The Bow River Project:  Collaboration for Improved Water Management

Mike Kelly, Alberta WaterSMART

A. Michael Sheer, HydroLogics Inc.

Dan Sheer, HydroLogics Inc.

Mike Nemeth, Alberta WaterSMART

Mike Kelly- introduction, project description, (what, where, who, why)

Mike and Dan Sheer- the model and modelling process, the development of the performance measures, and how data and models can improve decision making

Mike Nemeth- what we found, what’s next Comments, questions, discussion

Structure of our Discussion

The Bow River Basin

9650 sq. Miles, 400 miles long, 1.2 million people

Lower natural summer flow (loss of glacier storage) Rapid population and recreational demand growth Bow Basin closed to new water allocations Low dissolved oxygen concerns in Calgary (fish

health) Periodic very low flows downstream of Bassano Reach-dependent impacts on fisheries (K-Country) Global demand for irrigated agriculture production No system to manage or mitigate drought or flood No overarching regulatory or management

framework

Water Challenges Require Attention Some problems we want to resolve

South Saskatchewan River Basin Flows (Bow + Oldman)

Historic and tree ring data indicate future flood/drought events could be far more severe than recent record

Source: David Sauchyn, University of Regina

History Demonstrates Extreme Climate Variability

5

South Saskatchewan RegionEstimated Water Use by Sector

7%

85%

4%

2%

2%0.1%

Agricultural Other Municipal Industrial Commercial Petroleum

Estimated Water Use 2.4 billion m3 per year

Lower Kananaskis Lake - October

Lower Kananaskis Lake - April

It can be managed for environmental and economic benefits

The Bow is a Managed River

Bow River at Calgary - Natural vs. Managed Flows (38 years data)

Source: BRBC State of Watershed Plan

Bow River Project Consortium Member Organizations

Alberta Water Research Institute

Alberta WaterSMART

Bow River Basin Council

Bow River Irrigation District

Calgary Regional Partnership

City of Calgary

County of Newell

Ducks Unlimited Canada

Eastern Irrigation District

HydroLogics Inc.

Rocky View County

Trout Unlimited Canada

Water and Environmental Hub

Western Irrigation DistrictParticipation from: Alberta Environment; Alberta Sustainable Resource Development;

Alberta Agriculture & Rural Development; Alberta Tourism, Parks & Recreation

1. Causing no significant, measurable environmental harm

2. Assuming Bow River basin remains closed to new licenses

3. Respecting TransAlta’s reputation as an environmentally responsible and proactive corporation (fix problems not blame)

4. Not proposing TransAlta bear the cost of providing benefits to others

5. Meeting Alberta’s annual apportionment commitments to Saskatchewan

6. Maintaining minimum flow requirements for municipalities

7. Supporting the long term population/economic growth forecasts

8. Meeting Siksika First Nation’s needs

9. Respecting Alberta’s water priority system (FITFIR)

10. Achieving Alberta’s policy goals in Water for Life Strategy

Project Guided by Ten Principles

Objective: Model the Bow and its tributaries for environmental sustainability and improvement to enhance social and economic development opportunities throughout the basin to accord with the goals of the Water for Life Strategy

Process: Intensive data review with interactive modelling workshops to develop practical, alternative scenarios for environmental, social and economic gains

Tool: Interactive hydrologic simulation model (Bow River Operational Model – BROM) created by OASIS modelling software

Data: WRMM, IDM, TAM, AESO, WCO, IOs, etc., demands/allocation, and all system operating rules

A collaborative project of water stakeholders holding over 95% of the licensed water on the Bow to assess changes to water

storage and flows in the Bow System

The Bow River Project Modelling

13

The Bow River Problem

• Closed Basin (to licenses)

• Increasing population

• Increasing M&I pressures

• Environmental flow concerns

• Hydropower issues

• Fishery concerns

• Trust issues• And more. . .

The Bow River Problem

• Infrastructure upgrades and hydropower relicensing provided a window of opportunity….

