Hydrological Sciences Journal

ISSN: 0262-6667 (Print) 2150-3435 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/thsj20

Assessment of environmental flows under limited

data availability: case study of the Acheloos River,
Greece

A. Efstratiadis, A. Tegos, A. Varveris & D. Koutsoyiannis

To cite this article: A. Efstratiadis, A. Tegos, A. Varveris & D. Koutsoyiannis (2014) Assessment
of environmental flows under limited data availability: case study of the Acheloos River, Greece,
Hydrological Sciences Journal, 59:3-4, 731-750, DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2013.804625

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.804625

Published online: 24 Feb 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2359

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 16 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=thsj20
 Hydrological Sciences Journal – Journal des Sciences Hydrologiques, 59 (3–4) 2014 731
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2013.804625
Special issue: Hydrological Science for Environmental Flows

Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability: case

study of the Acheloos River, Greece
A. Efstratiadis1, A. Tegos1,2, A. Varveris2 and D. Koutsoyiannis1
1
Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Heroon Polytechneiou 5,
GR-157 80 Zographou, Greece
[email protected]
2
ECOS Consulting S.A., Makedonon 10, GR-115 21 Athens, Greece

Received 28 September 2012; accepted 3 May 2013; open for discussion until 1 October 2014

Editor Z.W. Kundzewicz; Guest editor M. Acreman

Citation Efstratiadis, A., Tegos, A., Varveris, A., and Koutsoyiannis, D., 2014. Assessment of environmental flows under limited data
availability: case study of the Acheloos River, Greece. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 59 (3–4), 731–750.

Abstract The lower course of the Acheloos River is an important hydrosystem in Greece, heavily modified by a
cascade of four hydropower dams upstream, which is now being extended by two more dams in the upper course.
The design of the dams and hydropower facilities that are in operation has not considered any environmental
criteria. However, in the last 50 years, numerous methodologies have been proposed to assess the negative
impacts of such projects to both the abiotic and biotic environment, and to provide decision support towards
establishing appropriate constraints on their operation, typically in terms of minimum flow requirements. In this
study, seeking a more environmentally-friendly operation of the hydrosystem, we investigate the outflow policy
from the most downstream dam, examining alternative environmental flow approaches. Accounting for data
limitations, we recommend the basic flow method, which is parsimonious and suitable for Mediterranean rivers,
whose flows exhibit strong variability across seasons. We also show that the wetted perimeter–discharge method,
which is an elementary hydraulic approach, provides consistent results, even without using any flow data. Finally,
we examine the adaptation of the proposed flow policy (including artificial flooding) to the real-time hydropower
generation schedule, and the management of the resulting conflicts.
Key words modified rivers; hydroelectric dams; reservoir water balance; basic maintenance flow; wetted perimeter–discharge;
artificial floods

Evaluation des débits environnementaux avec des données limitées : étude de cas du fleuve
Acheloos, en Grèce
Résumé Le cours inférieur du fleuve Acheloos est un hydrosystème important en Grèce, fortement modifié par
une cascade de quatre barrages hydroélectriques, en cours d’extension avec deux autres barrages sur le cours
supérieur. La conception des barrages et des installations hydroélectriques en service n’a tenu compte d’aucun
critère environnemental. Cependant, au cours des cinquante dernières années, de nombreuses méthodes ont été
proposées pour évaluer les impacts négatifs de tels projets sur l’environnement abiotique et biotique, et pour
fournir une aide à la décision en vue d’établir des contraintes appropriées sur leur fonctionnement, essentielle-
ment en termes de besoins concernant les débits minimum. Dans cette étude, en cherchant un fonctionnement de
l’hydrosystème plus respectueux de l’environnement, nous avons étudié la politique de vidange du barrage le plus
en aval, en examinant des approches alternatives d’estimation des débits environnementaux. En tenant compte
des limites liées aux données, nous recommandons la Méthode des débits de base (Basic Flow Method), qui est
parcimonieuse et adaptée aux rivières méditerranéennes dont les débits présentent une forte variabilité
saisonnière. Nous avons également montré que la méthode liant périmètre mouillé et débit, qui est une approche
hydraulique élémentaire, fournit des résultats cohérents, même sans l’utilisation de données de débit. Enfin, nous
avons examiné l’adaptation de la politique de débit proposée (y compris les inondations artificielles) au calendrier
de production hydroélectrique en temps réel, et la gestion des conflits qui en résultent.
Mots clefs rivières modifiées ; barrages hydroélectriques ; bilan en eau de réservoirs ; débit d’entretien de base ; relation
périmètre mouillé–débit ; crues artificielles

© 2014 IAHS Press

732 A. Efstratiadis et al.

1 INTRODUCTION Koutsoyiannis 2012). It refers to the ancient site

Gortyn, crossed by the river Lethaios, today called
Because of their potential impacts on the natural
Mitropolianos, which dominates the valley of
morphological and hydrological conditions, large-
Messara, Crete, and starts with an invocation to
scale dams may cause significant modifications to
gods (translation by Davies 1996):
downstream river systems and, consequently, to
their ecological status. Indeed, the spatial and tem-
Θιοί· τô ποταμô αἴ κα κατὰ τὸ μέττον τὰν ῥοὰν
poral regulation of flows caused by large reservoirs
θιθῆι ῥῆν κατὰ το Ϝὸν αυτô, θιθεμένōι ἄπατον
may result in major changes to the hydrological
ἤμην. Τὰν δὲ ῥοὰν λείπεν ὄττον κατέκει ἀ ἐπ’
regime of the river, which in turn may have negative
ἀγορᾶι δέπυρα ἤ πλίον, μεῖον δὲ μὴ.
impacts on both biotic and abiotic river conditions.
On the other hand, we cannot ignore the beneficial (Gods. If anyone makes the flow run from the
and multidimensional role of such projects, in terms middle of the river towards his own [property],
of providing water for various uses (water supply, it is without penalty for the person so doing.
irrigation, hydroelectric production, navigation, etc.), [He is] to leave the flow as wide as the bridge
together with the reduction of flood risk. Another that the agora holds, or more, but not less.)
possible benefit is the formation of an attractive
lake landscape, favouring the touristic development EFA has become a major issue in watershed manage-
of the surrounding area. In this respect, it is essential ment, for which numerous approaches are in use, of
to seek a compromise between the maximization of all levels of complexity; in general, these are classi-
the socio-economic benefits and the environmental fied in four categories, referred to as hydrological,
improvement, which requires a holistic and rational hydraulic rating, habitat simulation and holistic.
viewpoint to handle the numerous contrasting or even Comprehensive reviews of these methods are pro-
conflicting interests (Christofides et al. 2005, vided by Tharme (2003), Acreman and Dunbar
Efstratiadis and Hadjibiros 2011). (2004) and Petts (2009). There exist many interpreta-
The Water Framework Directive (Water tions of EFA. For instance, Tharme (2003) defines the
Framework Directive 2000/60/EC) pays particular problem as “an assessment of how much of the origi-
attention to heavily modified water bodies, for which nal flow of a river that should continue to flow down
it aims to ensure a good ecological and water quality it and onto its floodplains in order to maintain speci-
status. In this respect, the water policies for regulated fied, valued features of the ecosystem”. Another defi-
rivers have been thoroughly revised to incorporate eco- nition is provided within the Brisbane Declaration
logical, environmental and water quality criteria within (2007), asserting that “environmental flows describe
the design and management of reservoirs towards pro- the quantity, quality and timing of water flows
vision (or re-establishment) of natural conditions, to required to sustain freshwater and estuarine ecosys-
some extent (Acreman et al. 2008). In order to guaran- tems and the human livelihoods and well-being that
tee a sufficient level of protection for the downstream depend on them”. While the latter definition is more
aquatic environment, it is common practice to establish general, it gives the impression that EFA is rather a
a minimum outflow rate through the reservoir, either theoretical issue, involving the estimation of the water
temporally steady (static) or variable (dynamic), which needs of ecosystems under pristine (i.e. unmodified)
is typically called environmental, ecological, minimum river conditions. In contrast, the former definition
or maintenance flow (Alcázar et al. 2008). accepts the existence of two flow regimes, an original
In recent decades, environmental flow assess- and a modified one. Nevertheless, any EFA should be
ment (EFA) has become an issue of continuous accompanied by an operational plan for the manage-
research, globally. As reported by Tharme (2003), ment of the water resources. This should compromise
early approaches are found from the end of the the environmental needs with the human ones, under
1940s in western USA; in the same article are listed all technical, economic and institutional constraints.
207 different methods within 44 countries. In fact, In this context, EFA is an essential, yet not unique,
regulations of such kind are very old and must have component in defining sustainable river/dam opera-
been developed based on common sense and empiri- tion rules, which requires an integrated and system-
cal criteria. The following example of flow regulation wide viewpoint.
in Greece survives thanks to epigraphic evidence After defining the environmental objectives, the
from the 5th century BC (Davies 1996; see also next step is their incorporation into the management
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 733

