Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States

Reservoirs are a significant source of carbon (C) to the atmosphere, but their emission rates vary in space and time. We compared C emissions via diffusive and ebullitive pathways at several stations in six large hydropower reservoirs in the southeastern US that were previously sampled in summer 201...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences 2024-07, Vol.129 (7), p.n/a
Hauptverfasser: Pilla, Rachel M., Faehndrich, Chloe S., Fortner, Allison M., Jett, R. Trent, Jones, Michael W., Jones, Nikki J., Phillips, Jana R., Hansen, Carly H., Iftikhar, Bilal, Jager, Henriette I., Matson, Paul G., Griffiths, Natalie A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 7
container_start_page
container_title Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences
container_volume 129
creator Pilla, Rachel M.
Faehndrich, Chloe S.
Fortner, Allison M.
Jett, R. Trent
Jones, Michael W.
Jones, Nikki J.
Phillips, Jana R.
Hansen, Carly H.
Iftikhar, Bilal
Jager, Henriette I.
Matson, Paul G.
Griffiths, Natalie A.
description Reservoirs are a significant source of carbon (C) to the atmosphere, but their emission rates vary in space and time. We compared C emissions via diffusive and ebullitive pathways at several stations in six large hydropower reservoirs in the southeastern US that were previously sampled in summer 2012. We found that carbon dioxide (CO2) diffusion was the dominant flux pathway during 2012 and 2022, with only three exceptions where methane (CH4) diffusion or CH4 ebullition dominated. CH4 diffusion rates were positively associated with water temperature. However, we found no clear predictors of CH4 ebullition, which had extremely high variability, with rates ranging from 0 to 739 mg C m−2 day−1. For CO2 diffusion, the direction of the flux shifted between 2012 and 2022, where all but three stations across all reservoirs emitted CO2 in summer 2012, but every station sequestered CO2 in summer 2022. Here, indicators of greater algal production were associated with CO2 sequestration, including surface chlorophyll‐a concentration, surface dissolved oxygen saturation, and pH. Additional sampling campaigns outside the summer season highlighted the importance of seasonal phenology in primary production on the direction of CO2 diffusive fluxes, which shifted to positive CO2 fluxes by the end of August as productivity decreased. Our results demonstrate the importance of capturing CO2 sequestration in field and modeling measurements and understanding the seasonal drivers of these estimates. Measuring C emissions from multiple pathways in reservoirs and understanding their spatiotemporal responses and variability are vital to reducing uncertainties in global upscaling efforts. Plain Language Summary Inland waters, including reservoirs used for many different purposes, contribute greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere. With 34 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide, methane is of particular concern since reservoirs emit disproportionally large amounts of it. However, our ability to quantify reservoir emissions is limited by high variability in these emissions over space and time. In this study, we measured emissions from several stations across six reservoirs and compared these emissions to a previous study from 2012 to understand potential longer‐term variation in emissions and assess driver variables. Overall, we found that algal productivity was an important driver of fluxes among the reservoirs and could in fact lead to carb
doi_str_mv 10.1029/2023JG007580
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_osti_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_2428090</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3085336935</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2219-f6a75ed4b5ced1203467c8615940685d564e58640f8ff6f3b636a5f2741ac8b43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxRdRUGpvfoCgV6v5s0mzRym2VQTBqteQZic00m5qJrX02xutiCfn8obHj8ebqaozRq8Y5c01p1zcTygdSk0PqhPOVDPQjWKHv7sUx1Uf8Y2W0cVi7KRazhbBZyShIyOb5rEjt6uAGGKH5BUSbpDM4H0DmJPNxSXjFFdkumtTXMctJPIECOkjhvSdkRdAZnFTxGKG1JGXLmRoySzbDHhaHXm7ROj_aK96Gd8-j6aDh8fJ3ejmYeA4Z83AKzuU0NZz6aBlnIpaDZ1WTDY1VVq2UtUgtaqp194rL-ZKKCs9H9bMOj2vRa863-dGzMGgKxXcwsWuA5cNr7mmDS3QxR5ap_h9oHmLm9SVXkZQLYVQjZCFutxTLkXEBN6sU1jZtDOMmq-_m79_L7jY49uwhN2_rLmfPE14Kd2IT1frg6E</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3085336935</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Pilla, Rachel M. ; Faehndrich, Chloe S. ; Fortner, Allison M. ; Jett, R. Trent ; Jones, Michael W. ; Jones, Nikki J. ; Phillips, Jana R. ; Hansen, Carly H. ; Iftikhar, Bilal ; Jager, Henriette I. ; Matson, Paul G. ; Griffiths, Natalie A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Pilla, Rachel M. ; Faehndrich, Chloe S. ; Fortner, Allison M. ; Jett, R. Trent ; Jones, Michael W. ; Jones, Nikki J. ; Phillips, Jana R. ; Hansen, Carly H. ; Iftikhar, Bilal ; Jager, Henriette I. ; Matson, Paul G. ; Griffiths, Natalie A. ; Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)</creatorcontrib><description>Reservoirs are a significant source of carbon (C) to the atmosphere, but their emission rates vary in space and time. We compared C emissions via diffusive and ebullitive pathways at several stations in six large hydropower reservoirs in the southeastern US that were previously sampled in summer 2012. We found