Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Carbon balances were calculated for the summer stratication period of 2001 for the hydroelectric reservoir L.
Skinnmuddselet (created in 1989) and the natural L. Ortr.. asket, and estimated on annual basis for both lakes. The
reservoir and the lake have similar chemical characteristics and are located in adjacent catchments in the northern part
of Sweden. Our main hypothesis was that the CO2 production and emissions from the reservoir, L. Skinnmuddselet,
. asket, due to the decomposition of ooded vegetation and peat.
would be greater than in the natural L. Ortr.
The carbon balances showed that the total production of CO2 per unit lake surface area during the summer was very
. asket and 25.3 g C m2 in L. Skinnmuddselet). The
similar in the natural lake and the reservoir (31.3 g C m2 in L. Ortr.
sediments were the major CO2 source in the reservoir, while most of the mineralization in the natural lake occurred in
the water column. On annual basis the natural L. Ortr.. asket produced and emitted more CO2 per unit of lake surface
area than the reservoir L. Skinnmuddselet since mineralization proceeded during winter when L. Skinnmuddselet was
emptied for electricity production. Therefore, the potential for CO2 emission was not greater in the reservoir than in the
natural lake.
r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0043-1354/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.watres.2003.10.035
ARTICLE IN PRESS
532 J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538
using a Hitachi U-1100 spectrophotometer and a Componentout CP1out VP1out CP2out VP2out
Shimadzu TOC-5000 analyzer, respectively.
CP3out VP3out CP4out VP4out ; 4
Carbon uxes (F ) were calculated using the formula where VPxin is the total inowing water volume of the
given by Cole and Caraco [16]: period, VPxout is the total outowing water volume of
the period, and n is the length of each period (i.e. 21
F kpCO2w gassat KH ; 1 days).
The retention of DOC, DIC and CO2 was calculated,
where pCO2w is the partial pressure of the gas in the
in each case, as the difference between input and output.
surface water calculated from ppm-values using the ideal
Lake Carbon pools were calculated from the volume-
gas law and Henrys law, K H is Henrys constant
weighted concentrations in the different strata and from
calculated according to Weiss [17], and gassat is the
the volumes of each stratum. The internal net supply
concentration of the gas the water would have at
(INS) of the carbon components was calculated as:
equilibrium with the overlying atmosphere (365 matm).
The piston velocity, k (cm h1), was calculated accord- INS DPool Retention; 6
ing to Cole and Caraco [16] as: where DPool represents the mass difference between
k 2:07 0:215 U 1:7
; 2 28 May and 19 August in the lakes pool of the different
carbon components. DPool was calculated using vo-
where U is the wind speed. Since both lakes are lume-weighted CP1 and CP4 concentrations in the
elongated in a southeastnorthwest direction and quite different strata and volume data from each lake.
narrow the differences in actual wind speed induced by
morphology were very low. We therefore estimated a
2.5. Estimations of mineralization in the water columns
mean daily wind speed (2.5 m s1) for the observation
and sediments
period (cf. [18]). Wind speed data from weather stations
located nearby the study areas were obtained from the
The calculated internal net supply of DIC, combined
Swedish National Road Administration. . asket
with data from a study conducted in L. Ortr.
in 1994 [13], allowed the carbon mineralization in both
2.4. Lake carbon balances the water columns and the sediments of L. Skinnmudd-
. asket to be calculated. The estimations
selet and L. Ortr.
Lake carbon balances for DOC, DIC and CO2 for the were based on the following assumptions:
whole study period of 28 May19 August were Assumption 1: The internal net supply of DIC (INS)
calculated for both lakes. The calculations were based is a valid estimate of the internal mineralization of
on carbon concentrations in the inlets, the outlets and organic carbon. Considering the carbonate-poor soil
lakes (measured on four occasions during the study and bedrock of the studied catchments, inorganic inputs
period), and daily inow and outow data for L. of DIC are unlikely to be signicant.
