Red River Basin Disaster Information Network
On-Line Workshop
Thursday - May 25, 2000 - 12:00 Noon CDT

Water and Climate Change
Vulnerability and Adaptation

Allen Tyrchniewicz
Senior Specialist, Natural Resource Management
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)

Amy Sebring, Moderator
RRBDIN Coordinator/EIIP Technical Projects Coordinator

[Introduction]

Amy Sebring: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us in the Red River room of the EIIP Virtual Forum. Our topic today is Water and Climate Change. Background information for today's session may be found at http://www.emforum.org/redriver/workshop/wk000525.htm

The issue of climate change generally, also known as "global warming" is a hot topic, if you will forgive the pun. There is an ongoing international effort to assess the potential impacts for different regions of the world, as well as different sectors. One sector that is of primary concern is water, and the potential impacts on both supply and quality. This is closely linked to the general theme of sustainable development.

Last week, a workshop was held in Winnipeg that was co-sponsored by the International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD) and several other organizations. We are very pleased to have Allen Tyrchniewicz with us today to report on the outcome.

Allen is a Senior Specialist for Natural Resource Management with IISD, and has been instrumental in raising the awareness of climate change in the Prairies through a number of workshops on adapting to climate change. The main focus has been on the need for agriculture and water management to adapt to the changing climatic conditions. Please see the background page for further biographical information.

Welcome, Allen, and thank you very much for taking time to be with us today.

[Workshop Presentation]

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Thank you Amy. Before I get into the presentation about the recent workshop on water and climate change, it was suggested that I tell you a little about the International Institute for Sustainable Development.

IISD was formally announced at the first Globe Conference in Vancouver in 1990. IISD was Canada's response to the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Report). Our Mission is: To champion innovation, enabling societies to live sustainably. IISD's audiences are government, business and civil society. Our style is to increase our influence by working collaboratively with other institutions - building long-term strategic alliances, while retaining the institutional agility necessary to confront the challenges of sustainable development.

IISD has five key areas of focus, Natural Resource Management, Climate Change, Trade, Economic Incentives, and Measures and Indicators. The Water Sector workshop was a cross between Natural Resource Management and Climate Change. Natural resource sustainability continues to be of growing importance even where natural resources contribute a decreasing portion of the national economy. The potential impacts of Climate Change can have a serious impact on water management in the Prairies.

For this reason, it was felt necessary to pull together some of the climate change modelers and hydrology modelers to improve the understanding of a very difficult topic. The Water Sector: Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change workshop was held May 18, 2000 at the Lombard Hotel in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The goal of the workshop was to raise the awareness of climate change in the water sector and to promote the development of adaptation strategies for water management in the Prairies. More precisely, the workshop was designed to:

* Foster discussions for dealing with climate change and water issues using existing and future scientific knowledge;

* Identify and strengthen linkages between water managers, public policy, and adaptation strategies relating to climate change and water issues;

* Facilitate communication, consultation, and negotiation among interested parties, and where appropriate, create mechanisms for achieving practical solutions relating to climate change and water in the Prairies; and

* Contribute to a national assessment of water sector vulnerability to climate change and potential adaptation measures.

The 95 participants came from across the Prairies, with representation from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The participants were decision-makers ranging from landowners, to local officials, to government officials. Presentations were heard from experts in climate change and water management. Dr. Jim Bruce provided a background to climate change, and highlighted the need for adaptation. The following slide shows how temperatures have increased compared to the climate change models.

[Slide 1]

The following slide gives an indication of the temperature changes for the region.

[Slide 2]

Linda Mortsh took participants through the work of the Canadian Climate Change Impacts Scenarios Project, highlighting who was involved, and how data was being made available in different formats. The following slide provides contact information for these data sets.

[Slide 3]

Al Pietroniro provided a background on hydrology modeling with a particular emphasis on the variables relating to climate change. Al showed just how complex hydrology modeling can be, as outlined in the following slide.

[Slide 4]

Following the general presentations, regional presentations were made to provide a background of the issues in the Canadian Prairies. Alf Warkentin provided a flood and drought perspective and the implications of climate change.

Betty Collins outlined the potential of wetlands to assist in adapting to climate change and their role for wildlife. Dave McGee concluded the regional perspective component of the workshop with a presentation of how Alberta is increasing their flexibility to deal with the changing aspects of the climate.

The final presenter was Lawrence Martz, who outlined the GEWEX project, which combines the climate models with the hydrology models to get a better understanding of the impacts of climate change in the MacKenzie basin.

For the southern Prairie a plausible scenario involved large temperature increases (~7 deg C winter, ~3 deg C summer); more spring rain, with little change in summer; higher vapor pressures but still significant increases in potential evaporation in spring-summer; lower soil moisture except early spring; earlier spring breakup but, on average lower peak flows because of snowmelt episodes during the winter.

