wade oxford university - university of oxford · oxford university climate and water seminars...

Taking account of climate change in long term

water resources plans

Oxford University Climate and Water Seminars

Steven Wade

Group Manager (Water), HR Wallingford

[email protected]

Steven Wade

Group Manager (Water), HR Wallingford

[email protected]

Overview

•Background – water resources in the South

East of England

•Applied research to support guidelines

• Scientific approach (dealing with uncertainties etc)

• Stakeholder participation

• Practical tools and guidance

•How are climate data incorporated in plans?

• Company final plans?

• What next?

Introduction: Water Availability & Supply in

England and Wales

20%80%Southern

Region

75%25%Thames

Water

50%50%Anglian

Water

Surface

Water

Ground

water

Public

Water

Supply

Water Availability (Groundwater):

(Environment Agency, 2001).

Introduction: Water Availability & Supply in

England and Wales (Surface Water)

Summer Winter

(Environment Agency, 2001).

Water resources planning

Anglian Water

HOT SPOT: LINCOLN • Transfer water from Elsham • Investigate Future Trent Source

HOT SPOT: GRANTHAM • Membrane plant at Saltersford • Long Term: Complete the Central Links Trunk Main (postAMP5) HOT SPOT: LINCS/CAMBS FENLAND

• Transfer water from Wing • Wing WTW Extensions

HOT SPOT: MID/NORTH NORFOLK • Part of Strategic Main • Stoke Ferry WTW - AMP5

HOT SPOT: IXWORTH / BURY ST. EDMUNDS • Increase supply from Ixworth • Future Supply from Thetford

HOT SPOT: IPSWICH / COLCHESTER • Link Main Ipswich - Colchester • Link Main Colchester - Halstead • Increase take from Ardleigh • Increase blend from Lexden • AMP5 - Extend Alton WTW

HOT SPOT: RUTHAMFORD (WEST) • Wing WTW Extensions • Duplication of existing trunk mains

WATER SUPPLY/DEMAND BALANCEStrategic Schemes

Existing Infrastructure

Proposed AMP4Infrastructure

BOURNE

IPSWICH

MURSLEY

NORWICH

BUCKINGHAM

SHERINGHAM

BRAINTREE

TOWCESTER

MILTON KEYNES

BARNOLBY

GRANTHAM

DAVENTRY

BURY ST EDMUNDS

COLCHESTER

Proposed AMP4 SourceWorks

AW SDB Team 12-03

MARCH

WISBECH

Future Infrastructure

Post AMP4 Source Works

REZONE

TRANSFER

REZONE

STOKEFERRY

TRANSFER

TRANSFER

LINK

WINGEXTNS

WINGINFRASTRUCTURE

CAISTOR

TRANSFER

IXWORTH

TRANSFER

ALTONWATER

TRANSFER

THREE VALLEYS WATER Co. • Take full allocation (91Ml/d Ave)

Grafham

LINCOLN

LINK

BradenhamRes

Water Resource Planning in the UK

•Water Resource Plans• Supply Demand

Balance (25 + years)

• Options Appraisal

• Economic Assessment

• Determine funding for and timing of new schemes

•Drought Plans • Set out drought triggers

and management for 10yr RP+ droughts

Overview of research for water industry &

Environment Agency

• Background • Climate change considered since 1990 and in WRPs since

1997 – latest emphasis on risk and uncertainty

• UKWIR/EA Project aims (ToR) • To produce a robust methodology which water

companies can use for the assessment of the impact of climate change in water resource planning and which has the support of the Regulator

• To build on the procedure for the rapid determination of the effects of climate change by the 2020s on mean monthly run-off and average annual groundwater

recharge, developed for UKWIR (03/CL/04/2)

Climate change scenarios – from GCM to catchment scale

• Stage 1

• Application Regional Climate

Model HadRM3

• Interpolation of UKCIP02 data

to catchment scale

• Stage 2

• Develop a procedure to

downscale multiple Global

Climate Models

• Catchment scale scenarios

based on multiple models

Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high

emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.

(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)

Summer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitation

percentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change with

respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the

1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)

Crown Copyright 2002. The UKCIP02 Climate Scenario data have been madeavailable by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).DEFRA accepts no responsibility for any inaccuracies or omissions in the data

nor for any loss or damage directly or indirectly caused to any person or bodyby reason of, or arising out of any use of, this data.

