ARTICLE IN PRESS

Water Research 38 (2004) 531538

A comparison of the carbon balances of a natural lake

. asket) and a hydroelectric reservoir
(L. Ortr.
(L. Skinnmuddselet) in northern Sweden
(
Jan Aberg, .
Ann-Kristin Bergstrom*, .
Grete Algesten, Kenneth Soderback,
Mats Jansson
Department of Ecology and Environmental Science, Umea University, Umea SE-901 87, Sweden
Received 15 May 2003; received in revised form 16 October 2003; accepted 20 October 2003

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 m
2 in L. Skinnmuddselet). The
similar in the natural lake and the reservoir (31.3 g C m
2 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.

Keywords: Emission; Carbon dioxide; Mineralization; Sediments; Morphometry

1. Introduction carbon [24], and the degree of net heterotrophy in

Lakes where organic carbon mineralization by hetero-
trophic organisms exceeds CO2 xation by phototrophic
organisms are net heterotrophic. The water columns of
net heterotrophic lakes are supersaturated with respect
to CO2, which results in a net ux of CO2 from the lake
surface to the atmosphere [1]. Most of the lakes
worldwide can be expected to be net sources of CO2,
mainly due to mineralization of allochthonous organic
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +46-90-786-95-44; fax: +46-
90-786-67-05.
E-mail address: ann-kristin.bergstrom@eg.umu.se
.
(A.-K. Bergstrom).
unproductive lakes is proportional to their input of
allochthonous organic carbon [57].
Hydroelectric reservoirs have special prerequisites for
net heterotrophy and should in many cases be regarded
as anthropogenic sources of atmospheric CO2 [812].
The ooding of land areas means that the photosynth-
esis of the terrestrial vegetation stops and the break-
down of large organic carbon sources in peat and
ooded vegetation produces large quantities of CO2 [9].
Factors that affect the amount of carbon emitted from
reservoirs include: input of allochthonous organic
carbon, the amount and type of organic carbon deposits
in the ooded land, age of the reservoir, and water
temperature [11,12].

