Appendix 2: Estimating CO2 emissions from lands converted to permanently flooded lands

Appendix 2

Possible Approach for Estimating CO2 Emissions
from Lands Converted to Permanently Flooded
Land: Basis for Future Methodological Development

The time elapsed since flooding has a significant influence on greenhouse gas fluxes from flooded lands and also
on the partition of the gases. Recent statistical analyses on reservoirs worldwide indicate that there is a rapid
surge of emissions immediately after flooding, after which emissions return to a relative stable level (Tremblay
et al., 2005; Therrien et al., 2005; Soumis et al., 2005; and Huttunen et al., 2002, 2003). The rate of the postflooding decrease in emissions may depend on the region in which the reservoir is located, but seems to vary in
about a 10-year period (Delmas et al., 2005; Abril et al., 2005; Tremblay et al., 2005).
Evidence suggests that CO2 emissions for approximately the first ten years after flooding are the results of decayof some of the organic matter on the land prior to flooding. The easily degradable carbon and nutrients are madeavailable to producer organisms upon flooding and metabolized. Beyond this time period, CO2 emissions are
sustained by the input of organic material transferred into the flooded area from the watershed (Houel, 2003;
Hélie, 2004; Cole and Caraco, 2001). To avoid double-counting of CO2 emissions, which may already been
captured in the greenhouse gas budget of managed lands in the watershed and in the absence of conclusive
evidence on the longer term impact of flooding on these emissions, the default methodology only considers thefirst 10 years post flooding.
Any emissions caused by land-use change activity itself (e.g., CO2 or non-CO2 emissions due land clearance
before flooding of the land) should be estimated using the methodologies provided elsewhere in this Volume.
Prior to flooding land may be cleared. Organic material may be burnt or may be harvested (e.g., for timber). The
resultant emissions should be estimated using the appropriate methodologies in this Volume for estimating thechange in the carbon stock before flooding. These emissions should be estimated in the year they occur.
Subsequent to flooding and any land clearing, carbon dioxide emissions from Land Converted to Flooded Landcan occur via the following pathways:•

Diffusive Emissions, due to molecular diffusion across the air-water interface; this is the major pathway forCO2 emissions;•

Bubble Emissions, or gas emissions from the sediment through the water column via bubbles; this is a very
minor pathway for CO2 emissions;•

Degassing Emissions, or emissions resulting from a sudden change in hydrostatic pressure, as well as theincreased air/water exchange surface after reservoir waters flow through a turbine and/or a spillway(Duchemin, 2000; Hélie, 2004; Soumis et al., 2004; and Delmas et al., 2005)

This Appendix presents a hierarchy of 3 methods of increasing sophistication called Levels 1, 2 and 3.
Levels 1 and 2 estimate diffusive emissions only. A level 3 method, based on detailed measurements, includes
all relevant fluxes of carbon dioxide emissions from flooded lands. Level 3 includes degassing emissions andconsiders the age, and the geographical location and the water temperature of the reservoir. The Level 3 method
is not outlined further in this Appendix, but countries should refer to the Box 2a.1 on derivation of countryspecific emission factors as a resource for implementing Level 3. When using Level 3, all relevant emissions
from flooded lands should be estimated for the life-time of the reservoir. Table 2a.1 summarizes the coverage ofthe three levels with respect to CO2 emission pathways.

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Ap2.1

Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

BOX 2A.1
DERIVATION OF COUNTRY-SPECIFIC EMISSION FACTORS

Programs to derive country-specific emission factors should carefully consider the potential
overlap with other sectors and the proper attribution of emissions. For example, N2O emissions
ultimately due to fertilizer application or sewage treatment in the watershed should not be reported
in the Flooded Land category.
In general, the derivation of country-specific emission factors requires actual measurements ofgreenhouse gas fluxes from reservoir surfaces. Separate emission factors should be developed forthe predominant types of reservoirs in the national territory. To minimize the required effort,
reservoirs should first be grouped into categories that take into account the main factors
responsible for variability among reservoirs, especially climate zone and geological basement(which strongly affects pH). Maps and national ecological stratification can be useful to carry out
this task.
Within each reservoir category, a measurement strategy should be designed to obtainrepresentative flux values by reservoir age, morphology, management regime, nutrient status andother relevant factors if necessary. Finally, within any single reservoir, a rigorously designed flux
sampling scheme should be applied to take into account the spatial variability caused by variations
in depth and water current, proximity to the shore, and presence of aquatic vegetation; and thetemporal variability caused by diurnal and seasonal cycles. Flux measurements should be takenover an entire year, preferably over several years.
Useful information can be obtained from the following references: Therrien et al., 2005; Duchemin
et al., 2006; Delmas et al., 2005; Abril et al., 2005; Rosa et al., 2004; Soumis et al., 2004; Tavaresde lima, 2002; Huttunen et al., 2002; Duchemin, 2000; Duchemin et al., 1999; Rosa et al., 1996;
and Duchemin et al., 1995.
The development of emission factors should take into account predominant emission types:
diffusive, bubbles, and degassing. Measurements of CH4 and CO2 aqueous concentrations at
various points upstream and downstream of the reservoir are needed to estimate degassing
emissions.

