-
Tatiara PWA: Groundwater Resource Condition and Modelling Results• Overview of resource and condition• Potential resource condition limits• Groundwater modelling• ResultsCommunity Meeting in Keith – 31/8/2017
Roger CranswickSenior HydrogeologistWater Science Unit
-
Hydrogeology and Hydrogeological Zones• Two broad regions, coastal
plain and mallee highlands
• Unconfined aquifers found within different types of limestones that store and transmit groundwater
• Groundwater recharge is sourced from rainfall and runaway holes
• Unconfined extraction ranges from 60–112 GL/y
• Full allocation 139 GL/y
• Confined aquifer extraction is small, < 400 ML/y
-
Hydrogeological Cross-Section
Coomandook Formation
Coastal Plain
Padthaway Formation
Basement
Qua
tern
ary
Lim
esto
ne A
quife
r
Murray Group Limestone
Mallee Highlands
Loxton-Parilla Sands
Ettrick Marl
Murray G
roup Limestone Aquifer
Coomandook Formation
Bridgewater Formation
Highland Transition
Not to scale
Watertable
A A’
Quaternary limestone aquifer• Thin (< 30 to 40 m) with very high
yields in upper section• Higher groundwater salinity• Rainfall and irrigation recharge• Throughflow from highlands• ~71 GL/y groundwater extracted
Murray Group Limestone aquifer• Thick (up to 90 m) with moderate yields• Lower groundwater salinity• Rainfall recharge and throughflow• ~15 GL/y groundwater extracted
Coastal PlainQuaternary Limestone Aquifer
Mallee HighlandsTertiary Limestone Aquifer
-
Coomandook Formation
Coastal Plain
Padthaway Formation
Basement
Qua
tern
ary
Lim
esto
ne A
quife
r
Murray Group Limestone
Mallee Highlands
Loxton-Parilla Sands
Ettrick Marl
Murray G
roup Limestone Aquifer
Coomandook Formation
Bridgewater Formation
Highland Transition
Not to scale
Watertable
A A’
Average Groundwater Balance (1985)
101 GL/y74 GL/y
10 GL/y
0 GL/y
Murray Group Limestone aquifer• Moderate inflows (53 GL/y)• Moderate outflows (53 GL/y)• No loss of storage (0 GL/y)
Quaternary limestone aquifer• Large inflows (137 GL/y)• Large outflows (137 GL/y)• No storage loss (0 GL/y)
34 GL/y
8 GL/y
0 GL/y
Coastal PlainQuaternary Limestone Aquifer
Mallee HighlandsTertiary Limestone Aquifer
-
Coomandook Formation
Coastal Plain
Padthaway Formation
Basement
Qua
tern
ary
Lim
esto
ne A
quife
r
Murray Group Limestone
Mallee Highlands
Loxton-Parilla Sands
Ettrick Marl
Murray G
roup Limestone Aquifer
Coomandook Formation
Bridgewater Formation
Highland Transition
Not to scale
Watertable
A A’
Average Groundwater Balance (2006-2015)
38 GL/y71 GL/y
1 GL/y
20 GL/y
Murray Group Limestone aquifer• Moderate inflows (36 GL/y)• Moderate outflows (66 GL/y)• Considerable loss of storage
(30 GL/y) – from western margin• Very small % reduction of total
storage in the MGL aquifer
Quaternary limestone aquifer• Large inflows (83 GL/y)• Large outflows (103 GL/y)• Considerable storage loss (20 GL/y)• Possible implications for aquifer
performance
14 GL/y
15 GL/y
30 GL/y
Coastal PlainQuaternary Limestone Aquifer
Mallee HighlandsTertiary Limestone Aquifer
-
Regional Groundwater Flow• Regional groundwater flow
approximately east to west
• Depth to groundwater is 40 to 65 m in the east and approximately
-
Groundwater Level Trends
505254565860
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
SHG007
60
62
64
66
68
70
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
