Multi-model groundwater-management optimization: reconciling disparate conceptual models

Abstract

Disagreement among policymakers often involves policy issues and differences between the decision makers’ implicit utility functions. Significant disagreement can also exist concerning conceptual models of the physical system. Disagreement on the validity of a single simulation model delays discussion on policy issues and prevents the adoption of consensus management strategies. For such a contentious situation, the proposed multi-conceptual model optimization (MCMO) can help stakeholders reach a compromise strategy. MCMO computes mathematically optimal strategies that simultaneously satisfy analogous constraints and bounds in multiple numerical models that differ in boundary conditions, hydrogeologic stratigraphy, and discretization. Shadow prices and trade-offs guide the process of refining the first MCMO-developed `multi-model strategy into a realistic compromise management strategy. By employing automated cycling, MCMO is practical for linear and nonlinear aquifer systems. In this reconnaissance study, MCMO application to the multilayer Cache Valley (Utah and Idaho, USA) river–aquifer system employs two simulation models with analogous background conditions but different vertical discretization and boundary conditions. The objective is to maximize additional safe pumping (beyond current pumping), subject to constraints on groundwater head and seepage from the aquifer to surface waters. MCMO application reveals that in order to protect the local ecosystem, increased groundwater pumping can satisfy only 40 % of projected water demand increase. To explore the possibility of increasing that pumping while protecting the ecosystem, MCMO clearly identifies localities requiring additional field data. MCMO is applicable to other areas and optimization problems than used here. Steps to prepare comparable sub-models for MCMO use are area-dependent.