policy of the existing reservoir system. Typically, ecological importance, protected under the Ramsar
these objectives are addressed in terms of external Convention. In order to estimate the environmental
constraints to reservoir stages and outflows (e.g. demand at the estuary, we attempted to “reconstruct”
Harman and Stewardson 2005, Suen and Eheart the natural flows along the river for a 42-year period,
2006, Suen 2011). The outlines of each policy first using rather limited hydrological data (i.e. sparse flow
depend on the purpose of the project, because differ- measurements and reservoir level and outflow data, on a
ent types of dams alter natural flow regimes in dif- daily basis). Next, we revised the outflow scheduling
ferent ways (Richter and Thomas 2007). This article through the most downstream dam, taking into account
puts emphasis on large-scale hydroelectric reservoirs, the results of the EFA analysis and the real-time man-
the role of which is of key importance with regard to agement of the related infrastructures (power plants,
scheduling of energy production at the national level. channels, etc.). The whole methodology can be used
Traditionally, their management is determined as a framework for similar studies, involving heavily
through pre-specified operation rules, with the goal modified Mediterranean rivers, where the only available
of maximizing energy revenue, while meeting other data are daily discharge records.
water uses. In this context, the regulation of outflows
is determined by both the long- and the short-term
energy demand, the temporal variability of which is 2 PARSIMONIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL
radically different to the variability of the natural FLOW MODELS: OVERVIEW
flows. Obviously, the flexibility of the hydropower
2.1 Problem statement
generation schedule is restricted when the outflow
policy is also determined by environmental con- It is recognized that the health and sustainability of
straints. In general, the latter limit the contribution river ecosystems depends on multiple factors, includ-
of peak hydropower plants to adapting the power ing flow regime, river hydraulics (e.g. geometry of
supply to the demand and to providing certain ancil- channel and riparian zone), level of exploitation,
lary services to the electrical grid (Pérez-Díaz and presence of physical barriers to connectivity, etc.
Wilhelmi 2010). For this reason, the task of adapting (Acreman and Dunbar 2004). Thus, it involves a
the operation rules of large-scale hydropower sys- number of biological, geomorphological, physical
tems to account for environmental requirements is and chemical processes in a river that form and
far from straightforward. To our knowledge, the prac- maintain aquatic ecosystems (Suen and Eheart
tical aspects of this issue, which is a challenging 2006). However, an overall evaluation of all the
multidisciplinary problem, have gained little attention above factors within an EFA study is extremely dif-
in the literature. For instance, Jager and Smith (2008) ficult. Despite the important advances towards under-
reviewed decision-making efforts and optimization standing the complex eco-hydrological processes and
techniques to problems involving both hydropower their interactions, the amount and time length of the
and environmental criteria. Renöfält et al. (2010) required information (in terms of field observations)
investigated the impacts of hydropower generation remains the most important restricting factor.
on freshwater ecosystems and discuss efficient miti- Therefore, in many real-world applications the pro-
gation measures. Beilfuss (2010) developed a simu- blem is normally handled under significantly limited
lation model, using a 97-year historical flow series, to data availability (e.g. Smakhtin et al. 2006). In such
assess the trade-offs between environmental flow cases, it is essential to seek parsimonious EFA
scenarios and hydropower generation in the Lower approaches, in terms of data requirements.
Zambezi Basin, Mozambique. A simulation-based Among the various methodologies that are avail-
approach, using the HEC-5 package, was also able in the literature, the most parsimonious ones are
employed by Babel et al. (2012), in order to improve the so-called hydrological and hydraulic rating
the operation of the hydropower system of La Nga approaches. In the former category fall a large variety
River basin, Vietnam. of methods, from very simple rules-of-thumb to more
In this study, we review alternative EFA sophisticated procedures, all of which use streamflow
approaches that are suitable for areas with limited data time series as a single input. Quoting Palau and
availability and investigate their implementation within Alcázar (1996), streamflow can be considered as the
the operation of the hydroelectric scheme of Acheloos “genetic code of the river”, driving the relationship
River, which produces more than 40% of the hydro- between the hydrological variability and the physical
electric energy in Greece, while its estuary is of major and biological river structure and dynamics. In fact,
734 A. Efstratiadis et al.

the flow regime determines the hydraulic and geo- 20-year period. The method identifies a critical flow
morphologic characteristics of the river (distribution rate for the summer and winter months (expressed as
of velocities and depths, bank form, bed width, bed percentage of MAF), according to the river condi-
substrate types, sediment transport), which in turn tions. For the dry period, the proposed ratios are 10%
determine both the abiotic structure and the biotic for poor to fair quality (survival), 20% for good
composition of the riverine ecosystems. This is a habitat and 30% for excellent habitat, while for the
rather straightforward task, when such data are avail- wet period the corresponding ratios are 30%, 40%
able in gauging stations operating for quite a long and 50%, respectively.
time (15–20 years) and under natural flow regimes The flow targets are also assessed by considering
(Richter et al. 1997, Alcázar et al. 2008, Kennard specific exceedence percentiles of flow-duration
et al. 2010). Yet, in a case of regulated rivers pre- curves, derived from statistical analysis of daily dis-
processing is essential to obtain the so-called “natur- charge records (Smakhtin 2001). For instance, the
alized” time series, since after the construction of the Q95 (i.e. the flow which is equalled or exceeded
dam the flow regime is radically modified. The sug- 95% of time) is adopted as a minimum standard in
gested time resolution of flow data is at least daily, UK, Australia, Taiwan and Bulgaria, while Canada
although mean monthly data are also suitable for and Brazil typically use the Q90 discharge. On the
some simple methods. other hand, some countries consider much less con-
On the other hand, hydraulic rating approaches servative thresholds, such as the Q364, which corre-
assume that hydraulics is the key driver of the river sponds to the minimum daily flow of the year, and it
ecosystem integrity. In this context, they evaluate a is practically estimated as the 99.7% discharge quan-
number of hydraulic, morphological and geometrical tile. The UK standard, i.e. Q95, was recently specified
characteristics (particularly, the wetted perimeter) and by a multidisciplinary team of lead water scientists
establish links with habitat availability of target biota. and competent authorities, who are responsible for
implementing the WFD (Acreman et al. 2008). In
this context, the team of fish ecologists recommended
2.2 Elementary hydrological methods
various abstraction thresholds as a percentage of flow
In elementary hydrological approaches, also referred on the day in excess of the natural Q95, which is
to as desktop or lookup-table methods, the critical encountered as the lower limit for fish maintenance.
minimum flow is expressed in terms of statistical The Q95 was also proposed by hydrology experts, on
indices, such as percentages of annual flows or per- the basis of hydraulic data retrieved from 65 sites
centiles from a flow-duration curve (Acreman and over the UK.
Dunbar 2004). A characteristic index-based approach
is imposed by the French Freshwater Fishing Law of
2.3 Advanced hydrological methods
1984, which requires that residual flows in bypassed
sections of a river must be at least 1/40 of the mean Instead of imposing a time-constant flow constraint,
annual flow (MAF) for existing schemes and 1/10 of advanced hydrological approaches account for the
MAF for new ones (Acreman et al. 2008). Similar variability of flows at multiple temporal scales
standards have been employed in many countries and (monthly, seasonal and annual) and thus they are
incorporated in the related environmental legislation. purported to be more ecologically relevant. The
In particular, the minimum average monthly flow has most representative of them are the basic flow
been generally used in Greece to determine the flow method (BFM; Palau and Alcázar 1996) and the
to be maintained below dams. In Spain, the 10% of range of variability approach (RVA; Richter et al.
MAF is generally employed, for river basins with 1996, 1997).
limited information, while the routine values in The BFM was developed and broadly applied in
Portugal are 2.5% to 5.0% of MAF (Tharme 2003). Spain (especially across the Ebro watershed), but in
While most of the aforementioned standards are recent years it has also gained increasing recognition
rather empirical, the Tennant (1976) method (also elsewhere. It is based on the study of irregularities in
known as Montana method) is the first one attempt- hydrological series of daily mean flows using the
ing to quantify a correlation between the streamflow simple moving average model as a tool to extract
regime and the resilience of fish fauna. Its develop- the relevant information. Its key assumption is that
ment required the collection of a huge amount of organisms living in a river system are adapted to it,
field habitat, hydraulic and biological data, during a and therefore the biological cycles and ecological
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 735