SEN01445
47
49
51
53
55
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
CAN012
40
42
44
46
48
50
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
PET015
252729313335
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
WLL020
20
22
24
26
28
30
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
STR017
22
24
26
28
30
32
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
WLL108
60
62
64
66
68
70
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)
Year
TAT010
45
47
49
51
53
55
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
RWSL
(mAH
D)Year
WRG011
• Stable trends in highlands
• Stable to declining trends on the coastal plain
-
Groundwater Resources: Salinity All Data• Groundwater salinity
increases from east to west
• Salinity influenced by• Recharge processes• Shallow watertables• Land clearance• Irrigation recycling
GDE
-
Groundwater Salinity Trends
0
1000
2000
3000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
SHG004
0
1000
2000
3000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
TAT108
1000
2000
3000
4000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
WLL104
1000
2000
3000
4000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
WRG116
3000
4000
5000
6000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
STR111
2000
3000
4000
5000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
PET104
1000
2000
3000
4000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
CAN104
0
1000
2000
3000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015
Salin
ity (m
g/L)
Year
SEN018
2000
3000
4000
5000
1975 1985 1995 2005 2015Sa
linity
(mg/
L)Year
WRG114
• Stable trends in east• Changing trends after
land clearance• Rising trends on the
coastal plain
-
Evolution of management approachesTraditional Approach• Allocations guided by estimates of average recharge but…
– These estimates contain uncertainty (sometimes +/- 50%)– Recharge varies widely across the landscape and over time (wet and dry periods)– Irrigation responsive to rainfall (Tatiara PWA extraction has ranged from 60–112 GL/y)– What to do with unexpected changes (large areas of declining WLs, increasing salinity)?
Resource Condition Limit Approach• Approach aims to keep the condition of the resource within agreed limits,
to avoid unacceptable levels of risk to the economic, social or environmental values associated with the groundwater resource
• Should be specific to the local or regional behaviour of the aquifer (e.g. could be applied to hydrogeological zones)
• Should be measurable to enable management responses based on changing resource condition (i.e. resource condition triggers)
• To be developed through engagement with community and stakeholders• RCLs presented shown here are examples of possible RCLs
-
Possible Resource Condition Limits (RCLs)Coastal Plain• Aquifer Performance (yield) – maintain
water levels in high yielding parts of aquifer
• Hydraulic Gradient – maintain throughflow to prevent rapidly increasing salinity and reversal of regional flow
Mallee Highlands• Hydraulic Gradient – maintain
throughflow to mitigate increasing salinity and deliver groundwater to the coastal plain
What will happen to each RCL• if extraction increases/decreases?• and/or if recharge decreases?• Can resource condition triggers be
effective in preventing RCL exceedance?
