Team Members
Teachers
Project Advisor
Who hasn’t heard the catastrophic tales of the world’s water drying up? Who actually believes them? In certain places around the world with arid climates, this is a real danger. New Mexico is one such place. The people of this state use too much water from the aquifer from which most of the state’s water is pumped. As the water supply dwindles, the population grows. How long until this issue becomes a serious problem?
In Albuquerque, New Mexico, the government has seen this problem and is taking steps to fix it. The City of Albuquerque has implemented conservation and management plans in order to conserve this most important resource. But will they work?
Team 13’s Supercomputing Challenge project was initially to create a complete model of the city’s groundwater supply. Upon hearing that the City of Albuquerque and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) had already spent millions of dollars on this selfsame project, the gears began turning in another direction. The project’s main goal then became to write a program to numerically model the Albuquerque water system in order to predict the effectiveness of the City’s conservation and management plans.
Large amounts of data from the City and USGS were gathered and meticulously examined. It first had to be decided what data would be used where. Calculating future rainfall and gallons per capita per day were the first steps towards the completion of the project. The final product is a program that can predict how much water will be taken from the aquifer one hundred years following any given year, based on user input.
To humans, water is one of the most valuable resources that we have, as it enables us to live. We use water for everything from agriculture and engineering to transportation. Humans need to protect the water from overuse and pollution. In the arid climate of New Mexico, this resource is doubly precious, especially in a metropolitan area like Albuquerque.
The city sits atop a pool of water that spans from Cochiti Reservoir in the north to downstream San Acacia in the south. The City of Albuquerque is pulling all of its water from this aquifer. For decades, we believed that the aquifer provided a perfect, inexhaustible supply of water. We also thought that precipitation or the Rio Grande would automatically replace all water that we removed from the aquifer. But in 1993, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) released a study of the water system, (the aquifer and the natural and manmade factors that affect it), that disclosed that the water level has dropped about 160 feet since the year 1960. It also revealed that only about one half of the water that we remove from the aquifer is getting replaced.
On September 22, 2000, the Albuquerque Journal printed an article that stressed the issues of our dwindling water supply. The article said that the water level is continuing to fall at about a rate of two feet per year. It also outlined the City of Albuquerque’s plans to use river water for the purpose of drinking by the year 2005. It told us that this could create yet another problem. Endangered species, such as the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher and the Silvery Minnow, can’t survive unless a certain amount of water always remains in the river.
In addition, the Albuquerque Public Works Department’s draft of the Fundamental Water Service Policies states, "As used in the context of a sustainable water supply, sustainability is the concept of use and management of water resources today so as not to limit the choices and opportunities for future generations with regard to those water resources." This means that we, the citizens and government of Albuquerque, need to make a real effort today to protect and conserve water so that future generations won’t have to go to extreme lengths to get a sustainable supply of clean water.
To address these issues, our project was to create a model of the Albuquerque water system that functions the same way as the actual system. The model includes important factors such as aquifer recharge, both by natural and human means, the city's water removal from the aquifer, as well as that which leaves the system naturally, rainfall and other types of precipitation, population growth, and use of water routed through the San Juan/Chama diversion tunnels for the purpose of drinking.
The model was validated by being run on previous years. We cross-referenced our results with the actual data from those years. When our model was calibrated, we ran different scenarios of weather patterns, population, etc., in order to predict the future sustainability of the water supply. Finally, when we had all of this figured out, we used our model to study individual, as well as combinations of, the City of Albuquerque’s water management and conservation plans.
To build this model, we needed a basic understanding of the workings of water. For example, we needed to know that water is measured in terms of acre-feet, (an acre of water one foot deep), and gallons. We needed to know information specific to this aquifer. We needed to know the factors that affected the amount of groundwater and how much can be safely removed.
Water Systems
Water behaves in a very complicated system, very like a life form. Water falls from the sky as precipitation such as rain, snow or hail. When it rains, the water gets absorbed into the ground, flows into, or lands in, a body of water, or is used by plants. When it snows or hails, if it doesn’t melt immediately, it will result in runoff in the spring, when it does melt, it either flows into the nearest body of water, or gets absorbed into the ground. From here, the water does several things. If it falls to the ground and doesn’t flow into a water body, it will either sink into the ground, joining an aquifer and becoming groundwater, or it will evaporate and begin the cycle again. That which does become groundwater, very little of the actual water that falls, may sit in the aquifer for many years until it eventually flows slowly into a body of water, or gets pumped out. The water that is used for plants does something called evapotranspiration in which the water evaporates from the leaves or other parts of the plant. Some of the water that flows into rivers gets removed by evaporation, animals or man. This circle, where water falls, lands, evaporates and becomes rain again, or percolates through the ground to become part of an aquifer, is known as the hydrologic cycle.