Skinnmuddselet (courtesy of Graninge AB Energy Assumption 2: The mineralization of the DOC-pool in
. asket (Bergstrom,
Company) and L. Ortr. . unpubl. data). . asket (mw o)
the water column of L. Ortr. . and L.
The study period was divided into four 3-week periods Skinnmuddselet (mwS ) during our study period was
(P1; P2; P3 and P4), with sampling dates in the middle . asket during the
assumed to be the same as in Lake Ortr.
of each period. The sampling occasion in every period summer of 1994 (equivalent to ca. 10% of the lake
yielded the area weighted emissions, EP1 ; EP2 ; EP3 ; EP4 carbon pool) [13]. This was calculated as:
(mg C d1) and the carbon component concentrations,
CP1 ; CP2 ; CP3 ; CP4 (for inlets, outlets and water
mwO. 0:1DOCpoolO. : 7
columns), which were assumed to be representative
averages for P1; P2; P3 and P4; respectively. Diffusive Assumption 3: Since the littoral zones have a minor
inows were assumed to correspond to the carbon importance for the whole lake carbon mobilization in
concentrations of R. Giga( n (L. Skinnmuddselet) and R. the lakes (cf. Study area), the difference between the
. an (L. Ortr.
Or( . asket).
internal net supply of DIC (INS) and the amount of
The amounts of carbon that were transported to or carbon mineralized in water columns was assumed to
from the lake (Componentin, Componentout and Emis- represent the amount of carbon mineralized in the
sion) were calculated as sediments in each lake (msO. ; msS ):
Componentin CP1in VP1in CP2in VP2in
CP3in VP3in CP4in VP4in ; 3 msO. INSO. mwO. : 8
ARTICLE IN PRESS
534 J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538
2.6. Surface pCO2 and sediment area in contact with the 3.2. Thermal stratification
epilimnion-L. Skinnmuddselet
A weak and unstable metalimnion at 12 m depth was
The lake was divided into ve sub-areas and the ve . asket in early June. At the same time,
observed in L. Ortr.
sampling locations were located approximately in the the shallow water column of L. Skinnmuddselet was
middle of each sub-area. The proportion of the sediment almost completely mixed. During the second sampling
area that was in contact with the epilimnion in each sub- occasion in late June, both lakes had a distinct, 5 m deep
area was estimated from depth level-sediment area epilimnion. Thereafter, the depth of the epilimnion
relationships. For each sub-area, the relative amount . asket, the depth of
increased in both lakes. In Lake Ortr.
of the total sediment area in contact with the epilimnion the epilimnion reached >13 m in mid-August. At this
was then plotted against the surface pCO2. The point most of the water column in L. Skinnmuddselet
calculation was performed for the period late June to was mixed. The proportion of the total sediment surface
late July, when the lake was stratied. in contact with epilimnion water was always o45% in
. asket. In L. Skinnmuddselet the corresponding
L. Ortr.
proportion was approximately 60% during late June,
and >80% during early June, July and August.
3. Results
3.3. Water chemistry and gas fluxes
3.1. Hydrology
The summer means and ranges of DIC, CO2, pH,
ABS, DOC and nutrient concentrations in the two lakes
Both lakes had similar hydrological regimes, char-
are presented in Table 2. The absorbance and DOC
acterized by a peak inow during the spring ood in . asket
concentrations were somewhat higher in Lake Ortr.
April/May and occasional high ow events during the
and there were clear differences in concentrations of
summer (Fig. 1a). The outlet discharge (Fig. 1b) differed
CO2 and DIC between the epilimnion and hypolimnion
due to the fact that the spring-ood water to a large
in both lakes. The hypolimnetic concentrations of DIC
extent was retained in L. Skinnmuddselet to replenish . asket increased >50 mM during the
and CO2 in L. Ortr.
the large volume of water (approximately 90% of the
study period, and a similar tendency was observed in the
lakes volume) that had been released for electricity
sporadic samples from the hypolimnion of L. Skinn-
production during the preceding winter.
muddselet (Table 2). Both lakes had similar pH-values
and nutrient concentrations.