requirements are adapted to the seasonal fluctuations The RVA is even more complex, since it uses 32
of flows. Given that the organisms can withstand parameters to describe the hydrologic changes that
significantly low-flow conditions for limited time are directly related to the quality of ecosystems. The
periods, the method aims to determine the average so-called indicators of hydrological alteration (IHA)
duration and magnitude of such periods, on the basis are grouped into five categories:
of up to 100-day moving average time series (since in
1. The mean monthly flow values, providing a gen-
Mediterranean rivers, the low-flow period lasts about
eral measure of habitat availability or suitability
3 months). Summarizing Palau and Alcázar (2012),
(e.g. humidity for riparian vegetation, water for
the computational procedure is the following: First,
land animals);
we identify the so-called basic flow Qb, which is the
2. The magnitude and duration of hydrological
absolutely minimum discharge that should be main-
extremes (floods and droughts), which are asso-
tained along the river. In this respect, we calculate the
ciated with environmental stress and disturbance
moving averages of daily flows, from 1-day to 100-
(e.g. dehydration for animals, anaerobic stress for
day intervals, for at least 10 years. For each year i
plants) and also affect the colonization processes;
and each interval k we extract the minimum flow
3. The timing of annual extreme conditions, asso-
value qik, accounting for an annual period starting
ciated with the life cycles of various organisms,
in April, i.e. the so-called “hydrobiological” year.
the reproductive behaviour and the accessibility
Next, we calculate the relative increment between
to specific habitats;
each pair of consecutive minima as follows:
4. The frequency and the duration of high and low

flows, which are associated with the soil moisture
bki ¼ qki  qki 1 =qki 1 (1) regime in the riparian zone, the soil characteris-
tics, the duration and extent of specific seasonal
For each year i, we select the moving average flow habitats, the river geomorphology, etc.;
qikmax with the largest relative increment; the mean 5. The rate and frequency of change in conditions,
value of all qikmax represents the basic flow Qb. which describe the abruptness and number of
In order to maintain the river ecosystem as close intra-annual cycles of environmental variation
as possible to the natural conditions, it is also impor- and thus provide a measure of the rate and fre-
tant to represent the temporal variability in the pro- quency of environmental changes.
posed regulated flow regime. In this context, for each
In a modified flow regime, the IHA parameters
month j we estimate the so-called basic maintenance
should be maintained within the limits of their natural
flow by the formula:
variability. In the absence of other ecological infor-

0:50 mation, a threshold of one standard deviation from
BMFj ¼ Qb Qmean;j =Qmin;j (2) the mean value of each parameter is suggested as a
default limit, in order to set the environmental flow
where Qmean, j and Qmin, j are the mean and minimum targets.
discharge of month j.
In reality, the BFM constitutes a broad manage-
2.4 Hydraulic rating methodologies
ment proposal, including a number of issues affecting
the biological functioning of regulated rivers. Thus, Input data for hydraulic rating approaches (also
apart from a monthly schedule of minimum mainte- known as habitat retention methods) are both histor-
nance flows, it also accounts for the so-called “bank- ical flow records and cross-section data. Since the
full flow”, which represents the dominant discharge available aquatic habitat, for given flow conditions, is
in channels at dynamic equilibrium and it is usually by definition determined by the wetted perimeter of
calculated as the 1.5-year flood (this is a generally the channel, most of these approaches use the above
accepted value, although a wider range of estimates geometrical characteristic as a basic tool for ecologi-
of the corresponding return period have been cal evaluation. The rationale is that the wetted peri-
reported in the literature, particularly in semi-arid meter of shallow and wide rivers is more sensitive
climates; cf. Shamir et al. 2013), as well as the against flow changes, in comparison to narrow and
“maximum flow”, estimated as the 25-year flood. deep ones (Acreman and Dunbar 2004). In particular,
The method is now incorporated within the Spanish the wetted perimeter–discharge breakpoint has been
regulation implementing the obligations of the WFD. extensively employed to define optimum or
736 A. Efstratiadis et al.

minimum flows for fish rearing in the USA since the oldest dam (Plastiras) is located on a tributary of
middle 1970s. The breakpoint (also referred to as the Acheloos (Tavropos), and diverts the entire runoff
inflection point) is the point where the slope of the of its upstream basin (161 km2) to the adjacent
stage–discharge curve changes (decreases), so that a plain of Thessaly for irrigation and water supply,
large increase of flow results in a small increase of also taking advantage of an exceptional hydraulic
perimeter. The lowest breakpoint in the curve is taken head, ranging from 561 to 577 m. The other three
to represent a critical discharge below which habitat dams (Kremasta, Kastraki, Stratos) form a cascade
conditions for aquatic organisms rapidly become along the main river course. In particular, the
unfavourable (Gippel and Stewardson 1998). In the Kremasta Dam, with a height of 160 m, has been
absence of in situ hydrometric data, the Manning for years the highest earth dam in Europe. The reser-
equation is generally used to identify the stage–dis- voir, with total storage capacity of 4500 hm3, extends
charge relationship, in which the detection of the up to 80 km2 and it is the largest in Greece, while the
breakpoint can be made either graphically or analyti- hydropower station, with installed capacity of 160
cally. The analysis should be implemented in a few MW, is also the largest in Greece. Apart from energy
selected cross-sections, particularly in shallow areas production, the system provides water for domestic
(e.g. riffles) or areas with important ecological char- supply and irrigation, as well as flood control to the
acteristics, which are considered as critically limiting downstream areas (Aetoloacarnania plain).
biotopes. The obvious assumption is that the protec- Future configurations of the system have also
tion of the most critical hydraulic areas ensures the been studied, involving the interbasin transport of
maintenance of the entire aquatic ecosystem. part of the upstream flows of Acheloos to Thessaly.
Some components of this system are completed. In
particular, the dam and the hydropower plant of
3 CASE STUDY Mesochora, in the upper Acheloos course, have
been operationally ready for more than a decade,
3.1 The River Acheloos and its hydroelectric
but the reservoir is kept empty and the project is
reservoir system
not operating due to opposition by ecologists and
The case study involves the assessment of environ- local communities. The interbasin transfer tunnel is
mental flows of the Acheloos River and their imple- also almost complete, while the dam at Sykia at the
mentation within an operational management plan. beginning of the tunnel is under construction and
The Acheloos River is located in Central Western some of the preliminary works are completed.
Greece, and is the largest river in the country in Critical assessments of the situation have been pro-
terms of flow and the second one in terms of length vided by Koutsoyiannis (2011) and Fourniotis
(~220 km). Its river basin, depicted in Fig. 1, covers (2012).
an area of 5027 km2. The mean annual precipitation
reaches 1350 mm and the mean annual (naturalized)
3.2 The Acheloos estuary and its ecological
discharge at the estuary is estimated to be 136.9 m3 s-1,
importance
which corresponds to an equivalent depth of more
than 850 mm and a runoff coefficient of 63%. In the The environmental value of the entire river basin of
mountainous areas, due to the domination of low Acheloos is indisputable. For instance, the riverine
permeability formations (flysch), the mean annual ecosystems in the upper and middle course have been
runoff exceeds 1000 mm and the runoff coefficient identified as important habitats for many threatened
is around 70%, an outstanding percentage for species of freshwater fish and birds. Fortunately, this
Mediterranean catchments. part of the basin is only slightly influenced by human
From the early 1960s, the Public Power intervention. Yet, the most important and sensitive
Corporation (PPC) constructed four major dams and ecosystems are hosted in the estuary, extended areas
interconnected hydropower stations in the middle and of which belong to the NATURA 2000 sites, while
lower course of the river. Their characteristics are the Acheloos Delta is protected by the Ramsar
summarized in Table 1. The system hosts 43% of Convention (Varveris et al. 2010).
the installed hydropower capacity of the country, i.e. The geomorphological and hydrodynamic condi-
1302 out of 3060 MW, and today produces 42% of tions of the estuary (e.g. distribution of brackish and
the annual hydroelectric energy, i.e. 1880 out of 4500 freshwater) favoured the development of important
GWh (official data by the PPC; Argirakis 2009). The wetlands, such as lagoons, coastal salt lacustrine and
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 737

4 400 000000000

4 400 000000000
250 000000000 300 000000000

4 350 000000000

4 350 000000000
4 300 000000000

4 300 000000000
4 250 000000000

4 250 000000000

250 000000000 300 000000000

Fig. 1 The Acheloos River basin and its reservoir system, also showing future works of the Acheloos interbasin transfer
(diversion) plan, which are denoted in italics (map by A. Koukouvinos).

freshwater marshes, with remarkable biological albanicus, Barbus peloponnesius, Trichonovelonitsa

diversity (Fourniotis 2012). In particular, in the (Cobitis trichonica), Greek Dromitsa (Rutilus ylikien-
lower course and the estuary, three main types of sis), as well as the unique European species of
riparian forests grow, i.e. riparian forests with Salix Silurus aristotelis. Birds are the largest group of
alba and Populus nigra as dominant species, a forest vertebrates, recording 259 species (Fulica atra,
of Fraxinus angustifolia, and clusters with Tamarix Larus genei, Egretta alba, Phalacrocorax carbo,
parviflora and Vitex agnus-castus. Regarding fish Aythya ferina, Anas penelope, etc.). For this reason,
fauna, 41 species have been identified, including the Acheloos Delta has also been included in the
endangered Sturgeon (Acipencer sturio), Barbus Special Bird Areas list. Finally, at least 20 species
738 A. Efstratiadis et al.

