Chapter 34

Potential Impact of Climate Change

on Surface Water and Groundwater
Interactions in Lower Reaches of Ganges
River, India

Syed Aaquib Hussain, Kousik Das, Soumendra Nath Bhanja

and Abhijit Mukherjee

Abstract Present projections of climate change scenario show an increase in

global temperature and CO2 content, which have indirect impacts on surface water
flow, but rainfall has direct impacts on surface run-off and groundwater storage
system. This study investigates the effect of climate change on aquifer storage and
surface run-off, and interactions with the river Bhagirathi-Hooghly, the lowermost
reach of Ganges River in Indian state of West Bengal, by considering changes in
rainfall events from 1999 to 2013. From time series analyses, it has been shown that
there is a linear decreasing trend of rainfall in the selected study area in Nadia
district of West Bengal. It has been shown that baseflow to the river has an inverse
relation with rainfall, which indicates that higher rainfall events relate to the low
baseflow and lower rainfall will relate to the higher baseflow with a correlation
coefficient of −0.74. The direct effect of climate change induced through precipi-
tation indicates that the total run-off in the river is decreasing with time which
causes stresses on groundwater.

Keywords Climate change
GW–SW interaction
Rainfall
Run-off

Sea level rise

S. A. Hussain
S. N. Bhanja
A. Mukherjee (&)

Department of Geology and Geophysics, Institute of Technology (IIT)—Kharagpur,
Kharagpur 721302, West Bengal, India
e-mail: [email protected]
K. Das
A. Mukherjee
School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Indian Institute
of Technology (IIT)—Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721302, West Bengal, India
A. Mukherjee
Applied Policy Advisory to Hydrogeosciences Group, Indian Institute
of Technology (IIT)—Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721302, West Bengal, India

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 583

A. Mukherjee (ed.), Groundwater of South Asia, Springer Hydrogeology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3889-1_34
584 S. A. Hussain et al.

34.1 Introduction

According to the IPCC (2007a), climate change can significantly affect the
groundwater and surface water bodies. It can cause a widespread sea level rise,
inversions in precipitations, increase in temperature, ice and snow melting and
increase in frequency and magnitude of extreme weather such as heat waves, floods
and droughts (IPCC 2007a, b; USGS 2007; Bates et al. 2008; Gurdak et al. 2009;
Ludwig et al. 2014). Increase in temperature and evapotranspiration, coupled with
decreasing rainfall, prolonged and excruciating drought, causes a scarcity of water
resources (Schewe et al. 2014). These worldwide changes of climate extremes are
revealing the requirement of integrated water resource (both groundwater and
surface water) management practices for future water security (Taylor et al. 2013).
Over the past decades, several studies have examined the potential impacts of
global warming on surface water resources, but there is a paucity of studies do
exists for assessing the interactions between groundwater and climate change.
Change in pattern of climatic components can influence groundwater, both directly
through replenishment by recharge and indirectly through change in groundwater
use and interactions. Therefore, conjunctive management of groundwater–surface
water in response to climate change is required that needs the understanding of the
intricately linked groundwater and surface water processes. It also involves the
exact quantification of baseflow (groundwater discharged to surface water bodies
like rivers, streams) component. Groundwater is a vital water resource for global
water and food security especially in regions with limited water supplies (Bovolo
et al. 2009). Moreover, groundwater is relatively clean and more reliable than
surface water as it can be extracted in period of dry seasons and is less polluted than
surface water (Kundzewicz and Doll 2009).
The cyclic and noncyclic changes in the water level of surface water adjoining a
permeable aquifer create a differential hydraulic gradient (e.g. wave, tidal and
subtidal pumping) (Miller and Ullman 2004), which influences the flow dynamics
of groundwater.
Groundwater–surface water interactions have been assessed experimentally in
different physiographic settings such as mountain, riverine, coastal and karst ter-
rains (Correll et al. 1992; Harte and Winter 1993; Smerdon et al. 2005; Stark et al.
1994; Winter and Rosenberry 1995), leading to development of conceptual models
for groundwater–surface water exchange. Here, we have quantified the baseflow
component in total river flow and tried to delineate the influence of change in
rainfall pattern on baseflow component. More related information regarding
groundwater of South Asia is available in Mukherjee (2018).
34 Potential Impact of Climate Change on Surface Water … 585