that carbon dioxide (CO2) diffusion was the dominant flux pathway during 2012 and 2022, with only three exceptions where methane (CH4) diffusion or CH4 ebullition dominated. CH4 diffusion rates were positively associated with water temperature. However, we found no clear predictors of CH4 ebullition, which had extremely high variability, with rates ranging from 0 to 739 mg C m−2 day−1. For CO2 diffusion, the direction of the flux shifted between 2012 and 2022, where all but three stations across all reservoirs emitted CO2 in summer 2012, but every station sequestered CO2 in summer 2022. Here, indicators of greater algal production were associated with CO2 sequestration, including surface chlorophyll‐a concentration, surface dissolved oxygen saturation, and pH. Additional sampling campaigns outside the summer season highlighted the importance of seasonal phenology in primary production on the direction of CO2 diffusive fluxes, which shifted to positive CO2 fluxes by the end of August as productivity decreased. Our results demonstrate the importance of capturing CO2 sequestration in field and modeling measurements and understanding the seasonal drivers of these estimates. Measuring C emissions from multiple pathways in reservoirs and understanding their spatiotemporal responses and variability are vital to reducing uncertainties in global upscaling efforts. Plain Language Summary Inland waters, including reservoirs used for many different purposes, contribute greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere. With 34 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide, methane is of particular concern since reservoirs emit disproportionally large amounts of it. However, our ability to quantify reservoir emissions is limited by high variability in these emissions over space and time. In this study, we measured emissions from several stations across six reservoirs and compared these emissions to a previous study from 2012 to understand potential longer‐term variation in emissions and assess driver variables. Overall, we found that algal productivity was an important driver of fluxes among the reservoirs and could in fact lead to carbon dioxide sequestration. However, the seasonal phenology in algal productivity and related variables were also important to understand when considering emissions variability within a reservoir and over time. As we continue to collect emissions measurements from reservoirs, studies focused on multiple spatial and temporal scales (i.e., day and night) can improve upscaled estimates of greenhouse gas emissions to better quantify the role of reservoirs in the global carbon cycle. Key Points Reservoirs are a major source of carbon emissions, but spatial and temporal variability leads to uncertain modeled or upscaled estimates Across six reservoirs, summer CO2 diffusion was the dominant flux pathway and showed sequestration, linked to increased algal productivity Changes in algal productivity influence the direction of CO2 diffusion with key implications for assessing net reservoir emissions</description><identifier>ISSN: 2169-8953</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2169-8961</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2023JG007580</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Algae ; Atmosphere ; Carbon cycle ; Carbon dioxide ; Carbon dioxide fixation ; carbon dioxide fluxes ; Carbon sequestration ; Climate change ; Diffusion ; Diffusion rate ; Dissolved oxygen ; Emission measurements ; Emissions ; Emissions control ; ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES ; Estimates ; Fluxes ; Global warming ; Greenhouse effect ; greenhouse gas emissions ; Greenhouse gases ; HYDRO ENERGY ; Hydroelectric power ; hydropower reservoirs ; Inland waters ; Methane ; methane emissions ; Oxygen content ; Phenology ; Primary production ; primary productivity ; Productivity ; Reservoirs ; Summer ; Time measurement ; Variability ; Water temperature</subject><ispartof>Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences, 2024-07, Vol.129 (7), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2024. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2219-f6a75ed4b5ced1203467c8615940685d564e58640f8ff6f3b636a5f2741ac8b43</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9156-9486 ; 0000-0002-1871-1236 ; 0000-0001-9328-0838 ; 0000-0003-0068-7714 ; 0000000218711236 ; 0000000319473468 ; 0000000300687714 ; 0000000193280838 ; 0000000321057308 ; 0000000247286910 ; 0000000193192336 ; 0000000191569486 ; 000000034253533X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2023JG007580$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2023JG007580$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,1417,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/biblio/2428090$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pilla, Rachel M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faehndrich, Chloe S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fortner, Allison M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jett, R. Trent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Nikki J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Jana R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, Carly H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iftikhar, Bilal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jager, Henriette