Groundwater is everywhere, but in an aquifer, there is more a concentrated, larger amount. An aquifer is an underground formation of porous or permeable rock and loose materials, such as sand. They can be very small, but many go to hundreds of meters thick. Although the water in aquifers flows, it is not an underground river, which is a common misconception. The water does flow, however, but very slowly, at a rate of no more than a few feet per year: this can vary more, or less, in different cases, often depending on the slope of the land, or pressure within the aquifer.
The most general grouping of aquifers falls into two categories; confined and unconfined aquifers. In the case of unconfined aquifers, the groundwater doesn’t fill up to the surface, so that the levels of water in the aquifer can rise and fall. Generally, the form that an unconfined aquifer takes mimics the topography of the land it is in, such as hills and valleys. In the other type of aquifer, confined, the water is between two layers of a solid material, such as clay. Instead of being influenced to move by gravity, like the unconfined aquifers, the confined aquifers flow because of the intense water pressure caused by the level being unable to rise or fall.
Water leaves an aquifer by either exiting the ground at a body of water, a process called discharge, or by being removed by the pumping of a well. Water, called recharge, enters the aquifer by seeping down from bodies of water or from the surface, or through a process called injection, where it is pumped artificially back into the aquifer through wells. Water that is removed but not replenished by recharge or injection is called drawdown. Drawdown can be affected by an area’s location in relation to pumping well, i.e., drawdown will be higher near a large well, whereas it will be smaller in areas where there is no well.
Our Aquifer
The Albuquerque aquifer spans from Cochiti Reservoir, downstream to San Acacia in the south. It is about one hundred miles long, 25-40 miles wide, and can range in thickness anywhere from 5 meters to 14,000 meters in some places. This aquifer is called an unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifer. It is made up of sand and other very porous materials, allowing it to flow and percolate relatively easily. It is an unconfined aquifer in which the uppermost level, the ‘water table’ is able to rise and fall. The aquifer is also considered a basin-fill aquifer, which means that Rio Grande Valley forces surface water to flow into the river, where it can then recharge the aquifer. We remove water from our aquifer by pumping it out, yet rely on natural means to recharge the groundwater supply. Because of this, little of what we take out manages to make it back in.
Saving The Water
For our project we gathered information from the City of Albuquerque, the United States Geological Survey (USGS), and the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). We obtained data on water usage, population statistics and growth, and gallons (of water) per capita (person) per day (GPCD) from the City of Albuquerque. We also acquired information on water systems and their properties from the USGS and weather and climate data from the WRCC.
To save the water that we already have, the City of Albuquerque has implemented conservation measures that include drop days, (days where watering isn’t permitted/practical), low-flow toilets, landscaping restrictions, such as giving fines for ‘watering the sidewalk,’ restaurants only giving water to customers who request it, sheets in hotels and motels being washed only at guests’ request, and voluntary conservation measures that include taking shorter showers and avoiding baths. Table 1 shows the estimated savings that the conservation measures will bring.
| Low-flow toilets | About 33% of indoor residential water use can occur through the toilet. Ultra-low-flow toilets use only 1.6 gallons of water per flush while older toilets use 3.5 to 5 gallons per flush. |
| Low-flow shower heads | Low-flow showerheads deliver 2.5 gallons of water per minute and are relatively inexpensive. Older showerheads use 5 to 7 gallons per minute. |
| "Drop days" | Nearly 60% of Albuquerque's water use during the growing season is applied to landscape. |
| Water upon request and not changing sheets daily | 100,000,000 gallons per year |
To bring new water into the system, the city has implemented various water management plans. These include the recycling of gray and industrial wastewater to use to water City properties such as the Balloon Fiesta Park and public parks. San Juan/Chama water, which was obtained by the city in the 1970’s, and diverted into the Rio Grande by a system of diversion tunnels, will be treated and used as drinking water. Approximately half of this water will then be returned to the river and some of this may eventually be used to manually recharge the aquifer. Table 2 shows the estimated savings and new water the management plans will bring.
