京都大学防災研究所年報 第56号(平成24年度)

京都大学防災研究所年報第 56 号 B 平成 25 年 6 月 Annuals of Disas. Prev. Res. Inst., Kyoto Univ., No. 56 B, 203 Upgrading the Integrated Hydrological Model for the Kiso River System (II) Yoshinobu SATO, Motohiro HONMA and Yasushi SUZUKI Synopsis In the Kiso river system, the river flow is controlled by the many multi-purpose reservoirs operation located in the upstream of the basin. In order to simulate river flow more realistically, we upgraded our distributed hydrological model by considering actual reservoirs operation and water withdrawal from the river channel. The results indicate that our new model shows better performance than the previous one. Then, to mitigate the damages of the severe drought disasters, we tried several adaptation options by numerical simulations such as the change of the reservoir operation rules and inter basin water transfer. The results obtained in this study will contribute as an adaptation measures for the better water resources management. Keywords: Kiso river system, distributed hydrological model, reservoir operation, adaptation 5275km 2 985km 2 840km 2 9km 2 800km 2 Fig. 545

Tokuyama Chusetsu Mangoku Iwaya Inuyama Imawatari Magai(naruto) Misogawa Makio Agigawa Fig. Channel network, major dam and reference point in the Kiso River System. (:Dam;: Reference point) Kojiri2006 km (Hydro-BEAM: Hydrological River Basin Environment Assessment Model) Fig.7 SVAT(Soil-Vegetation-Atmosphere Transfer)Sato et al, 2008 202 [] 95696976 99996 9602008 4800m 3 /s 400m 3 /s300m 3 /s 20m 3 /s50m 3 /s500m 3 /s 200m 3 /s 200m 3 /s 24 3839m 3 6800m 3 5000m 3 4400m 3 5500m 3 2960m 3 38040m 3 [2] 4 546

7800m 3 4700m 3 4.0m 3 /s 3m 3.2m 3 /s.4m 3 /s 20m 3 /s 4/ /302.3m 3 /s2/3/3 0.7m 3 /s 6/6 /52960m 3 a6800m 3 0.542m 3 /s 30.55m 3 /s bm 3 9.9m 3 /s 2.584m 3 /s 6.58m 3 /s 39.93m 3 /s c2200m 3 2200m 3 0.8m 3 /s 3.2m 3 /s d6800m 3 2400m 3 0.3m 3 /s.098m 3 /s 2.902m 3 /s 40m 3 /s [3] am 3 /s bm 3 /s50m 3 /s cm 3 /s50m 3 /s dm 3 /s50m 3 /s [4] http://www2.river.go.jp/dam/ 993Fig.2 Fig.3 2 V /2/3 6/ /56/6/5 2008 H-V 547

maruyama 85 80 75 70 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 makio iwaya 88 87 86 85 84 83 425 45 405 395 385 375 365 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 agigawa misogawa 42 402 2 392 382 372 92 72 362 52 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 yokoyama tokuyama 206 20 96 9 86 8 393 383 373 363 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 93 95 97 99 0 03 05 07 09 Fig. 2 Daily averaged observed water storage level (m) of each dam in the Kiso river system. [5] a 3 548

Maruyama 85 80 75 70 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / Makio / 2/ Iwaya 88 87 86 85 84 83 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ Agigawa / / 2/ 425 45 405 395 385 375 365 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / Misogawa / 2/ 42 402 392 382 372 362 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / Yokoyama / 2/ 9 7 5 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / Tokuyama / 2/ 206 20 96 9 86 8 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / / 2/ 393 383 373 363 / 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ / / 2/ Fig. 3 Change of observed water storage level and simplified reservoir operation rule curve (m) of each dam in the Kiso river system. 2.584 m 3 /s 50 m 3 /s 2.402 m 3 /s.677 m 3 /s 200 m 3 /s 5/~9/30 m 3 /s50 m 3 /s.642 m 3 /s 3.62 m 3 /s 200m 3 /s5/~/3 5.06 m 3 /s m 3 /s50 m 3 /s 3.847 m 3 /s 4.4 m 3 /s 200 m 3 /s 5/~9/30 50 m 3 /s m 3 /s50 m 3 /s 2.44 m 3 /s 9.9 m 3 /s 50 m 3 /s 55 m 3 /s 5/~9/30 3.94 m 3 /s m 3 /s 39.930 m 3 /s 549