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
In general, hydroelectric reservoirs tend to emit larger
quantities of CO2 per unit area than natural lakes [11].
However, few studies have included detailed compar-
isons between natural lakes and hydroelectric reservoirs.
We therefore conducted a study in which we compared
. asket) and
the carbon balances of a natural lake (L. Ortr.
a hydroelectric reservoir (L. Skinnmuddselet). The lakes
have equal volumes, similar chemistry and are located
close to each other in the same geological and
climatological region in northern Sweden.
Our hypothesis was that the CO2 emissions from the
articial L. Skinnmuddselet should be greater than those
. asket, due to the decomposition
from the natural L. Ortr.
of ooded vegetation and peat.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Study area
L. Skinnmuddselet (63 590 N, 18 260 E) and L.
.
Ortr.asket (64 100 N, 18 550 E) are two large humic lakes,
located in northern Sweden along the main courses of
River Gide.alven and River Ore. . alven, respectively. L.
Skinnmuddselet is an articial hydroelectric reservoir
created in 1989. Before ooding, the land area where L.
Skinnmuddselet is located was a low relief moraine
landscape covered by forest areas (55%), mires (30%)
and small lakes (15%). The tree vegetation was removed
before damming (19871988). Branches thicker than
1 cm were gathered and burnt on site. Mires and lakes
were left untouched (Sundberg, pers. comm.). L.
. asket is a glacial trough, which has been water
Ortr.
lled since the deglaciation about 9300 years ago. There
is practically no macrobiological activity in the littoral
zones in the reservoir due to the continuous uctuations
of the water levels and ice erosion during winter, and in
the natural lake, the littoral zones only constitutes a few
percent of the total lake area [13]. Selected physical
characteristics of both lakes are presented in Table 1.
The climate within both catchments is characterized
by a mean annual temperature of 02 C and an annual
precipitation of 600700 mm per year [14]. The bedrocks
of both catchments are dominated by granite and gneiss,
mainly covered by till (75%), peat (15%), and coarse-
grained glaciouvial deposits (5%) [15]. Coniferous
forest and mires account for most of the vegetation
(70% and 15%, respectively). Less than 1% of the
catchments are used for agriculture.
2.2. Sampling and analyses
Sampling in the lakes, the inlets and the outlets was
carried out every third week during the study period of
28 May19 August, for analysis of carbon dioxide
(CO2), dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC), dissolved
Table 1
Physical and hydrological characteristics of Lake Skinnmudd-
. asket in the summer of 2001.
selet and Lake Ortr.
Lake Lake
Skinnmuddselet . asket
Ortr.
Catchment area (km2) 1400 2210
Mean lake area (km2) 27 8
Mean lake volume (Mm3) 170 170
Maximum depth (m) 20 64
Mean depth (m) 6.5 23
Mean water inow (m3 s
1) 20 33
Whole lake water exchange 110 61
time (days)
Epilimnion water exchange 94 22
time (days)
organic carbon (DOC), pH and absorbance (ABS). All
samples were collected with a Ruttner sampler (2 L). In
each lake, water was collected at ve stations, which
were evenly distributed along the length axis of the lakes
and located over the deepest parts possible. Wind speed,
air temperature, and absolute air pressure were mea-
sured with a portable meteorological tool (Silva Alba
Windwatch) on all sampling occasions at all stations.
Water temperatures in the inlets and the outlets were
measured with a Ruttner sampler thermometer. A
temperature probe (WTW LF196) was used to dene
the depths and temperatures of the epilimnion, meta-
limnion and hypolimnion. Lake water was collected
from the upper epilimnion, lower epilimnion, upper
hypolimnion and lower hypolimnion. Water from the
greatest depth at each station was collected 13 m above
. an, R. Varg(an
the sediment. In the major inlets (R. Or(
.
and R. Gig(an) and the outlets (R. Ore.alven and R.
Gide.alven) surface water (0.5 m depth) was collected.
During transport to the laboratory all bottles were
stored in the dark in thermally insulated bags. CO2 and
DIC were analyzed 15 h after sampling.
CO2 concentration was measured as follows: 50 mL of
headspace gas (outdoor air taken about 2 m above
ground) was equilibrated with the water, in 1.2 L glass
bottles, by vigorous shaking for 1 min. The headspace
gas was transferred to a 50 mL plastic syringe, after
which two measurements of CO2 were made using an
infrared gas analyzer (PP-systems EGM-3). DIC was
analyzed by adding 5 mL 25% HCl to the glass bottles
and then measuring CO2, as described above.
pH was measured with an Orion 230A+ meter
(electrode: Orion 9107BN). Water for absorbance
(ABS) and DOC analysis was ltered through glass
ber lters (Whatman GF/F) and 0.2 mm membrane
lters (PALLGelman Sciences Supors-200), respec-
tively. The ltered water was stored in a refrigerator
until analysis in September 2001, when absorbance
(wavelengths 250 and 430 nm) and DOC were measured
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538
using a Hitachi U-1100 spectrophotometer and a
Shimadzu TOC-5000 analyzer, respectively.
2.3. Carbon flux calculations
Carbon uxes (F ) were calculated using the formula
given by Cole and Caraco [16]:
F kpCO2w
gassat KH ; 1 days).
where pCO2w is the partial pressure of the gas in the
surface water calculated from ppm-values using the ideal
gas law and Henrys law, K H is Henrys constant
calculated according to Weiss [17], and gassat is the
concentration of the gas the water would have at
equilibrium with the overlying atmosphere (365 matm).
The piston velocity, k (cm h
1), was calculated accord-
ing to Cole and Caraco [16] as:
k 2:07 0:215 U 1:7
; 2
where U is the wind speed. Since both lakes are
elongated in a southeastnorthwest direction and quite
narrow the differences in actual wind speed induced by
morphology were very low. We therefore estimated a
mean daily wind speed (2.5 m s
1) for the observation
period (cf. [18]). Wind speed data from weather stations