I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matson, Paul G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Griffiths, Natalie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)</creatorcontrib><title>Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States</title><title>Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences</title><description>Reservoirs are a significant source of carbon (C) to the atmosphere, but their emission rates vary in space and time. We compared C emissions via diffusive and ebullitive pathways at several stations in six large hydropower reservoirs in the southeastern US that were previously sampled in summer 2012. We found that carbon dioxide (CO2) diffusion was the dominant flux pathway during 2012 and 2022, with only three exceptions where methane (CH4) diffusion or CH4 ebullition dominated. CH4 diffusion rates were positively associated with water temperature. However, we found no clear predictors of CH4 ebullition, which had extremely high variability, with rates ranging from 0 to 739 mg C m−2 day−1. For CO2 diffusion, the direction of the flux shifted between 2012 and 2022, where all but three stations across all reservoirs emitted CO2 in summer 2012, but every station sequestered CO2 in summer 2022. Here, indicators of greater algal production were associated with CO2 sequestration, including surface chlorophyll‐a concentration, surface dissolved oxygen saturation, and pH. Additional sampling campaigns outside the summer season highlighted the importance of seasonal phenology in primary production on the direction of CO2 diffusive fluxes, which shifted to positive CO2 fluxes by the end of August as productivity decreased. Our results demonstrate the importance of capturing CO2 sequestration in field and modeling measurements and understanding the seasonal drivers of these estimates. Measuring C emissions from multiple pathways in reservoirs and understanding their spatiotemporal responses and variability are vital to reducing uncertainties in global upscaling efforts. Plain Language Summary Inland waters, including reservoirs used for many different purposes, contribute greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere. With 34 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide, methane is of particular concern since reservoirs emit disproportionally large amounts of it. However, our ability to quantify reservoir emissions is limited by high variability in these emissions over space and time. In this study, we measured emissions from several stations across six reservoirs and compared these emissions to a previous study from 2012 to understand potential longer‐term variation in emissions and assess driver variables. Overall, we found that algal productivity was an important driver of fluxes among the reservoirs and could in fact lead to carbon dioxide sequestration. However, the seasonal phenology in algal productivity and related variables were also important to understand when considering emissions variability within a reservoir and over time. As we continue to collect emissions measurements from reservoirs, studies focused on multiple spatial and temporal scales (i.e., day and night) can improve upscaled estimates of greenhouse gas emissions to better quantify the role of reservoirs in the global carbon cycle. Key Points Reservoirs are a major source of carbon emissions, but spatial and temporal variability leads to uncertain modeled or upscaled estimates Across six reservoirs, summer CO2 diffusion was the dominant flux pathway and showed sequestration, linked to increased algal productivity Changes in algal productivity influence the direction of CO2 diffusion with key implications for assessing net reservoir emissions</description><subject>Algae</subject><subject>Atmosphere</subject><subject>Carbon cycle</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide fixation</subject><subject>carbon dioxide fluxes</subject><subject>Carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Diffusion</subject><subject>Diffusion rate</subject><subject>Dissolved oxygen</subject><subject>Emission measurements</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Emissions control</subject><subject>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Fluxes</subject><subject>Global warming</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>greenhouse gas emissions</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>HYDRO ENERGY</subject><subject>Hydroelectric power</subject><subject>hydropower reservoirs</subject><subject>Inland waters</subject><subject>Methane</subject><subject>methane emissions</subject><subject>Oxygen content</subject><subject>Phenology</subject><subject>Primary production</subject><subject>primary productivity</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Summer</subject><subject>Time measurement</subject><subject>Variability</subject><subject>Water temperature</subject><issn>2169-8953</issn><issn>2169-8961</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE9LAzEQxRdRUGpvfoCgV6v5s0mzRym2VQTBqteQZic00m5qJrX02xutiCfn8obHj8ebqaozRq8Y5c01p1zcTygdSk0PqhPOVDPQjWKHv7sUx1Uf8Y2W0cVi7KRazhbBZyShIyOb5rEjt6uAGGKH5BUSbpDM4H0DmJPNxSXjFFdkumtTXMctJPIECOkjhvSdkRdAZnFTxGKG1JGXLmRoySzbDHhaHXm7ROj_aK96Gd8-j6aDh8fJ3ejmYeA4Z83AKzuU0NZz6aBlnIpaDZ1WTDY1VVq2UtUgtaqp194rL-ZKKCs9H9bMOj2vRa863-dGzMGgKxXcwsWuA5cNr7mmDS3QxR5ap_h9oHmLm9SVXkZQLYVQjZCFutxTLkXEBN6sU1jZtDOMmq-_m79_L7jY49uwhN2_rLmfPE14Kd2IT1frg6E</recordid><startdate>202407</startdate><enddate>202407</enddate><creator>Pilla, Rachel M.