the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
| 02 Oct 2024
The 2018–2023 drought in Berlin: impacts and analysis of the perspective of water resources management
Abstract. The years 2018 to 2023 were characterised by extreme hydrometeorological conditions, with record-high average annual air temperatures and record-low annual precipitation, affecting the hydrogeological and hydrological conditions in Berlin and the catchments of its tributaries, mainly the Spree and Obere Havel. To combat the impact of the drought, various water resources management measures were implemented in Berlin and the Spree and Obere Havel catchments.
We analysed observed and modelled time series of hydrometeorological, hydrogeological and hydrological variables in Berlin and the Spree and Obere Havel catchments to characterise the years 2018–2023 also in comparison with long-term averages.
We found that the meteorological drought propagated into soil moisture drought and hydrological drought, e.g. in terms of record-low groundwater and surface water levels and streamflow, with smaller rivers drying up. Due to the intensity and duration of the drought, water resources management was only able to partially counteract the drought situation, so that water use was partially limited, e.g. in terms of shipping. Enhanced proportions of sewage water and reverse flow were associated with detectable concentrations of trace substances. However, Berlin’s water supply was always guaranteed and represents a stable system.
Climate change is expected to lead to more frequent meteorological droughts, which will have more severe hydrological impacts in the future due to socioeconomic changes in Berlin (increasing population) and the catchments (termination of mining discharges). Therefore, water resource management in the Spree and Obere Havel catchments and in Berlin needs to be adapted to combat such situations, taking into account the lessons learned from the 2018–2023 drought and possible future developments.
- Preprint
(1008 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(353 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-187', Samar Momin, 17 Oct 2024
This review is concerned with the paper titled "The 2018-2023 drought in Berlin: impacts and analysis of the perspective of water resources management":
General Comments:
The paper presents an in-depth and comprehensive study of the 2018-2023 drought in Berlin, focusing on the hydrometeorological, hydrogeological, and water resource management aspects. It effectively addresses the challenges posed by prolonged droughts and provides an analysis of the effectiveness of water management strategies in Berlin and its surrounding catchments, specifically the Spree and Obere Havel catchments.
The title accurately reflects the content, and the abstract offers a clear summary of the objectives, methodology, and findings. The manuscript is well-structured, with clear sectioning that guides the reader through the complex processes discussed.
The figures and tables provide valuable visual data, supporting the analysis, and are of high quality. The manuscript is also well-referenced, with appropriate credit given to previous studies. Overall, the paper offers significant scientific contributions in the context of water resource management under drought conditions, making it relevant for both regional and broader applications in the face of climate change.
Specific Comments:
- Comparative Analysis with Other Drought Events: The study focuses primarily on the 2018-2023 drought. It would help to add (one) more comparison(s) with other significant drought event(s), either in Berlin’s history or in other regions with similar climatic conditions.
-
Future Projections and Climate Change: The paper does a good job addressing future climate change impacts on water availability. It would help if the authors could elaborate on this section to include more specific projections that could provide clearer guidance for water resource management planning.
Technical Comments:
-
Grammar and Style:
- The manuscript is mostly well-written, but some sentences could be simplified for clarity. Some sentences are overly long and could benefit from being split to improve readability.
- Line 84: 9.7 C should be 9.7°C
- Line 240: "The hydrological summers of 2018 and 2022 showed higher temperatures (17.6 °C and 17.0°°C)" — revise the double "°" symbol.
-
Figure Captions:
- The figures are informative, but the captions could be expanded to better explain the relevance of the data presented. For example, Figures 8 & 9.
-
In-text Citations:
- There are minor inconsistencies in the citation format throughout the manuscript. Ensuring that all references follow a consistent style would improve the presentation of the paper.
-
Clarification on Data Availability:
- Some of the data sources, are not publicly available. It would be helpful to specify if this data can be accessed under certain conditions or if it remains confidential.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-187-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Ina Pohle, 16 Dec 2024
We would like to thank the reviewer for the overall positive assessment of our manuscript.
The reviewer’s comments provided constructive feedback and valuable suggestions, which we look forward to take into account in the revision process.
Please refer to individual comments in the attached file.
