Impact of Climate Change on the Frequency and Severity of Floods in the Pasig

Marikina River Basin

Cris Edward F. Monjardin1*, Clarence L. Cabundocan1,

Camille P. Ignacio1, Christian Jedd D. Tesnado1

1
School of Civil, Environmental, and Geological Engineering,
Mapua University, Muralla St.,Intramuros, Manila, 1002 Philippines

*Corresponding author E-mail: cefmonjardin@mapua.edu.ph

Abstract

This study was carried out to assess the impacts of climate change on the frequency

and severity of floods in the Pasig-Marikina River basin. This study used the

historical data from PAG-ASA, specifically from Science Garden weather station.

The historical data are coupled with a global climate model, the Hadley Center Model

version 3 (HadCM3) to account for the natural variability of the climate system in the

area. The observed data and the hydroclimatic data from HadCM3 is inputted in

Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM) that results to rainfall data from 1961-2017

and change in temperature data from 2018-2048. A rainfall time series for the river

basin was generated taking into account the average seasonal effects in the area. A

flood frequency curve was modelled. From that, flood value for 2048 is derived to be

at 3950cu.m/s. Additionally, the rapid urbanization in the area has contributed to the

changes in the river system making it more vulnerable to floods. The results of this

study support the claim that the Pasig-Marikina River basin will definitely be affected

by the climate variability in terms of the increase in rainfall depth and average

temperatures, higher flood frequency and more massive floods.

Keywords: rainfall, flood, GIS, HadCM3, SDSM

1. Introduction

The strategic location of the Philippines, lying beyond the western boundary

of the massive Pacific Ocean, is the main cause why the country has long been

subjected and exposed to extreme weather conditions. However, over the past few

years, the country had experienced most of the world’s strongest and destructive

typhoons. Study shows that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are the major

attributions of climate change. Climate change, enhanced by global warming, induces

the rising of sea surface and subsurface temperatures whilst contributes in producing

stronger typhoons. These stronger typhoons carry more moisture which may also

mean more precipitation. Wherein the highest recorded rainfall in Metro Manila was

triggered by Typhoon Ketsana or locally known as Tropical Storm Ondoy. According

to PAGASA, the rainfall produced by the typhoon itself amounted to 455 millimetres

in 24 hrs. The soil can only absorb a maximum of 200 mm of rainfall, and the record-

breaking amount of rainfall produced by Ondoy caused extreme flooding in Metro

Manila.

Among the affected areas by the flooding caused by Tropical Storm Ondoy,

Marikina City was mostly devastated. The whole city was almost submerged in flood

water which went as high as 10 feet deep. The Marikina River overflowed

transforming its streets to rivers. This traumatic consequence of floods has called for

the growing attention because of the need to prevent or control flood damages in our

society. Developing countries have identified various adaptation policies, most of

which focus on direct and tangible impacts. However, climate change impacts are not

limited to tangible damages: the drastic changes they bring also have enormous
influence on people’s daily lives in affected communities and economic activities in

affected areas.

In this context, Marikina River Basin was chosen to comprehensively simulate

the impacts of future climate change and identify necessary actions. The study area is

located east of Metropolitan Manila. This basin is the source of flood waters that

inundates low lying areas along the Pasig-Marikina River and Mangahan Floodway.

The rivers that overflowed and resulted to exceptionally high and extensive flooding

during the TS Ketsana event are the rivers that drain the basin. Studying the future

impacts of climate change on the severity of flooding in rainfall in this basin may

prevent or lessen future damages caused by flooding in the study area.

Figure 1: Study Area

Source: Development, calibration and validation of a flood model for Marikina River

Basin, Philippines and its applications for flood forecasting, reconstruction, and

hazard mapping

The main objective of the study is to determine the impact of climate change

on the frequency, and severity of floods in the Marikina River Basin. In line with the

main objective, the specific objectives are (1) to determine the rainfall pattern in

Marikina River Basin, (2) to gather historical records of the water level in Marikina

River Basin, (3) to assess the changes in land cover in the area of Marikina River

Basin affected by the flooding, and (4) to predict future temperature and precipitation

trends.

The results and findings of this study can be of interest to several concerned

sectors, especially to the local government unit of Marikina. Future government

policies and long-term development plans of the city can be incorporated on the

potential impacts of climate change.

Since there are restrictions in the access to general circulation model (GCM)

data, technical resources and technical expertise, climate projections are limited. This

study will prove to be beneficial for future researches on the impacts of climate

change in the Philippine setting.

This study covers the assessment of the impacts of climate change in terms of

precipitation and run-off in the Pasig-Marikina river basin. The analysis includes

gathering of hydro climatological data from agencies, such as PAGASA and DRRM

Marikina, collection and downscaling of GCM data through available software,

identifying the climate change scenario of the river basin, and simulation of rainfall-

runoff.
 2. Review of Related Literature

This chapter covers related literature and studies both from international and

local research studies. This chapter includes the hydrologic cycle, the study of climate

and how it is affected by anthropogenic forces, general circulation models,

downscaling, uncertainties, hydrological model, and relating climate change to floods.

These will be used by the researchers as basis in the entire course of the study.

Climate

Climate is described as the average condition of the atmosphere, land surfaces,

bodies of water, and the ecosystems that are in them. According to a study conducted

by Neelin in 2011, climate is not limited to what stated above but includes the

direction and strength of the wind, average cloud cover, and the currents in the ocean

that have effects on the temperature of the sea surface.

According to a study conducted by Badilla in 2008, our study area, the Pasig-

Marikina River Basin, has a type I climate. With that, the annual rainfall in the basin

ranges from 1700 to 3200 millimeters per year, where 80 percent of this precipitation

occurs during the wet season.

Climate change

According to a journal called The Climate Reality Project of 2016, the

Philippines is listed as the number one country that suffers the effects of climate

change. The reason for this is its strategic location lying at the western Pacific ocean,

surrounded by warm waters that will most likely get even warmer as an adverse effect

of climate change,
 In the study of Badilla in 2008, it was mentioned that the Pasig-Marikina

River basin is the source of flood waters as it overflow in the low-lying areas. Given

that the Philippines is the number one country affected by climate change in historical

data, floods in the areas around the basin is worried to worsend.

Floods

Flooding takes place in regarded floodplains when extended rainfall over

numerous days, severe rainfall over a brief time frame, or an ice or debris jam causes

a river or flow to overflow and flood the encompassing vicinity. Extreme

thunderstorms can deliver heavy precipitation or typhoons can carry excessive rainfall

over the coastal and inland states within the summer time and fall.

Currently, fields or forests are being developed and transformed into paved

roads, parking lots, or even establishments. The land, being covered by concrete

pavements, loses its ability to absorb the runoff. Urbanization significantly caused the

increase of runoff from two to six times. At times of flooding in the urban, streets are

transformed into rivers, while basements and underpass becomes impassable due to

the runoff.

Several factors cause flooding. Significant factors include rainfall intensity

and period. Intensity is the amount of rainfall over a period of time, and period is how

lengthy the rain lasts. Topography, soil situations, and ground cover also are of

significant consideration. According to a journal, most of the flash floods are caused

by thunderstorms that are slow-shifting and those that occur over the same vicinity or

heavy rains from hurricanes and tropical storms. Floods, on the other hand, may be

gradual- or rapid-rising, but normally increase over duration of hours or days.

General Circulation models

According to a study, 97% of domestic water being supplied in the Metro

comes from the Angat-Umiray System (Jaranilla-Sanchez, et al, 2012). A study was

made to critically assess the evolution of the water sources' system. In this study,

spatial correlation and relative error focusing were used in selecting the six GCM

models from CMIP3. In determining the effects of climate change on sources of

water, the researchers of the said study compared past and future discharge

simulations. Results shows that flood will definitely increase in the future, this was

based from the processed 6 GCM models. However, base flow will slightly decrease

in the future based on 4 analysed models. Lastly, SA drought index on discharge

quantified the hydrological drought in the years 20, 50, 100, and 20

Hydrological model

The hydrological model, SLURP, explains the complete hydrological cycle for

each land cover within a series of sub-basins which includes all dams, reservoirs,

regulators, and irrigation schemes in the basin (Kite, 2001). The advantages of using

this model are that it obtains results for each day of an indefinite period, and it is

utilized to simulate alternate scenarios.

Another researcher applied a hydrological model to the Brosna catchment to

simulate a runoff under four recommended climate scenarios for the year 2030

(Cunnane and Regan, 1994). The outcomes indicated that the magnitude of high and

low flows would be marginally greater than those within the range presently
experienced therefore, the frequency of flood and drought events would increase

within the catchment.