Table 1 Characteristic data of Acheloos reservoir system (existing development scheme).

Plastiras Kremasta Kastraki Stratos Mesohora

First year of operation 1959 1966 1969 1989 –

Dam height (m) 83.0 160.3 95.7 26.0 135.0
Total drainage area (km2) 161 3570 4118 4320 633
Total storage capacity (hm3) 362 4500 800 70 358
Useful storage capacity (hm3) 286 3500 50 10 225
Maximum level (m) 792.0 282.0 144.2 68.6 770.0
Intake level (m) 776.0 227.0 142.0 67.0 731.0
Maximum reservoir area (km2) 24.0 79.0 24.4 7.4 7.8
Spillway capacity (m3 s-1) 460 3000 3700 4000 3300
Installed capacity (MW) 130 436 420 156 160
Maximum head (m) 577 136 76 37 220
Annual energy production (GWh) 198 848 598 237 –
Note: The sum of runoff upstream of Plastiras Dam is diverted to the adjacent plain of Thessaly.

of reptiles and amphibians exist that are protected at rare during the last four decades. The substantial
international level. For analytical information on the differences between the natural and modified hydro-
flora and fauna of the broader area, the reader is logical conditions are illustrated in Fig. 2, which
referred to the Filotis website, a database for the compares, on a monthly basis, the main statistical
natural environment of Greece (http://filotis.itia. characteristics of historical outflows from the most
ntua.gr/). downstream dam (Stratos) and the “naturalized”
flows. The latter are estimated according to the meth-
odology described in Section 4.3. The data refer to
3.3 The actual management policy the period 1990–2008, i.e. after the completion of
The actual operation of the hydrosystem is mainly Stratos works (1989).
determined by the energy demand (usually, for peak The hydrological changes were also accompa-
energy production); the irrigation demand during the nied by major changes in the land management prac-
summer period is of less importance. The manage- tices in the Aetoloacarnania plain, due to the release
ment of these uses requires large-scale regulations of extended fertile areas. Even the floodplains of the
and abstractions (including the diversion of the sum Acheloos, very close to the main course, have been
of runoff of the upstream Tavropos basin), which occupied by agricultural activities and temporary set-
radically changed the former flow regime of the tlements. This practice, apart from being illegal and
river, particularly in the lower course and the estuary. dangerous (since the flood risk is reduced but not
In fact, the temporal variability of flows became eliminated), further contributes to the environmental
much smoother and flood phenomena were very degradation of the lower course areas. Moreover, the

Fig. 2 Comparison of statistics (left: mean values; right: standard deviations) of outflows through Stratos Dam (regulated
flows) and naturalized flows, for period 1990–2008.
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 739

PPC is obliged to adjust its control policy of the reliable statistical conclusions (Hughes and Smakhtin
reservoirs, in order to avoid conflicts with local 1996, Palau and Alcázar 2012). Moreover, the flow
society in case of damage due to inundations. In time series should correspond to unmodified condi-
this context, the outflow downstream of Stratos is tions. If the river regime is modified (e.g. due to the
not allowed to exceed the discharge capacity of the installation of large-scale hydraulic structures), the data
penstocks, while the spillway remains—except for have to be adjusted, by “removing” all regulation
very rare cases—out of use (Koutsoyiannis et al. effects (water storage, abstractions, water losses, etc.).
2012). However, this requires keeping empty storage This procedure is commonly referred to as “naturaliza-
in the reservoirs, which is actually inefficient in terms tion”, since the adjusted flows are assumed identical to
of hydroelectric energy management. the flows under natural conditions.
Unfortunately, no hydrometric station exists close
to the Acheloos estuary, to extract the required flow
3.4 Update of the environmental terms of time series at the exact point of interest; the unique
Acheloos hydrosystem flow gauge (Avlaki) is located in the upper course of
The environmental terms for the operation of the the river, 45 km upstream of the Kremasta Dam, and
reservoir system were specified in the mid-1990s controls only 27% of the total basin, i.e. 1358 out of
within the environmental impact assessment (EIA) 5027 km2 (Fig. 1). However, even if a flow record
study of the upper Acheloos project near the outlet was available, it would be necessary to
(Hydroexygiantiki 1995). This was one of the first correct its data, taking into account the operation of
studies in Greece dealing with the estimation of envir- the upstream reservoirs. Therefore, in order to evaluate
onmental flows. Among other things, it envisaged the the flow regime at the estuary, it is essential to extract
maintenance of a seasonally constant minimum flow the naturalized flows at each dam site, by proceeding
of 21.3 m3 s-1, downstream of the Stratos Dam. The from upstream to downstream (in particular, from
above constraint was determined through statistical Kremasta, to Kastraki, to Stratos, and finally to the
analysis of the mean monthly naturalized discharges estuary). In this context, all available hydrological
of the drier month (August). The proposed value information was considered, aiming to provide as
equals the 5-year minimum discharge, i.e. the dis- many reliable estimates as possible. Apart from the
charge with 80% exceedence probability. The study flow time series, outputs of the hydrological analysis
also determined the ecological flow downstream of the were the flow-duration curves at all points of interest,
rest of the dams of the interbasin transfer plan (Fig. 1). which allowed for estimating characteristic quantities
The environmental terms involving the existing on a probabilistic setting.
scheme of works (i.e. Kremasta, Kastraki and
Stratos) were incorporated within the related legisla- 4.2 Reproduction of naturalized flows at
tion only in 2007. In 2009, the PPC appointed a new Kremasta Dam
study (ECOS Consultants 2009; see also Varveris
et al. 2010) to investigate two key issues: (a) the Kremasta reservoir is the key regulator of the hydro-
suitability of the formerly proposed environmental system, due to its great storage capacity. In order to
flow, taking into account the most recent hydrologi- estimate the naturalized runoff of the upstream sub-
cal data as well as the advances in the field, and (b) basin, two types of data were used: (a) daily inflow
the adaptation of the management practices and the volumes for years 1965–2008, and (b) instantaneous
design of the related hydraulic works (if necessary), discharge measurements at the Avlaki station, which
to implement the proposed environmental policy. drains about 40% of the sub-basin of interest (1358
out of 3570 km2). The available record covers 30
years (1965–1994), and contains about 900 discharge
4 HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS values, non-uniformly distributed over time. Sparse
flow measurements close to the Kremasta have also
4.1 Outline of methodology
been employed before the construction of the dam
The investigation of the flow regime of the river is a key (1965), yet these were not accessible.
step of any EFA method, from the simplest to the most The reservoir inflows were directly provided by
sophisticated one. Modern approaches on EFA suggest the PPC. These have been estimated from the water
using flow records of daily or finer time resolution, and balance equation of the reservoir, on a daily basis. In
of length of at least 10 to 20 years, in order to extract particular, the inflow it was computed by accounting for
740 A. Efstratiadis et al.

the storage fluctuation during each day, st – st-1, the The reason for these inconsistencies is the ignor-
amounts of water used in energy production rt and the ance of term et + lt – pt in the water balance equation,
spill losses wt, i.e. together with measurement errors and other uncertain-
ties (e.g. in the stage–storage relationship). In fact,
it ¼ st  st1 þ rt þ wt (3) during the summer period, the evaporation losses may
be as much as 10 mm, which corresponds to 7.0 m3 s-1
of additional inflow, taking into account the large extent
The other water balance components, i.e. areal rainfall pt of the lake (40 to 75 km2). Moreover, the reservoir
and water losses due to evaporation et and leakage lt losses due to leakages are important, since they are
were neglected. However, this approach resulted in sys- estimated to be 6.0 m3 s-1, approximately (seasonal
tematic underestimations of inflows, especially during variations are neglected). This value is also to be con-
the summer period. In particular, the minimum inflow sidered (i.e. added) in the naturalized flows. Finally, the
value was found to be just 1.0 m3 s-1, while the minimum rain falling over the lake should be considered, although
observed value before the construction of the dam was its contribution during the summer months is minor.
18.5 m3 s-1. The inconsistency of the estimated inflows According to the above assumptions, we recal-
is easily proved, by comparing them with the measured culated the water balance equation of Kremasta, to
flows at Avlaki. The comparison is made in statistical obtain a consistent time series of daily inflows for
terms, i.e. by contrasting the two empirical flow-duration the years 1965–2008. The final record was extracted
curves. As shown in Fig. 3, their shapes exhibit signifi- by adding the upstream flows of Tavropos tributary,
cant differences in the low-flow area, which is of key which are diverted through the Plastiras Dam. As
importance for the assessment of the environmental shown in Fig. 3, the updated flow-duration curves
needs. Moreover, about 11% of the flow values at are substantially different from the original esti-
Kremasta are lower than the corresponding measure- mates. The key statistical characteristics of the nat-
ments at Avlaki, which is not realistic. uralized flows are given in Table 2. In particular, the