A strong positive correlation between surface pCO2
200 and DOC concentration in the epilimnion was found in
Inlet - L. Skinnmuddselet . asket (Fig. 2a) (r2 0:80; po0:0005), but not in
L. Ortr.
L. Skinnmuddselet (Fig. 2b). During the period of stable
Discharge (m s )
150
stratication, a strong positive relationship between
3
150
variations of pCO2 in the surface waters were less than
3
Table 2
. asket during the study period of 28 May19 August 2001 (mean values
Chemical characteristics of Lake Skinnmuddselet and Lake Ortr.
are given with ranges in parentheses)
DIC (mM) 120 (114128) 223 (199253) 115 (110121) 167 (137197)
CO2 (mM) 56 (5062) 141 (128157) 50 (3465) 118 (88153)
DOC (mg L1) 8.5 (7.910.8) 8.2 (7.610.7) 10.5 (8.413.6) 10 (9.210.5)
ABS (430 nm. 5 cm cyv) 0.15 (0.130.21) 0.16 (0.140.21) 0.19 (0.150.31) 0.19 (0.180.23)
pH 6.3 (6.26.5) 6.1 (5.96.3) 6.4 (5.26.7) 5.9 (4.46.3)
Total-N (mg L1)a 460 532
Total-P (mg L1)a 15 17
Chl-a (mg L1)a 4 2.2
a
Values originate from one sampling occasion in the summer of 2001 (Algesten unpublished data).
1500 2000
p CO2 (atm)
1500
p CO2 (atm)
1000
Table 3
. asket (L. O)
Lake carbon balances (g C m2) for L. Skinnmuddselet (L. S) and Lake Ortr. . during the period 28 May19 August 2001
(values in parentheses are given in tonnes C for the whole lake)
L. S. DOC 53 (1430) 12.2 (330) 46.7 (1260) 36.7 (990) 36.7 (990) 10 (270) 2.2 (60)
L. S. DIC 10 (270) 2.2 (60) 8.5 (230) 7.8 (210) 23.9 (645) 31.7 (855) 23.1 (625) 25.3 (685)
L. S. CO2 5.2 (140) 1.1 (30) 3.3 (90) 3.7 (100) 23.9 (645) 27.6 (745) 24.3 (655) 25.3 (685) 5.3 (143) 20 (542)
L. .
O. DOC 205 (1640) 10 (80) 350 (2800) 350 (2800) 350 (2800) 0 10 (80)
L. .
O. DIC 35 (280) 7.5 (60) 47.5 (380) 50 (400) 21.3 (170) 71.3 (570) 23.8 (190) 31.3 (250)
L. .
O. CO2 22.5 (180)) 6.3 (50) 15 (120) 18.7 (150) 21.3 (170) 40 (320) 25 (200) 31.3 (250) 20.5 (164) 10.8 (86)
a
Lake water pool of carbon.
b
Change in lake water pool from days 0 to 84.
c
Input of carbon via the inlets.
d
Output of carbon via the outlet.
e
Output (emission) of carbon over the water surface.
f
Total output of carbon (outlet+emission).
g
Retention (input-total output).
h
Total Internal Net Supply (DPool-Retention).
i
Internal Net Supply from water column mineralization (10% of the DOC-pool (Pool); based on results from the study by Jonsson
et al. [13]).
j
Internal Net Supply from sediment mineralization (Total Internal Net SupplyInternal Net Supply from water column
mineralization).
in both lakes (Table 3). The largest uncertainties within reservoirs in temperate regions (1300 mg CO2 m2 d1)
our study, which could have affected the nal results in [12].
