Difference between revisions of "Applying tools in specific use cases"
(Added brief details to the irrigation section on "specific use cases" and inserted a link to the irrigation page which is still being updated.) |
(Change font format) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
- Irrigation | - Irrigation | ||
| − | This section provides a summary of how the various tools represent irrigation from deffrent sources. A detailed case study description of irrigation representation is found [[Irrigation|here.]] | + | ''This section provides a summary of how the various tools represent irrigation from deffrent sources. A detailed case study description of irrigation representation is found [[Irrigation|here.]]'' |
'''Irrigation from groundwater''' | '''Irrigation from groundwater''' | ||
Revision as of 11:36, 3 June 2021
Suggestions relevant to applying different tools to specific use cases - can make separate pages for each and link them to a list here if there is sufficient material
- IAP & afforestation
- Riparian zones
- Wetlands
- Irrigation
This section provides a summary of how the various tools represent irrigation from deffrent sources. A detailed case study description of irrigation representation is found here.
Irrigation from groundwater
● Pitman tools & ACRU: Do not include irrigation from groundwater. ACRU does not include any groundwater withdrawal. Work-arounds in the Pitman tools do not allow for dynamic curtailment of irrigation when groundwater supplies are low.
Irrigation from reservoirs
● MIKE-SHE appears not to include irrigation from storage reservoirs, only runoff river and groundwater
Irrigation from multiple sources
● Pitman tools, ACRU, & SWAT only allow an irrigated area to be irrigated from one source, while MIKE-SHE allows multiple sources to be drawn upon in sequence to meet demands.
- Small farm dams
- Groundwater pumping
DEMO TABLE TEMPLATE TESTING
| Characteristic | WRSM-Pitman | SPATSIM-Pitman | ACRU | SWAT | MIKE-SHE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|