</creator><creator>Faehndrich, Chloe S.</creator><creator>Fortner, Allison M.</creator><creator>Jett, R. Trent</creator><creator>Jones, Michael W.</creator><creator>Jones, Nikki J.</creator><creator>Phillips, Jana R.</creator><creator>Hansen, Carly H.</creator><creator>Iftikhar, Bilal</creator><creator>Jager, Henriette I.</creator><creator>Matson, Paul G.</creator><creator>Griffiths, Natalie A.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>American Geophysical Union</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9156-9486</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1871-1236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9328-0838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0068-7714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000218711236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000319473468</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000300687714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000193280838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000321057308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000247286910</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000193192336</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000191569486</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/000000034253533X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202407</creationdate><title>Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States</title><author>Pilla, Rachel M. ; Faehndrich, Chloe S. ; Fortner, Allison M. ; Jett, R. Trent ; Jones, Michael W. ; Jones, Nikki J. ; Phillips, Jana R. ; Hansen, Carly H. ; Iftikhar, Bilal ; Jager, Henriette I. ; Matson, Paul G. ; Griffiths, Natalie A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2219-f6a75ed4b5ced1203467c8615940685d564e58640f8ff6f3b636a5f2741ac8b43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Algae</topic><topic>Atmosphere</topic><topic>Carbon cycle</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide fixation</topic><topic>carbon dioxide fluxes</topic><topic>Carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Diffusion</topic><topic>Diffusion rate</topic><topic>Dissolved oxygen</topic><topic>Emission measurements</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Emissions control</topic><topic>ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Fluxes</topic><topic>Global warming</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>greenhouse gas emissions</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>HYDRO ENERGY</topic><topic>Hydroelectric power</topic><topic>hydropower reservoirs</topic><topic>Inland waters</topic><topic>Methane</topic><topic>methane emissions</topic><topic>Oxygen content</topic><topic>Phenology</topic><topic>Primary production</topic><topic>primary productivity</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Summer</topic><topic>Time measurement</topic><topic>Variability</topic><topic>Water temperature</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pilla, Rachel M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faehndrich, Chloe S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fortner, Allison M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jett, R. Trent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Michael W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Nikki J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phillips, Jana R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, Carly H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iftikhar, Bilal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jager, Henriette I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matson, Paul G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Griffiths, Natalie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pilla, Rachel M.</au><au>Faehndrich, Chloe S.</au><au>Fortner, Allison M.</au><au>Jett, R. Trent</au><au>Jones, Michael W.</au><au>Jones, Nikki J.</au><au>Phillips, Jana R.</au><au>Hansen, Carly H.</au><au>Iftikhar, Bilal</au><au>Jager, Henriette I.</au><au>Matson, Paul G.</au><au>Griffiths, Natalie A.</au><aucorp>Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States</atitle><jtitle>Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences</jtitle><date>2024-07</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>129</volume><issue>7</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>2169-8953</issn><eissn>2169-8961</eissn><abstract>Reservoirs are a significant source of carbon (C) to the atmosphere, but their emission rates vary in space and time. We compared C emissions via diffusive and ebullitive pathways at several stations in six large hydropower reservoirs in the southeastern US that were previously sampled in summer 2012. We found that carbon dioxide (CO2) diffusion was the dominant flux pathway during 2012 and 2022, with only three exceptions where methane (CH4) diffusion or CH4 ebullition dominated. CH4 diffusion rates were positively associated with water temperature. However, we found no clear predictors of CH4 ebullition, which had extremely high variability, with rates ranging from 0 to 739 mg C m−2 day−1. For CO2 diffusion, the direction of the flux shifted between 2012 and 2022, where all but three stations across all reservoirs emitted CO2 in summer 2012, but every station