Fig. 3 Empirical flow-duration curves at Kremasta Dam (raw and corrected sample of mean daily discharges) and Avlaki
station (discharge measurements).
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 741

Table 2 Mean monthly naturalized flows across the more distinguishable than at the daily one, and there-
Acheloos River basin (m3 s-1). fore the calculations of the storage variations, st – st-1,
Plastiras Kremasta Kastraki Stratos Estuary are more accurate). Starting from the monthly inflows
to Kastraki, we estimated the monthly runoff of the
Oct. 2.5 52.4 59.7 62.1 65.2 intermediate sub-basin and the naturalized runoff of
Nov. 5.2 121.2 135.4 140.8 147.8
Dec. 10.0 216.7 239.7 249.3 261.8 the whole sub-basin. Next, for each month of the
Jan. 7.8 182.2 201.2 209.2 219.7 study period we calculated the ratios of the two run-
Feb. 9.5 192.6 215.4 224.0 235.2 off values (i.e. Kastraki runoff/Kremasta runoff),
Mar. 9.6 181.8 197.2 205.1 215.4
Apr. 8.6 179.5 190.3 197.9 207.8 which was assumed representative of the fraction of
May 5.1 112.6 118.7 123.4 129.6 the corresponding daily flows (this assumption is
June 1.8 53.2 57.4 59.7 62.6 reasonable, given that summer flows are not signifi-
July 1.1 32.5 35.9 37.4 39.3
Aug. 0.8 25.0 27.9 29.0 30.4
cantly affected by local flood events). Finally, we
Sep. 0.6 25.7 29.4 30.6 32.1 multiplied the daily flows at Kremasta by the related
Year 5.3 114.3 125.3 130.3 136.9 ratio, to obtain the naturalized flows at Kastraki. On a
mean monthly basis, their values range from 1.06 to
1.17 (the highest values exceed 1.50), while the ratio
mean annual discharge is 114.3 m3 s-1, the mean of the two catchment areas is 1.15. By employing
monthly discharge of the driest month (August) is different values for each month (504 values in total)
25.0 m3 s-1, and the overall minimum value is we accounted for the spatial heterogeneity of runoff,
7.5 m3 s-1. as much as possible. The results are summarized in
Table 2. As shown, the mean annual naturalized
discharge at the dam site is 125.4 m3 s-1 and the
4.3 Estimation of naturalized flows at the other
mean monthly discharge of August is 27.9 m3 s-1.
sites of interest
The most downstream reservoir of Stratos,
The next reservoir, Kastraki, has been in operation which has been in operation since 1989, drains a
since 1969. It receives the outflows of Kremasta and local sub-basin of 202 km2, the contribution of
the runoff of the intermediate sub-basin, which cov- which is minor, if compared to the whole upstream
ers an area of 548 km2. Since no abstractions exist in basin of 4320 km2. Unfortunately, in the specific
the river course between the two dams, and in order reservoir the historical data (lake level and outflows)
to estimate the naturalized flows at Kastraki we add are highly uncertain, thus the establishment of a
the daily runoff of the aforesaid sub-basin to the consistent water balance was impossible, even at the
naturalized flows at Kremasta. monthly time scale. In the absence of any other type
In theory, the runoff generated by the intermedi- of hydrological information, we estimated the daily
ate basin can be estimated by extracting the outflows naturalized flows at the dam site by simply increasing
from Kremasta (i.e. water releases for energy produc- the daily flow time series at Kastraki by 4%. Finally,
tion, abstractions for water supply and spill losses) we employed an additional 5% increase to obtain the
from the regulated inflows to Kastraki, which in turn daily flow sample at the estuary, with total drainage
are estimated by solving the daily water balance area 5027 km2. The two aforementioned ratios were
equation of the reservoir. However, within the daily estimated by taking into account the area of the
time interval, the level fluctuations of Kastraki are upstream basins and their mean annual precipitation,
not accurately represented, thus leading to major thus (inevitably) assuming a homogenous response of
errors is the computation of its inflows. For instance, the two basins to rainfall. In addition, we made the
about 25% of inflow values appear to be negative. empirical assumption that the equivalent runoff depth
Moreover, the correlation of the summer flows with in the lower Acheloos basin is 350 mm, on a mean
the corresponding flows at Kremasta, is as low as annual basis. Under this hypothesis, the mean annual
10%, which is totally unrealistic given that during the naturalized discharge in Stratos is 130.3 m3 s-1
dry period the dominant runoff process is baseflow. (136.9 m3 s-1 at the estuary), and the mean monthly
For this reason we employed an approximate discharge of August is 29.0 m3 s-1 (30.4 m3 s-1 at the
approach using monthly water balance data, which estuary). We note that the heavily modified system
are more accurate since the measurement errors downstream of Stratos is very poorly monitored. In
decrease as the temporal scale increases (in particular, fact, there are no systematic data with regard to
at the monthly time scale the level fluctuations are agricultural abstractions from the river, which could
742 A. Efstratiadis et al.

Table 3 Daily flows for various exceedence probability average monthly discharge of each year (typically, the
values (m3 s-1). lowest flow appears in August and occasionally in
Exceedence September), thus formulating a sample of 42 values.
probability Avlaki Kremasta Kastraki Stratos Estuary Next, we fitted a theoretical statistical distribution to
the sample, in particular the normal one (as shown in
0.99 4.5 11.6 13.2 13.7 14.4
0.98 4.6 13.0 14.4 15.0 15.8 Fig. 4, paradoxically it looks suitable), on the basis of
0.96 4.9 14.6 16.4 17.1 17.9 which we estimated the discharge value that corre-
0.95 5.1 15.4 17.3 18.0 18.9 sponds to a 5-year return period (i.e. 80% exceedence
0.90 6.2 18.6 20.9 21.8 22.8
0.80 9.4 24.7 27.8 29.0 30.4 probability). The 5-year low flow of the driest month
0.70 14.2 33.0 37.0 38.5 40.4 is 21.1 m3 s-1, which is almost identical to the legis-
0.60 21.1 46.4 51.3 53.4 56.1 lative flow constraint (21.3 m3 s-1), which was pro-
0.50 33.8 68.2 74.0 77.0 80.9
0.40 44.6 95.3 102.9 107.0 112.3
posed within the EIA study. This value is equal to
0.30 58.9 129.4 140.2 145.8 153.1 16.2% of the mean annual discharge.
0.20 79.3 173.3 188.2 195.7 205.5
0.10 104.8 244.6 267.4 278.1 292.0
0.05 139.4 343.1 378.3 393.5 413.1
0.02 195.8 537.3 593.3 617.1 647.9
5.2 Calculation of typical hydrological indices
0.01 246.3 734.4 814.9 847.5 889.8
We evaluated a number of indices, which are sum-
marized in Table 5, using the following approaches
of Section 2.2:
be very helpful for improving our estimations at the
estuary, especially during the low-flow period.
Based on the naturalized time series of daily
Tennant method Since the river is heavily mod-
discharge, we implemented a flow-duration analysis,
ified, we applied the MAF ratios that correspond to
at all sites of interest. Table 3 gives the flow values
poor quality conditions, i.e. 10% for the dry period
for characteristic exceedence probabilities, corre-
and 30% for the wet one. Given that the mean annual
sponding to specific time percentiles.