�

Percentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage change(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)

30 to 3525 to 3020 to 2515 to 2010 to 150 to 10

-10 to 0-20 to -10-30 to -20-40 to -30-50 to -40-60 to -50

Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high Medium-high

emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.emissions scenario.

(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)(2020s)

Summer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitationSummer precipitation

percentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change withpercentage change with

respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the respect to the

1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)1961 - 90 climate)

Crown Copyright 2002. The UKCIP02 Climate Scenario data have been madeavailable by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).DEFRA accepts no responsibility for any inaccuracies or omissions in the data

nor for any loss or damage directly or indirectly caused to any person or bodyby reason of, or arising out of any use of, this data.

Percentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage changePercentage change(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)(%)

30 to 3525 to 3020 to 2515 to 2010 to 15

0 to 10-10 to 0-20 to -10-30 to -20-40 to -30-50 to -40-60 to -50

Downscaling procedure: Example (Vidal and Wade,

2007)

Average changes in temperature (2020s)

A2 scenario

Changes in rainfall, 2020s

A2 scenario (UKWIR, 2007)

Jan Feb Mar Apr

May Jun Jul Aug

Sep Oct Nov Dec

-14 %

-12 %

-10 %

-8 %

-6 %

-4 %

-2 %

0

+ 2 %

+ 4 %

+ 6 %

+ 8 %

+ 10 %

+ 12 %

+ 14 %

+ 16 %

+ 18 %

+ 20 %

+ 22 %

UKWIR, 2007

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Jan

Feb Mar Apr

May Ju

n

Jul

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Win

ter

Spr

ing

Summ

erA

utum

n

Pe

rce

nt ch

an

ge

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

Jan

Feb Mar Apr

May Ju

n

Jul

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Win

ter

Spr

ing

Summ

erA

utum

n

Pe

rce

nt ch

an

ge

Mersey, NW England

Stour, SE England

Modelling process for 2006 and ongoing work

UKCIP08 climate change factors

(25 km- no downscaling)

2 rainfall-runoff models (multiple

calibrated versions – observed rainfall and PET 1961-90)

-50 0 +50

Jan

-50 0 +50

Feb

-50 0 +50

Mar

-50 0 +50

Apr

-50 0 +50

May

-50 0 +50

Jun

-50 0 +50

Jul

-50 0 +50

Aug

-50 0 +50

Sep

-50 0 +50

Oct

-50 0 +50

Nov

-50 0 +50

Dec

Distribution of monthly flow factors

weighted by climate scenario, percentiles and rainfall-runoff model fit (2020s and 2030s)

Medium emission A1B:

Factored rain 10th percentile

and PET Median (Oudin)

(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles




(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles

Low emission B1:



(Weight: 0.33)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles

Change in flow (2020s)

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Ju

n

Jul

Aug Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Q95

Perc

ent

cha

nge

5 25 50

75 95 Simplified MEDIAN SCENARIO

User selected DRY SCENARIO User selected WET SCENARIO

Note: Model runs left out if poor fit

Change in flow 2030s

High emission A1F1:



(Weight: 0.33)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles




(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles

UKCIP08 climate change factors

(25 km- no downscaling)

2 rainfall-runoff models (multiple

calibrated versions – observed rainfall and PET 1961-90)

-50 0 +50

Jan

-50 0 +50

Feb

-50 0 +50

Mar

-50 0 +50

Apr

-50 0 +50

May

-50 0 +50

Jun

-50 0 +50

Jul

-50 0 +50

Aug

-50 0 +50

Sep

-50 0 +50

Oct

-50 0 +50

Nov

-50 0 +50

Dec

Distribution of monthly flow factors

weighted by climate scenario, percentiles and rainfall-runoff model fit (2020s and 2030s)




(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles

Catchmod EnsemblesCatchmod Ensembles

PDM EnsemblesPDM Ensembles




(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles



Low emission B1:



(Weight: 0.33)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles




-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Ju

n

Jul

Aug Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Q95

Perc

ent

cha

nge

5 25 50

75 95 Simplified MEDIAN SCENARIO

User selected DRY SCENARIO User selected WET SCENARIO

Note: Model runs left out if poor fit

Change in flow 2030s

High emission A1F1:



(Weight: 0.33)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles






(Weight from Pdf)

Catchmod Ensembles

PDM Ensembles



Clim

ate scen

arios based

on

TA

R G

CM

s, FAR

GCMs, Ensem

bles, H

adRCM�

UKCP09

Prospects for river flows – role of storage Multi-model, A2 scenario, 2020s (UKWIR, 2007)

J F M A M J J A S O N D-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Ch

an

ge

in

mo

nth

ly f

low

s (

%)

Itchen@AllbrookHighbridge (42010)

90% confidence intervals


median

J F M A M J J A S O N D-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Ch

an

ge

in

mo

nth

ly f

low

s (

%)

Tamar@Gunnislake (47001)



median

BFI=46%

BFI=96%

Average changes in monthly flow for 70 catchmentsMulti-model, A2 scenario, 2020s (UKWIR, 2007)

Flow factor methods

Is there an appropriate catchment model?