located nearby the study areas were obtained from the
Swedish National Road Administration.
2.4. Lake carbon balances
Lake carbon balances for DOC, DIC and CO2 for the
whole study period of 28 May19 August were
calculated for both lakes. The calculations were based
on carbon concentrations in the inlets, the outlets and
lakes (measured on four occasions during the study
period), and daily inow and outow data for L.
Skinnmuddselet (courtesy of Graninge AB Energy
. asket (Bergstrom,
Company) and L. Ortr. . unpubl. data).
The study period was divided into four 3-week periods
(P1; P2; P3 and P4), with sampling dates in the middle
of each period. The sampling occasion in every period
yielded the area weighted emissions, EP1 ; EP2 ; EP3 ; EP4
(mg C d
1) and the carbon component concentrations,
CP1 ; CP2 ; CP3 ; CP4 (for inlets, outlets and water
columns), which were assumed to be representative
averages for P1; P2; P3 and P4; respectively. Diffusive
inows were assumed to correspond to the carbon
concentrations of R. Giga( n (L. Skinnmuddselet) and R.
. an (L. Ortr.
Or( . asket).
The amounts of carbon that were transported to or
from the lake (Componentin, Componentout and Emis-
sion) were calculated as
Componentin CP1in VP1in CP2in VP2in
CP3in VP3in CP4in VP4in ; 3 msO. INSO.
mwO. :
533
Componentout CP1out VP1out CP2out VP2out
CP3out VP3out CP4out VP4out ; 4
Emission nEP1 EP2 EP3 EP4 ; 5
where VPxin is the total inowing water volume of the
period, VPxout is the total outowing water volume of
the period, and n is the length of each period (i.e. 21
The retention of DOC, DIC and CO2 was calculated,
in each case, as the difference between input and output.
Lake Carbon pools were calculated from the volume-
weighted concentrations in the different strata and from
the volumes of each stratum. The internal net supply
(INS) of the carbon components was calculated as:
INS DPool
Retention; 6
where DPool represents the mass difference between
28 May and 19 August in the lakes pool of the different
carbon components. DPool was calculated using vo-
lume-weighted CP1 and CP4 concentrations in the
different strata and volume data from each lake.
2.5. Estimations of mineralization in the water columns
and sediments
The calculated internal net supply of DIC, combined
. asket
with data from a study conducted in L. Ortr.
in 1994 [13], allowed the carbon mineralization in both
the water columns and the sediments of L. Skinnmudd-
. asket to be calculated. The estimations
selet and L. Ortr.
were based on the following assumptions:
Assumption 1: The internal net supply of DIC (INS)
is a valid estimate of the internal mineralization of
organic carbon. Considering the carbonate-poor soil
and bedrock of the studied catchments, inorganic inputs
of DIC are unlikely to be signicant.
Assumption 2: The mineralization of the DOC-pool in
. asket (mw o)
the water column of L. Ortr. . and L.
Skinnmuddselet (mwS ) during our study period was
. asket during the
assumed to be the same as in Lake Ortr.
summer of 1994 (equivalent to ca. 10% of the lake
carbon pool) [13]. This was calculated as:
mwO. 0:1DOCpoolO. : 7
Assumption 3: Since the littoral zones have a minor
importance for the whole lake carbon mobilization in
the lakes (cf. Study area), the difference between the
internal net supply of DIC (INS) and the amount of
carbon mineralized in water columns was assumed to
represent the amount of carbon mineralized in the
sediments in each lake (msO. ; msS ):
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
epilimnion-L. Skinnmuddselet
The lake was divided into ve sub-areas and the ve
sampling locations were located approximately in the
middle of each sub-area. The proportion of the sediment
area that was in contact with the epilimnion in each sub-
area was estimated from depth level-sediment area
relationships. For each sub-area, the relative amount
of the total sediment area in contact with the epilimnion
was then plotted against the surface pCO2. The
calculation was performed for the period late June to
late July, when the lake was stratied.
3. Results
3.1. Hydrology
Both lakes had similar hydrological regimes, char-
acterized by a peak inow during the spring ood in
April/May and occasional high ow events during the
summer (Fig. 1a). The outlet discharge (Fig. 1b) differed
due to the fact that the spring-ood water to a large
extent was retained in L. Skinnmuddselet to replenish
the large volume of water (approximately 90% of the
lakes volume) that had been released for electricity
production during the preceding winter.
200
Inlet - L. Skinnmuddselet
Discharge (m s )
3.2. Thermal stratification
A weak and unstable metalimnion at 12 m depth was
. asket in early June. At the same time,
observed in L. Ortr.
the shallow water column of L. Skinnmuddselet was
almost completely mixed. During the second sampling
occasion in late June, both lakes had a distinct, 5 m deep
epilimnion. Thereafter, the depth of the epilimnion
. asket, the depth of
increased in both lakes. In Lake Ortr.
the epilimnion reached >13 m in mid-August. At this
point most of the water column in L. Skinnmuddselet
was mixed. The proportion of the total sediment surface
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.
3.3. Water chemistry and gas fluxes
The summer means and ranges of DIC, CO2, pH,
ABS, DOC and nutrient concentrations in the two lakes
are presented in Table 2. The absorbance and DOC
. asket
concentrations were somewhat higher in Lake Ortr.
and there were clear differences in concentrations of
CO2 and DIC between the epilimnion and hypolimnion
in both lakes. The hypolimnetic concentrations of DIC
. asket increased >50 mM during the
and CO2 in L. Ortr.
study period, and a similar tendency was observed in the
sporadic samples from the hypolimnion of L. Skinn-
muddselet (Table 2). Both lakes had similar pH-values
and nutrient concentrations.
A strong positive correlation between surface pCO2
and DOC concentration in the epilimnion was found in
. asket (Fig. 2a) (r2 0:80; po0:0005), but not in
L. Ortr.
L. Skinnmuddselet (Fig. 2b). During the period of stable