Weibull Normal

5 ESTIMATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL Exceedance probability (%)—scale: Normal distribution

FLOWS
99.95%
99.8%
99.5%

.05%
98%
95%
90%
80%
70%

50%
30%
20%
10%

.5%
.2%
For the estimation of the ecological requirements

5%
2%
downstream of Stratos we employed various EFA 50
approaches, based on the naturalized discharge time
series, averaged at daily, monthly and annual time 45
scales. All calculations herein refer to the dam site. In 40
order to “transfer” the results to the Acheloos estuary,
the corresponding flow values at Stratos should be 35
simply increased by 5%, in order to roughly account 30
for the runoff generated by the local sub-basin.
m3 s-1

25

20
5.1 Estimation of minimum 5-year discharge of
the driest month 15

As mentioned in Section 3.4, this approach was 10

adopted in the EIA study of 1995, within the investi- 5
gations of the operation of the Acheloos diversion
scheme. In the present study, we repeated the calcula- 0

tions, on the basis of the updated monthly discharge Fig. 4 Normal probability plot of minimum monthly flows
time series downstream of Stratos Dam, which extend of Acheloos estuary (dots: empirical probability obtained
over a period of 42 hydrological years (October 1966 using the Weibull plotting position; line: fitted normal
to September 2008). First, we picked up the minimum distribution).
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 743

naturalized discharge in Stratos is 130.3 m3 s-1, the Indices based on flow-duration analysis From
critical flow values are 13.0 and 39.1 m3 s-1, the flow-duration curves at Stratos, we calculated two
respectively. typical flow indices, specifically the Q90 (21.8 m3 s-1)
and the Q364 (11.3 m3 s-1).
French freshwater fishing law Since Stratos
Dam is an existing project, the minimum flow to
5.3 Basic flow method
leave downstream should be 1/40 (2.5%) of the
naturalized mean annual discharge, which is As mentioned in Section 2.3, the BFM has been widely
3.3 m3 s-1. employed for the assessment of environmental flows of
the River Ebro, Spain, the hydrological regime of which
is expected to have similarities with Acheloos.
UK standards for achieving good ecological
Following the typical procedure by Palau and Alcázar
status According to the flow-duration analysis of
(2012), we calculated the moving averages of the nat-
Table 3, the Q95 value in Stratos is 18.0 m3 s-1.
uralized daily flows at Stratos, from 1-day to 100-day
intervals (Fig. 5) and extracted the minimum flow value
Typical practices in Mediterranean countries (Fig. 6). In the specific case, the flow with the largest
In Italy, Spain and Portugal the standard percentages relative increment is the 1-day moving average mini-
are 2.5%, 5.0% and 10% of MAF, which correspond mum. The average of all daily minima, i.e. the basic
to 3.3, 6.5 and 13.0 m3 s-1. flow, for the considered study period (42 years) is

Fig. 5 Logarithmic plot of daily and 100-day moving average time series of Acheloos discharge at Stratos, used within
the BFM.

Fig. 6 Mean annual daily minima for various time intervals, used for the estimation of the basic flow in the context of
the BFM.
744 A. Efstratiadis et al.

13.3 m3 s-1, while the BMF values, which are calculated quantiles of monthly discharge, which are shown in
from equation (1), range from 16.8 m3 s-1 (July) to Fig. 8, and they are used to specify the desirable range
32.5 m3 s-1 (January), following the seasonal variability of monthly outflows through the Stratos reservoir. Other
of the naturalized flows (Fig. 7). Finally, the other two characteristic indicators, related to extreme hydrological
characteristic flows (“bankfull” and “maximum”) were conditions, are given in Table 4.
estimated using different return periods from the origin-
ally proposed. In particular, in order to establish an
artificial flooding plan through Stratos (Section 6.3) 5.5 Wetted perimeter–discharge method
we estimated the maximum daily flow for return peri-
ods 2 and 5 years. We selected five representative cross-sections along
the lower course of Acheloos, with different geome-
trical shapes (triangular, rectangular), where we
employed the maximum curvature approach by
5.4 Range of variability approach
Gippel and Stewardson (1998) to define the lower
We used the IHA/RVA software (version 7.0), devel- breakpoint of each rating curve, on the basis of the
oped by The Nature Conservancy (2009), to evaluate Manning equation. The critical flow over the five
the 32 IHA in the two sites of interest (Stratos and cross-sections ranges from 13.1 to 20.4 m3 s-1.
estuary). The most important are the 25% and 75% These values are reasonable, and within the range

Fig. 7 Logarithmic plot of mean and minimum monthly naturalized flows at Stratos vs basic and basic maintenance flows,
estimated through the BFM.

Fig. 8 Logarithmic plot of mean and minimum monthly naturalized flows at Stratos vs desirable low and high flow limits,
estimated through the RVA.
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 745

Table 4 Characteristic daily flow values at Stratos (m3 s-1), 5-year minimum monthly discharge and the Q90 daily
calculated within the RVA method. discharge, which provide quite conservative estimations.
Mean value Lower limit Upper limit However, the assumption of a constant flow
constraint may not be suitable for Mediterranean
1-day minimum 13.1 10.6 15.6 rivers, which are characterized by substantially dif-
3-day minimum 15.9 12.8 18.9
7-day minimum 17.8 14.1 21.4 ferent hydroclimatic conditions between the wet and
30-day minimum 22.5 17.4 27.6 dry period of the year. For this reason, we suggest
90-day minimum 29.1 23.0 35.1 revising the current environmental terms of the reser-
1-day maximum 1503.1 814.8 2191.3
3-day maximum 1025.5 615.9 1435.1
voir operation, in order to account for the seasonality
7-day maximum 698.0 440.2 955.8 of flows. In this context, we recommend using the
30-day maximum 378.1 262.2 494.0 BFM approach, which is well-documented for the
90-day maximum 272.5 192.8 352.1 River Ebro, Spain. As already mentioned, the Ebro
and Acheloos have many similarities, with regard to
hydroclimatic regime, man-made interventions,
of most of the hydrology-based approaches. This is a environmental value and importance to the national
very important conclusion, since the method only economy. A key advantage of BFM is its parsimony,
uses cross-section geometry, and does not require both in terms of data requirements and computations.
any hydrological information. Moreover, the outcome of the method, i.e. a specific
minimum maintenance flow for each month of the
year, is easy to understand and incorporate within an
6 ESTABLISHMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL environmental policy. In contrast, the RVA method
FLOW REQUIREMENTS provides a wide range of acceptable flows that are not
realistic to implement.
6.1 Evaluation of EFM approaches
The results of each method, in terms of minimum flow
6.2 Adaptation of Stratos outflow policy
targets at the two sites of interest are summarized in
Table 5. The already established constant minimum Until any new environmental flow policy is adopted, it
flow of 21.3 m3 s-1 exceeds the critical values obtained is essential to ensure that the current standard of
by almost all variants of the most representative hydrol- 21.3 m3 s-1 can be technically implemented. Given
ogy-based approaches, as well as the wetted perimeter– that all projects were constructed in past decades, with-
discharge method, employed at five cross-sections out any provision for environmental flows, this is a
downstream of Stratos. This value is very close to the non-trivial engineering problem that requires a

Table 5 Summary of environmental flow requirements at Stratos Dam and Acheloos estuary (flow values in m3 s-1),
estimated by different methods.
Method Stratos Estuary Remarks

5-year minimum monthly flow – 21.3 Legislative constraint, incorporated within outflow
(EIA study, 1995) policy of Stratos reservoir
5-year minimum monthly flow 21.1 22.2 Statistical analysis of annual minimum monthly
(updated data) flows (1965–2008)
Tennant method (10–30% MAF, for 13.0–39.1 13.7–41.1 Poor conditions are assumed since the river system is
dry/wet months) heavily modified
French freshwater fishing law 3.3 3.5 1/40 of mean annual flow is assumed for existing
(2.5% MAF) works
UK standards (Q95) 18.0 18.9 Estimated on the basis of empirical flow-duration
Q90 21.8 22.9 curves of daily flow data
Q364 11.3 11.9
BFM, basic flow (Qb) 13.3 14.0 Estimated through statistical analysis of daily to up to
BFM, basic maintenance flow, seasonally 16.8–32.5 17.6–34.1 100-day moving average flow time series
varying
RVA, 25% quantile of monthly discharge 14.6–135.3 15.3–142.1 Main indicators of hydrological alteration, computed
RVA, 75% quantile of monthly discharge 35.3–390.1 37.1–409.6 by the IHA/RVA 7.0 package
Wetted perimeter–discharge 13.1–20.4 Breakpoint analysis at five characteristic cross-sections,
between Stratos and estuary
746 A. Efstratiadis et al.

technically appropriate and economically efficient solu- hourly). Emphasis is given to the summer period,
tion. Given that the three cascade reservoirs (Kremasta, when three conflicting water uses arise, namely the
Kastraki, Stratos) serve multiple and conflicting water production of hydroelectric energy, the fulfilment of
uses, the incorporation of any new constraint obviously the downstream irrigation demand and the mainte-
increases the complexity of their combined manage- nance of the desirable flow target at the estuary.
ment. In addition, any modification to the actual opera- The area of interest downstream of Stratos Dam is
tion policy requires an agreement between all involved shown in Fig. 9. The system comprises two hydropower
stakeholders (PPC, farmers and local authorities). plants. The major one (Stratos I), with total installed
For convenience, the legislative minimum flow capacity of 150 MW (2 × 75 MW), is located at the
constraint for the Acheloos estuary refers to the loca- right abutment and its discharge capacity is 480 m3 s-1.
tion just downstream of Stratos, given that during the After passing through the turbines, the water is conveyed
summer period the surface runoff generated over the to a tunnel and a trapezoid channel of about 7 km length,
lower course basin is minor (and it may be further before reaching the natural river course. The small plant
reduced due to agricultural abstractions). Previous (Stratos II), with total installed capacity of 6.7 MW
studies, using advanced simulation models (2 × 3.35 MW), is constructed at the left abutment and
(Koutsoyiannis et al. 2002), proved that the applica- its maximum discharge is 45 m3 s-1. During summer, the
tion of the aforementioned constraint, expressed by power plants are put in operation only during the peak
means of constant monthly abstraction from Stratos, energy demand period, typically for 2 h in the morning
is certainly feasible and can be achieved with negli- and 2.5 h in the afternoon. The time of operation is also
gible risk. Therefore, in an operational context, the restricted because, for higher efficiency, it is necessary to
implementation of the environmental flow only operate each turbine as close as possible to its discharge
affects the outflow policy of the most downstream capacity. The outflow scheduling from each plant is
reservoir. Yet, the monthly time step is too rough to determined such as to satisfy the daily irrigation demand
represent all aspects of the real-time operation of the (4 100 000 m3) and the daily environmental demand
reservoir, i.e. the current scheduling of outflows (1 840 000 m3). Details are specified in the technical
through the power plant and the technical constraints study (ECOS 2009).
imposed by the related hydraulic works. For this Under this premise, it is impossible to maintain a
reason, it is essential to investigate the adaptation of steady environmental flow for the entire 24-h period,
the minimum flow constraint at finer time steps (e.g. without additional provisions. In practice, two large-