No

Yes

Water Resource Planning processes(See Environment Agency guidelines)

Does climate change triggermajor investment?

Yes

No

END

Use hydrological or hydrogeological models

More detailed work-select appropriate

methods?

FLOW FACTOR METHOD 1bApply ‘regionalised’

flow/recharge factors

START

Was the catchment modelled

in this project

Yes No

Simplified Method

Option to use modelled percentiles or ‘simplified method’

based on mean changeand standard deviation

FLOW FACTOR METHOD 1aApply flow/recharge factors

for modelled catchments

Consult with EA

FLOW FACTOR METHOD 1cApply re-sampling techniques

Calculate flow/recharge indicatorsSelect flow/recharge time series

‘Park’ impacts assessment

Rainfall-runoff methods

RAINFALL-RUNOFF METHODS

2b. Useperturbed time series

based on ‘UKWIR06’scenarios Section 3.9

Spreadsheet: Report CD-Rom

Water Resources Planning processes(See Environment Agency guidelines)

2c. Re-sampling

based on the ‘UKWIR06’scenarios

Section 3.10

Does climate change triggermajor investment?

YesNo

END

Run models for historical and changed climates(100-1000s runs)

2a.Use

perturbed time series based on ‘UKCIP02’

scenarios (Optional)Section 3.8

Spreadsheet: Report CD-Rom

Run models for historical and changed climates(7-8 runs)

3. Advanced

methods

Section 3.12

Any benefits of

further analysis?

Yes

No

START

#

Climate scenario data

Outputs – Thames at Kingston flow factors


-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

Jan

Feb Mar Apr

May Ju

n

Jul

Aug

Sep Oct

Nov

Dec

Q95

Perc

en

t cha

ng

e

5 25 50 75

95 Median Dry Scenario Wet Scenario

What have water companies done?

Water company activity on climate change

•OFWAT Climate Change Policy

•EA Environment Vision�� Sector Adaptation Plans �� R&D

•Water UK �� UKWIR R&D

•Water company Strategic Direction Statements (SDS)

•Final Water Resources Plans (PR09)

•Drought Plans

•Flood resilience, asset deterioration etc……..

OFWAT Climate Change Policy

http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/sustainability/climatechange/pap_pos_climatechange.pdf

Some key links

EA Water Resources Planning Guidelines

http://www.environment-

agency.gov.uk/business/sectors/39687.aspx

OFWAT

http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/sustainability/climatechange/

pap_pos_climatechange.pdf

Water UK

http://www.water.org.uk/

Covers water resources plans and climate change

adaptation actions

Water company approach impacts assessment

An integrated approach to examine impacts on:

1. Water supply (Deployable Outputs)

• Surface water

• Groundwater

2. Demand for water

3. Asset deterioration

4. Water quality

5. Drought prediction & management

Impacts of climate change on average demand

(pcc)

4.0%Dry

2.6%Mid

1.3%Wet•Higher than in PR04 (0.8-

2.7%)

•Higher than CCDEW (0.9-

1.8 %)

•A better estimate based

on local data, more

climate models and

consistent with supply

side

Drilling down

�� Zones 2 and 3, both large rural areas.

�� Detached��Bungalow �� Semi-detached �� Terraced. Flats

�� MOSAIC groups A (‘Symbols of Success’) and F (‘Welfare Borderline’), the most and least affluent respectively

�� Good relationships also exist for groups C (‘Suburban Comforts’) and E (‘Urban Intelligence’).