Inlet River rn - L. rtrsket

-1

150
stratication, a strong positive relationship between
3

surface pCO2 and the proportion of the total sediment

100
area in contact with epilimnion water was found for the
reservoir, L. Skinnmuddselet (Fig. 3) (r2 0:92;
50
po0:0005).
The ABS250nm: DOC-ratios of the lakes were not
(a) 0
Mar Apr Jun Jul Aug
signicantly different (two-sample t-test; n 15 15;
p 0:05), indicating that differences in pCO2 between
200
the lakes were not caused by differences in DOC quality
Outlet-L. Skinnmuddselet or bacterial availability of DOC. The chl-a concentra-
tion was very similar in the lakes (Table 2), and the diel
Discharge (m s )

Outlet -L. rtrsket

-1

150
variations of pCO2 in the surface waters were less than
3

60 matm, with pCO2 peaking during daytime. This

100
indicates that photosynthesis had a minor impact on
the pCO2 in the lakes. The average area-weighted
50 emission of CO2 during the study period was 1095 mg
CO2 m
2 d
1 (25 mmol m
2 d
1) in L. Skinnmuddselet
0 and 900 mg CO2 m
2 d
1 (21 mmol m
2 d
1) in L.
(b) Mar Apr Jun Jul Aug . asket. The CO2 emission did not differ statistically
Ortr.
Fig. 1. Discharge from (a) the inlets and (b) the outlets of Lake between lakes during summer (two-sample t-test, n
. asket.
Skinnmuddselet and Lake Ortr. 15 15; p 0:4).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538 535

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)

Lake Skinnmuddselet . asket

Lake Ortr.

Epilimnion (n 39) Hypolimnion (n 6) Epilimnion (n 38) Hypolimnion (n 38)

DIC (mM) 120 (114128) 223 (199253) 115 (110121) 167 (137197)
CO2 (mM) 56 (5062) 141 (128157) 50 (3465) 118 (88153)
DOC (mg L
1) 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 L
1)a 460 532
Total-P (mg L
1)a 15 17
Chl-a (mg L
1)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

1000 500 y = 11.0x + 309

2
R = 0.92
0
y = 71x + 187 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
R2 = 0.80
Relative proportion of the total sediment area in
500 contact with the epilimnion (%)
7 9 11 13 15 Fig. 3. Relationship between surface pCO2 and relative
(a) DOC (mg L-1) proportion of the total sediment area in contact with the
epilimnion in Lake Skinnmuddselet during summer stratica-
1500 tion. Points represent ve sub-areas of L. Skinnmuddselet. Each
sub-area was sampled on June 29 and on July 17.
p CO2 (atm)

. asket. Jonsson et al. [13] estimated the

tion in L. Ortr.
1000
whole lake carbon mineralization to be 27 g C m
2 for
the summer period (range 2233 g C m
2). In our budget
the whole lake mineralization is represented by INS
(Table 3) and was 31.3 g C m
2. In 1994, the amount of
500 carbon mineralized in the sediments during summer (84
7 9 11 days) was estimated to 80 t [13]. This amount was similar
(b) DOC (mg L-1) in our budget: 86 t (Table 3). Based on the close
agreement between our balance and the previously
Fig. 2. Relationship between surface pCO2 and DOC in (a) . asket, we consider that
. asket and (b) Lake Skinnmuddselet. calculated balance for L. Ortr.
Lake Ortr.
the carbon balances calculated in this study accurately
. asket and L.
describe the carbon uxes in both L. Ortr.
Skinnmuddselet.