255 000000000 260 000000000 265 000000000 270 000000000

4 285 000000000

4 285 000000000
4 280 000000000
4 280 000000000

255 000000000 260 000000000 265 000000000 270 000000000

Fig. 9 Overview of the area around Stratos Dam (Source: Hellenic Cadastre).
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 747

scale water releases are made, one in the morning and return periods, namely 2 and 5 years, which are
one in the afternoon, which are propagated along the 1400 and 2000 m3 s-1, respectively (both values
lower course of Acheloos. Evidently, during their refer to the annual maximum discharge at the estu-
travel, the hydrographs are attenuated before arriving ary). We propose to apply the aforementioned flow
at the estuary. However, preliminary hydraulic simu- values once per 1 and 5 years, respectively.
lations indicated that, without additional provisions,
extended parts of the river course remain periodically
7 SYNOPSIS AND DISCUSSION
dry, given that the inflows are intermittent.
To ensure the continuous flow constraint of Regulated river systems are a typical field for appli-
21.3 m3 s-1 along the entire river course, it is essential cation of EFA approaches. Yet, despite the signifi-
to ensure a time-regulation of the upstream hydro- cant progress made towards a holistic overview of
graph, using a suitable storage facility to be con- the problem and the development of a large variety
structed downstream of the dam. The most obvious of sophisticated eco-hydrological tools, their applic-
option is the utilization of the storage in the convey- ability is significantly restricted in cases of limited
ance channel at the end of Stratos I plant, by means data availability and quality. In such cases, hydro-
of sluice gates downstream. Hydraulic simulations logical approaches, which typically seek for a criti-
showed that the storage capacity attained by this cal flow to be maintained along the river, offer the
technique is sufficient. In this manner, ensuring the advantage of parsimony in terms of data require-
environmental flow becomes almost independent of ments and computations. Indeed, the most elemen-
the power production time schedule and environmen- tary of these methods only make use of the mean
tal benefits from the improved ecosystem functioning annual discharge, while the more advanced ones
are gained without any reduction of the economic employ analyses of daily flow time series. The sim-
value of the energy produced. Other technical options plicity of their outcomes is also desirable, given that
were also examined, including the construction of a the latter are to be incorporated within existing
small regulating reservoir or the exploitation of the water management policies.
neighbouring Lake Ozeros, but they were found to be In many countries, the flow standards implied by
substantially more costly. hydrological approaches have been incorporated
within environmental legislation. Their establishment
depends on local hydroclimatic conditions, but it is
also a political issue. Some countries adopt quite
6.3 Artificial flooding
conservative standards (e.g. Q90), while others apply
In recent years, artificial flooding downstream of much more relaxed values (e.g. 1/40 of MAF, in
dams has gained significant attention. It is expected France). It is interesting to remark that although
that the periodic release of large amounts of water such standards are clearly expressed in terms of dis-
(much larger than the usual releases) may help to charge, in the WFD the flow regime is not considered
reverse some of the negative impacts caused due to a primary quality element to assess water bodies (cf.
the interruption of the natural flow regime, which are Acreman and Ferguson 2010), which is, in our opi-
thoroughly reviewed by Petts and Gurnell (2005). nion, unreasonable.
Apart from the physical demarcation of the river, In Greece, the assessment and implementation of
artificial flooding has beneficial effects on the river environmental flows is a very difficult task, due to
geomorphology, the sediment transport, the water data scarcity as well as due to lack of standards.
quality and the ecosystem’s revitalization. In addi- Often, even the most essential hydrological informa-
tion, it discourages illegal occupation and change of tion is hardly available and its quality is many times
use of the wider river bed, which has become very questionable. The case study of Acheloos offers valu-
common as, after the dam operation, people have not able lessons on dealing with real-world systems of
seen it inundated by water for years (Koutsoyiannis high complexity under the aforementioned
et al. 2012). limitations.
In the present study, in addition to the imple- Most papers found in the literature handle EFA
mentation of the minimum flow constraint, we also as a theoretical problem in which the engineering
aimed to establish a plan for artificial flooding point-of-view is missing. A plausible explanation is
through Stratos Dam. In this context, we estimated that the technical aspects of the problem, including
the maximum daily flows for two characteristic the extraction and processing of hydrological data,
748 A. Efstratiadis et al.

are regarded as rather trivial. The case of the conservative approaches. For the future, we recom-
Acheloos proved that this is far from reality. The mend imposing a seasonally varying flow, which can
hardest part of the study was the estimation of the better preserve the eco-hydrological regime of the
naturalized time series along the river. A key step river. Among two well-known methods accounting
was the estimation of the reservoir inflows, by for seasonal variability, i.e. the BFM and the RVA,
solving the water balance equation on a daily the former seems more suitable. For, BFM is well-
basis, which was only possible for the most tested in the Ebro, i.e. a large-scale, heavily modified
upstream reservoir at Kremasta. In Kastraki reser- Mediterranean river, with many similarities to the
voir, this method provided realistic results only at Acheloos. The method also provides guidance for
the monthly time scale, while in the small reservoir artificial flooding, which is a new dimension in mod-
of Stratos it proved impossible to extract a consis- ern environmental policy. On the other hand, the
tent water balance. Therefore, the reliability of the RVA is quite complex, difficult to interpret and thus
water balance approach (which should be the rule, difficult to implement in practice.
in the case of regulated rivers) strongly depends on The wetted perimeter–discharge method, which
scale—it increases with reservoir scale and was employed at five representative cross-sections,
decreases with time scale (apparently, it also provided reasonable results, within the range of most
increases with river scale). Moreover, as we focus hydrological approaches. This is a very positive con-
on low flows, it is important to carefully account clusion, given that such an elementary hydraulic
for the loss components of the reservoir balance, method can be used for a preliminary assessment of
such as evaporation and leakage, the contribution the environmental requirements in areas with a total
of which may be crucial. In general, within any absence of hydrological data.
EFA study, the engineering experience and the The implementation of the legislative restriction
empirical evidence are of major importance, in of minimum flow within the actual management pol-
order to get consistent estimations of the required icy of the Acheloos reservoir system was also a
hydrological magnitudes. challenging engineering task. The system was
The most representative hydrology-based designed and operated for more than 50 years with-
approaches, as well as the wetted perimeter–dis- out any provision for environmental protection. The
charge method, were employed to assess the environ- flow constraint should be streamlined with the exist-
mental flows at the two sites of interest (Stratos Dam ing technical and operational constraints that are
and Acheloos estuary). These provided a wide range involved in the real-time operation of the system.
of results, in terms of critical flows or allowable Given that the primary objective is the production
range of them. In the absence of standards, based of peak hydroelectric energy, the maintenance of a
on the systematic observation of biological para- continuous discharge downstream of Stratos is not
meters under different flow conditions, it is impossi- desirable. However, it is feasible to fulfil the envir-
ble to make a proper evaluation of them. In this onmental and irrigation demand at the daily scale,
respect, the collection of systematic biological data through an effective scheduling of outflows.
is an essential task, in order to provide more compre- Preliminary hydraulic analysis indicated that it is
hensive environmental flow standards. However, possible to take advantage of the storage capacity of
such data, if ever obtained, will only be usable in the channel downstream of the dam, in order to
the long run. A promising solution for such data- regulate the outflows and ensure the desirable con-
scarce areas, as proposed by Arthington et al. tinuous flow in the estuary.
(2006), is to take advantage of flow–ecological The next research step will be the optimization
response relationships, obtained by calibrating the of the overall water resource system, including the
flow standards with biological data in well-monitored complex irrigation network in the lower course of
rivers, which could be classified in terms of some Acheloos. At least two levels of analysis should be
characteristic hydrological indices. In this context, adopted, i.e. a strategic one, for the derivation of the
the assessment of environmental flows will be long-term management policy, and an operational
based not on the hydrological data themselves, but one, for the real-time control of the system.
on the hydrological classification of each specific
river. Acknowledgements We are grateful to the ECOS
At present, a constant flow is established for the Consultants SA, for their collaboration within the
Acheloos River, which fits the outcomes of the most elaboration of the technical study. We also thank P.
 Assessment of environmental flows under limited data availability 749

