Lake Travis Mean Water Level Forecast (11/1/2021)
Lake Travis Monthly Mean Water Level Forecast
Author: David Ferreira (Resume)
Data Sources: LCRA, Texas Water Development Board (WaterDataforTexas.org)
Forecast
Forecast Data
Period |
Point Forecast |
Lo 80 |
Hi 80 |
Lo 95 |
Hi 95 |
Actual |
Delta |
% Delta |
Nov-21 |
664.0 |
658.7 |
669.4 |
655.9 |
672.2 |
|
|
|
Dec-21 |
664.8 |
657.0 |
672.6 |
652.8 |
676.8 |
|
|
|
Jan-22 |
665.2 |
655.5 |
674.9 |
650.4 |
680.1 |
|
|
|
Feb-22 |
666.4 |
655.1 |
677.7 |
649.1 |
683.7 |
|
|
|
Mar-22 |
666.8 |
654.1 |
679.6 |
647.4 |
686.3 |
|
|
|
Apr-22 |
666.7 |
652.7 |
680.7 |
645.3 |
688.1 |
|
|
|
Table 1: Mean forecast and confidence intervals by month (6-month forecast)
* When comparing the accuracy of our forecasts to that of the LCRA forecasts for Lake Travis, please keep in mind these 2 important details:
- The LCRA’s median forecasts are for water levels on a specific date (1st of each month?) while ours are forecasts of monthly average water levels.
- The LCRA holds the keys to the Mansfield Dam and actually controls the water level. We do not.
Notes:
We are not affiliated with the Lower Colorado River
Authority (LCRA) in any way whatsoever.
This document is not intended for commercial use or
publication. It is produced for demonstration and evaluation purposes only. It
serves as a record of our forecast of Lake Travis water levels made on 11/01/21.
This original forecast is provided free of charge to
interested members of the general public as a courtesy. No warranty is made as
to the accuracy.
Let us
help you automate your Data Science and Machine Learning processes.
Historical
Lake Travis is one of 6 lakes managed by the Lower Colorado
River Authority – the “Highland Lakes”. It was formed in 1941 when the river
was impounded by the completion of the Mansfield Dam. These lakes serve as
storage (inventory) to satisfy electrical demand for consumers across Texas and
irrigation water demand from downstream farmers.
While water levels of other LCRA lakes are managed to
maintain a narrow range of water levels, the water level of Lake Travis is
allowed to fluctuate in a much wider range than other Highland Lakes. This
creates challenges for property owners, commercial users, and recreation users
of Lake Travis.
In recent years, the lake has been managed in the range of
650’ to 690’ above mean sea level (MSL). However, a significant drought from
2010 to 2015 caused levels to remain below 640’ for several years.
Fig. 2: Lake Travis historical water levels and classical decomposition into component elements: seasonal, trend-cycle, and remainder (noise)
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1: Why do you do these Lake Travis forecasts?
A1: We generate these forecast on a quarterly or semi-annual
basis for the following reasons:
- Public Service: Private and commercial property owners, recreational users, and authorities all have a keen interest in knowing future water levels with maximum accuracy.
- We derive entertainment and educational value from doing forecasts like this and seek other opportunities for similar challenges.
- We seek to re-channel our successful software engineering career toward a hybrid career that will merge our enjoyment of software engineering with our passion for econometric analysis and forecasting.
- We have an ongoing recreational interest in the water level of Lake Travis.
Q1: Why don’t you forecast the levels of the other Highland
Lakes above and below Lake Travis? Is that too difficult for you? Are you scared?
A1: We
chose Lake Travis, in part, because of the challenge it presents and because of
the utility of accurate forecasts for ourselves and other stakeholders.
Predicting the levels of others lakes in this region might not be very useful
since their fluctuations are minimal. For what it’s worth, we are considering
adding other lakes to our forecast repertoire. But first we’d like to focus on
integrating our Neural Network model of Lake Travis with the model used in this
forecast.
Q2: Doesn’t LCRA provide forecasts of Lake Travis water
levels?
A2: Yes, they do provide 6-month “projections” each month. They
also hold the keys to the dam. They have both control and fiduciary interest in
the data being forecast. We encourage readers to compare our forecasts to LCRA
projections for accuracy. We would, however, caution the reader that LCRA
projections are for water levels for specific dates (the 1st of each
month?). In contrast, our forecasts are for a monthly average water level for
each month being forecast. Still, we believe the accuracy of our forecasts
surpasses that of the LCRA projections.
Q3: Can’t we just use Excel to forecast things like this?
A3: You can. And that may fit your particular need quite
well. Another method would be to print out a graph and draw a line through both
the same month in the first year of data and the last year of data and carry
that line forward. These methods might both suite your needs (no sarcasm
intended). We encourage you to compare these forecasts against ours, those of
LCRA, and observed results. We think you will find that not all methods are
equally accurate over time.
Q4: So … y’all studied Economics / Econometrics. How does
that qualify you to forecast a hydrological phenomenon like the water level of
a lake?
A4: The water level of Lake Travis is indeed a hydrological phenomenon. But it is also an economic phenomenon – it is impacted by statewide electrical demand, and the irrigation demands of farmers downstream. Forecasting the water level of Lake Travis is very much an econometric problem that involves some hydrology.
About the Author
Dave Ferreira has a life-long passion for quantitative
analysis, data-driven reasoning, and extracting insight and Truth from data
(the bigger, the better).
He is currently enrolled in the MS Finance & Economics
program at West Texas Univ. He is an experienced Software Development Eng.,
formerly of 3M, Dell, and Microsoft.
Dave is also a former Peace Corps Volunteer and in a prior
career, was a Staff Economist for a national industrial trade association.
Comments
Post a Comment