Uncertainties in Climate models

According to a journal written by Thomas M. Smith, today’s climate models

are based on the climate history of Earth over 150 years which may also include

uncertainties from the observation. In evaluating the results of the models with

developments in sea floor temperature in numerous ocean basins, they estimate the

uncertainty in model output came from the existing drastic variability of the climate

system from the unfolding of three separate simulations of a single climate model

"compelled with the identical greenhouse gases and sulfate aerosols" but initiated

with unique situations. In conclusion, the variety in modelled temperature traits

coming from the nonlinear dynamics of the climate system is small relative to the

uncertainty in observations. However, because the version only used one method, the

conclusions have overlooked the main source of the uncertainty in model simulations.

 Software implementation using a map viewer linked to a spatial database

allowing the flexible selection of areas for generation of series.

River Discharge Projection

River discharge projection is necessary to manage water-related disasters

caused by climate change, such as floods, droughts, and water scarcity[ CITATION

HUN12 \l 1033 ]. Hydrologic and flow routing models are used in transferring the

climate model outputs into river discharge. With these river discharge information, it

can assess future changes in water resources, flood discharge, droughts, and possible

future hotspots on water-related disasters can be identified.

 The results of the river discharge projections are the following: (1) clear

changes in hourly flood peak discharge, daily drought discharge, and monthly

discharge were detected; (2) for every discharge, the degree of change differed by

location; (3) the changes appeared in the neared future climate experiment and

became clearer in the future climate experiment; and (4) a significant decrease in

discharge detected.

Hadley Center Coupled Model version 3 (HadCM3)

HadCM3 has a good simulation of present climate without using varying

adjustments which is a major advance compared to other models[ CITATION Rei08 \l

1033 ]. It is capable to take the time-dependent characteristic of historical climate

change to help natural and anthropogenic forcing, which is useful in studies

concerning the detection and attribution of past climate changes [ CITATION Sto00 \l

1033 ].

Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM)

Statistical downscaling model (SDSM) is utilized to make high-resolution

climate data from coarse-resolution climate model (GCM) simulations. It also features

weather generator methods to make various understanding of synthetic weather series.

[ CITATION Gov17 \l 1033 ]

ArcGIS

ArcGIS, a geographic information system (GIS), is used to (1) create and use

maps, (2) organize geographic data, (3) studying mapped information and geographic
information, and (4) handling geographic information in a database. [ CITATION ESR

\l 1033 ]

3. Methodology

3.1 Research Design

The researchers will adopt a quantitative method to analyze the data of rainfall

and runoff. Simulation approach will be implemented to understand and visualize the

impact of climate change in the area of study.

3.2 Data Collection

The researchers will gather the necessary historical data of rainfall, water level

from PAG-ASA, DRRM Council, and the Marikina Local Government Unit. This will

be the initial step for this study.

3.3 Basin delineation

A 90-m spatial resolution Shuttle Radar Topography Mission – Digital

Elevation Model (SRTM-DEM), available online at www.philgis.org, was analysed

through ArcGIS 10.6.1 to delineate the basin and determine the study area. ArcGIS’s

ArcHydro tools were the primary instruments used to process the DEM. The process

includes Terrain pre-processing which then includes, DEM manipulation, filling sinks,

flow direction, flow accumulation, stream definition, stream segmentation, catchment

grid delineation, catchment polygon processing, drainage line processing, drainage

point processing, batch point generation, and after that, the final process called

watershed processing then generates a sub watershed through the command batch sub

watershed delineation.
 Figure 4: Study Area: Marikina River Basin Generated By ArcGIS 10.6.1
The process includes manual selection of a point of interest which is based on

the outlet generated by the application. The point was also based on a real map

containing the study area. The nearest point or outlet selected in this process was the

Manggahan Floodway which is also the lower boundary of the said basin.

3.4 Observed Data Collection

To better understand how climate may change in the future for the area of

concern, long-term observational records must be utilized. In the acquisition of data

for rainfall and temperature, the researchers used the data from PAG-ASA-DOST.

This agency collects date in respect of the atmospheric differences of the area on day-

to-day basis. Precipitation, maximum temperature, and minimum temperature data

for the years 1961-2017 were collected. These data were obtained from Science

Garden in Quezon City since it is the closest weather station to the area of study.

Since, the climate in the Philippines is diverse due to differences in land and

sea level temperatures; these temperatures must be recorded on long term basis at

various climatic zones of the country.

3.5 GCM Data Collection

The GCM used was the UK Meteorological Office, HadCM3 forced by

combined CO2 and albedo changes. For this study, the model run starts in 1961 and is

forced with an estimate of historical forcing to 2017 and a projected future forcing

scenario over 2018 – 2048 (30 years). This forcing is only an estimation of the ‘real’

forcing. For the climate variability to be considered in this study, the researchers used

a tool, named Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM 5.2). HadCM3 data were also

coupled in the downscaling technique. In the figure below, the global map has been

divided into seven smaller windows, with each window surrounding a main land area,

with the land-sea boundaries defined according to the HadCM3 land-sea mask. The

predictor variables are supplied on a grid box by grid box basis. The researchers chose

the region closes to the area of study. Three directories were assembled.

Figure 5: The global window where the researchers collected the HadCM3 data.

• “NCEP_1961-2001: This directory contains 41 years of daily observed

predictor data, derived from the NCEP reanalyzes, normalized over the

complete 1961-1990 period. These data were interpolated to the same grid as

HadCM3 (2.5 latitude x 3.75 longitude) before the normalization was

implemented.”

• “H3A2a_1961-2099: This directory contains 139 years of daily GCM

predictor data, derived from the HadCM3 A2(a) experiment, normalized over

the 1961-1990 period.”

 • “H3B2a_1961-2099: This directory contains 139 years of daily GCM

predictor data, derived from the HadCM3 B2(a) experiment, normalized over

the 1961-1990 period.”

The predictor utilized was under SRES scenarios. A2 climate change scenario was

adopted for this study since it is the only available option and closely resembles that

of the real scenario. The A2 scenario corresponds to a very heterogeneous world with

high population growth, and less concern for rapid economic development.

[CITATION Int \l 1033 ]

3.6 Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM)

SDSM is used to calculate statistical relationships based on multiple linear

regression techniques between the predictors and the predictand. Using the observed

atmospheric data, these relationships are developed. [CITATION Wil \l 1033 ].

Prior to data analysis, quality control for the data has been done to check

whether there are missing values and to show the maximum and minimum values and

other several information.

Likewise, screening of variables is completed to check and filter the data that

the researchers will be using for analysis. The historical rainfall data is chosen as the

predictand for this stage. The start date and end date are 01/01/1961 and 12/31/2001,

using the NCEP as basis. There are 26 predictor variables from the directory of NCEP

1961-2001 but due to some restriction in SDSM, only 12 variables at a time can be

run. As shown in the figure below, the highest value of correlation for every variable

is shown in red. These data show the effect of each variable on the data for each

month.
 Meanwhile, the Correlation matrix shows the correlation of the variables with

the observed data. The partial-r and P-value are used for choosing a parameter for this

study. The researchers will have to choose a parameter that has the highest correlation.

The next step is to create a scatter plot for each parameter. The scatter plot will

help the researchers to inspect each predictor visually based on their inter-variable

behavior for specified season. For this research, the researchers select relative

humidity at 500 hPa (ncepr500as.dat), relative humidity at 850 hPa (ncepr850as.dat),

and mean temperature at 2m (nceptempas.dat) as the predictor variables.

For the model calibration, the three predictors were utilized. There are twelve

rows correspond to the twelve months in a year from January to December. The first

column is the intercepts while the second to fourth columns are comprised of the three

parameters used and the last two columns are for the standard error and R-squared

statistics.

The next stage is to create a weather generator. The weather generator

produces groups of artificial weather series daily given the observed climatic

data/variables and the results of the model calibration.

Table 1: Summary of Downscaled Annual Average Rainfall from 1961-2001

Rainfa Rainfa Rainfa Rainfa Rainfa

Year Year Year Year Year
ll ll ll ll ll
1961 6.8 1969 6.5 1977 6.3 1985 6.6 1993 6.6
1962 5.8 1970 6.3 1978 7.1 1986 6.7 1994 7.1
1963 6.3 1971 5.9 1979 6.7 1987 6.8 1995 6.8
1964 6.2 1972 7.3 1980 6.6 1988 6.9 1996 6.5
1965 5.8 1973 6.3 1981 7.1 1989 6.3 1997 6.7
1966 6.3 1974 6.3 1982 6.7 1990 6.8 1998 7.2
1967 6.4 1975 6.9 1983 7.6 1991 6.9 1999 7.1
1968 5.8 1976 6.6 1984 6.6 1992 6.5 2000 7.2
2001 7.2
3.7 Change in Temperature data

Raw dataset for temperature from 1961-2017 were collected from the

available sources such as PAG-ASA. Meanwhile, projected change in temperature

from 1961-2099 were quantified through the SDSM 5.2 tool.