TABLE 2A.1
LEVELS AND CO2 EMISSION PATHWAYS FOR LAND CONVERTED TO FLOODED LAND

CO2
Level 1•

Diffusive emissions

Level 2•

Diffusive emissions

Level 3•All emissions

CHOICE OF METHOD
The flow chart in Figure 2a.1 guides inventory compilers through the processes of selecting the appropriate level.
Level selection and the level of spatial and temporal disaggregation implemented by inventory agencies will
depend upon the availability of activity and emissions factor data, as well as the importance of reservoirs as
contributors to national greenhouse gas emissions.
Lev e l 1
Level 1 provides a simplified approach to estimating CO2 emissions from reservoirs using default emission
factors and highly aggregated area data. The only CO2 emission pathway included under Level 1 is diffusion
during the ice-free period. CO2 diffusive emissions related to ice-cover period are assumed to be zero. The
default assumption is that CO2 emissions are limited to the first 10 years after the flooding took place, and any
subsequent emissions of CO2 come from carbon entering the reservoir from other land areas (e.g., upstream
agriculture). Equation 2.16 of Chapter 2 can be used to estimate the carbon stock change in above-ground living
biomass due to land conversion to Flooded Land if above-ground biomass is cleared before flooding. If theabove-ground biomass is burned, one should use Equation 2.14 or 2.27 of Chapter 2 (Emissions from biomass

Ap2.2

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Appendix 2: Estimating CO2 emissions from lands converted to permanently flooded lands

burning). In addition, the flux equation, as described below, should be used in all cases to estimate CO2
emissions from carbon not cleared.
Decay of above-ground biomass left on site and soil organic matter will both contribute to the emissions.
Equation 2a.1 shows the Level 1 method for these CO2 emissions.

EQUATION 2A.1
CO2 EMISSIONS FROM LAND CONVERTED TO FLOODED LAND (LEVEL 1)

CO2 Emissions LWflood = P • E (CO 2) diff • A flood ,total _ surface • f A • 10 −6
Where:
CO2 EmissionsLW flood = total CO2 emissions from Land Converted to Flooded Land, Gg CO2 yr-1
P = number of days without ice cover during a year, days yr-1
E(CO2)diff = averaged daily diffusive emissions, kg CO2 ha-1 day-1
Aflood, total surface = total reservoir surface area, including flooded land, lakes and rivers, hafA = fraction of the total reservoir area that was flooded within the last 10 yrs

The CO2 emissions estimated by Equation 2a.1 are highly uncertain because the default emission factor does notaccount for differences in site-specific conditions and time since flooding. The use of Equation 2a.1 may also
lead to overestimating emissions when used in conjunction with Equations 2.14, 2.16, or 2.27 in Chapter 2.
Countries using a Level 2 method can more accurately represent the proper time profile of the CO2 emissions
following flooding. Guidance on Level 2 methods is given below.
Lev e l 2
Under Level 2, country-specific emission factors are used to estimate CO2 diffusive emissions. In Level 2, CO2
emissions can be estimated from reservoirs following the approach shown in Equation 2a.2. As with Level 1, theCO2 emissions from Land Converted to Flooded Land should be estimated only for ten years after flooding whenusing Level 2 method unless country-specific research indicates otherwise.
The estimation of diffusive emissions can also be extended to distinguish between periods in which thereservoirs are ice-free and those in which they are ice-covered (Duchemin et al., 2006). This may be a significant
improvement in accuracy for countries in colder climates. The flooded land area may be further disaggregatedby climatic zone, geological basement, or any relevant parameter listed in Box 2a.1.

