PeakTrace: Routing of hydropeaking waves using multiple hydrographs—A novel approach

Hydropeaking is known for its adverse impacts on river ecosystems. However, the implementation of mitigation measures is still largely pending due to conflicting priorities of ecology and economics, which require scenario building to assess trade‐offs. Therefore, widely applicable and standardized tools are needed to analyze hydropeaking hydrology in affected rivers to expedite mitigation efforts. Here, we present a novel empirical approach—PeakTrace—that can (a) detect and follow source‐specific hydropeaking waves in the downstream direction by using multiple hydrographs and (b) describe how to flow metrics of hydropeaking waves change along a river's course. In detail, PeakTrace first identifies associated flow events and then models translation and retention processes between neighboring hydrographs. Finally, the models can be combined to establish a non‐linear hydropower plant‐specific model. We demonstrate the PeakTrace method's usability in 16 Austrian case studies. The results underline the high performance of PeakTrace, describing the longitudinal development of flow metrics with high model accuracy up to 25 km or more. Ecologically‐relevant metrics, such as rate of change or amplitude, decrease with distance from the hydropower outlet regarding down‐ramping events; the same pattern can be observed for up‐ramping events too, except for the rate of change for which an intensity increase may be observed, probably due to slope and the roughness difference between base flow and peak flow. Overall, this paper underlines the usability of PeakTrace as a basis to assess hydropower plant‐specific hydro‐ecological impacts and evaluate hydropeaking mitigation measures, especially by incorporating critical flow thresholds of river biota and life stages.

[1]  J. Hellström,et al.  Modelling the downstream longitudinal effects of frequent hydropeaking on the spawning potential and stranding susceptibility of salmonids. , 2021, The Science of the total environment.

[2]  G. Pasternack,et al.  Revealing the diversity of hydropeaking flow regimes , 2021, Journal of Hydrology.

[3]  P. Baran,et al.  An indicator to characterize hydrological alteration due to hydropeaking , 2021 .

[4]  M. Olivares,et al.  Grid-wide assessment of varying re-regulation storage capacity for hydropeaking mitigation. , 2021, Journal of Environmental Management.

[5]  S. Schmutz,et al.  Response of European grayling, Thymallus thymallus, to multiple stressors in hydropeaking rivers. , 2021, Journal of environmental management.

[6]  V. Gouraud,et al.  Identification of effective hydropeaking mitigation measures: are hydraulic habitat models sufficient in a global approach? , 2021 .

[7]  K. Smokorowski The ups and downs of hydropeaking: a Canadian perspective on the need for, and ecological costs of, peaking hydropower production , 2021, Hydrobiologia.

[8]  G. Pasternack,et al.  Automated analysis of lateral river connectivity and fish stranding risks—Part 1: Review, theory and algorithm , 2020, Ecohydrology.

[9]  Ana L. Quaresma,et al.  New insights into hydropeaking mitigation assessment from a diversion hydropower plant: The GKI project (Tyrol, Austria) , 2020 .

[10]  C. Nilsson,et al.  Hydropeaking affects germination and establishment of riverbank vegetation. , 2020, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[11]  S. Schmutz,et al.  Life Stage-Specific Hydropeaking Flow Rules , 2019, Sustainability.

[12]  S. Schmutz,et al.  Ecologically-based criteria for hydropeaking mitigation: A review. , 2019, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  K. Alfredsen,et al.  Performance of A Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Model for the Evaluation of Stranding Areas and Characterization of Rapid Fluctuations in Hydropeaking Rivers , 2019, Water.

[14]  C. Feld,et al.  Macroinvertebrate drift response to hydropeaking: An experimental approach to assess the effect of varying ramping velocities , 2018, Ecohydrology.

[15]  C. Hauer,et al.  Hydropeaking Impacts and Mitigation , 2018 .

[16]  C. Hauer,et al.  Longitudinal assessment of hydropeaking impacts on various scales for an improved process understanding and the design of mitigation measures. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[17]  S. Schmutz,et al.  Effects of river bank heterogeneity and time of day on drift and stranding of juvenile European grayling (Thymallus thymallus L.) caused by hydropeaking. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[18]  I. Kopecki,et al.  Depth-dependent hydraulic roughness and its impact on the assessment of hydropeaking. , 2017, The Science of the total environment.

[19]  A. Wüest,et al.  A conceptual framework for hydropeaking mitigation. , 2016, The Science of the total environment.

[20]  B. Grün,et al.  A method to detect and characterize sub‐daily flow fluctuations , 2016 .

[21]  Van De Bund Wouter,et al.  Working Group ECOSTAT report on common understanding of using mitigation measures for reaching Good Ecological Potential for heavily modified water bodies - Part 1: Impacted by water storage , 2016 .

[22]  S. Schmutz,et al.  Response of Fish Communities to Hydrological and Morphological Alterations in Hydropeaking Rivers of Austria , 2015 .

[23]  R. Mcmanamay,et al.  Characterizing Sub‐Daily Flow Regimes: Implications of Hydrologic Resolution on Ecohydrology Studies , 2015 .

[24]  Julian Friedrich Sauterleute,et al.  A computational tool for the characterisation of rapid fluctuations in flow and stage in rivers caused by hydropeaking , 2014, Environ. Model. Softw..

[25]  M. S. BEVELHIMERa,et al.  CHARACTERIZING SUB-DAILY FLOW REGIMES : IMPLICATIONS OF HYDROLOGIC RESOLUTION ON ECOHYDROLOGY STUDIES , 2014 .

[26]  A. Siviglia,et al.  Multiple drift responses of benthic invertebrates to interacting hydropeaking and thermopeaking waves , 2013 .

[27]  H. Habersack,et al.  Impact analysis of river morphology and roughness variability on hydropeaking based on numerical modelling , 2013 .

[28]  A. Montanari,et al.  Uncertainty in river discharge observations: a quantitative analysis , 2009 .

[29]  Jo Vegar Arnekleiv,et al.  Factors influencing stranding of wild juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta) during rapid and frequent flow decreases in an artificial stream , 2003 .

[30]  A. Harby,et al.  Field experiments on stranding in juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo Salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) during rapid flow decreases caused by hydropeaking , 2001 .