3.4. Lake carbon balances and mineralization

Whole lake carbon balances are presented in Table 3. 4. Discussion

The carbon balance for L. Ortr.. asket was checked
against the carbon balance calculated by Jonsson et al. The carbon balances demonstrate the strong inuence
[13] for the summer of 1994, where several independent of the internal net supply of CO2, i.e. mineralization of
methods were used to estimate the carbon mineraliza- organic carbon in water and sediment on carbon cycling
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
536 J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538

Table 3
. asket (L. O)
Lake carbon balances (g C m
2) 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)

Poola DPoolb Inputc Output Retentiong Internal net supply

Outletd Emissione Totalf Totalh Wateri Sedimentj

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
our study, which could have affected the nal results in
the carbon balances, probably lies within the infrequent
sampling (every third week). But since our carbon
. asket was very well matched with the
balance for L. Ortr.
earlier more detailed study (where sampling was
conducted every second week) (cf. [13]) our carbon
balance calculations seem reasonably accurate. Another
possible source of error is the assumption that 10% of
the DOC-pool in the water column of the lakes was
mineralized during summer. However, this share was
carefully chosen, based on the earlier study in L.
. asket [13], and on the observed range reported for
Ortr.
humic lakes (614%; average 10%, [19]). Moreover the
water chemistry of both lakes was very similar (Table 2)
and DOC availability should not differ much between
the lakes (cf. [19]). Therefore the potential uncertainties
should not have caused large errors in the conclusions of
this study.
The summer means of pCO2 in the surface water of
the reservoir (1200 matm) and the natural lake
(1050 matm) were 2.53 times greater than the atmo-
spheric average (365 matm), and similar to the estimated
global mean for natural lakes (1000 matm) [2]. Conse-
quently, net uxes of CO2 to the atmosphere occurred
from both lakes and the mean emission rate was similar
in the reservoir and in the natural lake (1095 and 900 mg
CO2 m
2 d
1, respectively). These rates are higher than
the average for natural lakes (700 mg CO2 m
2 d
1) [11],
but lower than reported summer means for hydroelectric
reservoirs in temperate regions (1300 mg CO2 m
2 d
1)
[12].
The total production of CO2 per unit lake surface area
during the summer was similar in both lakes (31.3 g m
2
. asket and 25.3 g m
2 in L. Skinnmuddselet;
in L. Ortr.
Table 3). Thus, both lakes had a similar capacity for
mineralizing organic carbon and producing CO2. How-
ever, the CO2 produced in the natural lake and the
reservoir originated from different pools. The surface
. asket was positively related to the DOC
pCO2 in L. Ortr.
concentration in the epilimnion (Fig. 2a), indicating that
epilimnetic mineralization of DOC in the lake water was
the major source of the emitted CO2 during the summer,
in agreement with previously reported results from L.
. asket [13,20]. In L. Skinnmuddselet there was no
Ortr.
relationship between DOC concentration in the epilim-
nion and surface pCO2 (Fig. 2b), but a signicant
relationship between sediment area in contact with
epilimnion and pCO2 in surface water (Fig. 3). This
result, together with the indications from the mass
balance calculations that most of the CO2 production
occurred in the sediments in L. Skinnmuddselet (Table
3), demonstrate that the sediment rather than the lake
water was the major CO2 source in L. Skinnmuddselet.
One reason for the importance of sediments in L.
Skinnmuddselet is the high sediment surface area to lake
volume ratio (approximately 160) compared to the
corresponding ratio in L. Ortr.. asket (approximately
50). However, these ratios do not explain why the CO2
production rate in the sediment was twice as high in L.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Aberg et al. / Water Research 38 (2004) 531538
Skinnmuddselet (20 g C m
2) as in L. Ortr. . asket
(10.8 g C m
2) (Table 3). This difference could have
been an effect of substrate availability [20] and/or