• But… only 6 months to do a 2-year project

16

The CAN, CADRe, CMDS, Process• Computer Aided Negotiaion, Computer Aided

Dispute Resolution, Computer Modeling for Decision Support…. Many names, similar approaches

• 4 Phases:1. Performance Measures2. Bow River Operations Model3. Alternative Development and Testing4. Reaching Consensus

• We also precondition a win-win approach. No proposed solution can leave any party worse off than current policy

17

Water Management is NOT Zero Sum• Timing is as important as quantity • Quality is also important• Each stakeholder is likely to have multiple

management objectives• Stakeholders share many objectives but have

different priorities• Stated preferences for management

alternatives often run counter to actual interests

18

Phase 1: Performance Measures• At HydroLogics we use Performance Measures for

multiple purposes:– Creating a robust suite of metrics– Providing an opportunity to agree that each group is

“allowed to have their own interests, and a chance to express those interests

– Giving stakeholders an opportunity to discover what they really want

• Performance measures are easy. People know what they want, right?– Occasionally, yes, more often, no.– Drilling down to what stakeholders really need can

create a number of Eureka moments!– Defining these value in a group setting helps to build

trust.

19

Phase 1: Performance Measures

• Not all PMs can be affected by policy, but that’s still an important lesson. – Knowing what you can change and getting your

needs heard by the rest of the group can be just as critical as finding the solution

• We shy away from Single Composite Scores as it makes value-tradeoffs difficult

• Here are a few of the major PMs that we ended up following in the Bow River Basin.

Bow River Overview

Environmental Flow Regimes (Bassano Flows)

Performance Measures

Bow River Overview

Lower Kananaskis Elevation Range(Relative to Target)

Performance Measures

Bow River Overview

Irrigation District Shortages(Consecutive Day)

Performance Measures

Bow River Overview

Average Annual Power Revenue(Generation and Ancillary Services)

Performance Measures

28

Phase 2: Build the Model

• Oh yeah, that thing. Easy – right?

• We had our own trials and tribulations on this front.

• The most important thing, though, is continuous and continuing involvement of the stakeholders.

• Keeping everyone involved makes the model itself more trustworthy and transparent.

29

Choosing a Model

• The BRP was not obliged to use OASIS, but chose to use it as a modeling base to take advantage of a few key characteristics:

1. Short run time: From clicking “Run” to results was < 15 minutes

2. Operating rules are input in a “plain English” like language intelligible to operators

3. Easily modifiable “on-the-fly”: New operations, redeveloped schemes, or refined objectives can usually be quickly implemented and tested to allow for rapid progress

30

Phase 3: Alternative Development and Testing

• Here’s where the Collaborative Modeling really comes into play.

• The CMDS session is:– Several groups split up in a room, playing with

the model (with technical support) and trying all kinds of operations to see if anything works.

31

Phase 3: Alternative Development and Testing

• Lots of groups like these

• Several days• Convene -> Regroup -> Retry -> Re-convene -> etc.• Then the

modelers take it all home and clean it up/push the limits

Phase 3: Alternative Development and Testing

1

2

3

Initial Ideas were not at all where we ended up

1. Spray repairs2. Kananaskis

requirements3. Water Bank

By the end of the CMDS days, stakeholders were all competing internally to find the best solution for the group

33

The Water Bank in the Bow River Basin• Policy Changes

1. Irrigation districts agree not to call water from Junior licenses

2. Stabilize Lower Kananaskis Reservoir3. Stabilize Releases into the Kananaskis River4. Purchase 60,000 AF of storage in existing

upstream reservoirs for use in supplementing flows at Bassano» Purely an accounting measure» Refills using 10% of “capture-able” inflows

34

Water Bank? What’s a Water Bank?

• Improving benefits in the Bow is all about timing– All the water goes downstream anyway

• The water bank is a volume of water that can be used to make releases as needed, rather than on a schedule suited solely to TAU– Spread across all TAU reservoirs

• A bank account is useless without something to put in it– % of inflows equal to % of storage is credited to the

bank– Account can’t exceed the agreed storage volume

35

How is the Water Bank Used?