EQUATION 2A.2
CO2 EMISSIONS FROM LAND CONVERTED TO FLOODED LAND (LEVEL 2)(⎡ ( Pf • E f (CO2 ) diff ) + ( Pi • Ei (CO2 ) diff )CO2 Emissions LWflood = ⎢−6⎢⎣ A flood , surface • f A • 10

(

)

) •⎤
⎥
⎥⎦

Where:
CO2 emissionsLW flood = total CO2 emissions from Land Converted to Flooded Land, Gg CO2 yr-1
Pf = ice-free period, days yr-1
Pi = period with ice cover, days yr-1
Ef(CO2)diff = averaged daily diffusive emissions from air water-interface during the ice-free period,
kg CO2 ha-1 day-1
Ei(CO2)diff = diffusive emissions related to the ice-covered period, kg CO2 ha-1 day-1
Aflood, surface= total reservoir surface area, including flooded land, lakes and rivers, hafA = fraction of the total area flooded within the last 10 yrs, dimensionless2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Ap2.3

Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

Figure 2a.1 Flow Chart for selection of appropriate levelStart

Are detailed
information on reservoirs
and seasonally integrated
CO2 emission factors
available ?

Estimate emissions from all
relevant emission pathways
using country-specific dataand emission factors.

Yes

Box 4: Level 3
NoAre
historical andcurrent data available
on the reservoir
areas?

Yes

Were
domestic studies
done on CO2 emissions
on reservoirs?

Estimate emissions
using default andcountry-specific
data.

Yes

Box 3: Level 2
NoAre
flooded lands a
key category1 and is CO2
significant2?

No

Yes

Collect or compile data on
reservoir surface area anddetermine seasonallyintegrated CO2 emission
factors for reservoirs.

No
Estimate diffusive
emissions using
default emission
factors andactivity data.
Box 1: Level 1

Estimate emissions using
default method and default
emission factors andnational activity data.
Box 2: Level 1

Note:
1: See Volume 1 Chapter 4, "Methodological Choice and Identification of Key Categories" (noting Section 4.1.2 on limited resources), for
discussion of key categories and use of decision trees.
2: A subcategory is significant if it accounts for 25-30% of emissions/removals for the overall category.

Ap2.4

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Appendix 2: Estimating CO2 emissions from lands converted to permanently flooded lands

Lev e l 3
The Level 3 methods for estimating CO2 emissions are comprehensive and must include additional countryspecific data on all relevant CO2 emission pathways, such as degassing emissions. Emission factors are
disaggregated to reflect all relevant sources of temporal and spatial variability (see Box 2a.1). To avoid double
counting, Level 3 also requires partitioning emissions from the degradation of flooded organic matter and fromthe decay of organic matter originating from the watershed.

CHOICE OF EMISSION FACTORSThe key default values needed to implement Level 1 method are emission factors for CO2 via the diffusion
pathways. Table 2a.2 presents measured emissions for various climate zones. These measured emissions
integrate known spatial (intra-reservoir and regional variations) and temporal variations (dry/rainy and otherseasonal variations, inter-annual variations) in the emissions from reservoirs, as well as fluxes at the water-air
interface of reservoirs. Level 1 applies only to the ice-free period. During complete ice-cover period, CO2
emissions are assumed to be zero, although in reality emissions do occur. All data have been obtained frommeasurements in hydroelectric or flood control reservoirs.
For Level 2, country-specific emission factors should, to the extent possible, be used and should include
emissions during the winter (ice-cover) period. The development of country-specific emission factors is
discussed in Box 2a.1. The derivation of country-specific factors should be clearly documented, and ideallypublished in peer reviewed literature. Guidance in Box 2a.1 is applicable also for derivation of emission factors
for Level 3.

CHOICE OF ACTIVITY DATA
Several different types of activity data may be needed to estimate flooded land emissions, depending on the level
being implemented and the potential sources of spatial and temporal variability within the national territory.

Flooded land area
For Level 1, the total reservoir area is required, and the proportion flooded in the last ten years (fA). The use, ina higher level, of more detailed emission profiles over time will require corresponding information on the age
distribution of flooded lands. Countries can obtain their flooded land area from a drainage basin cover analysis,
from a national dam database, from the International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD, 1998) or from theWorld Commission on Dams report (WCD, 2000). Since flooded land area could change rapidly, and because of
the 10-year time limit, countries should use updated and recent data of reservoir surface area. Under Level 2,
this activity data should be disaggregated by relevant categories (see Box 2a.1). For Level 2 and Level 3,
countries should create a national reservoir database with relevant data or information on reservoir names, types,
geographical coordinates, year of impoundment, surface area, depth, outflow rate, and other relevant parameters
as described in Box 2a.1.