34.2 Study Area

The study has been conducted in the river reach of Bhagirathi-Hooghly at Nadia
district, West Bengal, India (Chap. 1, Fig. 1.1; Fig. 34.1). The river reach con-
sidered here has a length of approximately 150 km. Nadia is mostly located within
fluvio-deltaic plain. The soil character along the flood plains is fine silt and loamy;
especially along the river, it is fine to coarse loamy soil (C-DAP 2014). The
geology of the Nadia district shows the presence of a major subsurface fault lying
along the river’s left bank from Krishnanagar to Kalyani (C-DAP 2014). The
climate of Nadia is characterized by a hot summer, high humidity all around the
year, well-distributed rainfall during the monsoon. The winter sets in the middle of
November and continues till the end of February. The rainfall during the monsoon
months from June to September constitutes about 78% of the annual rainfall (AFR
2014). Maximum rainfall occurs in the month of July–August. Temperature ranges
from 27 to 42 °C (minimum to maximum) with a maximum humidity of 96%
(C-DAP 2014).

Fig. 34.1 a Depicts the terrain view of the study location of river Bhagirathi-Hooghly.
b Represents the spatial location at river Bhagirathi-Hooghly at Nadia district where baseflow has
been computed. c Represents the rainfall distribution pattern of Nadia district from 1999 to 2013
586 S. A. Hussain et al.

34.3 Methodology

34.3.1 Baseflow Calculation

The hydrograph separation method is used here for computing baseflow through the
selection of analytical expression, derivation of the characteristic flood hydrograph
and optimization of the run-off-related parameters. Using river stage data from the
river reaches of Ganges over the period of 15 years (1999–2013), the annual run-off
and baseflow components are computed. The baseflow is the component which is
minutely affected by the seasonal variations that are taking place due to the changes
in the amount of precipitation received over a period of time. To find the
groundwater fraction (baseflow component) in the total river flow, the river
geometry, flow velocity and the river stage data have been used. The discharge
across the river cross-sectional area is being plotted against the Julian day to get the
flood hydrograph curve and the technique of baseflow separation from the total
streamflow component. Then, the area under the hydrograph and under the base-
flow recession curve is separately calculated in MATLAB 2014b. The area fraction
would provide the contribution from the baseflow component in the total river flow
(Fig. 34.2).

Fig. 34.2 Time series of total river flow and baseflow rates (m3/yr)
34 Potential Impact of Climate Change on Surface Water … 587

34.4 Results and Discussions

34.4.1 Baseflow Variation

Baseflow component in selected river reaches is found to be highest (0.59) in 2012

with a mean value of 0.40 within the study period (Fig. 34.2). There is an
approximate increasing linear trend of baseflow component for the selected time
series of year 1999–2013. It is found that baseflow contributes 26–51% of total
river water volume.
The groundwater fraction (baseflow) has also been plotted against rainfall for the
period of 1999–2013 (Fig. 34.3). It was observed that the baseflow fraction in
the total river flow is a bit high considering that the stream continues to receive the
groundwater discharge even through the duration of the overland flow peak (Fetter
2000). Substantial amount of total run-off is comprised of interflow and rest of
overland flow. Due to changes in precipitation and temperature, there is an over-
burden on the aquifers to meet the future water demands.

Fig. 34.3 Time series of mean annual rainfall and baseflow fraction
588 S. A. Hussain et al.

