100 key questions to guide hydropeaking research
- 1University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Water, Atmosphere and Environment, Institute of Hydrobiology and Aquatic Ecosystem Management, Wien, Austria
- 2Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach, San Michele all'Adige, Italy
- 3RiverLy, INRAE, Villeurbanne, France
- 4CERIS, Civil Engineering Research and Innovation for Sustainability, Instituto Superior Técnico, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal
- 5Fluvial Dynamics Research Group, University of Lleida, Lleida, Spain
- 6Hydrological Processes Area, Catalan Institute for Water Research, Girona, Spain
- 7Natural Systems and Resources Department, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
- 8Institute of Applied Research, Karlsruhe University of Applied Science, Karlsruhe, Germany
- 9Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
- 10Aquatic Systems Biology Unit, School of Life Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
- 11Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- 12Landscape Dynamics and Biodiversity, Forest Sciences and Technology Centre of Catalonia, Solsona, Spain
- 13Energy Systems, SINTEF Energy Research, Trondheim, Norway
- 14Institute of Natural Resource Sciences, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Wädenswil, Switzerland
- 15Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
- 16Water Resource and Knowledge Department, Norwegian Environment Agency, Trondheim, Norway
- 17Norsk institutt for naturforskning, Department for Aquatic Ecology, Trondheim, Norway
- 18Technical University of Munich, Hydrology and River Basin Management, Munich, Germany
- 19Technical University of Munich, Agricultural Production and Resource Economics Unit, Freising, Germany
Hydropeaking has received increasing attention in the last years, but many knowledge gaps remain, potentially hampering effective policy and management efforts in rivers under such type of hydropower production. In this study, we collected open hydropeaking research questions from over 200 experts in river science, practice, and policy across the globe using an online survey available in five languages. We used a systematic method of determining expert consensus (Delphi method) to identify 100 core questions related to the following thematic fields: (i) hydrology, (ii) physico-chemical properties of water, (iii) river morphology and sedimentology, (iv) ecology and biology, (v) socio-economics and energy markets, (vi) policy and regulation, as well as (vii) management and mitigation measures. The consensus list of questions shall inform and guide researchers in focusing their efforts to foster a better science-policy interface, thereby improving the sustainability of peak-operating hydropower in a variety of settings.
How to cite: Hayes, D., Bruno, M. C., Alp, M., Boavida, I., Batalla, R., Bejarano, M. D., Noack, M., Vanzo, D., Casas-Mulet, R., Vericat, D., Carolli, M., Tonolla, D., Halleraker, J., Gosselin, M.-P., Chiogna, G., and Venus, T.: 100 key questions to guide hydropeaking research, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-5314, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-5314, 2023.