the carbon balances, probably lies within the infrequent The total production of CO2 per unit lake surface area
sampling (every third week). But since our carbon during the summer was similar in both lakes (31.3 g m2
. asket was very well matched with the
balance for L. Ortr. . asket and 25.3 g m2 in L. Skinnmuddselet;
in L. Ortr.
earlier more detailed study (where sampling was Table 3). Thus, both lakes had a similar capacity for
conducted every second week) (cf. [13]) our carbon mineralizing organic carbon and producing CO2. How-
balance calculations seem reasonably accurate. Another ever, the CO2 produced in the natural lake and the
possible source of error is the assumption that 10% of reservoir originated from different pools. The surface
the DOC-pool in the water column of the lakes was . asket was positively related to the DOC
pCO2 in L. Ortr.
mineralized during summer. However, this share was concentration in the epilimnion (Fig. 2a), indicating that
carefully chosen, based on the earlier study in L. epilimnetic mineralization of DOC in the lake water was
. asket [13], and on the observed range reported for
Ortr. the major source of the emitted CO2 during the summer,
humic lakes (614%; average 10%, [19]). Moreover the in agreement with previously reported results from L.
water chemistry of both lakes was very similar (Table 2) . asket [13,20]. In L. Skinnmuddselet there was no
Ortr.
and DOC availability should not differ much between relationship between DOC concentration in the epilim-
the lakes (cf. [19]). Therefore the potential uncertainties nion and surface pCO2 (Fig. 2b), but a signicant
should not have caused large errors in the conclusions of relationship between sediment area in contact with
this study. epilimnion and pCO2 in surface water (Fig. 3). This
The summer means of pCO2 in the surface water of result, together with the indications from the mass
the reservoir (1200 matm) and the natural lake balance calculations that most of the CO2 production
(1050 matm) were 2.53 times greater than the atmo- occurred in the sediments in L. Skinnmuddselet (Table
spheric average (365 matm), and similar to the estimated 3), demonstrate that the sediment rather than the lake
global mean for natural lakes (1000 matm) [2]. Conse- water was the major CO2 source in L. Skinnmuddselet.
quently, net uxes of CO2 to the atmosphere occurred One reason for the importance of sediments in L.
from both lakes and the mean emission rate was similar Skinnmuddselet is the high sediment surface area to lake
in the reservoir and in the natural lake (1095 and 900 mg volume ratio (approximately 160) compared to the
CO2 m2 d1, respectively). These rates are higher than corresponding ratio in L. Ortr.. asket (approximately
the average for natural lakes (700 mg CO2 m2 d1) [11], 50). However, these ratios do not explain why the CO2
but lower than reported summer means for hydroelectric production rate in the sediment was twice as high in L.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538 537
Skinnmuddselet (20 g C m2) as in L. Ortr. . asket . asket and higher in the sediment of L. Skinnmudd-
Ortr.
(10.8 g C m2) (Table 3). This difference could have selet. Therefore, our results do not support the hypoth-
been an effect of substrate availability [20] and/or esis that emission from the reservoir should be higher
temperature [21,22]. In L. Skinnmuddselet, a majority than from the natural lake. On the contrary, it appears
of the sediments (>80%) were in contact with that the natural lake was a greater source of CO2 than
epilimnion water with temperatures around 15 C during the reservoir on an annual basis, because mineralization
the summer. In contrast, in Lake Ortr.. asket >55% of processes also occurred in the winter in the natural lake.
the sediments were in contact with hypolimnion water However, an important aspect when discussing the
with temperatures around 57 C. Thus, most of the consequences of building reservoirs, such as L. Skinn-
difference in CO2 production rate in the sediments muddselet, is that, before ooding, the land area now
between the lake and the reservoir could be explained by covered by water was probably a net sink for CO2 [9].