• A bank account is useless unless you can make withdrawals– Withdrawals are made to maintain a flow of 800 cfs

at Bassano (2x current minimum flow)– When a withdrawal is made TAU releases that much

more than they would have released without the withdrawal

– This requires a formula to determine “how much TAU would have released

• Withdrawals are debited from the account

36

Operating Rules are Key

• The benefits from the bank depend on when water is released

• The impacts on TAU generating revenues depend on when the water is released

• The amount in the bank depends on the accounting procedures– % of inflow– How much TAU would have released anyway

• Negotiations on the Water Bank MUST focus on the operating rule if the Bank is to produce the expected benefits

37

Water Bank Operations

01/01/29 03/02/29 05/01/29 06/30/29 08/29/29 10/28/29 12/27/29

Date

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000

110000

Sto

rag

e (

AF

)

Remaining Storage in WaterBank

Water Bank Storage Remaining Water Bank Storage Used to Date Accumulated Water Bank Inflows

The Water Bank in the Bow River Basin

The Water Bank in the Bow River Basin

The Water Bank in the Bow River Basin

The Water Bank in the Bow River Basin

42

Phase 4: Consensus and beyond• By building trust during Phases 1 & 2, consensus works

itself out during Phase 3

• With consensus on the Water Bank Policy, the Bow River Consortium (the formal name of our stakeholder group) took this suggestion to the Alberta Minister of the Environment– Received very favorably– Easy to see why, most of the major stakeholders who might object

had already agreed

• Other Alberta basins, including the larger South Saskatchewan River Basin, are under consideration for a similar process

• Even led to a live day-by-day drought exercise with the Bow River Consortium using the Bow River Model– But that’s a story for another day…..

43

One More Note

• When building these models, and engaging the stakeholders, it is absolutely important to come out with a specific plan and/or recommendation for policy

• HOWEVER!

• It is just as, if not more important, to recognize that bringing these stakeholders into continuing contact where they can practice adaptive management and continue to refine policies is a product in, and of, itself.

44

Making It Happen• The Bow River Project demonstrated that better,

coordinated operations can produce benefits for all parties– The demonstrated scheme may not be the best scheme– Perfect is the enemy of good

• Implementing any plan will require a negotiation of:– An amount of storage– A payment for storage and/or lost generation revenue– A set of operating rules and limitations for all parties so

that each party is assured it will get what it expects– An institutional arrangement for implementing the rules– A procedure for modifying the rules as conditions change– Criteria for measuring success

45

Defining the Operating Rules

• Operating Rules include:– Definition of TAU base release (how much they would

have released anyway) – this needs to be workable and representative, not precisely correct

– Basic rules and limitations on how much TAU can deviate from the definition

– Definition of expected use for water in the Water Bank

– Basic rules and limitations of deviations from Water Bank uses

– Rules must be flexible

46

Institutional Arrangements: Responsibilities

• Scheduling releases from the Water Bank– Accommodating user needs in real time

• Performing the water accounting• Resolving disputes• Reviewing results

– Evaluating success by measured results

• Suggesting changes to improve the rules over time

Many other scenarios could be tested using BROM

current preferred scenario

Project Created Four Alternate Scenarios

Scenario 1Stabilized Lower Kananaskis

Lakeand Kananaskis River

Scenario 2Stabilized Kananaskis +

“Water Bank” at 40,000 af

Scenario 4Stabilized Kananaskis +

Water Bank at 60,000 af + Increasing Spray by 61,000 af

Scenario 3Stabilized Kananaskis +

“Water Bank” at 60,000 af

Protection of water sources for economic and municipal growth (50 years)

Healthier in-stream aquatic systems, fisheries and riparian zones

Sufficient water for irrigation needs and expansion (retain water access)

Renewal of Kananaskis tourism, recreation, & aquatic ecosystems

Achieve Water for Life Goals

None of this will occur without a negotiated deal with TransAlta

If We Manage The Bow River Differently, Collaboratively, We Can Have:

Water for Life Goal 1: Safe, secure drinking water supply for Albertans

Protected Calgary flow levels to protect fisheries and ensure water quality standards

Adequate, quality raw water supply for 50 year forecast growing population demands in the Bow Basin

Emergency-only drinking water supply reserved for downstream populations (Lower Kananaskis Lake)

Ability to model alternative water supply sources for 20+ towns and cities

Benefits Contribute to All Water For Life Goals

Water for Life Goal 2: Healthy aquatic ecosystems

Dramatic improvements to aquatic health and fisheries in Lower Kananaskis Lake and Kananaskis River

80% reduction in lowest flow rates below Bassano and Bow River Opportunity to monetize significant fish habitat offsets on Kananaskis