Period of ice-free cover/Period of ice-cover
Under all levels, the periods during which the reservoirs are ice-free or completely ice-covered are required toestimate CO2 emissions. This information can be obtained from national meteorological services.

Outflow/Spillway volume
Under Level 3, flooded land outflow and spillway volume are required to estimate degassing emissions of CO2.

CO 2 concentrations upstream and downstream of dams
Under Level 3, CO2 concentrations upstream and downstream of dams would be needed for estimation of thedegassing emissions. Information on measurement techniques can be obtained from the references cited in Box
2a.1.

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Ap2.5

Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

TABLE 2A.2
CO2 MEASURED EMISSIONS FOR FLOODED LAND
Diffusive emissions (ice-free period)
Ef(CO2)diff (kg CO2 ha-1 day-1)

ClimatePolar/Boreal wet

Cold temperate,
moist

References

Median

Min

Max

Nm

Nres

11.8

0.8

34.5

1011

20

Bergström et al., 2004; Åberg et al.,
2004; Huttunen et al., 200220

Duchemin, 2000; Schlellhase et al.,1994 ; Duchemin et al., 1999 ;Duchemin et al., 1995; Tremblay etal., 2005

15.2

4.5

86.3

633

Warm temperate,
moist

8.1

-10.3

57.5

507

33

Duchemin, 2000; Duchemin,
2002a ; St-Louis et al., 2000; Smith
and Lewis, 1992 ; Tremblay et al.,2005

Warm temperate, dry

5.2

-12.0

31.0

390

43

Soumis et al., 2004 ; Therrien et al.,2005

Tropical, wet

44.9

11.5

90.9

642

7

Keller and Stallard, 1994; GalyLacaux et al., 1997; Galy-Lacaux,
1996; Duchemin et al., 2000;
Pinguelli Rosa et al., 2002; Tavaresde lima et al., 2002; Tavares delima, 2005

Tropical, dry

39.1

11.7

58.7

197

5

Pinguelli Rosa et al., 2002; Dos
Santos, 2000

The values in the second column represent the medians of CO2 emissions reported in the literature, which themselves are arithmetic
means of flux measured above individual reservoirs. The medians are used because the frequency distributions of underlying flux
measurements are not normal, and their arithmetic means are already skewed by extreme values. Min and Max values are, respectively,
the lowest and highest of all individual measurements within a given climate region; these are provided as an indication of variability
only. Nm = number of measurements; Nres = number of reservoirs sampled.
These measurements may include non-anthropogenic emissions (e.g., emissions from carbon in the upstream basin) and possible double
counting of anthropogenic emissions (e.g., waste water from urban areas in the region of the reservoir) and so may overestimate theemissions.

U NCERTAINTY ASSESSMENT
The two largest sources of uncertainty in the estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs are theemission factors from the various pathways (diffusive, bubble and degassing) and the estimates of reservoir
surface areas.

Emission factors
The CO2 diffusive emissions shown in Table 2a.2 vary by one to two orders of magnitude in boreal andtemperate regions, and by one to three in tropical regions. Therefore, the use of any emission factor derived from
Table 2a.2 will result in high uncertainty. Since the age of reservoirs has a significant influence on CO2 fluxes
during the first 10 years, the method may result in an underestimation of CO2 emissions.

Ap2.6

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Appendix 2: Estimating CO2 emissions from lands converted to permanently flooded lands

CO2 degasssing emissions, which are typically significant in temperate and tropical regions, are an importantsource of uncertainty for Level 3. Research demonstrated that these CO2 emissions accounted for all thegreenhouse gas emissions from a reservoir in a temperate dry region, and for up to 30% in temperate moist
region (Soumis et al., 2004). In cold temperate regions, degassing CO2 emissions accounted for less than 5% of
the total greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs (Duchemin, 2000; Hélie, 2003).
To reduce the uncertainties on emissions factors, countries should develop appropriate, statistically valid
sampling strategies that take into account factors underlying the temporal and spatial variability of the ecosystem
studied (see Box 2a.1).