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
1985 1995 2005 2015
Wat
erle
vel (
mA
HD
)
Aquifer Performance (Coastal Plain)
STR111 STR111 RCL Pad Fmn Base
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
1985 1995 2005 2015
Wat
erle
vel (
mA
HD
)
Hydraulic Gradient (Coastal Plain)STR110 LAF003
50
55
60
65
70
1985 1995 2005 2015
Wat
erle
vel (
mA
HD
)
Hydraulic Gradient (Highlands)
TAT108 WRG116
-
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Grou
ndw
ater
Sal
inity
(mg/
L)
STR111 STR111 Linear (STR111)
Salinity Trajectory• Rising salinity trends caused by irrigation recycling likely to continue if local
groundwater is used for irrigation
• Trajectory of trends towards specific crop thresholds may be a useful indicator
• For example:• ~1500 mg/L for grapes and potatoes• ~3000 mg/L for spray irrigation of lucerne• ~7000 mg/L for flood irrigation of lucerne
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Grou
ndw
ater
Sal
inity
(mg/
L)
STR111 STR111 Salinity Threshold Linear (STR111)
Approx 12 years until threshold reached
-
Key Messages – Resource Condition• Coastal plain had steady WLs from the mid-1970s to mid-
1990s before a considerable declines
• Mallee highlands have steady WLs with some declining trends adjacent to the coastal plain
• Consistent rising salinity in some parts of the coastal plain due to irrigation recycling
• Influence of clearing native vegetation is yet to be observed in most of the mallee highlands but has shown changes where depth to watertable is shallow (~< 15 m)
• Resource condition limits to be specific, measureable and developed through engagement with stakeholders/community
• RCLs give context to previous analysis of trends, e.g. “triggers”– Coastal plain: aquifer performance (yields) and hydraulic gradient
– Mallee highlands: hydraulic gradient
-
Questions
Groundwater Resource Condition
-
Tatiara Groundwater Model • 97 km N–S, 84 km E–W • Broken up into 200x200 m
cells and 2 layersObservation wells
Extraction dataHydraulic parameter zones
Recharge inputs
• Model simulates groundwater flow and groundwater level variations
• Does not directly simulate salinity dynamics but…• Can be used to assess the risk of changing salinity
based on groundwater flow (rates and direction)
-
Mallee highlands
Coastal plain
Tatiara Groundwater Model: Calibration
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
STR2
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
STR116
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
55
57
59
61
63
65
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
SHG7
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG116
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG11
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
WLL106
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
70
72
74
76
78
80
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
TAT106
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
65
67
69
71
73
75
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
SEN6
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015
Head
(m A
HD)
PET104
Observed Model A
Model B Model C
• High to medium confidence for 82% of observation wells
• Some uncertainty where aquifer is thin and highly variable in nature
-
Tatiara Groundwater Model: Mass balance• Rainfall recharge lower after mid to late-1990s• Extraction relatively consistent but is variable from year to year• Storage decreasing since the mid-1990s• Regional outflow decreasing as water levels decline
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Flux
(G
L/y)
Tatiara PWA Groundwater Balance Diffuse rechargeExtractionStoragePoint rechargeGroundwater ETInflowOutflowDiffuse Recharge
InflowPoint Recharge
Groundwater ET
Extraction
OutflowStorage
-
Future Scenarios
• Four extraction scenarios• S1 – Extraction at full allocation (130 GL)• S2 – Periodic high/low (102, 82, 61 GL… = 93 GL)• S3 – Current extraction (84 GL)• S4 – Lower extraction (61 GL)
• SA Climate Ready datasets produced by Goyder Institute• Best available projections of weather data for SA• We included wet, dry and average projected rainfall datasets
• Used Upper South East recharge model: compared to the 1986–2005 average, 2016–2045 average:• Rainfall is 5 to 8 % lower• Temperatures 0.8 to 1.4 OC warmer• Recharge lower by 12 to 19 %
but still higher than 2006–20150
50
100
150
0
50
100
150
Rech
arge
(G
L/y)
Intermediate
Carbon Emission Scenario
1986-19951996-20052006-20152016-20252026-20352036-2045
High Carbon Emission Scenario
-
Questions
Groundwater Model Development
-
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR2
Observed S1I S1H
40
42
44
46
48
50
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
PET104
Observed S1I S1H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SHG7
Observed S1I S1H
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR116
Observed S1I S1H
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG11