Table 2: Projected change in Temperature from Downscaled data

1961 0.845 1988 0.275 2016 0.634 2044 0.539 2072 0.524
1962 0.674 1989 0.224 2017 0.623 2045 0.482 2073 0.865
1963 0.658 1990 0.138 2018 0.753 2046 0.523 2074 0.6
1964 0.689 1991 0.234 2019 0.769 2047 0.31 2075 0.643
1965 0.665 1992 0.212 2020 0.719 2048 0.285 2076 0.764
1966 0.562 1993 0.239 2021 0.723 2049 0.419 2077 0.776
1967 0.58 1994 0.24 2022 0.707 2050 0.415 2078 0.688
1968 0.487 1995 0.196 2023 0.765 2051 0.22 2079 0.699
1969 0.619 1996 0.172 2024 0.66 2052 0.489 2080 0.782
1970 0.408 1997 0.251 2025 0.72 2053 0.6 2081 0.944
1971 0.501 1998 0.285 2026 0.767 2054 0.261 2082 0.877
1972 0.5 1999 0.266 2027 0.81 2055 0.187 2083 0.666
1973 0.524 2000 0.252 2028 0.803 2056 0.218 2084 0.808
1974 0.458 2001 0.405 2029 0.772 2057 0.294 2085 0.895
1975 0.382 2002 0.282 2030 0.761 2058 0.357 2086 0.954
1976 0.255 2003 0.222 2031 0.811 2059 0.238 2087 0.813
1977 0.279 2004 0.509 2032 0.761 2060 0.38 2088 0.946
1978 0.169 2005 0.34 2033 0.65 2061 0.475 2089 1.036
1979 0.194 2006 0.483 2034 0.777 2062 0.295 2090 0.946
1980 0.298 2007 0.557 2035 0.739 2063 0.32 2091 1.011
1981 0.27 2008 0.476 2036 0.77 2064 0.328 2092 1.049
1982 0.075 2009 0.555 2037 0.666 2065 0.427 2093 0.938
1983 0.3 2010 0.576 2038 0.603 2066 0.558 2094 1.031
1984 0.3 2011 0.57 2039 0.598 2067 0.393 2095 1.05
1985 0.207 2012 0.5 2040 0.606 2068 0.546 2096 1.052
1986 0.195 2013 0.502 2041 0.575 2069 0.541 2097 1.104
1987 0.27 2014 0.533 2042 0.603 2070 0.548 2098 1.163
2015 0.56 2043 0.47 2071 0.498 2099 1.034

4. Results and Discussions

4.1 Rainfall Pattern based on Observed data

 Graph 1: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year from 1968-2017
As seen from the graph above, the observed average rainfall is understood to

have increased from the year 1961 to year 2017. The best fit trend line is y = 0.0399x

– 72.188. At the year 2012, a 12.1mm rainfall was noted in the Science Garden; this is

regarded as the highest average rainfall recorded from the time frame of 1961 to 2017.

On the other hand, the lowest average rainfall recorded was on 1969. It was during

this year when a 4.4mm rainfall is observed. An increase in rainfall of 0.0399mm per

year likely.

Based on the historical records gathered from PAG-ASA, the months of May,

August, and September incurred the highest increase in amount of rainfall. Since these

three months fall under the dry season in the study area; it can be inferred that the dry

season is much more affected by climate variability as compared to the wet season

from November to April. The month of September has seen the most drastic increase

in rainfall with 0.1175mm increase per year.

4.2 Rainfall Pattern from Downscaled data

 Object 3

Graph 5: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year from 1961-2001

The graph above depicts the rainfall pattern gathered from the SDSM 5.2, a

downscaling tool for climate models. The best fit trend line is y = 0.021x – 34.951.

The highest average rainfall was tallied during the year 1983, while it was during

1962, 1965, and 1968 when the lowest mean rainfall is seen for the time frame of

1961-2001.

The downscaled precipitation data show that July, September and October

have experienced the greatest increase in rainfall from 1961 to 2001. September has

the highest incremental increase of 0.0744mm per year. From these information, it can

be said that the results of downscaling support the historical records in saying that the

dry season will be much affected by the impacts of climate change in terms of

precipitation increase.

4.3 Maximum Water level and Discharge in the Pasig-Marikina River

The flood area of Sto. Niño is the most significant because it has an area of

517 sq. km which is located between mountain area and alluvial plain. It has an

average estimated lag time of 5.5 hours which is influenced by the slope of the

channel of about 1/1500 and its length of 36.5 km. The JICA Preparatory Study
 3
m
projected the release of 3211 at Sto. Niño for the year 2009. Manning’s
s

roughness coefficient of 0.033 is used to come up with the data.

Table 3: Historical Data for Water level and discharge

Water Water Water

Discharg Discharg Discharge
Year Level Year Level Year Level
e (cu.m/s) e (cu.m/s) (cu.m/s)
(m) (m) (m)
1958 14.78 507 1971 14.5 439 1997 17.16 1279
1959 N/A 2072 1972 18.05 1559 1998 18.41 1680
1960 18.06 1562 1973 13.95 318 1999 18.3 1642
1961 16.82 1161 1974 13.98 324 2000 19.02 1895
1962 17.1 1261 1975 13.7 269 2001 16.31 972
1963 16.19 931 1976 16.9 1192 2002 17.94 1523
1964 17.45 1367 1977 19.44 2051 2003 17.76 1464
1978
1965 15.48 702 - N/A N/A 2004 19.08 1917
1985
1966 19.4 2036 1986 20.92 2650 2005 16.03 876
1987
1967 18.2 1609 - N/A N/A 2006 16.37 993
1993
1968 16.68 1107 1994 16.33 980 2007 16.9 1192
1969 17.45 1367 1995 18.4 1676 2008 16.74 1130
1970 20.48 2464 1996 16.08 893 2009 22.16 3211

4.4 Rainfall vs. Temperature

Object 7

Graph 11: Rainfall vs. Temperature

 The graph above shows the climate graph of the Pasig-Marikina River Basin.

It consists of monthly temperature and precipitation on the area. With these

parameters, the climate in the area can be predicted.

Wet season is evident on a month where the average precipitation is 2.4 in (60

mm). According to the graph above, the wet season starts from May to December and

dry from January to April, where August is the wettest month with an average

precipitation of 17.24 inches and February as the driest with an average precipitation

of 0.59 inches. The temperature is high with very little variation. The lowest

maximum temperature recorded is 30.31˚C in December and highest maximum

temperature of 34.66˚C during the month of May.

4.5 Temperature Change Projection

Using the statistical downscaling tool, the annual change in temperature was

derived for the area of concern. An increasing trendline can be seen in the graph given

by the equation of y = 0.0033x – 6.0491, and a coefficient of determination of 0.1616.

There is a fairly convincing relationship between the variables as seen in the graph. It

can be interpreted based on the trend that an increase of 0.0033⁰C is expected each

year.

Object 9
 Graph 9: Projected change in Annual Temperatures from Downscaled data
4.6 Flood Frequency Curve

Object 11

Graph 10: Flood Frequency Curve

The researchers estimated the probable frequency of floods based on annual

maximum discharges at Sto. Niño as shown in the graph above. The linear trend is

observed to be at y= 729.22ln(x)+663.75, where y is the maximum discharge

expressed in cu.m/s and x is the recurrence interval in years. For the year 2048, the

estimated maximum discharge follows the trend and is said to be at 3945 cu.m/s.

4.7 Rainfall Time Series

 Object 13

Graph 11: Rainfall Time Series

The graph above shows the time series for rainfall in the Pasig-Marikina River

basin using the historical records on precipitation. The researchers arrived at this

graph with y=0.0249x+5.8707 trend line. Taking the mean of the individual seasonal

effects gives the average seasonal effects of the area. The average seasonal effects are

considered to smooth out the seasonal variation. The area of study has two distinct

seasons according to the Modified Coronas Classification; wet from November to

April and dry for the rest of the year. For the projection of future rainfall based on this

time series, on the year 2048 an amount of 15.2 mm average rainfall during the dry

season while 4.6 mm average rainfall are to be expected.