Tsira and A. Koukouvinos, for their useful com- Harman, C. and Stewardson, M.J., 2005. Optimizing dam release
ments, as well as Y. Kouvopoulos, Head of the rules to meet environmental flow targets. Rivers Research and
Applications, 21, 113–129.
Hydrology Department of PPC, for his collaboration. Hughes, D.A. and Smakhtin, V., 1996. Daily flow time series patch-
We are grateful to the Guest Editor M. C. Acreman ing or extension: a spatial interpolation approach based on flow
and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive duration curves. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 41 (6),
851–871.
suggestions, which helped us to substantially Hydroexygiantiki, S.A., 1995. Integrated study of the environmen-
improve the paper. tal impacts from Acheloos diversion. Athens: Directorate for
Acheloos Diversion Works, General Secretariat of Public
Works, Ministry of Environment, Planning and Public
Works.
REFERENCES Jager, H.I. and Smith, B.T., 2008. Sustainable reservoir operation:
can we generate hydropower and preserve ecosystem values?
Acreman, M.C. and Dunbar, M.J., 2004. Defining environmental
River Research and Applications, 24 (3), 340–352.
river flow requirements—a review. Hydrology and Earth
Kennard, M.J., et al., 2010. Quantifying uncertainty in estimation of
System Sciences, 8, 861–876.
hydrologic metrics for ecohydrological studies. River Research
Acreman, M.C. and Ferguson, J.D., 2010. Environmental flows and
and Applications, 26, 137–156.
the European Water Framework Directive. Freshwater Biology,
Koutsoyiannis, D., 2011. Scale of water resources development and
55 (1), 32–48.
sustainability: small is beautiful, large is great. Hydrological
Acreman, M.C., et al., 2008. Developing environmental standards
Sciences Journal, 56 (4), 553–575.
for abstractions from UK rivers to implement the EU Water
Koutsoyiannis, D., 2012. Water control in the Greek cities [online].
Framework Directive. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 53 (6),
Water Systems and Urbanization in Africa and Beyond,
1105–1120.
Uppsala, Sweden, Solicited Talk. Available from: http://itia.
Alcázar, J., Palau, A., and Vega-Garcia, C., 2008. A neural net model
ntua.gr/1195/ [Accessed 28 December 2013].
for environmental flow estimation at the Ebro River Basin,
Koutsoyiannis, D., Efstratiadis, A., and Karavokiros, G., 2002. A
Spain. Journal of Hydrology, 349 (1–2), 44–55.
decision support tool for the management of multi-reservoir
Argirakis, I., 2009. Exploitation of hydroelectric stations as multipur-
systems. Journal of the American Water Resources
pose works. In: Contribution of hydroelectric works to the energy
Association, 38 (4), 945–958.
planning of the country [online]. Workshop, Technical Chamber
Koutsoyiannis, D., et al., 2012. Floods in Greece. In: Z.W.
of Greece (TEE) and Peripheral Department of Epirus, Ioannina.
Kundzewicz, ed. Changes of flood risk in Europe
Available from: library.tee.gr/digital/m2380/m2380_argirakis.pdf
Wallingford: IAHS Press, 238–256.
[Accessed 28 December 2013]. (in Greek).
The Nature Conservancy, 2009. Indicators of hydrologic alteration
Arthington, A.H., et al., 2006. The challenge of providing environ-
version 7.1 user’s manual [online]. Available from: http://
mental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecological
www.conservationgateway.org/Files/Pages/indicators-hydrologic-
Applications, 16 (4), 1311–1318.
altaspx47.aspx [Accessed 28 December 2013].
Babel, M.S., et al., 2012. Operation of a hydropower system con-
Palau, A. and Alcázar, J., 1996. The basic flow: an alternative approach
sidering environmental flow requirements: a case study in La
to calculate minimum environmental instream flows. In:
Nga river basin, Vietnam. Journal of Hydro-Environment
Proceedings of 2nd international symposium on habitats hydrau-
Research, 6 (1), 63–73.
lics. Ecohydraulics 2000, Quebec, Vol. A, 547–558.
Beilfuss, R., 2010. Modelling trade-offs between hydropower gen-
Palau, A. and Alcázar, J., 2012. The basic flow method for incorpor-
eration and environmental flow scenarios: a case study of the
ating flow variability in environmental flows. River Research
Lower Zambezi River Basin, Mozambique. International
and Applications, 28, 93–102.
Journal of River Basin Management, 8 (3–4), 331–347.
Pérez-Díaz, J.I. and Wilhelmi, J.R., 2010. Assessment of the economic
Brisbane Declaration, 2007. 10th international river symposium and
impact of environmental constraints on short-term hydropower
environmental flows conference, 2007 [online]. Available from:
plant operation. Energy Policy, 38 (12), 7960–7970.
http://www.eflownet.org/download_documents/brisbane-
Petts, G.E., 2009. Instream flow science for sustainable river man-
declaration-english.pdf [Accessed 28 December 2013].
agement. Journal of the American Water Resources
Christofides, A., et al., 2005. Resolving conflicting objectives in the
Association, 45 (5), 1071–1086.
management of the Plastiras Lake: can we quantify beauty?
Petts, G.E. and Gurnell, A.M., 2005. Dams and geomorphology: research
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 9 (5), 507–515.
progress and future directions. Geomorphology, 71, 27–47.
Davies, J.K., 1996. Deconstructing Gortyn: when is a code a code?
Renöfält, B.M., Jansson, R., and Nilsson, S., 2010. Effects of hydro-
In: L. Foxhall and A.D.E. Lewis, eds. Greek law in its political
power generation and opportunities for environmental flow
setting: justifications not justice. Oxford: Oxford University
management in Swedish riverine ecosystems. Freshwater
Press, 33–56.
Biology, 55 (1), 49–67.
ECOS Consultants SA, 2009. Specific technical study for the ecological
Richter, B.D., et al., 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic
flow through Stratos Dam. Athens: Public Power Corporation.
alteration within ecosystems. Conservation Biology, 10,
Efstratiadis, A. and Hadjibiros, K., 2011. Can an environment-
1163–1174.
friendly management policy improve the overall performance
Richter, B.D., et al., 1997. How much water does a river need?
of an artificial lake? Analysis of a multipurpose dam in Greece.
Freshwater Biology, 37, 231–249.
Environmental Science and Policy, 14 (8), 1151–1162.
Richter, B.D. and Thomas, G.A., 2007. Restoring environmental flows
Fourniotis, N.T., 2012. A proposal for impact evaluation of the
by modifying dam operations. Ecology and Society, 12 (1), 12.
diversion of the Acheloos River on the Acheloos estuary in
Shamir, E., et al., 2013. Geomorphology-based index for detecting
Western Greece. International Journal of Engineering Science
minimal flood stages in arid alluvial streams. Hydrology and
and Technology, 4 (4), 1792–1802.
Earth System Sciences, 17, 1021–1034.
Gippel, C.J. and Stewardson, M.J., 1998. Use of wetted perimeter in
Smakhtin, V.U., 2001. Low flow hydrology: a review. Journal of
defining minimum environmental flows. Regulated Rivers:
Hydrology, 240, 147–186.
Research and Management, 14, 53–67.
750 A. Efstratiadis et al.

Smakhtin, V.U., Shilpakar, R.L., and Hugues, D.A., 2006. Hydrology- Tharme, R.E., 2003. A global perspective on environmental flow
based assessment of environmental flows: an example from assessment: emerging trends in the development and applica-
Nepal. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 51 (2), 207–222. tion of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River
Suen, J.-P., 2011. Determining the ecological flow regime for exist- Research and Applications, 19, 397–441.
ing reservoir operation. Water Resources Management, 25 (3), Varveris, A., et al., 2010. Assessment of environmental flows of
818–835. Acheloos Delta [online]. European Geosciences Union General
Suen, J.P. and Eheart, J.W., 2006. Reservoir management to balance Assembly 2010, Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 12,
ecosystem and human needs: incorporating the paradigm of the Vienna, 12046, European Geosciences Union. Available from:
ecological flow regime. Water Resources Research, 42 (3), http://itia.ntua.gr/963/ [Accessed 28 December 2013].
W03417. Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC, 2000. Establishing a frame-
Tennant, D.L., 1976. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recrea- work for community action in the field of water policy. Official
tion and related environmental resources. Fisheries, 1 (4), 6–10. Journal of the European Communities, L327.