chile incorporated the protection of minimum e-flows in 2005 and established that these do not exceed 20% of the mean annual streamflow, except in some exceptional cases. This upper limit is consistently lower than the e-flows safeguarded in other countries, where 20%-80% of the mean annual streamflow are protected. This turns out in WSI values between 80% and 100% in all basins, well above the threshold associated with over-committed basins under extreme risk of water scarcity (70% typically). When moving from the legally allowed to the actually allocated water use scenario, we found contrasting results: about 70% of the basins show low water scarcity risk (WSI <40%), while an 18% have WSI above 100%, indicating the allocation is going beyond current law limits and even beyond physical limits. Our results reveal that the link between e-flows, water allocation and water security has not been adequately incorporated in the current law. E-flows stipulated by law are insufficient to fulfil environmental requirements, while placing the basins under extreme risk of water scarcity if the total allowed withdrawals were exerted. To move towards a system that can effectively achieve long-term water security, we recommend: (i) To define tolerable water scarcity risks for basins, considering environmental requirements. (ii) To translate those risks into measurable basin indices to measure water security, such as the WSI. (iii) To set maximum water use limits (or minimum e-flows) within the basins that are compatible to the water security goals. If, under current and projected water availability conditions, the existing withdrawals exceed these limits, water managers should be able to adapt total consumption to the required limits.
在这项工作中,我们提出了一种新方法来诊断一种水资源分配方案在流域尺度上是否与长期水安全兼容,并提出实现这种兼容性的步骤。我们认为,当上游取水后河流的剩余流量不足以保障河流的生态功能时,流域就面临着极端的水资源短缺风险,这表明水资源管理失败。为了验证这一点,我们分析了智利(南纬17°至55°)广泛水文气候条件下277个流域的水资源短缺风险和受保护的环境流量(生态流量)。对于每个流域,基于水资源压力指数(WSIs,计算为取水量与水资源可利用量的比率)评估水资源短缺风险,考虑两种用水情景:(i)WSI,其中总取水量对应于法律允许的最大消费用水量,即河流中仅保留受法律保护的生态流量,以及(ii)WSI,其中总取水量对应于流域内实际分配的消费用水量。此外,我们通过对比智利保护的生态流量与其他六个国家保护的生态流量,评估了水资源管理系统保护河流生态功能的充分性。智利的水资源分配系统在2005年纳入了对最低生态流量的保护,并规定这些流量不超过年平均流量的20%,某些特殊情况除外。这个上限一直低于其他国家保护的生态流量,在其他国家,年平均流量的20%至80%受到保护。这导致所有流域的WSI值在80%至100%之间,远高于与面临极端水资源短缺风险的过度开发流域相关的阈值(通常为70%)。当从法律允许的用水情景转变为实际分配的用水情景时,我们发现了截然不同的结果:约70%的流域显示出低水资源短缺风险(WSI<40%),而18%的流域WSI高于100%,这表明分配超出了当前法律限制,甚至超出了物理限制。我们的结果表明,生态流量、水资源分配和水安全之间的联系在现行法律中没有得到充分体现。法律规定的生态流量不足以满足环境要求,而如果允许的总取水量得到实施,流域将面临极端的水资源短缺风险。为了朝着能够有效实现长期水安全的系统迈进,我们建议:(i)考虑环境要求,为流域定义可容忍的水资源短缺风险。(ii)将这些风险转化为可衡量的流域指标以衡量水安全,如WSI。(iii)在流域内设定与水安全目标兼容的最大用水限制(或最低生态流量)。如果在当前和预计的水资源可利用条件下,现有取水量超过这些限制,水资源管理者应能够使总用水量适应所需限制。