| Shallow Ground Water Irrigation - use shallow, nonpotable ground water to irrigate the Biological Park and areas in the central city | 900 acre-feet per year |
| Southside Recycling - reclaimed water to irrigate green areas and provide industrial water to the Southeast Heights and South Valley | 3,000 acre-feet per year |
| North I-25 Reuse Corridor - recycled wastewater and reclaimed surface water withdrawn from the river just south of Alameda for irrigation and industrial water including Balloon Fiesta Park, factories, schools, parks and golf courses | 3,900 acre-feet per year |
| Drinking water from San Juan-Chama Diversion | 94,000 acre-feet per year, half of it is native Rio Grande water which will be returned to the river |
For our program, we needed to find data pertaining to the weather and population growth for the City of Albuquerque. We got historical population data from Jean Witherspoon at the Water Resources Division of the City of Albuquerque Public Works Department, and found our historical weather data from the Western Regional Climate Center. We used this data to develop the scenario that our program uses. We did not find an independent scenario for the city, but multiple scenarios because of the fact that there is no one single idea for the future of Albuquerque. We found four different scenarios for Albuquerque. We used these scenarios when running the program in order to give us an accurate view of a possible future.
The first step of our project was to establish a baseline Gallons per Capita per Day (GPCD). We began by studying actual water usage data from before the City’s conservation projects were implemented (see Table 3). While studying the historical water usage data from the City of Albuquerque Water Resources Department, we conjectured that the amount of water used often depends on the amount of rainfall. The rainfall data that was used came from the Western Regional Climate Center. (See Figure 1.) Generally, we found that increased water use can be attributed to a decrease in rainfall.
Rainfall | ||
10.75 | ||
12.98 | ||
8.34 | ||
13.11 | ||
4.99 | ||
10.25 | ||
11.59 | ||
12.08 | ||
9.03 | ||
11.15 |
In order to derive the relationship between rainfall and GPCD, we used trend analysis. Using Microsoft Excel, we experimented, in trial-and-error style, with linear trend, quadratic trend, cubic trend, and quartic trend. The quartic equation, an equation with a fourth power, (see Figure 2) turned out to be the closest to solving our problems.
The result of the quartic equation matches fairly closely to the historical GPCD, as shown in Figure 3.
Because total water consumption depends on the service population, we needed to estimate the growth of the city’s population. In our research, we found two different growth rate estimates. The first is the current population growth rate, which is 1.5% per year. This rate is based on the last twelve years of actual population growth. The second is a projected rate from the Albuquerque City Planning Department, which is 1% per year. This rate is based upon the declining population growth rate from the 1950’s. Although these population growth rates can be used in the program, we decided to make growth rate a user-input variable, rather than limiting it to just the two set rates. Table 4 shows projected populations using both rates.
Once we had the rates of population growth established, we had to figure out what the rainfall would be for future years. It is generally very dry, and average rainfall per year in Albuquerque is 8.99 inches. In addition, we found that there are two weather patterns that are believed to affect yearly precipitation levels. The first is Pacific Decadal Oscillation, or PDO. It was developed by Charlie Liles, the National Weather Service’s top official in New Mexico. It is similar to El Nino and La Nina, except that it lasts for decades. This ten-year pattern dictates that one year will be wetter-than-average, four average, and five dryer-than-average. Currently, we are in the wet part of the cycle. But, according to the pattern, it is also on the downswing; we will have dry spells for the next 20 years with only 60%-80% of our average rainfall. The second pattern type, the wet/dry pattern (WDP), is based on the last 80 years. Of the next twenty years, 27% will be wet years, 46% will be dry, and 27% average years.
In our program, the user may choose between wet-dry, PDO, and a custom pattern. With the custom pattern the user is able to enter a specific percent for wet, dry and average rainfall years. The entered percentages are then used to create three categories of random numbers. These three categories are wet, dry and normal. These categories are then broken down into another random number set. The random number plus/minus forms the minimum/maximum baseline, allowing for a wide range of values.