Occasional very severe floods could occur with heavier earlier spring rains with snowmelt, winter flows higher, summer and autumn flows lower, annual discharge lower; aquifer recharge reduced; increased potential for flash floods on small watersheds, although average conditions would be drier, any change in frequency of severe long drought (every 30-50 years in past) is very uncertain.

For water quality contaminants (e.g. Phosphorus) increase as flows increase (floods, non-point sources) above a certain threshold (e.g. 125 m3/sec for Red River at Selkirk), and increase with lower flows below this threshold (point sources).

In more northern basins both winter and summer precipitation may increase, which combined with temperature / evaporation increases may result in little change in flows. However, it was noted that small changes in average annual temperature can lead to large flow losses with no precipitation changes.

The Agriculture Working Group suggested the key vulnerability was the diminishing water resources, including surface, groundwater and aquifers. The increasing possibility of droughts could have impacts on decisions about pasture or croplands, irrigation, controls for new pests and soil quality, and use of wetlands. The group felt that some government policy and agencies as well as the lack of data and/or research was also a vulnerability to climate change.

The working group pointed out that agriculture has been able to adapt to droughts to a certain extent, citing the drought of the 30's compared to the 80's. Watershed management was seen as one of the key adaptations to climate change. This ranged from on-farm water management to aquifer recharge, to prevention of wetlands loss. The group decided it would be necessary to adapt policies to be more flexible to water management. More information is required to make informed decisions, such as forecasting and modeling.

The Wildlife Working Group felt there would be significant changes in the biodiversity and species distributions. This would be due to the increase of temperature, eutrophication, salinity, as well as the greater disease spectrum.

Water birds are especially sensitive to this type of changes. Cold water species of fish will decrease, while the warm water species will predominate. Spring spawning fish are also at risk. Perhaps the biggest vulnerability in our predictive ability is the limited knowledge or information gaps.

The Wildlife Working Group suggested two preconditions are required for adaptation, broad buy-in by all decision makers, and that "no-regrets" options are initiated first. The group felt it was necessary to adopt a set of numerical standards for water quality.

Increased head water storage will be required, but it will also require incentives for landowners to participate. Conservation farming practices will be necessary, such as a reduction in nutrient loading, and effluent controls.

The group also raised concerns about more large reservoirs, more irrigation and the operation of reservoirs as potential hazards to wildlife. It was felt that there should be more emphasis on enact / enforce current regulations (e.g. drainage), ecological services payments to landowners, better allocation & licensing and give "wildlife" a place at the decision making table.

The Community Economic Development Working Group was concerned that communities and businesses perceive water as abundant and inexpensive. There was also a concern about increased migration to urban centers if dryer conditions prevailed in farm regions. One particular vulnerability raised by the Working Group, was that a vocal minority claimed there is no threat from climate change and that there is little media coverage.

The Community Economic Development Working Group indicated that a holistic approach to education/communication was required to successfully adapt to climate change. This would include incentives and disincentives. Water recycling needs to be used more extensively, and water labeling of products (analogues to energy labeling) could provide users with more information about their products. The Group felt more research on regional and community impacts was required and that opportunities already known should be capitalized, such as longer shipping season at Churchill and the potential for greenhouses to supply produce locally.

The Energy Group felt the infrastructure needs to be assessed from a climate change perspective, citing examples of operational difficulties especially transmission lines due to winds and ice storms, dam operations with possibly more severe ice jams, and the increased conflict over cooling water supplies for thermal plants (AB & SK), particularly with warmer water.

In Manitoba, concern was raised over lower hydro production and export revenues. Oil fields were also a concern because of methods using water would be restricted for stream or water injections. The overall concern was higher prices and more volatility. The key adaptation from the Energy Working Group focused on greater conservation and increased demand side management. There is a possibility to increase hydro capacity and add more alternative energy, especially natural gas, wind, solar.

Improving operations to take changes into account was also suggested, but there is an increased potential for a Sask-Nelson system wide severe drought. Another key adaptation was to take advantage of opportunities, such as a longer ice-free season, which would make reservoir operation easier and shift in seasonal demand helps to even out demand peaks.

Well that was the results of the workshop, the workshop report will be available shortly. A full report focused on water and climate change for all of Canada should be available at the end of July. I will forward the Web site address when it becomes available.

Thank you for your attention. Back over to you, Amy.

[Questions & Answers]

Amy Sebring: Thank you very much for that report, Allen. We will take audience comments and questions next. Please indicate you wish to be recognized by sending in a question mark at any time. Then compose your question, have it ready so we can keep the flow moving, but hold it until you are recognized. Don, we would also be interested to hear your perspective on the workshop. From what Allen tells us, it looks like we can see some issues emerging from the various sectors.