sequestered CO2 in summer 2022. Here, indicators of greater algal production were associated with CO2 sequestration, including surface chlorophyll‐a concentration, surface dissolved oxygen saturation, and pH. Additional sampling campaigns outside the summer season highlighted the importance of seasonal phenology in primary production on the direction of CO2 diffusive fluxes, which shifted to positive CO2 fluxes by the end of August as productivity decreased. Our results demonstrate the importance of capturing CO2 sequestration in field and modeling measurements and understanding the seasonal drivers of these estimates. Measuring C emissions from multiple pathways in reservoirs and understanding their spatiotemporal responses and variability are vital to reducing uncertainties in global upscaling efforts. Plain Language Summary Inland waters, including reservoirs used for many different purposes, contribute greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane to the atmosphere. With 34 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide, methane is of particular concern since reservoirs emit disproportionally large amounts of it. However, our ability to quantify reservoir emissions is limited by high variability in these emissions over space and time. In this study, we measured emissions from several stations across six reservoirs and compared these emissions to a previous study from 2012 to understand potential longer‐term variation in emissions and assess driver variables. Overall, we found that algal productivity was an important driver of fluxes among the reservoirs and could in fact lead to carbon dioxide sequestration. However, the seasonal phenology in algal productivity and related variables were also important to understand when considering emissions variability within a reservoir and over time. As we continue to collect emissions measurements from reservoirs, studies focused on multiple spatial and temporal scales (i.e., day and night) can improve upscaled estimates of greenhouse gas emissions to better quantify the role of reservoirs in the global carbon cycle. Key Points Reservoirs are a major source of carbon emissions, but spatial and temporal variability leads to uncertain modeled or upscaled estimates Across six reservoirs, summer CO2 diffusion was the dominant flux pathway and showed sequestration, linked to increased algal productivity Changes in algal productivity influence the direction of CO2 diffusion with key implications for assessing net reservoir emissions</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1029/2023JG007580</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9156-9486</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1871-1236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9328-0838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0068-7714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000218711236</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000319473468</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000300687714</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000193280838</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000321057308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000247286910</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000193192336</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000191569486</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/000000034253533X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2169-8953
ispartof Journal of geophysical research. Biogeosciences, 2024-07, Vol.129 (7), p.n/a
issn 2169-8953
2169-8961
language eng
recordid cdi_osti_scitechconnect_2428090
source Wiley Online Library All Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Algae
Atmosphere
Carbon cycle
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide fixation
carbon dioxide fluxes
Carbon sequestration
Climate change
Diffusion
Diffusion rate
Dissolved oxygen
Emission measurements
Emissions
Emissions control
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Estimates
Fluxes
Global warming
Greenhouse effect
greenhouse gas emissions
Greenhouse gases
HYDRO ENERGY
Hydroelectric power
hydropower reservoirs
Inland waters
Methane
methane emissions
Oxygen content
Phenology
Primary production
primary productivity
Productivity
Reservoirs
Summer
Time measurement
Variability
Water temperature
title Shifts in Carbon Emissions Versus Sequestration From Hydropower Reservoirs in the Southeastern United States
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T07%3A15%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_osti_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Shifts%20in%20Carbon%20Emissions%20Versus%20Sequestration%20From%20Hydropower%20Reservoirs%20in%20the%20Southeastern%20United%20States&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20geophysical%20research.%20Biogeosciences&rft.au=Pilla,%20Rachel%20M.&rft.aucorp=Oak%20Ridge%20National%20Laboratory%20(ORNL),%20Oak%20Ridge,%20TN%20(United%20States)&rft.date=2024-07&rft.volume=129&rft.issue=7&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=2169-8953&rft.eissn=2169-8961&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2023JG007580&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_osti_%3E3085336935%3C/proquest_osti_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3085336935&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true