System to pay for environmental improvements Potential for modeling further aquatic benefits e.g. riparian

improvements, dissolved oxygen parameters, fishery protection Foundation for long-term protection of river ecology without impeding

growth and development in the basin

Benefits Contribute to All Water For Life Goals

Water for Life Goal 3: Reliable, quality water supplies for a sustainable economy

Improved alignment of irrigation needs, environmental values and upstream users

Ability to model impact of improved water use efficiency throughout the basin including in irrigation district operations

Potential to explore and implement further flood and drought mitigation options

Improved means to model impacts of water diversion transfers Retain or expand clean, green hydro power for the long run

Benefits Contribute to All Water For Life Goals

Sufficient water for forecast population growth

Water quality retainedMinimum flow retained for

fisheries and aquatic environment No additional flooding

Future modeling could explore:preventing ice jam floods managing flows to address

dissolved oxygen and phosphorous concerns

Results of Stress Test 1: Increasing Calgary Region Demand by 2.4x

More than doubled municipal demand does not create unmanageable shortages for other users

Protection of Water for People & Municipalities

A collaborative project of water stakeholders to assess possible changes to water storage and flows in the Bow system.

It concluded that:

The Bow River System can and should be managed differently.

Integrated management of the Bow River System from headwaters to confluence is realistic and achievable.

Substantial economic, environmental and social benefits accrue throughout the Bow Basin.

The proposed changes can be implemented for relatively modest cost, and step-by-step over a reasonable period of time.

The Bow River Project at a Glance

Full Project reports are available at www.albertawater.com

The Bow River Simulation had three main objectives:

Revisit and validate the BROM and the preferred scenario recommendations

Test and improve the proposed integrated river management operating rules

Identify and address the consequences of the proposed integrated river management operating rules.

Bow River Simulation

Participants concluded that the BROM is a realistic model and a valuable tool for: understanding the river system exploring changes and potential opportunities to manage the

system for improved performance outcomes Real time management of the river is better than modelled

scenarios (‘Robo-river’)

The Simulation confirmed: that the Bow River system can and should be managed

differently to achieve many economic, environmental and social goals throughout the Bow basin.

the value of stabilizing the Kananaskis system and establishing a water bank for instream benefits at Bassano, Kananaskis and elsewhere.

Simulation Conclusions

The SSRB Adaptation Project: A collaborative project of southern Albertans to explore practical options for adapting to climate variability

and change.

Water is fundamental to community sustainability and growth

How water is managed in the SSRB will become even more important in the face of changing weather patterns and climate

This project will build on and integrate existing data, tools, capacity and knowledge to:

Improve our shared understanding

Explore how to manage for the range of potential impacts

Support collaborative testing of adaptation responses

Increase capacity for water resource management throughout the SSRB

Continuing Work to Optimize River System Management

Work will be conducted with Stakeholders, by Stakeholders

Phase 1. Foundational Blocks: Initial Assessment

Identify the data, tools, capabilities, processes and frameworks currently used for river management in the SSRB, identify critical gaps and avoid duplication

Phase 2. Bow River Basin: Adaptation and Live Test Year

Advance the movement to integrated river management in the Bow system with a focus on adaptation

Phase 3. Oldman River Basin and South Saskatchewan River Modelling

Build the comprehensive river system model for the Oldman and South Sask (OSSK) Basins with an adaptation focus

Phase 4. Foundational Blocks: Development

Begin to fill the critical gaps identified in the Initial Assessment

SSRB Adaptation Project Has Four Phases

58

Next Bow River Phase is Starting Now

Activities Time Frame

1. Re-engagement of the Bow River Basin Stakeholders

April - May

2. Addition of the Highwood and Sheep River Systems to BROM

April - Sept

3. Integrated River Management Business Case April - Nov or earlier

4. Bow Basin Climate Change Modelling and Adaptation Strategies

June - Dec

5. Capital Infrastructure Options June - Nov

6. Bow River Results and Recommendations, and Continued Stakeholder Engagement

Nov - Feb 2013

7. Test Year with TransAlta 2013 or earlier

8. Integration other with SSRB workOldman, Southern Tributaries

TBD

Implications for WW7B

Benefits of water management are largely local

Local stakeholders need a say in water management• Local knowledge• Local values• Ability to implement

Water management is not a zero sum game• Stakeholders share many values• The same operations can provide improvements for many

objectives

People of goodwill can agree