Our next step was to figure out savings from the various water conservation plans. We learned, from the City of Albuquerque’s conservation plans, that residential water usage is 71% of the total water used. During an average year 60% of water usage is indoors, and the rest outdoors. The conservation savings that we implemented as part of the program are the outdoor water savings, low-flow toilet and showerhead savings, as well as ‘water on demand’ savings. We determined the amount of outdoor water savings by using the program to figure the baseline GPCD, which is then multiplied by 71% for residential usage, 40% for outdoor usage and 50% for percent-of-savings. To determine the amount of water savings from low-flow toilets, we used the baseline GPCD multiplied by 71% for residential usage, 60% for indoor usage, and 33% for the amount used in toilets. Then we subtracted low-flow toilets from normal toilets and divided it by the normal (3.5-1.6/3.5) to get the percent of savings. We used the same method to figure the low-flow showerhead savings, substituting the toilet numbers with showerhead ones respectively. Figure 4 shows the indoor water usage percentages. The program is set up so that the user enters a beginning rate of compliance (as a decimal) for each of the types of plans.
We then implemented the City’s water management plans in the program. Three management plans were used in our program. The North I-25 Reuse Corridor is where Phillip’s Semiconductor Plant, as well as other industrial corporations, use their gray water for watering parks, such as the Balloon Fiesta Park, rather than disposing of it. The Southside Recycling Corridor is where the wastewater treatment plant will use its water to water nearby parks, golf courses and other recreational areas. The third plan is the Shallow Groundwater Irrigation plan in which low quality groundwater will be used for irrigation of the Albuquerque Biological Park and surrounding areas. These were all in acre-feet; therefore the program converts them to gallons. We implemented these into the program by subtracting the total management plan savings from our computed total water usage and used the calculations so far to determine the conserved GPCD. Values for the management are not seen or affected by the user, as they are set rates.
Our final addition to the program was the implementation of the water from the San Juan/Chama (SJ/C) Project. This part is different from the rest of the program because it does not affect the GPCD, but the drawdown, (the amount of water that is removed from the aquifer that is not replenished), so it is the final variable in the program. The user enters the year in which SJ/C first goes into effect. The program then uses this information to compute the amount of drawdown, beginning in that specific year, which is affected by the SJ/C water.
The USGS computed that the mountain front and tributary recharge rate for a normal year is 110,000 acre-feet. We reduced this by other urban withdrawals, rural withdrawals and commercial and industrial withdrawals, (23,700 + 6,400 + 8,300 acre-feet, respectively), resulting in an annual recharge of 72,600 acre-feet for a normal rainfall year. However, if the rainfall is below average, the recharge will be less, but, conversely, an above average rainfall will cause the recharge to increase.
Drawdown is the amount that the city pumps out of the aquifer that is not replenished. Our program computes drawdown by subtracting recharge from the total amount pumped. If this amount is negative, then the aquifer is being filled. If the amount is positive then the aquifer is being depleted.
This model is a parallel-processing program that uses Message Passing Interface (MPI) routines to communicate between processors. All input and output for the program is done by the root processor (rank = 0). The data is broadcast to all processors and the processors each do a share of the calculations. Once the calculations are complete the results are returned to the root processor.
The program prompts for the type of weather pattern to be used. Because the patterns that we found to be most accurate are PDO and WDP, the program has these patterns built in. The program also has a custom weather option in the event that another weather type occurs. The program prompts for current population in order to compute the total water usage. The user inputs the population growth rate, as well as the year from which the original population came, (the starting year). Next is the prompt that asks how many years the program is to run for, with a maximum of one hundred years. Then the program needs to know the compliance rates for the low-flow showerheads and toilets, in order to know how much will be saved from this. The user enters the initial compliance rate. Since current regulations require all new construction to use the low-flow toilets and showerheads, the compliance rates are increased as the population grows. The final prompt asks what year the San Juan/Chama project goes into effect. The program then broadcasts the data to all of the processors.
The program stores these values into the local classes. One class is used to calculate the yearly rainfall from the weather pattern entered. The GPCD is computed using this rainfall. Next, the conservation savings are computed based on the GPCD and compliance levels. These plans are subtracted from the baseline GPCD. This modified GPCD is multiplied by 365 days and the population to give the total water demand. The management plans are subtracted from the total water demand. After dividing the total water demand by 365 and population, we have a new GPCD. The San Juan/Chama water savings is then subtracted from the year’s total water demand to give the amount that has to be pumped from the aquifer. The program assumes that any excess water is pumped back into the aquifer following the implementation of SJ/C. This new calculated data is then collected by the main processor.