4.8 Land Cover Data

 (1984) (2016)
Figure 1. Land Cover maps of the Marikina River Basin captured from Google Earth
Pro: 1984 and 2016
The maps of the Marikina River Basin shown for 1984 and 2016 (Figure 1)

illustrate a significant change in the land cover of the study area. Based on the visual

interpretation of the maps captured from Google Earth Pro, a large reduction of

brushland area is shown in the east portion of the basin. The results revealed the

greatly increase of built-up (establishments) also in the east portion and south portion

of the basin.

The results from the map in 1984 showed that the brushland area was

dominant on Marikina River Basin. The built-up area was also present in the east

portion of the basin and a little portion in the south. The forest area covers the

northeast portion of the basin.

However, the results from the map in 2016, the brushland areas noticeably

reduced and the built-up area remarkably increased. The built-up areas largely

increased in the east and south portion of the basin. The forest area has also reduced

its area in the northeast portion of the basin.

4.9 Rating Curve

Object 15

Graph 15: Water level vs. Discharge of Marikina River in Sto. Niño station
The graph above shows the rating curve for Marikina River taking the data

from Sto. Niño station. As seen from the trend, there is a positive relationship between

the water level of the river and the discharge over the years. The relationship is

expressed by the power function of y = 4.748 x 0.1818 with y representing the water

level and x for the discharge. For the year 2048, when the discharge reaches 3950

cu.m/s, the average water level is expected to have an annual average of 21.34m

which is considered a 3rd alarm according to Marikina River’s water level monitoring.

4.10 Flood Hazard Map from ArcGIS

 Figure 13. 2018 Flood Hazard map of Marikina City captured from ArcGIS
Figure 13 is the 2018 flood hazard map of Marikina City based on different

rainfall scenarios using ArcGIS. The flood hazard map presents three colors according

to the severity of the flood hazard. Yellow represents low flood hazard, orange

denotes medium flood hazard, and red signifies high flood hazard. From figure 13,

medium flood hazard is observed to be dominant in the flood hazard map for the next

five years. It also shows high flood hazard in the west portion of Marikina City,

including the river system of Marikina River and the areas near the river.

Figure 14. 2048 Flood Hazard map of Marikina City captured from ArcGIS
Figure 14 is the 2048 flood hazard map of Marikina City, also created using

ArcGIS. The figure shows a flood hazard map in accordance to the rainfall return rate

per region and detailed flood reports from citizens. From figure 14, high flood hazard

is remarked to be dominant in the flood hazard map for the next twenty-five years.
Most areas of Marikina City will expect high risk of flooding. Also seen in the flood

hazard map are the medium flood hazards near the areas with high flood hazard.

4.11 Comparison of Results to Similar Studies

In a study by Tebakari, et. Al on Chao Phraya River basin in Thailand, they

used MRI-AGCM3.1 and 3.2 as their global climate model for the analysis. Their

results show that the average annual increase in air temperature in their area was

found to be 2.8⁰C for the period of 2075-2099. They have used two methods: HSBC

and CLM for data bias correction. The area has seen a gradual increase in rainfall

according to the historical records and likewise with the results of their simulation.

The months of July and August have incurred the highest increase. Likewise, the

discharge flow of the river in the Nakhon Sawan Station is affected by the increase in

the amount of rain, as the flow rate increases. Based on their findings, considering the

effects of climate change, severe flooding and high-flow discharge are likely to

happen toward the end of 21st century.

Meanwhile, in a research conducted in Indonesia’s Kapuas River Basin by

Henny Herawati et al., the change in the annual and monthly precipitation for the area

has seen a declining trend for the period of 1968-2013. However, the amount of

rainfall has been increasing for the past 30 years, although the intensity is decreasing.

In comparison, to the researchers’ study on the impacts of climate change in

the Pasig-Marikina River Basin; the same conclusions were formulated. For the past

30 years, the precipitation values has seen an increasing trend and that trend is

assumed to continue for the next 30 years.

5 Conclusion

This study focused on the determination of the impact of climate change on

the frequency and severity of floods in the Pasig-Marikina River basin. The

atmospheric data, referring to rainfall and temperature, from PAG-ASA was coupled

with the climate model, HadCM3 to account for the natural variability of the climatic

system in the area of study. The observed atmospheric data from PAG-ASA covers the

year 1961-2017. Through a series of multiple linear regressions and statistical analysis

from the Statistical Downscaling Model (SDSM), the amount of precipitation for the

year 1961-2001 and change in temperature were generated for the time span of 2018-

2048. Projections on the amount of precipitation for the year 2018-2048 were

obtained through the generation of the rainfall time series while taking into

consideration, the average seasonal effects in the area. Meanwhile, a flood frequency

curve is generated based on the available data on water level and water discharge in a

stretch of the river basin which is in Sto. Niño.

The results show that climate change will affect the precipitation in the Pasig-

Marikina River basin considering the climate scenario used. The amount of

precipitation in the area will observe an increasing trend for the next 30 years (2018-

2048). Based on the outputs, both the wet and the dry seasons will incur an increase in

precipitation but the dry season of May to October will acquire a greater increase in

amount of rainfall. It was projected that the annual rainfall depth will increase by

0.0399 mm per year. Considering the average seasonal effects of ±5.3, rainfall depth

will increase by 0.0249 mm per year. Likewise, the average temperature in the area

will increase for the next 30 years with an incremental increase of 0.0033⁰C each year

starting from the baseline year of 1961. The researchers were able to estimate for the
future discharge in the river basin. The projection for the year 2048 is about 3,950

cu.m/s.

In addition, changes in land use impact the pattern of floods in the area. About

half of the river basin is protected areas under the authority of DENR. The remaining

areas are mostly owned by private sectors. Rapid population growth and urban sprawl

contributed to increase in flooding due to impermeable ground surface. Most floods

occur in the lower catchments of the basin due to indiscriminate discharge of wastes

from the inhabitants nearby the river. Thus, the river basin will overflow resulting to

the inundation of the areas it traverses.

The outcomes of this study suggest that the Pasig-Marikina River basin will be

affected by the climate variability in terms of the increase in rainfall depth and

average temperatures, higher flood frequency and more massive floods.

6 Acknowledgement

The researchers would like to express their sincere gratitude to the following

people who unselfishly gave their invaluable assistance towards the understandings of

this humble piece of work. Engr. Cris Edward F. Monjardin, their thesis adviser,

for his dedication and keen interest above all his overwhelming attitude to help his

students had been solely and mainly responsible for completing their paper. Engr.

Fibor J. Tan, their course coordinator, for providing the materials and working links,

for his guidance in leading the members of the group in finishing this paper. Freedom

of Information (FOI) Receiving Officer, for providing the necessary data used by the

researchers in preparation for the results of this paper. Their parents and friends, for

their constant encouragement throughout their work, for their kind help and providing

them necessary references during the work duration. Above all, to our Lord God, who
made all things possible, for all the blessings He showers them, for His every day

guidance, for providing physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual strengths that

resulted to the success of this work.

References

[1] Arnaud Mareuil, R. L. (2006). Impacts of climate change on the frequency and
severity of floods in the Chateauguay River basin, Canada.

[2] Badilla, R. A. (2008). Flood Modelling on Pasig-Marikina River Basin.

[3] Chow, V., Maidment, D., & Mays, L. (1988). Applied Hydrology. McGraw-
Hill Publishing Company.

[4] Climate Council. (2017). Intense Rainfall and Flooding: The Influence of
Climate Change.

[5] ESRI. (2018). ESRI. Retrieved from About ArcGIS: https://www.esri.com/en-

us/arcgis/about-arcgis/overview

[6] Gahlau, K. D. (2018). Australian Academy of Science.

[7] Government of Canada. (2017, May 24). Government of Canada. Retrieved

from Downscaling Tools: http://climate-scenarios.canada.ca/?page=dst-intro

[8] Hamed, K., & Rao, A. R. (1999). Flood Frequency Analysis.

[9] HEC-HMS - Hydrologic Engineering Center. (2008). Retrieved from

Hydrologic Engineering Center: http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-
hms/

[10] HEC-RAS - Hydrologic Engineering Center. (2008). Retrieved from

Hydrologic Engineering Center: http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-
ras/

[11] HUNUKUMBURA, P. B., & TACHIKAWA, Y. (2012). River Discharge

Projection under Climate Change in the Chao Phraya River Basin, Thailand,
Using the MRI-GCM3.1S Dataset. Journal of the Meteorological Society of
Japan. Ser. II, 90, 137-150.