temperature [21,22]. In L. Skinnmuddselet, a majority
of the sediments (>80%) were in contact with
epilimnion water with temperatures around 15 C during
the summer. In contrast, in Lake Ortr.. asket >55% of
the sediments were in contact with hypolimnion water
with temperatures around 57 C. Thus, most of the
difference in CO2 production rate in the sediments
between the lake and the reservoir could be explained by
assuming a Q10 value of 23 for sediment microbial
processes [22]. Therefore, our results do not provide
clear evidence that the ooded bottom contained more
available organic substrates for heterotrophic bacteria
than natural lake sediments.
We also compared the two lakes on an annual basis.
During the period from January to May, 90% of the
water volume of L. Skinnmuddselet is emptied for
hydroelectric power generation. If we assume that the
accumulated CO2 in the reservoir represented by the
supersaturation levels during late autumn is emitted to
the atmosphere when the reservoir is emptied and the
water is transported 100 km downstream to the sea,
another 3.8 g C m
2 must be added to the amount of
CO2 emitted during the summer (23.9 g C m
2, Table 3).
. asket, CO2 is produced throughout the
In L. Ortr.
winter, resulting in an accumulation of CO2 in the
unstratied water column (from 70 mM in autumn to
115 mM in late winter, Algesten unpubl. data). During
spring circulation the accumulated CO2 (45 mM) will
probably, to a large extent, be emitted to the atmosphere
[23], which then corresponds to an emission of 11.5 g
C m
2. During autumn circulation L. Ortr. . asket will
probably have a larger emission than L. Skinnmuddse-
let, due to the small volume of hypolimnetic water in L.
Skinnmuddselet. The difference in supersaturation
between late summer and autumn circulation corre-
sponds to an emission of 11.4 g C m
2. Consequently, on
an annual basis the total amount of CO2 emitted from L.
. asket can be estimated to amount to 44.2 g C m
2,
Ortr.
which is more than in L. Skinnmuddselet (27.8 g C m
2).
Thus, the difference in emission between the reservoir
and the natural lake on an annual basis was mainly due
to the differences during autumn and spring turnover,
when approximately 50% of the amount of carbon was
emitted from the natural lake.
Our results do not indicate any dramatic differences in
CO2 production and emission between the reservoir and
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
originated from different pools. This variation in CO2
production was related mainly to differences in mor-
phometry (i.e. the surface to volume ratio), which caused
CO2 production to be higher in the lake water in L.
537
. asket and higher in the sediment of L. Skinnmudd-
Ortr.
selet. Therefore, our results do not support the hypoth-
esis that emission from the reservoir should be higher
than from the natural lake. On the contrary, it appears
that the natural lake was a greater source of CO2 than
the reservoir on an annual basis, because mineralization
processes also occurred in the winter in the natural lake.
However, an important aspect when discussing the
consequences of building reservoirs, such as L. Skinn-
muddselet, is that, before ooding, the land area now
covered by water was probably a net sink for CO2 [9].
The total effect of the reservoir on the catchment carbon
balance is therefore equivalent to the present emission
from the reservoir (750 t of CO2 per year) plus the
previous net accumulation of carbon in the terrestrial
system now covered by water. This total effect is difcult
to quantify since we do not know the net carbon balance
of the terrestrial system, but it is possible that the most
pronounced effect of the reservoir is a decrease in CO2
xation in an area of the catchment corresponding to the
surface of the reservoir rather than an increase in
respiration within that area.
5. Conclusions
The total production of CO2 per unit of lake surface
area during the summer was similar in the natural lake
and the reservoir.
The sediments were the major CO2 source in the
reservoir, while most of the mineralization in the natural
lake occurred in the water column. This variation in
CO2 production was related mainly to differences in