Observed S1I S1H
60
62
64
66
68
70
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SEN4
Observed S1I S1H
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WLL106
Observed S1I S1H
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG116
Observed S1I S1H
65
67
69
71
73
75
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045He
ad (m
AHD
)
TAT20
Observed S1I S1H
S1 – Full Allocation
Hydrograph Projections
-
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG116
Observed S2I S2H
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG11
Observed S2I S2H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WLL106
Observed S2I S2H
65
67
69
71
73
75
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045He
ad (m
AHD
)
TAT20
Observed S2I S2H
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR2
Observed S2I S2H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR116
Observed S2I S2H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SHG7
Observed S2I S2H
60
62
64
66
68
70
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SEN4
Observed S2I S2H
40
42
44
46
48
50
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
PET104
Observed S2I S2H
S2 – Periodic Extraction
Hydrograph Projections
-
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG11
Observed S3I S3H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG116
Observed S3I S3H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WLL106
Observed S3I S3H
65
67
69
71
73
75
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045He
ad (m
AHD
)
TAT20
Observed S3I S3H
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR2
Observed S3I S3H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR116
Observed S3I S3H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SHG7
Observed S3I S3H
60
62
64
66
68
70
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SEN4
Observed S3I S3H
40
42
44
46
48
50
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
PET104
Observed S3I S3H
S3 – Average Extraction
Hydrograph Projections
-
45
47
49
51
53
55
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG11
Observed S4I S4H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WRG116
Observed S4I S4H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
WLL106
Observed S4I S4H
65
67
69
71
73
75
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045He
ad (m
AHD
)
TAT20
Observed S4I S4H
15
17
19
21
23
25
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR2
Observed S4I S4H
20
22
24
26
28
30
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
STR116
Observed S4I S4H
50
52
54
56
58
60
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SHG7
Observed S4I S4H
60
62
64
66
68
70
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
SEN4
Observed S4I S4H
40
42
44
46
48
50
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
PET104
Observed S4I S4H
S4 – Lower Extraction
Hydrograph Projections
-
From 1995 to 2015
Indicative change in waterlevels, 1995–2015
-
S1 – Extraction at Full Allocation
Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045
-
S2 – Periodic Extraction
Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045
-
S3 – Average Extraction
Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045
-
S4 – Lower Extraction
Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045
-
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Diffuserecharge
Lateralinflow
Pointrecharge
ET Storage Lateraloutflow
Extraction
10-y
ear a
vera
ge ra
te (G
L/y)
S1H (Tatiara PWA) 1986-19951996-20052006-20152016-20252026-20352036-2045
Implications for storage and outflow• Loss of storage continues overall – performance of aquifers and waterlevels• Lateral outflow increases with decreasing extraction – influences salinity trends
-
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Diffuserecharge
Lateralinflow
Pointrecharge
ET Storage Lateraloutflow
Extraction
10-y
ear a
vera
ge ra
te (G
L/y)
S2H (Tatiara PWA) 1986-19951996-20052006-20152016-20252026-20352036-2045
Implications for storage and outflow• Loss of storage continues overall – performance of aquifers and waterlevels• Lateral outflow increases with decreasing extraction – influences salinity trends
-
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Diffuserecharge
Lateralinflow
Pointrecharge
ET Storage Lateraloutflow
Extraction
10-y
ear a
vera
ge ra
te (G
L/y)
S3H (Tatiara PWA) 1986-19951996-20052006-20152016-20252026-20352036-2045
Implications for storage and outflow• Loss of storage continues overall – performance of aquifers and waterlevels• Lateral outflow increases with decreasing extraction – influences salinity trends
-
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Diffuserecharge
Lateralinflow
Pointrecharge
ET Storage Lateraloutflow
Extraction
10-y
ear a
vera
ge ra
te (G
L/y)
S4H (Tatiara PWA) 1986-19951996-20052006-20152016-20252026-20352036-2045