The final calculation is that of drawdown using recharge which varies with the rainfall. All of the collected data along with the drawdown is written to the screen. Figure 5 is a flowchart showing the main processing of our program.
Upon the completion of writing our program, we ran various scenarios of the management plans and conservation measures in order to get results. We ran five scenarios, each with five separate runs to account for extreme numbers generated by the program’s random numbers. The five scenarios that we ran were Happy Days Scenario (Happy), Pacific Decadal Oscillation, 1% Growth Scenario (PDO1), Pacific Decadal Oscillation, 1.5% Growth Scenario(PDO15), Wet/Dry Pattern, 1% Growth Scenario(WDP1), and Wet/Dry Pattern, 1.5% Growth Scenario(WDP15). The output from each of the runs was captured in a file that we downloaded from pi to a Windows PC. We loaded the information that we got from the program into Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. Following this, we got a running total of the drawdown by adding together the previous years’ drawdowns.
The Happy Days scenario is the ideal scenario, in which all variables are ‘perfect’. The scenario assumes that all management plans are implemented on time and work correctly, that the rainfall for every year will fall within the average amount, and that all city water accounts comply completely with all conservation measures implemented by the city. This scenario starts in 1999 and runs for 100 years.
The results that we got from the program showed that the city will continue to achieve negative drawdown from the aquifer until 2005 when San Juan/Chama goes into effect. From there the drawdown drastically drops as the city removes less and less from the aquifer. It continues to drop until about 2060. Then it begins to rise exponentially, just as it had previously until SJ/C. This ideal situation bodes well, as it doesn’t reach our current drawdown again until after the hundred years for which we had run the program. This is very similar to the City of Albuquerque’s predictions for its future from current trends, yet ours shows the most ideal situation. Figure 6 shows the average of the five Happy Days runs. A positive number denotes aquifer discharge; a negative number denotes aquifer recharge.
Pacific Decadal Oscillation, 1% Growth Scenario
The next scenario takes on the properties of the PDO weather scenario, (50% dry years, 10% wet, 40% average). This scenario assumes that SJ/C is implemented on time and works correctly, that 10% of water accounts comply with the low-flow showerhead and toilets, and that 40% of accounts comply with the water on request and outdoor plan. The population growth rate in PDO1 is 1%. This scenario starts in 1999 and runs for 100 years.
With this scenario, the drawdown will rise until 2005 when SJ/C is implemented and will begin to drop until about 2040. At this time, the drawdown will begin to rise exponentially, having never broken into negative drawdown. Figure 7 shows the average of the five PDO1 runs, where positive numbers equal aquifer drawdown.
Pacific Decadal Oscillation, 1.5% Growth Scenario
The PDO15 scenario takes on the properties of the PDO weather scenario, (50% dry years, 10% wet, 40% average). This scenario assumes that SJ/C is implemented on time and works correctly, that 10% of water accounts comply with the low-flow showerhead and toilets, and that 40% of accounts comply with the water on request and outdoor plan. The population growth rate in PDO15 is 1.5%. This scenario starts in 1999 and runs for 100 years.
In PDO15 the drawdown will rise until 2005 when SJ/C is implemented and will begin to drop until about 2025, where it evens out until about 2030. At this time, the drawdown will begin to rise exponentially, having never broken into negative drawdown. Figure 8 shows the average of the five PDO15 runs, where positive numbers equal aquifer drawdown.
Wet/Dry Pattern, 1% Growth Scenario
The fourth scenario takes on the properties of the WDP weather scenario, (46% dry years, 27% wet, 27% average). This scenario assumes that SJ/C is implemented on time and works correctly, that 10% of water accounts comply with the low-flow showerhead and toilets, and that 40% of accounts comply with the water on request and outdoor plan. The population growth rate in WDP1 is 1%. This scenario starts in 1999 and runs for 100 years.
In this scenario, the drawdown rises quickly until 2005 when SJ/C is implemented, and will begin to drop until about 2030. It manages to reach negative drawdown around 2020 but rises out of negative about 2040. It continues to rise exponentially from there. Figure 9 shows the average of the five WDP1 runs, where positive numbers equal aquifer drawdown, and negative numbers equal recharge.