34.4.2 Rainfall Variation

The amount of rainfall received over the period of 15 years (1999–2013) in that
particular river reach is shown in Fig. 34.3. Highest rainfall data was recorded as
1974.4 mm in 1999. The mean rainfall value for the study period is 1318.7 mm; it
shows a linear decreasing trend for the selected time periods.
The year-wise data shows that the baseflow fraction in the river has an inverse
relation with rainfall. It indicates that higher rainfall events are associated with the low
baseflow fraction and vise versa. The correlation can also be obtained among the
amount of rainfall received each year and the baseflow fraction in the river drainage
flow. The correlation coefficient is calculated to be −0.74 (statistically significant with
p values <0.01). The overlap is being plotted (Fig. 34.3) to show that rainfall received
is inversely proportional to the amount of baseflow fraction each year. In 2012, with
minimum annual rainfall of 381.3 mm, surface water in selected river reaches might
be enriched from the groundwater discharge which indicates that besides withdrawal
of groundwater for industrial, domestic and agricultural purposes, groundwater is also
discharged to river stream as baseflow, which can create stress to groundwater storage.
It was also observed that with lower rainfall, the baseflow rate increases for the first
6 years from 1999–2004 showing a negative correlation of −0.96 and then for the
next 9 years, with only exception in 2012, the baseflow rate more or less decreased
with lower rainfall showing a positive correlation coefficient of 0.85 (Fig. 34.4).

Fig. 34.4 Time series of mean annual rainfall and baseflow rate
34 Potential Impact of Climate Change on Surface Water … 589

In recent trends of global warming, water scarcity is affecting river water flow.
According to the IPCC (2007a), temperature rising and atmospheric carbon dioxide
affect river water directly, but rainfall is affecting the flow of river indirectly.
Reduction in rainfall also affects the groundwater recharge. It gives an insight that
there is a delegate balance between rainfall, groundwater recharge and baseflow to
river.

34.4.3 Impact of Climate Change on Surface Water

and Groundwater

The direct effects on the surface water through the changes of the long-term climate
variables, such as precipitation, indicate that the total river flow in the river reaches
of Bhagirathi-Hooghly at Nadia district is decreasing (total area under the flood
hydrograph).
There was an intricate relationship between groundwater recharge and river
water flow. The inverse relationship between rainfall event and baseflow fraction
can be used as an effective predictor for change in groundwater storage. In previous
studies, it has been reported that baseflow or groundwater fraction is also related to
the atmospheric temperature change implicitly. It is also a fact that increase in
temperature can increase the water vapour capacity of the air and the evaporation
rate which in turn can reduce the groundwater recharge and baseflow as well
(Cooper et al. 2015).
The contribution of groundwater to river flow can be identified from the stable
isotopic compositions of water. At the global climate change scenario, sea level is
rising up to 3.2 mm/year (IPCC 2007a). At different locations along the river reach
in Nadia, the d18O values of groundwater samples range from −3.1 to −6.1‰,
while in the river water samples of Bhagirathi-Hooghly, d18O values vary from
−5.6 to −5.7‰ and are found to be more depleted than the Ichamati samples, with
d18O values of −3.0 to −0.4‰ (Mukherjee et al. 2007). From the stable isotopic
composition, it can be revealed that the groundwater is mixing with the surface
water, as the d18O value of river water is moderately high that cannot be attained
without having groundwater contribution from deep down subsurface. Also, the
elevated heavier isotopic composition of groundwater might be attributed due to the
salt water intrusion into the coastal aquifers that has resulted as an effect of sea level
rise. But SLR trend in the Bay of Bengal (BoB), near the mouth of
Bhagirathi-Hooghly river is 4.67 mm/year, which is higher than normal predicted
rate or rise (NOAA: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_global_
station.htm?stnid=500-131). These are some of the attributes of climatic variabil-
ity leading to the disturbance at the entire land–water interface. The mouth of
Bhagirathi-Hooghly River has been considered as one of the major sources of
nutrient transport to the BoB, which may have major contribution to the ocean
water ecosystem of BoB. Hence, climate change impacts and human interventions
590 S. A. Hussain et al.

are causing reduction in groundwater storage and surface water discharge to the
BoB which can disrupt the ocean ecosystem.

