Subject: Defining urban land use under MABIA method Posted: 4/3/2023 Viewed: 1816 times
Dear all,
I am writing to seek assistance regarding a problem I am facing with representing urban areas under a catchment using the MABIA method in WEAP. Specifically, I am struggling to define urban land use under the MABIA method.
My aim is to achieve a more detailed analysis by using the MABIA method for modeling agricultural areas. However, the catchment I am working with includes urbanized areas that are covered with impervious surfaces. I have attempted to model these areas as a part of the catchment defined in MABIA, but I have been unsuccessful in defining urban land use under this method.
As a potential solution, I am considering modeling the agricultural and other land uses separately. Specifically, I would use the MABIA method for the agricultural catchment and the soil moisture method for the other catchment, which would represent different land uses. However, I am uncertain whether this approach is appropriate or if there are any potential drawbacks to this method.
Thank you for your assistance,
Esin
Mr. Brian Joyce
Subject: Re: Defining urban land use under MABIA method Posted: 4/3/2023 Viewed: 1801 times
Dear Esin,
I would suggest that you separate urban and agriculture as you proposed. The MABIA model is really intended to look in detail at irrigated agriculture, drawing upon crop libraries and using daily climate input data. I think it is perfectly reasonable to keep this distinct from urban, which may not require so much detail.
I would suggest that you consider carefully the location of return flows and diversions. Do urban and agricultural demands draw from the same source? Is one situated such that it can receive return flow from the other? Etc.
I hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Brian
Ms. Esin Yandımata
Subject: Re: Defining urban land use under MABIA method Posted: 4/7/2023 Viewed: 1637 times
Thank you very much for your prompt and enlightening response Mr. Joyce. I have a few follow-up questions and would greatly appreciate it if you or any other WEAP Forum user could assist me with them.
My study aims to model circular economy scenarios in a watershed that includes urban, industrial, and agricultural land uses. Based on your suggestion, I have decided to use the MABIA method for agricultural areas and the Soil Moisture method for other land uses. I am also being cautious about return flows and diversions, as you pointed out. Additionally, I am modeling urban areas and others (forests, wetlands and water bodies) as two separate catchments using the Soil Moisture method. This will enable me to model the transfer of rainwater collected from the catchment city to another demand site as part of the circular economy scenario. I would like to know if this approach is sensible.
Furthermore, I attempted to add a runoff or transmission link from the city catchment to a demand site but discovered that it is not feasible. To address this issue, I plan to use a hypothetical reservoir to transport rainwater via a transmission link from the urban areas catchment to the reservoir, and then to the demand site via another transmission link. Does this approach seem reasonable to you? Additionally, I intend to model irrigation return flow by using a hypothetical reservoir to collect the return flows and redirect them back to agricultural demand sites. However, I am uncertain about how to model the pumps that will transport the water from the hypothetical reservoir to the demand site. Can you offer any advice on this?
Finally, as part of my circular economy model, I would like to incorporate "nature-based solutions." However, I could not find any resources on how to model these solutions in WEAP. Could you please provide any insights on this matter?
Thank you in advance for your assistance,
Esin
Topic "Defining urban land use under MABIA method"