Fig. 4 Monthly amount of actual water intake from river channel of the Kiso river basin at each water intake point. 50 m 3 /s 0.4 m 3 /s0.65 m 3 /s 0.38 m 3 /s3.3 m 3 /s [6] 550

Fig. 5 Monthly amount of water intake pattern from river channel of the Kiso river basin at each water intake point. Fig.4 983200826 50 5050 998999 m 3 /s 55

Fig.5Fig.4 Fig.4 3.62m 3 /s3.94m 3 /s 7.56m 3 /s 65384m 3.94m 3 /s 684800m 3 93% 56.3m 3 993200893m 3 50m 3 /s / 2.9m 3 /2079.9m 3 2.9m 3 995870% 6(994) 35 799572005 20 25 9762008334 2 535 200 0.5m 3 /s2.0m 3 /s.0m 3 /s [] [2] 997 20002009 2000 2008 Fig. 6980200930 Qobs Qcal(old) Qcal(new)2 980 999972008 Fig.6 552

3 2008 2008 2008 Fig.79802009 Fig.6 273.4 m 3 /s 269.6 m 3 /s 276.4 m 3 /s 265. m 3 /s 275.2 m 3 /s 282.0 m 3 /s 2.7 m 3 /s 24.3 m 3 /s 284.3 m 3 /s. m 3 /s 2.4 m 3 /s 2.4 m 3 /s 79. m 3 /s 87.3 m 3 /s 87.3 m 3 /s [] Fig.89932009 79.8m822m 3 207m 3 ( 4800m 3 /s) 589839 827m 3 /s 6 [2] Fig.99932009 2008 m 880m879m 6800m 3 2/5 3/3832m 837m 5/-m 879m7/3 8/3862m/4 -m879m 553

Fig. 6 Daily average river discharge at each reference point in the Kiso river system. (980-989) 554

Fig. 6 Daily average river discharge at each reference point in the Kiso river system. (990-999) 555

Fig. 6 Daily average river discharge at each reference point in the Kiso river system. (2000-2009) 556

Imawatari Chusetsu Qobs Qcal(new) Qcal(old) Qobs Qcal(new) Qcal(old) 0 200 300 400 0 200 300 400 Inuyama Mangoku Qobs Qcal(new) Qcal(old) Qobs Qcal(new) Qcal(old) 0 200 300 400 0 200 300 400 Magai Qobs Qcal(new) Qcal(old) 0 200 300 400 Fig. 7 Flow duration curve at each reference point in the Kiso river system. (980-2009) [3] Fig.9932009 5000m 3 m4m4m m 3 38m 3 690m 3 V 2/203/3 500m 3 377m 5/20-m4m 994 6 995 99992004 557

Fig. 8 Performance of the reservoir operation model for Maruyama Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 Fig. 9 Performance of the reservoir operation model for Makio Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 Fig. Performance of the reservoir operation model for Iwaya Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 [4] 2 Fig. 6//5 600m 3 (400.5m) (42m) 558

Fig. Performance of the reservoir operation model for Agigawa Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 Fig. 2 Performance of the reservoir operation model for Misogawa Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 Fig. 3 Performance of the reservoir operation model for Yokoyama Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 994 40m 3 /s 995 994995 995 559

Fig.995 [5] Fig.2 9962 997 6/ /5(200m 3 ) (22.5)2 200m 3 2400m 3 3m 3 20052006 [6] Fig.3 2008 2008 2008 500m 3 /s [7] Fig.4 6/6 /52008 Fig. 4 Performance of the reservoir operation model for Tokuyama Dam. ( Observed, Calculated) Unit: m 3 560

20002009 20082000 9946 990999 7 SIM-.5m 3 /s SIM-2 50m 3 /s4.0m 3 /s 40m 3 /s5.3m 3 /s SIM-32.0m 3 /s SIM-4 SIM-5 SIM-6990 SIM-7 990 50m 3 / 4.0m 3 /s 40m 3 / 5.3m 3 /s 4.7m 3 /s []20002009 Fig.520002009 m 3 /s m 3 /s 535666 67m 3 /s 54 3 50m 3 /s 40m 3 /s 50m 3 /s99 23840 3 /s 343 (a) (b) (c) 700 650 600 550 500 450 Observed SIM- SIM-2 SIM-3 SIM-4 SIM-5 50 20 90 60 30 Observed SIM- SIM-2 SIM-3 SIM-4 SIM-5 Fig. 5 Influence of additional water supply for drought mitigation. (2000-2009) (a) Inuyama (Drought), (b) Magai (Severe drought), (c) Magai (Drought) 240 2 80 50 20 Observed SIM- SIM-2 SIM-3 SIM-4 SIM-5 56