Wet/Dry Pattern, 1.5% Growth Scenario
Scenario WDP15 takes on the properties of the WDP weather scenario, (46% dry years, 27% wet, 27% average). This scenario assumes that SJ/C is implemented on time and works correctly, that 10% of water accounts comply with the low-flow showerhead and toilets, and that 40% of accounts comply with the water on request and outdoor plan. The population growth rate in WDP15 is 1.5%. This scenario starts in 1999 and runs for 100 years.
Here the drawdown rises quickly until 2005 when SJ/C is implemented, and will do a shallow drop about 2010, then evens out until around 2030 where it begins a slow rise, never reaching negative drawdown. In about 2040, the drawdown starts rising exponentially. Figure 10 shows the average of the five WDP15 runs, where positive numbers equal aquifer drawdown.
Table 5 shows the inputs for the five types of runs on the program. And, for the interested reader, full output of all twenty-five runs can be found in Appendix B.
| Happy Days | |||||
| %Dry, %Wet, %Normal | |||||
| Population | |||||
| Growth Rate | |||||
| Current Year | |||||
| Number of Years to Run | |||||
| Shower Compliance | |||||
| Toilet Compliance | |||||
| Outdoor Compliance | |||||
| Water Request Compliance | |||||
| Year SJ/C Is Effective |
All in all, we managed to accomplish most of our goals. Our program encompasses all of the major variables, and returns results that make sense in the given context. The results were good, in that they were realistic, but they predict future water problems for the City of Albuquerque.
According to the various graphs and numbers that were calculated by the program, the biggest help to the water supply was the implementation of the San Juan/Chama Project. Once the city begins to get most of its water from the river, the drawdown in the aquifer decreases dramatically. When you add that to the fact that the City begins pumping water back into the aquifer, the result is a negative drawdown in which the aquifer begins to grow instead of shrink.
The results that we got for the future of the water system all showed that in the near future our water supply is fine up until about 2040 to 2060, when the drawdown starts growing exponentially. The City of Albuquerque’s prediction that, with 1% population growth, we would be fine until about 2060 is, according to our program, a rather accurate one.
The graphs of the results for each of the five scenarios seemed to mirror a population growth curve once the San Juan/Chama effects wore off. This seems to suggest that the biggest threat to the water supply in the future is the growing population. Beyond the management and conservation plans, the best solutions would be to limit the population and, in addition, find a new reliable water supply.
Figure 11 shows a comparison between a population growth curve and the drawdown curve for our PDO15 run average. It can be seen that the population curve is very similar to the drawdown curve.
The project was basically completed as well as possible considering our limited time and resources. The City of Albuquerque and the USGS have spent years and millions of dollars working on a similar project.
If we had more time and money to spend on this project, we probably could have gone much farther with it. We could have run several more scenarios with differing variables for more accurate results. As with any scientific project, more results are synonymous with more accuracy.
As for future work with this project, we hope that other people, such as those who work for the City and USGS, will be able to use and expand upon our program. The model can easily be adapted to similar situations in other places by changing the rainfall, population, conservation, etc. The code is very versatile because the variables for the Albuquerque area can be changed to fit variables for different areas.
Other things that can be added to the program that we didn’t have time to implement are the effects of leaving water in the river, or pumping groundwater into the river, for the silvery minnow. We also couldn’t study the effects of small water-losses that add up, such as leaky pipes and broken water mains, nor did we study the effects on the aquifer of removing water from the river at Alameda and then returning about half of it downstream south of the city. We could probably have done much more with an already complex project with more time.
Challenge Team 13 would like to thank the following people for their contributions to our project. Whether the contribution be big or small, all were very significant to getting the project completed satisfactorily.
Jean Witherspoon for being our project advisor, providing us with lots of information to use in our program, and motivating us. As well as replying to all of our phone calls and giving us ideas for how to implement the model. She also has reviewed our final document and encouraged us.
Jim Bartolino for providing us with a huge supply of information about aquifers, Albuquerque’s aquifer, the Albuquerque/Middle Rio Grande Basin, drawdown, wells and water levels.
Debra Loftin for giving us the project idea, helping us with our presentations, setting up the Super Computing Challenge at Bosque, driving us to Glorietta and UNM, and proofreading our final report.
Jinni Durham reading our final report.
Laurel Behles for chauffeuring between group meetings, school and orthodontist appointments without (much) complaint, as well as proofreading our final report.