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-187', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Nov 2024
General comments:
The study by Pohle et al. comprises a multi-disciplinary and transdisciplinary case study on multiple drought indicators and impacts on different compartments and management territories of a large city, in this study the German capital Berlin. The study analysed the extreme drought conditions during the years 2018-2023 using a wide data spectrum ranging from classical meteorological data, water level of nearby reservoirs and lakes, stream flow data of two large rivers relevant for the city, groundwater series, modelled soil moisture data and sewage water discharge amounts and water quality data.
The multi-data approach alone makes this article to stand out as it rare to find drought studies that carry out a combined analysis of a whole range of meteorological, hydrological, hydrogeological and surface-water quality data specifically for urban settings. The result chapter presents the deficit aspects of the various compartments in turn, followed by a thorough discussion on the form of drought propagation and a projection for the future, when drought conditions may not be an exceptional and atypical behaviour, but a new normal. The discussion ends with a comprehensive list of how a large city such as the capital Berlin would be affected by such a drastic change of water availability, taking into consideration a wide range of management aspects for drinking water supply, surface water quality deterioration, and the potential need for a drought management plan. I very much liked this study and suggest publication with minor correction.Specific comments:
I have four specific comments, where the authors may consider to implement them to enhance the presentation of the topic:1. Case study character: you may want to add in the abstract, the introduction and the conclusion that the city of Berlin was selected as a case study to show the diversity of indicators, drought impacts and management questions relevant for large cities. Specifically the abstract and conclusion makes it very difficult to orientate on where this study is ‘playing’, especially for readers outside of Europe.
2. Drought propagation: The presentation of the drought propagation across compartments should get a more prominent place in your results or discussion section, and I suggest to move the visualisation S7 from the supplement into the main part of the paper, as the entire section 5.1 is actually refer to it.
3. Drought indicators: could you please comment why you haven’t used the rather standard rainfall deficit indicator SPI or SPEI to relate the change of meteorological, hydrological etc. droughts? It might be a whole new set of analysis, overlaying the rainfall based deficit analysis and the ‘real’ data analysis (e.g. SPI-6 for hydrological drought versus low discharge levels actually measured in the rivers) and beyond the scope of this study.
4. Urban vegetation and plant water availability: lots of different aspects of drought impacts were mentioned (drinking water supply, ship transport, water quality, cooling for energy production), but water demand for urban green was not included, why?
Technical comments:
Line 8ff: add that this is a case study of Berlin, and that the period 2018-2023 was a drought period within central Europe and/or Eastern Germany.Line 39: Berlin’s drinking water supply was introduced here quite abruptly; maybe inform first, that drought impacts are studied for this city in general.
Line 55: change references to normal standards
Line 181: specify what you mean with ‘for grass and sand’
Line 360: where is the origin of this data described – missing in 3.1? Please also provide detailed references to the other data sets, e.g. WSA does not appear in the list of reference.
Line 360: Figure 8 needs better resolution
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-187-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Ina Pohle, 16 Dec 2024
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on nhess-2024-187', Samar Momin, 17 Oct 2024
This review is concerned with the paper titled "The 2018-2023 drought in Berlin: impacts and analysis of the perspective of water resources management":
General Comments:
The paper presents an in-depth and comprehensive study of the 2018-2023 drought in Berlin, focusing on the hydrometeorological, hydrogeological, and water resource management aspects. It effectively addresses the challenges posed by prolonged droughts and provides an analysis of the effectiveness of water management strategies in Berlin and its surrounding catchments, specifically the Spree and Obere Havel catchments.
The title accurately reflects the content, and the abstract offers a clear summary of the objectives, methodology, and findings. The manuscript is well-structured, with clear sectioning that guides the reader through the complex processes discussed.
The figures and tables provide valuable visual data, supporting the analysis, and are of high quality. The manuscript is also well-referenced, with appropriate credit given to previous studies. Overall, the paper offers significant scientific contributions in the context of water resource management under drought conditions, making it relevant for both regional and broader applications in the face of climate change.
Specific Comments:
- Comparative Analysis with Other Drought Events: The study focuses primarily on the 2018-2023 drought. It would help to add (one) more comparison(s) with other significant drought event(s), either in Berlin’s history or in other regions with similar climatic conditions.
-
Future Projections and Climate Change: The paper does a good job addressing future climate change impacts on water availability. It would help if the authors could elaborate on this section to include more specific projections that could provide clearer guidance for water resource management planning.