34.5 Conclusion

This study has explicitly demonstrated the impacts of climate change on ground-
water stress and linked the yearly rainfall pattern to the groundwater–surface water
interaction. The higher rainfall increased the surface run-off drastically but reduced
the baseflow fraction and has an inverse, statistically significant relationship with
baseflow fraction with a correlation coefficient of −0.74. Also, due to climate
change, glaciers are melting that sustains the river water flow and reduces the
baseflow rate into the river. It should be noted that increasing stress on groundwater
due to climate change or due to anthropogenic activities may result in groundwater
pollution and reduction of groundwater discharge.

References

AFR (Annual Flood Report) (2014) Irrigation and waterways directorate. Government of West
Bengal
Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Wu S, Palutikof J (eds) (2008) Climate change and water technical
paper of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change Secretary, Geneva, Switzerland
Bovolo CI, Parkin G, Sophocleous M (2009) Groundwater resources, climate and vulnerability.
Environ Res Lett 4:035001
C-DAP (2014) Comprehensive district agriculture plan for Nadia District, pp 1–10
Cooper DJ, Wolf EC, Ronayne MJ, Roche JW (2015) Effects of groundwater pumping on the
sustainability of a mountain wetland complex, vol 3. Yosemite National Park, California,
pp 87–105
Correll DL, Jordan TE, Weller DE (1992) Nutrient flux in a landscape: effects of coastal land use
and terrestrial community mosaic on nutrient transport to coastal waters. Estuaries 15(4):
431–442
Fetter CW (2000) Applied hydrogeology, 4th edn, pp 37–48
Gurdak JJ, Hanson RT, Green TT (2009) Effects of climate variability and change on groundwater
resources. U.S. Geological Survey, Fact sheet, Sept:3074
Harte PT, Winter TC (1993) Factors affecting recharge to crystalline rock in the Mirror Lake area,
Grafton County, New Hampshire, paper presented at USGS toxic substances hydrology
program—Proceedings of the technical meeting. Colorado Springs, Colorado, 20–24 Sept
IPCC (2007a) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to
the fourth assessment report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York
IPCC (2007b) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of
working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate
change. Cambridge University Press
Kundzewicz ZW, Doll P (2009) Will groundwater ease freshwater stress under climate change?
Hydrogeological Sci J 54(4):665–675
34 Potential Impact of Climate Change on Surface Water … 591

Ludwig F, van Slobbe E, Cofino W (2014) Climate change adaptation and integrated water
resource management in the water sector. J Hydrol 518:235–242
Miller DC, Ullman WJ (2004) Ecological consequences of groundwater discharge to Delaware
Bay, United States. Ground Water 42:959–970
Mukherjee A (2018) Groundwater of South Asia. Springer, Singapore. ISBN 978-981-10-3888-4
Mukherjee A, Fryar AE, Rowe HD (2007) Regional-scale stable isotopic signatures of recharge
and deep groundwater in the arsenic affected areas of West Bengal, India. 334:151–161
Schewe J, Heinke J, Gerten D, Haddeland I, Arnell NW, Clark DB et al (2014) Multimodel
assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proc Nat Acad Sci U.S.A. 111:3245–3250
Smerdon B, Devito K, Mendoza C (2005) Interaction of groundwater and shallow lakes on
outwash sediments in the sub-humid Boreal Plains of Canada. J Hydrol 314(1):246–262
Stark J, Armstrong D, Zwilling D (1994) Stream-aquifer interactions in the straight river area,
Becker and Hubbard Counties, Minnesota, US Geological Survey. Water-resources investi-
gations report: 94-4009
Taylor RG et al (2013) Ground water and climate change. Nat Clim Change 3(4):322–329
USGS (2007) Climate variability and change. U.S. Geological Survey, Fact sheet 2007–3108
Winter TC, Rosenberry DO (1995) The interaction of ground water with prairie pothole wetlands
in the Cottonwood Lake area, East-Central North Dakota, 1979–1990. Wetlands 15(3):
193–211