[12] IPCC. (n.d.). Atmospheric Data. Retrieved from Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change: http://www.ipcc-
data.org/sim/gcm_clim/SRES_TAR/ddc_sres_emissions.html#a2

[13] Jojene R. Santillan, E. C. (2012). NEAR-REAL TIME FLOOD EXTENT

MONITORING IN MARIKINA RIVER PHILIPPINES: MODEL
 PARAMETERISATION USING REMOTELY-SENSED DATA AND FIELD
MEASUREMENTS.

[14] National Disaster Education Coalition. (1999). Talking about disaster: Guide
for standard messages: Produced by the National Disaster Education Coalition.
63-64.

[15] Neelin, J. D. (2011). Climate Change and Climate Modelling. New York:
Cambridge University Press.

[16] Reichler, T. a. (2008). How Well Do Coupled Models Simulate Today's

Climate? 303-311.

[17] Stott, P. S. (2000). External Control of 20th Century Temperature by Natural

and Anthropogenic Forcings. 2133-2137.

[18] The Climate Reality Project. (2016, January 19). The Climate Reality Project.
Retrieved from HOW IS CLIMATE CHANGE AFFECTING THE
PHILIPPINES? : https://www.climaterealityproject.org

[19] University of Twente. (2018, March 19). ILWIS. Retrieved from

https://www.itc.nl/ilwis/

[20] Villarin, J. T. (2016). 2016 Philippine Climate Change Assessment (PhilCCA):

The Physical Science Basis. The Oscar M. Lopez Center for Climate Change
Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management Foundation Inc. and Climate
Change Commission.

[21] Wilby, R. (2002). SDSM - a decision support tool for the assessment of
regional climate change impacts. Environmental Modelling Software, 145-157.
APPENDICES

Appendix A: Rainfall Pattern from Historical records

Object 19

Graph 2: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year from 1968-2017

Object 21

Graph 3: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of January

Object 24

Graph 4: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of February
 Object 26

Graph 5: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of March

Object 29

Graph 6: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of April

Object 32

Graph 7: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of May
 Object 34

Graph 8: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of June

Object 36

Graph 9: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of July

Object 38

Graph 10: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of August
 Object 40

Graph 11: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of September

Object 42

Graph 12: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of October

Object 44

Graph 13: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of November
 Object 46

Graph 14: Observed Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of December

Appendix B: Rainfall Pattern from Downscaled data

Object 48

Graph 15:Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year from 1961-2001

Object 50

Graph 16: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of January
 Object 52

Graph 17: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of February

Object 54

Graph 18: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of March

Object 56

Graph 19: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of April
 Object 58

Graph 20: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of May

Object 60

Graph 21: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of June

Object 62

Graph 22: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of July
 Object 64

Graph 23: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of August

Object 66

Graph 24: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of September

Object 68

Graph 25: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of October
 Object 70

Graph 26: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of November

Object 73

Graph 27: Downscaled Average Rainfall vs. Year for the months of December

Appendix C: Comparison between rainfall patterns of the observed and

downscaled data

Object 75

Graph 28: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data from 1961-2001
 Object 77

Graph 29: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of January

Object 79

Graph 30: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of February

Object 82

Graph 31: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of March
 Object 84

Graph 32: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of April

Object 86

Graph 33: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of May

Object 88

Graph 34: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of June
 Object 90

Graph 35: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of July

Object 93

Graph 36: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of August

Object 96

Graph 37: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of September
 Object 98

Graph 38: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of October

Object 100

Graph 39: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of November

Object 103

Graph 40: Comparison between downscaled data and observed data for the months
of December
Appendix D: Annual Change in Temperature from the base year 1961

Object 106

Graph 41: Projected change in Annual Temperatures from Downscaled data

Appendix E: Observed Maximum Temperature in Pasig-Marikina River Basin

Object 108

Object 110
Object 112

Object 114

Object 117

Object 120
Object 122

Object 124

Object 127

Object 130
 Object 132

Object 134

Appendix F: Observed Minimum Temperature in Pasig-Marikina River Basin

Object 137

Object 140
Object 142

Object 144

Object 147

Object 150
Object 152

Object 154

Object 157

Object 160
 Object 162

Object 164

Appendix G: Summary of gathered data in tables

Table 1: Summary of Observed Annual Average Rainfall from 1968-2017

Year Rainfal Year Rainfal Year Rainfal Year Rainfal Year Rainfall
l l l l
1961 7.2 1972 10.1 1983 4.5 1994 7.1 2006 7.3
1962 6.5 1973 5.4 1984 6.5 1995 8.8 2007 6.3
1963 6.1 1974 7.9 1985 7.2 1996 5.6 2008 6.5
1964 7.4 1975 5.7 1986 9.9 1997 6.1 2009 9.6
1965 6 1976 6.2 1987 4.5 1998 7.4 2010 7.3
1966 7 1977 6 1988 7.1 1999 9.2 2011 10
1967 7.6 1978 7.3 1989 6.7 2000 11.1 2012 12.1
1968 5.5 1979 5.4 1990 8.5 2001 6.3 2013 9.5
1969 4.4 1980 5.8 1991 6.1 2002 8.2 2014 7.3
1970 6.9 1981 6.2 1992 6.2 2003 6 2015 8.4
1971 5.6 1982 5.4 1993 7.1 2004 6.1 2016 7.6
2005 6.5 2017 8.4

Table 2: Summary of Observed Monthly Average Rainfall data from 1968-2017

YEA JAN FE MA AP MA JU JUL AU SEP OC NO DEC

R B R R Y N G T V
1961 0 0.3 2 1.3 4 19.4 13.5 19.2 12.9 8.8 3.6 0.4
1962 1 0.1 0.3 2.8 3 6.3 31.9 11.1 16.2 1.6 3.2 0.4
1963 0.1 0 0.3 0 2.8 17.8 11.2 14.5 16.5 4.9 1.7 3.1
1964 1.1 0.1 0.5 0.7 5.7 17.1 12.2 23.8 8.4 7.2 8.5 3.8
1965 0.8 1.25 0 0.5 7.9 13 17.1 10.9 12.3 1.9 4.8 1.2
1966 0.5 1 0.2 0.3 21.6 0.9 10 9.1 22.1 3.5 11.9 3.1
1967 1.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 3.3 31.3 16.4 15.9 12.6 4 5.7 0.3
1968 0.2 0 0 0 4.3 6.3 13.3 22.9 12.7 5 0.4 0
1969 0 0 0 0.4 1.4 5 6.9 14.9 13.9 5.7 2.1 1.6
1970 0.3 0 0.2 1.6 1.2 4.9 14.4 16.6 29.1 14 0 0
1971 0 0 0 1.2 6.4 8.4 14.1 7.7 3.7 12.5 7.8 5.2
1972 1.3 0.1 1.3 1.4 5.7 16.4 60.8 18.8 8.6 2.1 3.4 0.6
1973 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.7 12.9 9.2 13 8.7 11.3 6.6 2.3
1974 0 1.5 0.1 1.2 2.9 15.2 9 36.4 2 9.7 12.4 3.5
1975 0.5 0 0 1 2.3 9.7 4.7 17.8 8.1 16.4 2.3 5.4
1976 2 0.1 0.6 0.2 7.6 7.3 10.5 8.7 26.8 6.4 2.5 1.5
1977 2.8 0.1 0.8 0.2 2.2 5.3 12.9 17.4 16.8 1.7 11.2 0
1978 0.1 0.3 0 1 6.3 5.8 9.3 23 18.7 18.6 2.6 1.5
1979 0.1 0 0 2.4 6.9 5.1 16.7 17.7 9.3 4 1 0.7
1980 0 0 3 0 5.1 5.7 13.1 8.3 15 11.2 6.7 0.8
1981 0 0.3 0 1 2.6 19.6 13 10.8 8.4 9.4 6 2.8
1982 0 0 0.9 1.6 2.4 6.4 19.7 13.7 10.7 3.5 3.6 1.6
1983 1.1 0.1 0 0 0.9 4.4 9.9 18.6 8.6 9.4 0.9 0
1984 0.5 0.1 0.7 2 4.3 16.6 7.5 19.8 8.4 14 3.4 0.1
1985 0 0.4 2 4.8 0.9 29.3 10 8 15.8 10.5 3.4 1.4
1986 0 0.1 0 0.8 7.8 5.4 25.7 25.7 20.6 21 8.1 2.4
1987 0.1 0 0 0.4 3 7.7 5.3 10.6 13.5 5.2 4.3 3.3
1988 2.8 1.3 0 0.8 5 16.1 15.9 5.1 12.4 20.3 5.5 0.1
1989 0.5 0.5 2.3 2.3 7.1 9.9 15.8 22.8 9.1 7.8 1.9 0
1990 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.6 6.3 15.6 18.8 19.5 19.4 8.1 10.1 3.2
1991 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.6 8.7 17.1 23.4 12.4 4.7 3.5 0.1
1992 0.2 0 0 0 2.8 4.9 16.8 24.8 12.8 6.7 4.8 0.2
1993 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 10.9 16 15.3 17.3 11.3 7.5 5.3
1994 1.6 0.9 1.4 1 6 14.1 25.8 11.1 14.2 5 0.3 3.6
1995 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 9.8 13.1 11.6 20.9 25 11.3 6.2 6.1
1996 0.6 0 0.3 2.7 3.7 4.7 12.9 11 16.2 8.9 5.4 0.4
1997 0.4 1.2 0 1 15.6 5.6 18.2 18 7.8 3.1 1.5 0.3
1998 0.6 0 0.2 0 6 9.6 6.5 8.8 20.6 15.7 6 14.3
1999 1.3 0.1 2.7 4.6 6.5 8.2 22.8 27.9 14.5 11.1 5.6 4.4
2000 0.6 1.9 3.3 1.3 19.1 5.9 32.4 16.8 20.1 17.3 8.5 6.1
2001 0.7 3.8 0.4 1 8.4 8.3 16.7 17.7 6.1 6.2 2.4 3.1
2002 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.7 1.6 6.1 42.3 14.3 14.2 7.8 7.8 1.2
2003 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.7 15 7.7 8.7 12.3 16.6 6 3.9 0.2
2004 0.2 1.3 0 2.9 6.7 7.2 10.8 22.1 10.3 2.8 6.8 1.9
2005 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.2 4.4 17.6 7.1 11 13.8 15.7 2.6 2.8
2006 1.8 0.2 2.5 0 5.6 11.1 21.4 10 22.3 6.8 3 2.5
2007 0.1 0.9 0.7 0.9 8.3 3.3 6.6 21.6 14.6 7.1 9.5 1.7
2008 1.5 0.8 1.3 1.2 8.4 12 7.3 13.9 14.9 8 6.3 2.3
2009 1.4 0.4 3 4.6 8.7 14.6 21.3 13.2 37.5 8.8 1.8 0.2
2010 0.2 0 0.1 0.7 2 11.9 13.2 20.3 12.9 13.3 8.5 4.4
2011 5 0 1.1 0.1 10.1 24.2 17.7 20.5 14.9 9.2 9 7.1
2012 1.3 4.4 6.3 0.1 10.6 10.4 28.6 44.7 24.7 10.9 0.9 1.5
2013 1.5 3.2 4.3 1.6 5.5 18.4 7.2 31.4 22.8 11.5 3 3.7
2014 0 0 0.7 0.8 3.5 8.1 15.4 13.3 24.2 13 3.2 4.9
2015 0.9 0.1 0.4 2.2 2.9 18.8 22.9 16.2 16.2 8.1 0.7 10.2
2016 0.6 1.3 0.2 3 6.5 6.3 8.7 25.4 19.8 10.3 4.1 5.3
2017 1.8 2.9 0.3 5.1 10.5 12 19.9 14.7 14 9.5 5.6 3.7