SIM-6 990// 990/3/ 990/5/ 990/7/ 990/9/ 990// 99// 99/3/ 99/5/ 99/7/ 99/9/ 99// SIM-6 992// 992/3/ 992/5/ 992/7/ 992/9/ 992// 993// 993/3/ 993/5/ 993/7/ 993/9/ 993// SIM-6 994// 994/3/ 994/5/ 994/7/ 994/9/ 994// 995// 995/3/ 995/5/ 995/7/ 995/9/ 995// SIM-6 996// 996/3/ 996/5/ 996/7/ 996/9/ 996// 997// 997/3/ 997/5/ 997/7/ 997/9/ 997// SIM-6 998// 998/3/ 998/5/ 998/7/ 998/9/ 998// 999// 999/3/ 999/5/ 999/7/ 999/9/ 999// Fig. 6 Influence of additional water supply for drought mitigation at Inuyama. (990-999) 562

SIM-6 990// 990/3/ 990/5/ 990/7/ 990/9/ 990// 99// 99/3/ 99/5/ 99/7/ 99/9/ 99// SIM-6 992// 992/3/ 992/5/ 992/7/ 992/9/ 992// 993// 993/3/ 993/5/ 993/7/ 993/9/ 993// SIM-6 994// 994/3/ 994/5/ 994/7/ 994/9/ 994// 995// 995/3/ 995/5/ 995/7/ 995/9/ 995// SIM-6 996// 996/3/ 996/5/ 996/7/ 996/9/ 996// 997// 997/3/ 997/5/ 997/7/ 997/9/ 997// SIM-6 998// 998/3/ 998/5/ 998/7/ 998/9/ 998// 999// 999/3/ 999/5/ 999/7/ 999/9/ 999// Fig. 7 Influence of additional water supply for drought mitigation at Magai. (990-999) 563

SIM-7 990// 990/3/ 990/5/ 990/7/ 990/9/ 990// 99// 99/3/ 99/5/ 99/7/ 99/9/ 99// SIM-7 992// 992/3/ 992/5/ 992/7/ 992/9/ 992// 993// 993/3/ 993/5/ 993/7/ 993/9/ 993// SIM-7 994// 994/3/ 994/5/ 994/7/ 994/9/ 994// 995// 995/3/ 995/5/ 995/7/ 995/9/ 995// SIM-7 996// 996/3/ 996/5/ 996/7/ 996/9/ 996// 997// 997/3/ 997/5/ 997/7/ 997/9/ 997// SIM-7 998// 998/3/ 998/5/ 998/7/ 998/9/ 998// 999// 999/3/ 999/5/ 999/7/ 999/9/ 999// Fig. 8 Influence of additional water supply for drought mitigation at Magai. (990-999) 564

SIM- 0.5m 3 /s 0.5m 3 /s SIM-2 m 3 /s3 40m 3 /s40 50m 3 /s23 SIM-3 40m 3 /s 50m 3 /s 2.0m 3 /ssim-2 SIM-4 SIM-3 SIM-2 40m 3 /s4850m 3 /s29 SIM-5 [2]990999 Fig.6990 SIM-6990999 m 3 /s 536 497 SIM-7 Fig.7 50m 3 /s 287257 994(6) (Fig.8) 990999 (40m 3 /s)92 78 6 3 565

9946 4 202, 55B, pp. 59-527. Kojiri T. (2006): Hydrological River Basin Assessment Model (Hydro-BEAM), In Singh V.P. and Frevent D.K., "Watershed models", Taylor & Francis, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp. 63 626. Sato Y., Ma X.Y., Xu J.Q., Matsuoka M., Zheng H.X., Liu C.M. and Fukushima Y. (2008): Analysis of long-term water balance in the source area of the Yellow River basin, Hydrological Processes Vol.22, pp. 68 629. 566