assuming a Q10 value of 23 for sediment microbial The total effect of the reservoir on the catchment carbon
processes [22]. Therefore, our results do not provide balance is therefore equivalent to the present emission
clear evidence that the ooded bottom contained more from the reservoir (750 t of CO2 per year) plus the
available organic substrates for heterotrophic bacteria previous net accumulation of carbon in the terrestrial
than natural lake sediments. system now covered by water. This total effect is difcult
We also compared the two lakes on an annual basis. to quantify since we do not know the net carbon balance
During the period from January to May, 90% of the of the terrestrial system, but it is possible that the most
water volume of L. Skinnmuddselet is emptied for pronounced effect of the reservoir is a decrease in CO2
hydroelectric power generation. If we assume that the xation in an area of the catchment corresponding to the
accumulated CO2 in the reservoir represented by the surface of the reservoir rather than an increase in
supersaturation levels during late autumn is emitted to respiration within that area.
the atmosphere when the reservoir is emptied and the
water is transported 100 km downstream to the sea,
another 3.8 g C m2 must be added to the amount of 5. Conclusions
CO2 emitted during the summer (23.9 g C m2, Table 3).
. asket, CO2 is produced throughout the
In L. Ortr. The total production of CO2 per unit of lake surface
winter, resulting in an accumulation of CO2 in the area during the summer was similar in the natural lake
unstratied water column (from 70 mM in autumn to and the reservoir.
115 mM in late winter, Algesten unpubl. data). During The sediments were the major CO2 source in the
spring circulation the accumulated CO2 (45 mM) will reservoir, while most of the mineralization in the natural
probably, to a large extent, be emitted to the atmosphere lake occurred in the water column. This variation in
[23], which then corresponds to an emission of 11.5 g CO2 production was related mainly to differences in
C m2. During autumn circulation L. Ortr. . asket will morphometry (i.e. the surface to volume ratio) and not
probably have a larger emission than L. Skinnmuddse- to regulation.
let, due to the small volume of hypolimnetic water in L. On an annual basis, the natural lake produced and
Skinnmuddselet. The difference in supersaturation emitted more CO2 per unit of lake surface area than the
between late summer and autumn circulation corre- reservoir, since mineralization proceeded during the
sponds to an emission of 11.4 g C m2. Consequently, on winter when the reservoir was emptied for electricity
an annual basis the total amount of CO2 emitted from L. production.
. asket can be estimated to amount to 44.2 g C m2,
Ortr.
which is more than in L. Skinnmuddselet (27.8 g C m2).
Thus, the difference in emission between the reservoir Acknowledgements
and the natural lake on an annual basis was mainly due
to the differences during autumn and spring turnover, We thank Bjarne Sundberg and Lars-Erik Dahlen for
when approximately 50% of the amount of carbon was their assistance, at the courtesy of Graninge AB Energy
emitted from the natural lake. Company, during the eldwork and for providing data.
Our results do not indicate any dramatic differences in Financial support was provided by the Swedish Energy
CO2 production and emission between the reservoir and Agency.
the natural lake during the summer, which can be
explained as an effect of river regulation. However, the
CO2 produced in the natural lake and the reservoir References
originated from different pools. This variation in CO2
production was related mainly to differences in mor- [1] del Giorgio PA, Cole JJ, Caraco NF, Peters RH. Linking
phometry (i.e. the surface to volume ratio), which caused planktonic biomass and metabolism to net gas uxes in
CO2 production to be higher in the lake water in L. northern temperate lakes. Ecology 1999;80:142231.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
538 J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538
[2] Cole JJ, Caraco NF, Kling GW, Kratz TK. Carbon [12] Duchemin E, Lucotte M, St Louis V, Canuel R. Hydro-
dioxide supersaturation in the surface waters of lakes. electric reservoirs as an anthropogenic source of green-
Science 1994;265:156870. house gases. World Resource Review, 2003;14:33453.