Joseph and Ann Merrick for chauffeuring between group meetings and school.
Dorothy Ashmore for forcing us to work, helping us with the code, forcing us to finish the project and final report, doing chauffeur duty between group meetings and meetings with City people, and for providing a never-ending stream of Pepsi.
Albuquerque Public Works Department, September 2000, Draft Fundamental Water Services Policies.
Alley, W. M., Reilly, T. E., Franke O. L., 1999, Sustainability of Ground-Water Resources, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186.
Bartolino, J.R., 1997, Middle Rio Grande Basin Study, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-034-97.
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, City of Albuquerque, Population Projections, 2000.http://www.cabq.gov/planning/statistics/popproj.pdf
City of Albuquerque Public Works Department, Water Resources, 1997, City of Albuquerque Water Resources Management Strategy.
Cooney Productions (Producer), 1995, Quenching Our Thirst: Albuquerque Water Challenge, [Videotape]. For the Public Works Department, City of Albuquerque.
Cooney Productions (Producer), 1999, Tapping the Legacy: Seeking a Sustainable Water Supply, [Videotape]. For the Public Works Department, City of Albuquerque.
Earp, D., Postlethwait, J., and Witherspoon, J, "Albuquerque's Environmental Story - Water", November 29, 2000 http://www.cabq.gov/aes/s5water.html
Eckel, B., Thinking in C++. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1995
Fleck, J., November 5, 2000, "State Could Be in Decades-Long Dry Spell", Albuquerque Journal
Franke, O. L., Reilly, T. E., Pollock, D. W., and LaBaugh, J. W., 1998, Estimating Areas Contributing Recharge to Wells, Lessons from Previous Studies, U. S. Geological Survey Circular 1174.
Galloway, D., Jones, D., and Ingebritsen, S. E., editors, 1999, Land Subsidence in the United States, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1182.
Gregory, J., based on material by Gordon, L., Albuquerque’s Environmental Story, January 28, 2001 http://www.cabq.gov/aes/s5pop.html
Hawley, J.W. and Haase, C.S., 1992, Hydrogeologic framework of the northern Albuquerque Basin, New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Open-file Report 387
Kernodle, J.M., McAda, D.P., and Thorn, C.R., 1995, Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Albuquerque Basin, Central New Mexico, 1901-1994, With Projections to 2020, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4251, and The City of Albuquerque Publics Work Department
Liles, C. "Albuquerque’s Seasonal Precipitation Relationship with the Pacific Decadel Oscillation", February 2, 2001 http://www.srh.noaa.gov/abq/feature/albuquerquePDO.htm
Middle Tennessee State University, "An Introduction to the UNIX Make Utility", http://www.mtsu.edu/~csdept/UNIX_ HELP/make.html
Pacheco, P.S., A User’s Guide to MPI, San Francisco: University of San Francisco, 1998
Rankin, D. R., 2000, Water-Level Data for the Albuquerque Basin and Adjacent Areas, Central New Mexico, Period of Record Through 1999, U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-231, and City of Albuquerque.
Thorn, C.R., McAda, D.P., and Kernodle, J.M., 1993, U.S. Geological Survey, 1992, Geohydrologic Framework and Hydrologic Conditions in the Albuquerque Basin, Central New Mexico, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4149, and The City of Albuquerque Publics Work Department, Water Utility Division.
Thorn, C.R. 1996, Ground-Water Monitoring in the Albuquerque Area, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-088-96.
Wallach, Dan, A Coding Convention for C++ Code. Rice University, Online. Internet. 15 Oct. 1999. http://www.cs.rice.edu/~dwallach/CplusPlusStyle.html
Western Regional Climate Center, "ALBUQUERQUE WSFO AIRPOR, NEW MEXICO Monthly Total Precipitation (inches)", http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?nmalbu
Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L., Alley, W.M., 1999, Ground Water and Surface Water - A Single Resource, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1139.
U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Ground-Water-Level Monitoring in Middle Rio Grande Basin Piezometers http://nm.water.usgs.gov/city.html
U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Ground-Water Monitoring and Municipal Pumpage in the Albuquerque Area, Central New Mexico http://nm.water.usgs.gov/lithos/index.html
U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Geological Survey-Middle Rio Grande Basin Study http://rmmcweb.cr.usgs.gov/public/mrgb/mrgbhome.html