Table 3: Summary of Downscaled Annual Average Rainfall from 1961-2001

Rainfal Rainfal Rainfal Rainfal Rainfal

Year Year Year Year Year
l l l l l
1961 6.8 1969 6.5 1977 6.3 1985 6.6 1993 6.6
1962 5.8 1970 6.3 1978 7.1 1986 6.7 1994 7.1
1963 6.3 1971 5.9 1979 6.7 1987 6.8 1995 6.8
1964 6.2 1972 7.3 1980 6.6 1988 6.9 1996 6.5
1965 5.8 1973 6.3 1981 7.1 1989 6.3 1997 6.7
1966 6.3 1974 6.3 1982 6.7 1990 6.8 1998 7.2
1967 6.4 1975 6.9 1983 7.6 1991 6.9 1999 7.1
1968 5.8 1976 6.6 1984 6.6 1992 6.5 2000 7.2
2001 7.2

Table 4: Summary of Downscaled Monthly Average Rainfall from 1961-2001

JA FE MA AP MA JU JU AU SE OC NO DE
N B R R Y N L G P T V C
196 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.4 6.8 13. 16. 15.9 12. 6.6 3.9 2.4
1 4 4 3
196 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.7 4.6 10. 16. 10.5 9.9 6.7 4.9 2.5
2 3 2
196 0.3 0.2 0.5 1.1 2.8 16. 14. 13.4 12 6.1 5 2.5
3 6 5
196 0.4 0.9 0.4 0.1 6.2 9.4 14. 16.2 11. 10 4 1.2
4 1 7
196 0.3 0 0.7 0.8 4.7 13 11. 11.7 11. 7.5 5.7 1.9
5 9 5
196 0.5 0.2 0.7 0.6 8.8 9.4 12. 14 14. 7.3 5.6 2.3
6 1 2
196 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.9 3.4 9 15. 16.8 14. 8 5 2
7 3 3
196 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.4 4.5 7.3 12 17.7 14 7 4.3 1.2
8
196 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.7 4.3 10. 18. 12.4 13. 9.2 4.7 2.4
9 4 2 7
197 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.8 4.1 6.6 15. 15.6 12. 10.7 5.1 3.1
0 3 8
197 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.6 4.3 8.7 15. 10.9 14. 7.4 4.9 2
1 1 9
197 0.6 0.2 1 1.6 5.4 12. 20. 20 11 7 5.2 2.3
2 2 8
197 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.8 3 7.7 15. 16.7 13. 7.8 5.3 2.3
3 8 9
197 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.1 3.2 10. 12. 19.2 10. 8.4 5.2 2.8
4 5 5 8
197 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 4.1 13. 13. 18.7 12. 9.8 5 2.8
5 4 5 6
197 0.7 0.3 0.6 1.1 6.7 8.1 15. 16.5 14. 8.4 4.2 2.5
6 6 6
197 0.7 0.3 0.3 1 3.8 7.1 17. 16.4 13. 7.8 4.5 2.5
7 6 5
197 0.5 0.4 0.7 1 5.6 10. 17. 19.7 12. 10.5 3.2 2.2
8 4 7 2
197 0.7 0.2 0.6 1.3 5.3 13. 14 18.2 13. 5.9 4.6 2.2
9 8 1
198 0.7 0.7 0.6 1.2 5.4 11.9 14. 17.2 11. 8.8 4.1 1.6
0 8 5
198 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.6 5.7 11.3 15. 19 12. 10.3 5.2 2.2
1 6 9
198 0.5 0.3 0.5 2.2 4 11.1 16. 15.5 13. 9 5.5 1.4
2 6 7
198 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.6 6.5 10. 16. 18.7 17. 12.7 5.1 2.5
3 1 1 4
198 0.6 0.4 0.5 1.4 5.8 10. 13. 19.4 11. 8.2 4.8 2
4 5 3 6
198 0.7 0.4 0.7 1.9 4.1 12. 13. 20 10. 6.8 5.6 2
5 3 3 9
198 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.8 6.8 10. 17. 16 11. 8.7 4.6 2.5
6 1 6 8
198 0.7 0.2 0.7 1 4.8 10. 17. 13 15. 9.7 5.1 3
7 8 2 3
198 0.6 0.4 0.6 1.5 4.8 12. 15 14.4 15. 11.5 4.2 2.6
8 4 1
198 0.3 0.2 1 0.7 4.5 8.5 14. 17.1 15. 17.6 4.7 1.5
9 2 1
199 0.7 0.3 0.9 1 5.5 12. 15. 15.3 13. 10.2 3.9 1.8
0 5 8 3
199 0.4 0.6 0.7 1 3.5 11.7 16. 19.3 12. 8.4 5.5 2
1 8 3
199 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.9 5.4 9.5 13. 16.3 16. 7.3 4.7 2
2 2 9
199 0.3 0.4 0.7 1 4 9.1 15. 17.7 14. 8.5 4.8 3.1
3 4 2
199 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.8 7.7 8.5 18. 17.2 14. 9 5 2.5
4 6 1
199 0.6 0.2 0.8 0 6.1 9.2 16. 18.1 13 9.6 4.6 2.4
5 2
199 0.7 0.5 0.4 1.5 5.8 6.8 14. 14.4 17 8.8 5.3 2.3
6 2
199 0.7 0.6 0.3 1 4.5 11.9 15. 15.6 14. 8.1 5.3 1.7
7 9 7
199 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.2 6.7 8.8 14. 13.5 17. 12.3 5.4 3.7
8 5 6
199 0.9 0.6 0.6 1.5 5.4 10. 17. 13.9 15. 9.7 5.2 3.3
9 4 8 9
200 0.7 0.7 0.4 1.4 7.3 10 18. 16.2 11. 10.1 5.7 3.1
0 8 7
200 0.5 0.6 1 1.1 6.4 9.7 17 16.2 15. 9 6 2.6
1 3

