Extent of gross underestimation of precipitation in India

Abstract

The underestimation of precipitation (UoP) in the hilly and mountainous parts of South Asia is estimated by some studies to be as large as the observed precipitation (P). However, UoP has been analyzed to only a limited extent across India. To help bridge this gap, watershed-scale UoP was analyzed using various P datasets within a water imbalance analysis. Among these P datasets, the often-used Indian Meteorological Department (IMD) dataset is of primary interest. The gross UoP was identified by analyzing the extent of the imbalance in the annual water budget of watersheds corresponding to 242 river gauging stations for which quality-controlled data on catchment boundaries and streamflow are available. The water year (WY)-based volume of observed annual P was compared against the observed annual streamflow (R) and the satellite-based actual evapotranspiration (ET). Across many watersheds of both Northern and Peninsular India, spurious water imbalance scenarios (P≤R or P≪R+ET) were realized. It is shown that the management of water, such as groundwater extraction, reservoir storage and water diversion, is generally minimal compared to the annual P in such watersheds. It is also shown that annual changes in terrestrial water storage are minimal compared to the annual P in such watersheds. Assuming that data on R (and, to a lesser extent, ET) are reliable, it is concluded that UoP is very likely the cause of this imbalance. Inter-watershed groundwater flow (IGF) is assumed to be negligible. While the effect of IGF on R is unknown, examples are provided which show that IGF is unlikely to be the cause of the observed imbalance in certain watersheds. All 12 of the P datasets analyzed here suffer from UoP, but the extent of the UoP varies by dataset and region. The reanalysis-based datasets ERA5-Land and IMDAA are less affected by UoP than the IMD dataset. Based on the 30-year period of WY 1985–2014, P for the whole of India could be as much as 19 % (ERA5-Land) to 37 % (IMDAA) higher than that from the IMD, with substantial variability within years and river basins. The actual magnitude of UoP is speculated to be even greater. Moreover, trends seen in the IMD's P are not always present in ERA5-Land and IMDAA. Studies using IMD should exercise caution since UoP could lead to the misrepresentation of water budgets and long-term trends. Limitations of this study are discussed.