Flooded land surface area
National statistical information on the flooded area retained behind large dams (> 100km2) should be available
and will probably be accurate to within 10%. Where national database on dams are not available, and otherinformation is used, the flooded land areas retained behind dams will probably have an uncertainty of more than
50%, especially for countries with large flooded land areas. Detailed information on the location, type andfunction of smaller dams may be also difficult to obtain, though statistical inference may be possible based on
the size distribution of reservoirs for which data are available. Reservoirs are created for a variety of reasons that
influence the availability of data, and, consequently, the uncertainty on surface area is dependent on countryspecific conditions.

ReferencesÅberg, J., Bergström, A.K., Algesten, G., Söderback, K. and Jansson, M. (2004). A comparison of the carbon
balances of a natural lake (L. Östräsket) and a hydroelectric reservoir (L. Skinnmuddselet) in northern
Sweden, Water Research, 28, 531-538.
Abril, G., Guérin, F., Richard, S., Delmas, R., Galy-Lacaux, C., Gosse, P., Tremblay, A., Varfalvy, L., dosSantos, A.M. and Matvienko, B. (2005). Carbon dioxide and methane emissions and the carbon budget of
a 10-years old tropical reservoir (Petit-Saut, French Guiana). Global Biogeochemical Cycle (in press).
Bergström, A.K., Algesten, G., Sobek, S., Tranvik, L. and Jansson, M. (2004). Emission of CO2 fromhydroelectric reservoirs in northern Sweden, Arch. Hydrobiol., 159, 1, 25-42.
Cole, J.J. and Caraco, N.F. (2001). Carbon in catchments: connecting terrestrial carbon losses with aquatic
metabolism. Marine and Freshwater Research, 52:101-110
Delmas, R.. Richard, S., Guérin, F., Abril, G., Galy-Lacaux, C., Delon, C. and Grégoire, A. (2005). Long Term
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Hydroelectric Reservoir of Petit Saut (French Guiana) and Potential
Impacts. In Tremblay, A., L. Varfalvy, C. Roehm and M. Garneau (Eds.). Greenhouse gas Emissions:
Fluxes and Processes, Hydroelectric Reservoirs and Natural Environments. Environmental Science Series,
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 293-312.
dos Santos, M.A. (2000). Inventário emissões de gases de efeito estufa derivadas de Hidréletricas, PhD.
Dissertation, University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 154p.
Duchemin, E., Lucotte, M., Canuel, R. and Soumis, N. (2006). First assessment of CH4 and CO2 emissions fromshallow and deep zones of boreal reservoirs upon ice break-up, Lakes and Reservoirs: Research andManagement, 11:9-19.
Duchemin É. (2000). Hydroelectricity and greenhouse gases: Emission evaluation and identification ofbiogeochemical processes responsible for their production, PhD. Dissertation, Université du Québec àMontréal, Montréal (Québec), Canada, 321 p (available on CD-ROM).
Duchemin, É., Lucotte, M., Canuel, R. and Chamberland, A. (1995). Production of the greenhouse gases CH4
and CO2 by hydroelectric reservoirs of the boreal region, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 9, 4, 529-540.
Duchemin, É., Lucotte, M., Canuel, R., Almeida Cruz, D., Pereira, H.C., Dezincourt, J. and Queiroz, A.G.
(2000). Comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from an old tropical reservoir and from other reservoirs
worldwide, Verh. Internat. Verein. Limnol., 27, 3, 1391-1395.
Duchemin, É., Canuel, R., Ferland, P. and Lucotte, M. (1999). Étude sur la production et l’émission de gaz àeffet de serre par les réservoirs hydroélectriques d’Hydro-Québec et des lacs naturels (Volet 2), Scientificreport, Direction principal Planification Stratégique - Hydro-Québec, 21046-99027c, 48p.
Fearnside, P.M. (2002). Greenhouse gas emissions from a hydroelectric reservoir (Brazil’s Tucurui dam) and theenergy policy implications, Water Air and Soil Pollution 133, 1-4, 69-96.