Table 3: Projected change in Temperature from Downscaled data

1961 0.845 1988 0.275 2016 0.634 2044 0.539 2072 0.524
1962 0.674 1989 0.224 2017 0.623 2045 0.482 2073 0.865
1963 0.658 1990 0.138 2018 0.753 2046 0.523 2074 0.6
1964 0.689 1991 0.234 2019 0.769 2047 0.31 2075 0.643
1965 0.665 1992 0.212 2020 0.719 2048 0.285 2076 0.764
1966 0.562 1993 0.239 2021 0.723 2049 0.419 2077 0.776
1967 0.58 1994 0.24 2022 0.707 2050 0.415 2078 0.688
1968 0.487 1995 0.196 2023 0.765 2051 0.22 2079 0.699
1969 0.619 1996 0.172 2024 0.66 2052 0.489 2080 0.782
1970 0.408 1997 0.251 2025 0.72 2053 0.6 2081 0.944
1971 0.501 1998 0.285 2026 0.767 2054 0.261 2082 0.877
1972 0.5 1999 0.266 2027 0.81 2055 0.187 2083 0.666
1973 0.524 2000 0.252 2028 0.803 2056 0.218 2084 0.808
1974 0.458 2001 0.405 2029 0.772 2057 0.294 2085 0.895
1975 0.382 2002 0.282 2030 0.761 2058 0.357 2086 0.954
1976 0.255 2003 0.222 2031 0.811 2059 0.238 2087 0.813
1977 0.279 2004 0.509 2032 0.761 2060 0.38 2088 0.946
1978 0.169 2005 0.34 2033 0.65 2061 0.475 2089 1.036
1979 0.194 2006 0.483 2034 0.777 2062 0.295 2090 0.946
1980 0.298 2007 0.557 2035 0.739 2063 0.32 2091 1.011
1981 0.27 2008 0.476 2036 0.77 2064 0.328 2092 1.049
1982 0.075 2009 0.555 2037 0.666 2065 0.427 2093 0.938
1983 0.3 2010 0.576 2038 0.603 2066 0.558 2094 1.031
1984 0.3 2011 0.57 2039 0.598 2067 0.393 2095 1.05
1985 0.207 2012 0.5 2040 0.606 2068 0.546 2096 1.052
1986 0.195 2013 0.502 2041 0.575 2069 0.541 2097 1.104
1987 0.27 2014 0.533 2042 0.603 2070 0.548 2098 1.163
2015 0.56 2043 0.47 2071 0.498 2099 1.034

JA FE MA AP MA JU JU AU SE OC NO DEC
 N B R R Y N L G P T V
196 29. 32. 33.4 33. 33.9 31. 29. 29.6 30. 30. 30.5 31.3
1 6 2 9 5 9 2 3
196 29. 30. 32.6 33. 34.2 32. 29. 30.7 29. 31. 30.7 30.2
2 7 7 3 6 3 6 7
196 27. 29. 32.2 33. 35.1 30. 30. 30 29. 30. 31.2 29.9
3 9 7 7 2 3 1 5
196 30. 30. 32.4 34. 35.3 31. 31. 29.8 30. 30. 29.4 28.8
4 5 8 5 7 4 2 8
196 28. 30. 31.8 34. 32.8 31 31 29.2 30. 31. 30.5 30.1
5 8 8 6 1 1
196 40. 32 33.6 35. 41.1 32. 31. 31 29. 30. 30.5 29.9
6 5 7 3 2 6 7
196 28. 30. 32 34. 34.9 31 30. 29.2 30. 31 29.4 30.4
7 9 4 2 7 2
196 29. 30. 32.5 34 35.1 34. 31. 30.1 30. 30. 29.9 30.5
8 8 5 2 7 8 1
196 31 31. 32.8 34. 36 32. 32 29.9 29. 30. 31.2 29.7
9 2 7 6 8 7
197 31 30. 33.7 34 35.7 32. 30 30.1 29. 30. 30 29.8
0 4 7 3 8
197 30. 30 32.6 33. 32.2 31. 30. 30.5 31. 29 30.6 30.2
1 5 3 1 7 5
197 29. 31. 31.0 33. 33.6 32. 29. 30.1 31. 31. 31.5 30.8
2 3 7 8 1 3 6 9
197 31. 31. 33.2 35. 36.3 33. 31. 31.4 31. 30. 30.7 29.1
3 1 7 7 7 7 4 6
197 29. 31. 32.4 34. 33.7 31. 31. 29.6 32. 30. 29.8 30.1
4 6 2 8 6 6 1 3
197 29. 31. 33.1 34. 34.9 32. 31. 30.2 31. 31. 30.7 29.2
5 9 2 1 4 7 6 4
197 28. 30. 32.2 34. 35 31. 33 31.4 32. 31 30.3 29.5
6 8 2 1 9 5
197 26. 25. 26.8 28. 29.4 29. 27. 27.9 27. 27. 26.2 26.1
7 4 9 7 1 9 2 4
197 30. 30. 32.2 34. 34.4 33. 31. 31.6 30. 31. 30.1 29.2
8 6 3 4 6 7 4 9
197 30. 30. 34.0 34. 33.9 31. 31. 29.6 30. 29. 30.7 30.8
9 6 7 7 4 3 3 9
198 30. 31. 32.6 34. 34.5 32. 31. 31.8 30. 31. 30.7 29.7
0 6 6 2 6 3 6 2
198 29. 31. 33.7 35. 35.6 32. 32. 31.6 32. 31. 30.8 30.2
1 1 4 6 2 3 9 7
198 29. 31. 33.9 34. 35.2 33. 30. 31.2 31. 32. 31.9 30.9
2 7 6 8 9 7 1 2
198 31. 32. 34.7 36. 37.1 34. 33. 32.2 32. 31. 31.3 30.4
3 1 5 1 9 2 5 6
198 30. 32. 34.1 35. 33.9 32. 32. 29.6 32. 30. 31.6 30.7
4 4 3 8 1 7 4 8
198 30. 33. 34.7 34. 34.9 31. 32. 31.4 31. 31. 31.9 30.7
5 5 9 2 7 2 8 7
198 30. 31. 33.7 35. 34.3 33. 31. 30.9 31. 31. 31.9 30.8
6 3 1 4 4 8 1 3
198 30. 31. 32.2 35. 36.9 33. 32. 32.6 32. 32. 32.1 31.2
7 7 3 9 5 6 2 8
198 31. 32. 34.2 35. 35.7 32. 32. 32.9 33. 30. 30.9 30.2
8 8 7 8 6 2 1 8
198 31. 31. 32.7 34. 34.6 32. 32. 30.9 31. 31. 31.2 29.8
9 6 1 7 8 2 5 9
199 31. 32. 33.1 36. 34.9 31. 31. 30.8 31. 31. 31.2 30.1
0 1 8 3 7 4 4 1
199 30. 30. 33.0 34. 35.4 33. 31. 29.6 31. 31. 30.4 30.2
1 4 9 6 3 8 1 6
199 30. 32. 34.4 36. 35.6 34. 32. 30.9 31. 31. 30.4 30.7
2 3 1 3 1 2 4 9
199 30. 31. 32.8 34. 36.1 34. 32. 31.1 31. 31. 31.4 30.1
3 9 1 9 3 0 1 2
199 30. 32. 32.7 34. 33.9 33. 29. 31.5 31. 31. 32.2 31.4
4 6 1 6 0 9 3 2
199 30. 31. 33.3 35. 34.2 33. 32. 31.6 30. 31. 31.2 29.1
5 4 4 6 7 1 7 3
199 30. 30. 33.2 33. 33.7 33. 32. 31.8 31. 32. 30.3 29.7
6 1 6 0 7 1 1 1
199 29. 31. 32.4 34. 34.2 33. 31. 31.1 31. 32. 32.3 31.9
7 8 1 3 2 4 8 4
199 32. 33. 34.6 36. 35.4 34. 33. 32.9 31. 31. 31.9 30.2
8 3 5 3 0 7 3 2
199 30. 30. 32.5 33. 33.6 31. 30. 30.6 30. 31. 30.8 30.2
9 4 8 3 9 9 7 7
200 30. 31. 32.2 34. 32.4 32. 30. 31.9 30. 31. 31.3 30.5
0 8 3 8 9 1 9 0
200 30. 31. 31.9 35. 34.8 32. 31. 31.8 30. 32. 32.0 30.0
1 9 6 0 9 4 6 7
200 31. 30. 33.1 34. 34.8 33. 30. 31.8 31. 32. 31.1 32.1
2 1 8 9 9 4 6 3
200 31. 31. 32.9 35. 35.0 32. 30. 32.0 31. 32. 32.2 30.4
3 5 0 7 6 6 1 8
200 30. 31. 33.8 35. 34.2 31. 30. 32.5 32. 32. 31.6 30.6
4 8 5 0 6 8 0 2
200 30. 32. 32.6 34. 35.6 31. 32. 31.3 32. 31. 31.2 30.8
5 3 8 4 1 0 6 3
200 30. 31. 32.3 34. 33.3 33. 30. 30.4 32. 31. 32.1 30.7
6 4 3 7 2 3 6 9
200 30. 31. 33.2 34. 34.5 33. 32. 30.6 31. 30. 30.8 30.8
7 7 3 6 9 8 5 9
200 31. 30. 32.7 34. 32.9 32. 32. 31.0 31. 30. 31.7 30.2
8 2 7 5 7 0 2 9
200 29. 32. 33.2 33. 33.5 31. 31. 31.5 30. 31. 31.9 31.2
9 8 1 2 6 4 7 3
201 31. 33. 34.1 35. 36.2 33. 32. 32.4 33. 31. 31.2 30.3
0 2 3 6 7 9 0 4
201 30. 31. 31.8 32. 33.6 31. 30. 30.8 31. 31. 32.0 30.7
1 1 3 9 8 9 4 7
201 31. 31. 32.0 34. 33.8 32. 31. 30.2 31. 31. 32.7 31.8
2 1 4 7 0 6 3 6
201 30. 32. 32.8 35. 34.4 33. 32. 30.8 30. 31. 31.6 31.2
3 3 0 1 3 4 9 1
201 29. 30. 32.6 34. 35.3 32. 31. 31.6 31. 31. 31.8 30.6
4 4 7 2 9 4 7 9
201 29. 30. 32.3 34. 34.6 34. 31. 32.2 32. 32. 33.4 31.2
5 4 9 5 3 8 7 1
201 31. 31. 33.2 35. 34.8 33. 32. 30.9 31. 31. 31.8 31.2
6 6 2 5 7 7 6 9
201 30. 30. 32.6 34. 34.5 33. 32. 32.4 32. 31. 31.8 30.3
7 4 4 0 9 3 4 2

