Premium
“The Optimal Steady‐State in Groundwater Management,” by Keith C. Knapp and Eli Feinerman 2
Author(s) -
Reichard Eric C.,
Lefkoff L. Jeff
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
jawra journal of the american water resources association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.957
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1752-1688
pISSN - 1093-474X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1987.tb00846.x
Subject(s) - steady state (chemistry) , transient (computer programming) , assertion , groundwater , transient state , flow (mathematics) , state (computer science) , computer science , mathematical optimization , mathematics , chemistry , engineering , algorithm , geotechnical engineering , geometry , electrical engineering , programming language , operating system
Knapp and Feinerman (1985) pose and solve a problem of steady‐state allocation of ground water based directly on the underlying dynamic problem. Their dynamic steady‐state formulation incorporates both the equations of transient ground. water flow and the discount rate. We wish to discuss two aspects of their analysis. First, we question their assertion that the computational advantages of the dynamic steady.state formulation will justify its substitution for the full transient problem. In fact, the dynamic steady‐state problem will often be harder to solve than the properly formulated transient problem. Second, we argue that the dynamic steady‐state is a concept that has limited applicability in ground‐water management. In cases where the optimal steady state is indeed useful, the dynamic solution is often identical to the static solution.