Implications for storage and outflow• Loss of storage continues overall – performance of aquifers and waterlevels• Lateral outflow increases with decreasing extraction – influences salinity trends
-
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
S1: Aquifer Performance RCL
S1I S1H Observed RCL (3 m) Base PFm
Implications for resource condition limits• a specific and measurable condition which reflects an unacceptable risk to the
groundwater resource and stakeholders/community• E.g. aquifer performance (yield): maintain WLs within high yielding part of aquifer
RCL likely to be exceeded
-
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
S2: Aquifer Performance RCL
S2I S2H Observed RCL (3 m) Base PFm
Implications for resource condition limits• a specific and measurable condition which reflects an unacceptable risk to the
groundwater resource and stakeholders/community• E.g. aquifer performance (yield): maintain WLs within high yielding part of aquifer
-
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
S3: Aquifer Performance RCL
S3I S3H Observed RCL (3 m) Base PFm
Implications for resource condition limits• a specific and measurable condition which reflects an unacceptable risk to the
groundwater resource and stakeholders/community• E.g. aquifer performance (yield): maintain WLs within high yielding part of aquifer
-
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035 2045
Head
(m A
HD)
S4: Aquifer Performance RCL
S4I S4H Observed RCL (3 m) Base PFm
Implications for resource condition limits• a specific and measurable condition which reflects an unacceptable risk to the
groundwater resource and stakeholders/community• E.g. aquifer performance (yield): maintain WLs within high yielding part of aquifer
-
Questions
Development of Resource Condition Limits
Model Results
-
Key Messages – Model Overview• Groundwater trends and levels are well simulated by the Model with high
to medium confidence in all areas
• Projected recharge is 12–19 % lower than 1986–2005 average but– This is still higher than more recent 2006–2015 average
– Relative increases to recharge help stabilise coastal plain WLs in some scenarios
• Continued declines projected for the mallee highlands – Mostly next to the coastal plain
– Due to the influence of ~20 years of declining WLs on coastal plain
• Throughflow to the west– Full allocation extraction shows decreasing of outflows, this increases risk of worsening
salinity trends
– Lower/Average/Periodic extraction shows similar or greater outflow rates than 2006–2015
• RCLs are generally not exceeded*– *Except funder full allocation extraction which shows continuing WL declines
– *As long as the rainfall recharge picks up (relative to the recent particularly dry period)
-
Key Messages – Scenarios and Risk• Full allocation extraction (S1 – 130 GL/y)
– Declining WLs on coastal plain (2-5 m) with declines in highlands (2-3 m), mostly adjacent to plains
– Coastal plain RCLs are likely to be exceeded
– Increased risk of both enhanced salinity trends and reduction in aquifer performance (yield)
• Periodic extraction (S2 – 93 GL/y)– Stable to declining WLs on coastal plain (
-
Implications for the revision of the WAP• Resource condition limits to be further developed and agreed upon
– should be specific and measurable in each hydrogeological zone
• Model results can be applied to inform: – risk of reaching agreed RCLs of different extraction rates
– effectiveness of management approaches
• Further scenarios can run to test policy settings
-
Questions
Groundwater Model Projections
-
Tatiara PWA: Groundwater Resource Condition and Modelling ResultsHydrogeology and Hydrogeological ZonesHydrogeological Cross-SectionAverage Groundwater Balance (1985)Average Groundwater Balance (2006-2015)Regional Groundwater FlowGroundwater Level TrendsGroundwater Resources: Salinity All DataGroundwater Salinity TrendsEvolution of management approachesPossible Resource Condition Limits (RCLs)Salinity TrajectoryKey Messages – Resource ConditionQuestions ��Groundwater Resource ConditionTatiara Groundwater ModelTatiara Groundwater Model: CalibrationTatiara Groundwater Model: Mass balanceFuture ScenariosQuestions ��Groundwater Model DevelopmentHydrograph ProjectionsHydrograph ProjectionsHydrograph ProjectionsHydrograph ProjectionsIndicative change in waterlevels, 1995–2015Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045Indicative change in waterlevels, 2015–2045Implications for storage and outflowImplications for storage and outflowImplications for storage and outflowImplications for storage and outflowImplications for resource condition limitsImplications for resource condition limitsImplications for resource condition limitsImplications for resource condition limitsQuestions ��Development of Resource Condition Limits��Model ResultsKey Messages – Model OverviewKey Messages – Scenarios and RiskImplications for the revision of the WAPQuestions ��Groundwater Model ProjectionsSlide Number 42