Comment:

Donald Alexander: It was interesting to hear the different points of view and the fact that there appears to be some disagreement in the models but it does point to the fact that water must be managed on a watershed basis and that more emphasis be placed on drought proofing.

Question:

Bob Halliday: Allen, there are really two distinct problems, changes in averages and the possibility of more extreme events; did the workshop treat both of these?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Both issues were discussed. The Climate modelers tend to focus on the averages while the hydrology modelers are more concerned about the extremes. The effort ongoing is to combine the two models to give both results.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Allen, you mentioned the MacKenzie study --- is this an effort where both are being used?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: The averages were not seen as useful as the extremes for decision-makers on the ground. The MacKenzie is trying to build a model that address both issues.

Amy Sebring: When are results from MacKenzie expected?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: The study is ongoing for another 5 years, but some results are in now. Don raised a good point about droughts. The concern is that more droughts will occur, but when we get floods they could be larger.

Amy Sebring: Did MacKenzie or any other studies on Canadian water systems have findings for flooding? There have been some U.S. studies who find increased risk.

Allen Tyrchniewicz: The MacKenzie study was putting most of its efforts into combining the climatology and hydrology. The presentation did not get into flooding.

Question:

Bob Halliday: Do the folks who anticipate greater use of the port of Churchill also take in to account the effect on the rail line of melting permafrost? There's no free lunch.

Allen Tyrchniewicz: That is one of the concerns, but the argument is that technology can overcome that issue.

Comment:

Tracy Maconachie: Re: Churchill - there may in fact be a "free lunch" but it won't be for the people and development but rather for the polar bears who are already suffering from the delay of sea-ice formation each autumn - and the problem will not improve.

Amy Sebring: Allen, I expect the wildlife group mentioned this?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: The wildlife group did not mention Churchill, but they did feel that some wildlife would benefit from climate change.

Tracy Maconachie: Only in more temperate climates.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Allen, can you tell us a little more about what Alf Warkentin contributed? Has he looked at implications for the Red in particular?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Alf has started reviewing the climate change models, and is now applying that to some of his research. He is particularly interested with the impacts and necessary adaptations. Flood forecasting will change a great deal for Alf.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Is there any cross-border collaboration going on in climate change?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Very little from what I can tell except for work on carbon sequestration and some of the Global Circulation models.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Allen, in looking at some of the materials related to the general topic of climate change, I get the impression that the Canadian atmospheric modeling is held in very high regard internationally. Is this correct?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: As the models are improving, the new models are becoming more in agreement. The Canadian modelers seem to be cutting edge in the efforts.

Question:

Bob Halliday: Allen, did you get into the 'cycles' vs. 'change' discussion? Outcome?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: It really didn't come up at this meeting but that concern had come up in the past. The evidence (and public opinion) seems to be moving towards change. Most recognize there is an element of both.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Allen, the modeling done at NCAR, the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research, finds a possible 40% increase in wintertime precipitation in the Great Plains. Are you familiar with this, and has this been suggested by the Canadian modeling as well?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: The Canadian models are calling for a 10 to 20 percent increase in the winter for Canada, but this is the one component of the model that is most variable. Precipitation is the more difficult element of climate change to model.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Allen, I am interested in hearing more about how much adopting "no regrets" policies now was supported at the workshop.

Allen Tyrchniewicz: That seems to be a growing trend. People are willing to start some actions, if there are other benefits than just climate change. The concern is that it might not happen and money would have been spent needlessly.

Question:

Amy Sebring: There seems to be a closer identification with economic impacts in Canada, than in the U.S., other than there is great concern here from the implications for the energy sector. Is Canada more concerned about potential impacts on its overall economy?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: This could have come from the process used in Canada. Canada set up issue and sector tables from across the country to look at climate change so there was representation from the economic sectors looking at the issues, and making sure their butts were covered.

Question:

Bob Halliday: Could you argue that oil and gas are too valuable as a feedstock for the petrochemical industry to be consumed by combustion?

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Interesting question. In some cases that could be argued, particularly when alternatives exist, the agriculture sector is suggesting that ethanol should be used as a substitute. This would increase potential revenues to farmers and allow oil and gas to be used in other areas. This would also allow the oil and gas sector to concentrate on other non-polluting uses of their products.

[Closing]

Amy Sebring: We are up on our scheduled time. Thank you very much, Allen, and thank you to all our participants today. Please keep us posted on further developments as this process goes forward.

Please note that the international IPCC reports on this topic are scheduled to be issued just about a year from now. This will be the third in a series of 5-year assessments.

Allen Tyrchniewicz: Thank you, Amy.

Amy Sebring: We are adjourned, but please help me thank Allen for a fine job.