Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorBui, Minh Tuan
dc.contributor.authorLu, Jinmei
dc.contributor.authorNie, Linmei
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-08T11:56:27Z
dc.date.available2020-10-08T11:56:27Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-06
dc.description.abstractThe Arctic region is the most sensitive region to climate change. Hydrological models are fundamental tools for climate change impact assessment. However, due to the extreme weather conditions, specific hydrological process, and data acquisition challenges in the Arctic, it is crucial to select suitable hydrological model(s) for this region. In this paper, a comprehensive review and comparison of different models is conducted based on recently available studies. The functionality, limitations, and suitability of the potential hydrological models for the Arctic hydrological process are analyzed, including: (1) The surface hydrological models Topoflow, DMHS (deterministic modeling hydrological system), HBV (Hydrologiska Byråns Vattenbalansavdelning), SWAT (soil and water assessment tool), WaSiM (water balance simulation model), ECOMAG (ecological model for applied geophysics), and CRHM (cold regions hydrological model); and (2) the cryo-hydrogeological models ATS (arctic terrestrial simulator), CryoGrid 3, GEOtop, SUTRA-ICE (ice variant of the existing saturated/unsaturated transport model), and PFLOTRAN-ICE (ice variant of the existing massively parallel subsurface flow and reactive transport model). The review finds that Topoflow, HBV, SWAT, ECOMAG, and CRHM are suitable for studying surface hydrology rather than other processes in permafrost environments, whereas DMHS, WaSiM, and the cryo-hydrogeological models have higher capacities for subsurface hydrology, since they take into account the three phase changes of water in the near-surface soil. Of the cryo-hydrogeological models reviewed here, GEOtop, SUTRA-ICE, and PFLOTRAN-ICE are found to be suitable for small-scale catchments, whereas ATS and CryoGrid 3 are potentially suitable for large-scale catchments. Especially, ATS and GEOtop are the first tools that couple surface/subsurface permafrost thermal hydrology. If the accuracy of simulating the active layer dynamics is targeted, DMHS, ATS, GEOtop, and PFLOTRAN-ICE are potential tools compared to the other models. Further, data acquisition is a challenging task for cryo-hydrogeological models due to the complex boundary conditions when compared to the surface hydrological models HBV, SWAT, and CRHM, and the cryo-hydrogeological models are more difficult for non-expert users and more expensive to run compared to other models.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBui M T, Lu J, Nie L. A Review of Hydrological Models Applied in the Permafrost-Dominated Arctic Region. Geosciences. 2020;10(10):1-27en_US
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 1837738
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/geosciences10100401
dc.identifier.issn2076-3263
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/19555
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMDPIen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBui, M.T. (2022). Hydrological Modelling and Climate Change Impact Assessment on Future Floods in the Norwegian Arctic Catchments. (Doctoral thesis). <a href=https://hdl.handle.net/10037/26021>https://hdl.handle.net/10037/26021</a>
dc.relation.journalGeosciences
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2020 The Author(s)en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Mathematics and natural science: 400::Geosciences: 450::Hydrology: 454en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400::Geofag: 450::Hydrologi: 454en_US
dc.titleA Review of Hydrological Models Applied in the Permafrost-Dominated Arctic Regionen_US
dc.type.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel