USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Peter V Caldwell

Publications and source records attributed to Peter V Caldwell.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Reducing water scarcity by improving water productivity in the United States

Nearly one-sixth of U.S. river basins are unable to consistently meet societal water demands while also providing sufficient water for the environment. Water scarcity is expected to intensify and spread as populations increase, new water demands emerge, and climate changes. Improving water productivity by meeting realistic benchmarks for all water users could allow U.S. communities to expand economic activity and improve environmental flows. Here we utilize a spatially detailed database of water productivity to set realistic benchmarks for over 400 industries and products. We assess unrealized water savings achievable by each industry in each river basin within the conterminous U.S. by bringing all water users up to industry- and region-specific water productivity benchmarks. Some of the most water stressed areas throughout the U.S. West and South have the greatest potential for water savings, with around half of these water savings obtained by improving water productivity in the production of corn, cotton, and alfalfa. By incorporating benchmark-meeting water savings within a national hydrological model (WaSSI), we demonstrate that depletion of river flows across Western U.S. regions can be reduced on average by 6.2–23.2%, without reducing economic production. Lastly, we employ an environmentally extended input-output model to identify the U.S. industries and locations that can make the biggest impact by working with their suppliers to reduce water use 'upstream' in their supply chain. The agriculture and manufacturing sectors have the largest indirect water footprint due to their reliance on water-intensive inputs but these sectors also show the greatest capacity to reduce water consumption throughout their supply chains.

Conterminous United States

A comparison of hydrologic models for ecological flows and water availability

Robust hydrologic models are needed to help manage water resources for healthy aquatic ecosystems and reliable water supplies for people, but there is a lack of comprehensive model comparison studies that quantify differences in streamflow predictions among model applications developed to answer management questions. We assessed differences in daily streamflow predictions by four fine-scale models and two regional-scale monthly time step models by comparing model fit statistics and bias in ecologically relevant flow statistics (ERFSs) at five sites in the Southeastern USA. Models were calibrated to different extents, including uncalibrated (level A), calibrated to a downstream site (level B), calibrated specifically for the site (level C) and calibrated for the site with adjusted precipitation and temperature inputs (level D). All models generally captured the magnitude and variability of observed streamflows at the five study sites, and increasing level of model calibration generally improved performance. All models had at least 1 of 14 ERFSs falling outside a +/−30% range of hydrologic uncertainty at every site, and ERFSs related to low flows were frequently over-predicted. Our results do not indicate that any specific hydrologic model is superior to the others evaluated at all sites and for all measures of model performance. Instead, we provide evidence that (1) model performance is as likely to be related to calibration strategy as it is to model structure and (2) simple, regional-scale models have comparable performance to the more complex, fine-scale models at a monthly time step.

Ecohydrology