⌦⌦⌦⌦ No significant relationship existed for the other two groups B (‘Happy Families’) and D (‘Ties of Community’)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5 10 15 20 25

Mean monthly temperature (degC)

Pe

r c

ap

ita

de

ma

nd

(l/

h/d

)

WRZ 1

WRZ 2

WRZ 3

WRZ 4

WRZ 5

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5 10 15 20 25


Pe

r c

ap

ita

de

ma

nd

(l/

h/d

)

Property type B

Property type D

Property type F

Property type S

Property type T

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 5 10 15 20 25


Pe

r c

ap

ita

de

ma

nd

(l/

h/d

)

MOSAIC class A

MOSAIC class B

MOSAIC class C

MOSAIC class D

MOSAIC class E

MOSAIC class F

Other aspects of Supply Demand Balance

• Supply v demand (AADY, CPDY)

• - Sustainability ‘Losses’

• Proposed environmental investment

programme

• Reduce pollution from discharges

• Change abstraction licences in

sensitive areas

• WFD

• - Outage

• +/- Headroom

• Leakage is part of demand and

managed through targets

Other aspects of Supply Demand Balance

Risks and Uncertainty

S1 Vulnerable surface water

licences

S2 Vulnerable groundwater

licences

S3 Time Limited Licences

S4 Bulk transfers

S5 Gradual pollution of sources

causing a reduction in abstraction

S6 Accuracy of supply side data

S7 Sustainability Issues

S8 Uncertainty of impact of

climate change on source yields

S9 Uncertainty over New

Sources

-4

0

4

8

12

2002 2007 2012 2017 2022 2027 2032Year

Headro

om

Uncert

ain

ty (

Ml/d)

10% to 20% 20% to 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 60% 60% to 70%

70% to 80% 80% to 90% Mean new method old method

D1 Accuracy of sub-component data

D2 Demand forecast variation

D3 Uncertainty of impact of climate

change on demand

D4 Uncertainty of impact of

demand management

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Ml/d

Demand

Demand 149.1 149.8 150.1 151 151.7 153 153.6 154.8 155.4 156.5 157.1 158.9 159.9 161.7 162.6 164.4 165.4 167.6

2003-

04

2005-

06

2006-

07

2008-

09

2009-

10

2011-

12

2012-

13

2014-

15

2015-

16

2017-

18

2018-

19

2020-

21

2021-

22

2023-

24

2024-

25

2026-

27

2027-

28

2029-

30

(Average Baseline)

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Ml/d

Total Resources Demand

Total Resources 173.9 165.6 165.5 165.2 165.1 159.7 159.6 159.3 159.2 158.9 158.8 158.6 158.4 158.2 158.1 157.8 157.7 157.4

Demand 149.1 149.8 150.1 151 151.7 153 153.6 154.8 155.4 156.5 157.1 158.9 159.9 161.7 162.6 164.4 165.4 167.6

2003-

04

2005-

06

2006-

07

2008-

09

2009-

10

2011-

12

2012-

13

2014-

15

2015-

16

2017-

18

2018-

19

2020-

21

2021-

22

2023-

24

2024-

25

2026-

27

2027-

28

2029-

30

(Average Baseline)

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Ml/d

Total Resources

Demand

Dmd + Headroom

Total Resources 173.9 165.6 165.5 165.2 165.1 159.7 159.6 159.3 159.2 158.9 158.8 158.6 158.4 158.2 158.1 157.8 157.7 157.4

Demand 149.1 149.8 150.1 151 151.7 153 153.6 154.8 155.4 156.5 157.1 158.9 159.9 161.7 162.6 164.4 165.4 167.6

Dmd + Headroom 154.6 155.6 156.2 157.2 157.9 159.3 160 161.2 161.9 163 163.6 165.5 166.5 168.4 169.3 171.1 172.2 174.5

2003-

04

2005-

06

2006-

07

2008-

09

2009-

10

2011-

12

2012-

13

2014-

15

2015-

16

2017-

18

2018-

19

2020-

21

2021-

22

2023-

24

2024-

25

2026-

27

2027-

28

2029-

30

Final Plan – with measures 1Ml/d yield = £

2million

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Ml/d

Total Resources

Demand

Dmd + Headroom

Total Resources 173.85 161.21 159.62 158.89 158.09 157.34 159.5 160.76 161.1 160.1 165.76 174.32 173.59 172.86 172.14 171.33 170.35 169.59 168.46 167.56 171.9 170.82 169.95 174.94 176.11 173.05 174.18

Demand 149.11 149.43 149.74 150.09 150.5 150.92 151.57 152.21 152.9 153.51 154.09 154.67 155.26 155.86 156.34 156.92 157.7 158.65 159.64 160.54 161.42 162.32 163.19 164.07 165.13 166.2 167.29