Technical Comments:
-
Grammar and Style:
- The manuscript is mostly well-written, but some sentences could be simplified for clarity. Some sentences are overly long and could benefit from being split to improve readability.
- Line 84: 9.7 C should be 9.7°C
- Line 240: "The hydrological summers of 2018 and 2022 showed higher temperatures (17.6 °C and 17.0°°C)" — revise the double "°" symbol.
-
Figure Captions:
- The figures are informative, but the captions could be expanded to better explain the relevance of the data presented. For example, Figures 8 & 9.
-
In-text Citations:
- There are minor inconsistencies in the citation format throughout the manuscript. Ensuring that all references follow a consistent style would improve the presentation of the paper.
-
Clarification on Data Availability:
- Some of the data sources, are not publicly available. It would be helpful to specify if this data can be accessed under certain conditions or if it remains confidential.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-187-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Ina Pohle, 16 Dec 2024
We would like to thank the reviewer for the overall positive assessment of our manuscript.
The reviewer’s comments provided constructive feedback and valuable suggestions, which we look forward to take into account in the revision process.
Please refer to individual comments in the attached file.
-
RC2: 'Comment on nhess-2024-187', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Nov 2024
General comments:
The study by Pohle et al. comprises a multi-disciplinary and transdisciplinary case study on multiple drought indicators and impacts on different compartments and management territories of a large city, in this study the German capital Berlin. The study analysed the extreme drought conditions during the years 2018-2023 using a wide data spectrum ranging from classical meteorological data, water level of nearby reservoirs and lakes, stream flow data of two large rivers relevant for the city, groundwater series, modelled soil moisture data and sewage water discharge amounts and water quality data.
The multi-data approach alone makes this article to stand out as it rare to find drought studies that carry out a combined analysis of a whole range of meteorological, hydrological, hydrogeological and surface-water quality data specifically for urban settings. The result chapter presents the deficit aspects of the various compartments in turn, followed by a thorough discussion on the form of drought propagation and a projection for the future, when drought conditions may not be an exceptional and atypical behaviour, but a new normal. The discussion ends with a comprehensive list of how a large city such as the capital Berlin would be affected by such a drastic change of water availability, taking into consideration a wide range of management aspects for drinking water supply, surface water quality deterioration, and the potential need for a drought management plan. I very much liked this study and suggest publication with minor correction.Specific comments:
I have four specific comments, where the authors may consider to implement them to enhance the presentation of the topic:1. Case study character: you may want to add in the abstract, the introduction and the conclusion that the city of Berlin was selected as a case study to show the diversity of indicators, drought impacts and management questions relevant for large cities. Specifically the abstract and conclusion makes it very difficult to orientate on where this study is ‘playing’, especially for readers outside of Europe.
2. Drought propagation: The presentation of the drought propagation across compartments should get a more prominent place in your results or discussion section, and I suggest to move the visualisation S7 from the supplement into the main part of the paper, as the entire section 5.1 is actually refer to it.
3. Drought indicators: could you please comment why you haven’t used the rather standard rainfall deficit indicator SPI or SPEI to relate the change of meteorological, hydrological etc. droughts? It might be a whole new set of analysis, overlaying the rainfall based deficit analysis and the ‘real’ data analysis (e.g. SPI-6 for hydrological drought versus low discharge levels actually measured in the rivers) and beyond the scope of this study.
4. Urban vegetation and plant water availability: lots of different aspects of drought impacts were mentioned (drinking water supply, ship transport, water quality, cooling for energy production), but water demand for urban green was not included, why?
Technical comments:
Line 8ff: add that this is a case study of Berlin, and that the period 2018-2023 was a drought period within central Europe and/or Eastern Germany.Line 39: Berlin’s drinking water supply was introduced here quite abruptly; maybe inform first, that drought impacts are studied for this city in general.
Line 55: change references to normal standards
Line 181: specify what you mean with ‘for grass and sand’
Line 360: where is the origin of this data described – missing in 3.1? Please also provide detailed references to the other data sets, e.g. WSA does not appear in the list of reference.
Line 360: Figure 8 needs better resolution
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2024-187-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Ina Pohle, 16 Dec 2024
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 265 | 132 | 238 | 635 | 31 | 27 | 16 |
- HTML: 265
- PDF: 132
- XML: 238
- Total: 635
- Supplement: 31
- BibTeX: 27
- EndNote: 16
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1