morphometry (i.e. the surface to volume ratio) and not
to regulation.
On an annual basis, the natural lake produced and
emitted more CO2 per unit of lake surface area than the
reservoir, since mineralization proceeded during the
winter when the reservoir was emptied for electricity
production.
Acknowledgements
We thank Bjarne Sundberg and Lars-Erik Dahlen for
their assistance, at the courtesy of Graninge AB Energy
Company, during the eldwork and for providing data.
Financial support was provided by the Swedish Energy
Agency.
References
[1] del Giorgio PA, Cole JJ, Caraco NF, Peters RH. Linking
planktonic biomass and metabolism to net gas uxes in
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
dioxide supersaturation in the surface waters of lakes.
Science 1994;265:156870.
[3] del Giorgio PA, Cole JJ, Cimbleris A. Respiration rates in
bacteria exceed phytoplankton production in unproductive
aquatic systems. Nature 1997;385:14851.
[4] Prairie YT, Bird DF, Cole JJ. The summer metabolic
balance in the epilimnion of southeastern Quebec lakes.
Limnol Oceanogr 2002;47:31621.
[5] Sobek S, Algesten G, Bergstrom. A-K, Jansson M, Tranvik
LJ. The catchment and climate regulation of pCO2 in
boreal lakes. Global Change Biol 2003;9:63041.
[6] Hope D, Kratz TK, Riera JL. Relationships between pCO2
and dissolved organic carbon in northern Wisconsin lakes.
J Environ Qual 1996;25:14425.
[7] Jansson M, Bergstrom . A-K, Blomqvist P, Drakare S.
Allochtonous organic carbon and phytoplankton/bacter-
ioplankton production relationships in lakes. Ecology
2000;81:32505.
[8] Rudd JMV, Harris R, Kelly CA, Heckey RE. Are
hydroelectric reservoirs signicant sources of greenhouse
gases? Ambio 1993;22:2468.
[9] Kelly CA, Rudd JWM, Bodaly RA, Roulet NP, St. Louis
VL, Heyes A, Moore TR, Schiff S, Aravena R, Scott KJ,
Dyck B, Harris R, Warner B, Edwards G. Increases in
uxes of greenhouse gases and methyl mercury following
ooding of an experimental reservoir. Environ Sci Technol
1997;31:133444.
[10] Duchemin E, Lucotte M. Production of the greenhouse
gases CH4 and CO2 by hydroelectric reservoirs of the
boreal region. Global Biogeochem Cycles 1995;9:
52940.
[11] St Louis VL, Kelly CA, Duchemin E, Rudd JMV,
Rosenberg DM. Reservoir surfaces as sources of green-
house gases to the atmosphere: a global estimate.
BioScience 2000;50:76675.
[12] Duchemin E, Lucotte M, St Louis V, Canuel R. Hydro-
electric reservoirs as an anthropogenic source of green-
house gases. World Resource Review, 2003;14:33453.
[13] Jonsson A, Meili M, Bergstrom . A-K, Jansson M. Whole-
lake mineralization of allochthonous and autochthonous
organic carbon in a large humic lake (Ortr. . asket, N.
Sweden). Limnol Oceanogr 2001;46:1691700.
[14] Raab B, Vedin H. Climate, lakes and riversnational atlas
of Sweden. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist and Wiksell
International; 1995.
[15] Fred!en C. Geologynational atlas of Sweden. Stockholm,
Sweden: Almqvist and Wiksell International; 1994.
[16] Cole JJ, Caraco NF. Atmospheric exchange of carbon
dioxide in a low-wind oligotrophic lake measured by the
addition of SF6. Limnol Oceanogr 1998;43:64756.
[17] Weiss RF. Carbon dioxide in water and seawater: the
solubility of a non-ideal gas. Mar Chem 1974;2:20315.
[18] Kling GW, Kipphut GW, Miller MC. The ux of CO2 and
CH4 from lakes and rivers in arctic Alaska. Hydrobiologia
1992;240:2336.
[19] Tranvik LJ. Availability of dissolved organic carbon for
planktonic bacteria in oligotrophic lakes of differing humic
content. Microb Ecol 1998;16:31122.
[20] Jansson M, Bergstrom . A-K, Blomqvist P, Isaksson A,
Jonsson A. Impact of allochthonous organic carbon on
microbial food carbon dynamics and structure in Lake
. asket. Arch Hydrobiol 1999;144:40928.
Ortr.
[21] den Heyer C, Kalff J. Organic matter mineralization rates
in sediments: a within- and among lake study. Limnol
Oceanogr 1998;43:695705.
[22] Wetzel RG. Limnology: lake and river ecosystems. San
Diego, USA: Academic Press (NJ); 2001.
[23] Striegl RG, Kortelainen P, Chanton JP, Wichlna KP,
Bugna GK, Rantakai M. Carbon dioxide partial pressure
and 13C content of north temperate and boreal lakes at
spring ice melt. Limnology Oceanogr 2001;46:9415.