Dmd + Headroom 154.63 155.12 155.59 156.1 156.68 157.14 157.81 158.49 159.21 159.85 160.46 161.07 161.7 162.33 162.84 163.45 164.26 165.25 166.26 167.2 168.11 169.04 169.95 170.86 171.95 173.05 174.18

2003-

04

2004-

05

2005-

06

2006-

07

2007-

08

2008-

09

2009-

10

2010-

11

2011-

12

2012-

13

2013-

14

2014-

15

2015-

16

2016-

17

2017-

18

2018-

19

2019-

20

2020-

21

2021-

22

2022-

23

2023-

24

2024-

25

2025-

26

2026-

27

2027-

28

2028-

29

2029-

30

Minor improvements

Sustainability Loss

Major resource development

Effluent re-use

or desalinisation

Demand management

Leakage reduction

Climate change

Changing balance of imports/exports

Review of water quality impacts

Thames at Bray Intake

Determinand Comments

BOD Apart from a very few isolated values would achieve high

WFD status.

Ammonia General consistent quality over past 10 years. Would

achieve high WFD status.

TON No clear trend. All values exceed SWAD A1 guideline.

Orthophosphate Improvement in quality since 1999, but still have annual

variability. Would not achieve good WFD status.

HCH Gamma Very low values since 2000

Dieldrin Values at detection level since 2001

Parathion Values at detection level since 2001, although 2007 value

showed an increase

Oxygen (%sat) No trend. Would achieve high WFD status for whole

period.

Oxygen (mg/l) All values > 8 mg/l.

Scoping risks by water resource zone

Resource

Zone Source type

Aver

age

DO

Ml/d

Nitra

te

Phosp

hat

e

Turb

idity

Pes

tici

des

Chlo

rophyll

Sal

inity

Direct

Small

reservoir

Unknown Surface

Large

reservoir

LGS 1.20

Chalk

RZ1

Groundwater

Other 32.73

D irect 8.8 3

Sm all

reservo ir

Surface

L arge reservo ir

13 .05

L G S 7.8

C halk 23 .09

RZ 3

G ro u nd w at er

O th er 14 .31

Asset deterioration – leakage

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1 61 121 181 241 301

Months

Ho

urs

HadCM3 CGCM2 CSIRO-mk2GFDL-R30 CCSR/NIES ECHAM4/OPYC3Wet Mid Dry

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

1 61 121 181 241 301

Months

Me

an

te

mp

era

ture

(c

els

ius

)


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 61 121 181 241 301

Months

Fro

st

da

ys


•Climate influences

leakage

•Temperature

•Sunshine hours

•Frost days

•Case for investment in

new pipes

Conclusions: Impacts of climate change on

UK water resources

• Supply • Wetter and warmer winters & drier, warmer summers & increase frequency of

short rainfall droughts

• Increase in mean winter flow but a reduction summer flows and autumn and spring flows in some catchments (dependent on PET). No change in annual average recharge

• Range of results from different climate & hydrology models

• Catchment response & water resources impact depend on catchment/system characteristics

•Supply-Demand Balance• Climate change will increase demand by 1-4% and reduce supply by around 5-

20% by 2020s

•Environment protected by WFD and other legislation?

•Adaptation • Bring forward investment in supplies winter storage, effluent re-use,

desalination and effluent re-use and demand management

• Possible bias towards demand side measures?

• More resilient supplies or better drought management?

• Factor climate change/variability into other policies

Conclusions: methods

•Methods are suitable for rapid assessments at national and European scales

•Climate scenarios require updating to FAR models, Ensembles, UKCP09

•Water industry asked for probabilistic scenarios –what next?

Example project reports & research papers

Vidal, J.P. and Wade, S.D. (2007). A framework for developing high-resolution multi-model climate projections: 21st century scenarios for the UK. Int. J. Climatology (accepted).

Vidal, J.P. and Wade, S.D. (2007). Multimodel projections of catchment-scale precipitation regime. J. Hydrology (submitted).

Vidal, J.P. and Wade, S.D. (2007) Effects of climate change of river flows and groundwater recharge: Guidelines for resources assessments and UKWIR06 scenarios. UKWIR Report 05/CL/04/*

Wade, S.D., Barnett, C. and Fenn, T. (2006). Climate change and water resources. Defra Cross-Regional Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Research Programme: Topic C – Water.

Wade, S.D., Jones, P.D. and Osborn, T. (2006). The impacts of climate change on severe droughts. Implications for decision making. Environment Agency Science Report: SC040068/SR3.

wade oxford university - university of oxford · oxford university climate and water seminars...

Documents