[3] del Giorgio PA, Cole JJ, Cimbleris A. Respiration rates in [13] Jonsson A, Meili M, Bergstrom . A-K, Jansson M. Whole-
bacteria exceed phytoplankton production in unproductive lake mineralization of allochthonous and autochthonous
aquatic systems. Nature 1997;385:14851. organic carbon in a large humic lake (Ortr. . asket, N.
[4] Prairie YT, Bird DF, Cole JJ. The summer metabolic Sweden). Limnol Oceanogr 2001;46:1691700.
balance in the epilimnion of southeastern Quebec lakes. [14] Raab B, Vedin H. Climate, lakes and riversnational atlas
Limnol Oceanogr 2002;47:31621. of Sweden. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist and Wiksell
[5] Sobek S, Algesten G, Bergstrom. A-K, Jansson M, Tranvik International; 1995.
LJ. The catchment and climate regulation of pCO2 in [15] Fred!en C. Geologynational atlas of Sweden. Stockholm,
boreal lakes. Global Change Biol 2003;9:63041. Sweden: Almqvist and Wiksell International; 1994.
[6] Hope D, Kratz TK, Riera JL. Relationships between pCO2 [16] Cole JJ, Caraco NF. Atmospheric exchange of carbon
and dissolved organic carbon in northern Wisconsin lakes. dioxide in a low-wind oligotrophic lake measured by the
J Environ Qual 1996;25:14425. addition of SF6. Limnol Oceanogr 1998;43:64756.
[7] Jansson M, Bergstrom . A-K, Blomqvist P, Drakare S. [17] Weiss RF. Carbon dioxide in water and seawater: the
Allochtonous organic carbon and phytoplankton/bacter- solubility of a non-ideal gas. Mar Chem 1974;2:20315.
ioplankton production relationships in lakes. Ecology [18] Kling GW, Kipphut GW, Miller MC. The ux of CO2 and
2000;81:32505. CH4 from lakes and rivers in arctic Alaska. Hydrobiologia
[8] Rudd JMV, Harris R, Kelly CA, Heckey RE. Are 1992;240:2336.
hydroelectric reservoirs signicant sources of greenhouse [19] Tranvik LJ. Availability of dissolved organic carbon for
gases? Ambio 1993;22:2468. planktonic bacteria in oligotrophic lakes of differing humic
[9] Kelly CA, Rudd JWM, Bodaly RA, Roulet NP, St. Louis content. Microb Ecol 1998;16:31122.
VL, Heyes A, Moore TR, Schiff S, Aravena R, Scott KJ, [20] Jansson M, Bergstrom . A-K, Blomqvist P, Isaksson A,
Dyck B, Harris R, Warner B, Edwards G. Increases in Jonsson A. Impact of allochthonous organic carbon on
uxes of greenhouse gases and methyl mercury following microbial food carbon dynamics and structure in Lake
ooding of an experimental reservoir. Environ Sci Technol . asket. Arch Hydrobiol 1999;144:40928.
Ortr.
1997;31:133444. [21] den Heyer C, Kalff J. Organic matter mineralization rates
[10] Duchemin E, Lucotte M. Production of the greenhouse in sediments: a within- and among lake study. Limnol
gases CH4 and CO2 by hydroelectric reservoirs of the Oceanogr 1998;43:695705.
boreal region. Global Biogeochem Cycles 1995;9: [22] Wetzel RG. Limnology: lake and river ecosystems. San
52940. Diego, USA: Academic Press (NJ); 2001.
[11] St Louis VL, Kelly CA, Duchemin E, Rudd JMV, [23] Striegl RG, Kortelainen P, Chanton JP, Wichlna KP,
Rosenberg DM. Reservoir surfaces as sources of green- Bugna GK, Rantakai M. Carbon dioxide partial pressure
house gases to the atmosphere: a global estimate. and 13C content of north temperate and boreal lakes at
BioScience 2000;50:76675. spring ice melt. Limnology Oceanogr 2001;46:9415.