JA FE MA AP MA JU JU AU SE OC NO DEC
N B R R Y N L G P T V
196 18. 20. 22.4 22. 23.5 22. 22. 23.1 22. 22. 20.8 20.7
1 4 1 4 6 2 7 2
196 30. 19 27.3 22. 23 23. 23. 22.9 22. 22. 21.2 19.7
2 5 7 9 2 9 4
196 18. 18. 19.8 21. 22.7 23. 22. 22.9 22. 21. 21.2 20.7
3 9 4 5 3 9 8 9
196 20. 19. 20.9 21. 24.8 23 22. 22.3 23 22. 21.8 20.5
4 2 9 8 5 6
196 19. 19. 20.5 22. 23.1 23. 23. 22.9 23 22 22 20.8
5 5 1 2 6 5
196 25 20. 20.6 22. 23.2 23. 23. 23.5 22. 22. 22.3 21.6
6 1 6 7 3 6 5
196 19. 19. 20.5 22. 23.6 23. 23. 23.5 23. 22. 21.2 19.3
7 6 4 3 2 5 3 6
196 19. 19. 20.8 21. 23.5 23. 23. 23.7 24. 22. 20.5 20.2
8 6 6 5 9 6 4 2
196 21 20. 21.5 23. 24.5 24. 24. 23 23. 22. 21.3 22.3
9 8 1 2 2 1 9
197 21. 19. 21.6 22. 23.1 23. 23. 23 22. 22. 23.4 20.2
0 3 3 5 5 3 6 7
197 21. 20 22.8 21. 23.8 23. 23. 23.2 23. 22. 21.5 21.3
1 1 8 8 4 6 8
197 20. 20. 20.3 22. 23.7 23. 24. 23.4 23. 22. 22.2 21.5
2 3 3 3 9 0 4 7
197 20. 20. 20.1 22. 24.9 24. 24. 23.6 23. 22. 22.6 21.7
3 4 3 9 5 2 4 9
197 19. 21. 20.9 23. 23.8 23. 23. 23.8 23. 23. 22.7 21.7
4 6 2 2 9 6 6 8
197 21. 21. 22.3 23. 24.4 24. 23. 24.1 23. 23. 21.7 21.8
5 3 0 7 2 7 5 7
197 20. 19. 21.1 22. 25 23. 24. 25.3 23. 21. 24 20.8
6 3 9 9 9 1 5 6
197 22. 21. 21.4 22. 24.4 24. 24. 24.3 23. 22. 22.2 22.1
7 2 6 9 6 1 9 9
197 22. 21. 21.4 22. 24.4 24. 24. 24.3 23. 22. 22.2 22.7
8 2 6 9 6 1 9 9
197 19. 20. 22.8 23. 24.5 24. 24. 23.8 23. 23. 21.9 21.7
9 9 5 1 2 1 4 4
198 20. 20. 21.4 22. 24.0 23. 23. 23.1 23. 23. 22.4 21.3
0 8 9 4 2 1 4 1
198 19. 20. 20.7 23. 24.6 23. 23. 24.3 23. 22. 22.1 20.5
1 3 2 2 9 7 3 7
198 18. 19. 21.2 23. 24.1 24. 23. 23.6 23. 22. 21.4 21.5
2 7 2 4 4 8 4 2
198 20. 18. 21.6 22. 23.7 24. 23. 23.5 23. 22. 21.2 19.9
3 4 8 1 3 5 2 8
198 19. 19. 22.2 23. 23.3 23. 23. 23.2 22. 22. 21.7 19.8
4 7 6 2 3 2 3 3
198 18. 20. 21.1 23. 23.6 23. 22. 24.1 23. 22. 21.9 20.3
5 6 8 1 6 8 1 7
198 20. 20. 21.2 22. 24.3 24. 23. 23.8 22. 22. 22.3 20.1
6 0 0 7 1 2 7 7
198 18. 18. 21.0 23. 24.6 24. 24. 23.6 23. 23. 22.3 21.7
7 9 4 3 6 2 8 1
198 21. 21. 21.4 23. 24.7 24. 24. 23.9 23. 23. 22.6 20.3
8 3 2 8 0 2 9 9
198 21. 21. 22.4 23. 24.3 24. 24. 23.9 24. 23. 22.1 20.3
9 5 1 2 1 2 3 8
199 20. 21. 21.9 24. 24.8 24. 23. 24.4 23. 22. 22.8 21.8
0 7 1 4 6 7 6 9
199 20. 21. 21.0 23. 24.9 24. 24. 23.8 24. 22. 21.8 20.6
1 3 4 4 9 1 2 9
199 20. 20. 22.1 24. 24.8 24. 23. 23.8 24. 23. 21.5 21.0
2 1 6 0 8 7 1 6
199 20. 19. 21.4 23. 24.4 25. 24. 23.8 23. 23. 23.1 22.7
3 4 9 0 2 3 9 2
199 21. 21. 22.4 23. 25.2 24. 24. 24.3 24. 23. 22.0 21.4
4 3 4 7 4 5 3 4
199 21. 20. 21.5 23. 24.8 24. 24. 24.1 24. 23. 23.6 22.2
5 1 3 2 9 1 1 8
199 20. 20. 22.8 23. 24.9 24. 24. 23.9 24. 23. 23.2 20.8
6 8 3 8 6 3 2 8
199 19. 21. 20.9 23. 24.4 24. 24. 24.6 24. 23. 22.3 21.0
7 9 1 8 4 1 2 4
199 21. 22. 22.5 24. 25.9 25. 25. 24.5 24. 24. 24.0 23.2
8 2 2 5 4 1 4 6
199 22. 21. 23.4 24. 24.4 23. 24. 24.2 24. 23. 22.9 22.7
9 4 2 1 9 1 4 7
200 21. 22. 22.9 24. 24.3 24. 24. 24.5 23. 23. 23.4 22.9
0 3 3 2 5 0 9 7

Appendix H: Land cover data from Google Earth Pro (1984 – 2016)

1984
1992
2000
2008
2016