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Ap2.7

Volume 4: Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use

Galy-Lacaux, C. (1996). Modifications des échanges de constituants mineurs atmosphériques liées à la créationd'une retenue hydroélectrique. Impact des barrages sur le bilan du méthane dans l'atmosphère, PhD
dissertation, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse (France), 200 p.
Galy-Lacaux, C., Delmas, R., Jambert, C., Dumestre, J.-F., Labroue, L., Richard, S. and Gosse, P. (1997).
Gaseous emissions and oxygen consumption in hydroelectric dams: a case study in French Guyana,
Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 11, 4, 471-483.
Hélie, J.F. (2004). Geochemistry and fluxes of organic and inorganic in aquatic systems of eastern Canada:
examples of the St-Lawrence River and Robert-Bourassa reservoir: Isotopic approach, PhD. Dissertation,
Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal (Québec), Canada, 205p.
Houel, S. (2003). Dynamique de la matière organique terrigène dans les réservoirs boréaux, PhD. Dissertation,
Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal (Québec), Canada, 121p.
Huttunen, J.T., Alm, J., Liikanen, A., Juutinen, S., Larmola, T., Hammar, T., Silvola, J. and Martikainen, P.J.
(2003). Fluxes of methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide in boreal lakes and potential anthropogenic
effects on the aquatic greenhouse gas emissions, Chemosphere, 52, 609-621
Huttunen, J.T., Väisänen, T.S., Hellsten, S.K., Heikkinen, M., Nykänen, H., Jungner, H., Niskanen, A., Virtanen,
M.O., Lindqvist, O.V., Nenonen, O.S. and Martikainen, P.J. (2002). Fluxes of CH4, CO2, and N2O inhydroelectric reservoir Lokka and Porttipahta in the northern boreal zone in Finland, Global
Biogeochemical Cycles, 16, 1, doi:10.1029/2000GB001316.
International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD) (1998). World register of Dams 1998. Paris. International
Comittee on large Dams (Ed.). Metadatabase.
Keller, M. and Stallard, R.F. (1994). Methane emission by bubbling from Gatun lake, Panama, J. Geophys. Res.,99, D4, 8307-8319.
Rosa, L.P., Schaeffer, R. and Santos, M.A. (1996). Are hydroelectric dams in the Brazalian Amazon significant
sources of greenhouse gases? Environmental Conservation, 66, No. 1: 2-6. Cambridge University Press.
Rosa, L.P., Santos, M.A., Matvienko, B., Santos, E.O. and Sisar, E. (2004). Greehouse gas emissions fromhydroelectric reservoirs in tropical Regions, Climatic Change, 66: 9-21.
Rosa, L.P., Matvienko Sikar, B., dos Santos, M.A., Matvienko Sikar, E. (2002). Emissoes de dioxido de carbono
e de metano pelos reservatorios hydroelectricos brasileiros, Relatorio de referencia – Inventorio brasileirode emissoes antropicas de gase de efeito de estufa, Ministerio da Ciencia e tecnologia, Brazil, 199p.
Schlellhase, H.U. (1994). B.C. Hydro Strategic R&D; Carbon project - Reservoir case study, Powertech Labs
inc., Final Report, 1-57.
Smith, L.K. and Lewis, W.M. (1992). Seasonality of methane emissions from five lakes and associated wetlandsof the Colorado Rockies, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 6, 4, 323-338
Soumis, N., Lucotte, M., Duchemin, É., Canuel, R., Weissenberger, S., Houel, S. and Larose, C. (2005).
Hydroelectric reservoirs as anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gases. In Water Encyclopedia. Volume 3:
Surface and agricultural water, sous la dir. de J. H. Lehr et J. Keeley. p. 203-210. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley & Sons.
Soumis, N., Duchemin, É., Canuel, R. and Lucotte, M. (2004). Greenhouse gas emissions from reservoirs of thewestern United States, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 18, GB3022, doi:10.1029/2003GB002197.
St-Louis, V., Kelly, C.A., Duchemin, É., Rudd, J.W.M. and Rosenberg, D.M. (2000). Reservoir surfaces assources of greenhouse gases: A global estimate, Bioscience, 50, 9, 766-775.
Tavares de Lima, I. (2005). Biogeochemical distinction of methane releases from two Amazon hydroreservoirs,
Chemosphere, In Press
Tavares de Lima, I. (2002). Emissoa de metano em reservatorio hidreletricos amazonicos atraves de leis depotencia (Methane emission from Amazonian hydroelectric reservoirs through power laws), PhD
Dissertation, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 119 p.
Therrien, J. (2005). Aménagement hydroélectrique de l'Eastmain-1 – Étude des gaz à effet de serre en milieux
aquatiques 2003-2004. Rapport de GENIVAR Groupe Conseil Inc. à la Société d'énergie de la BaieJames. 48 p. et annexes.
Therrien, J. (2004). Flux de gaz à effet de serre en milieux aquatiques - Suivi 2003. Rapport de GENIVAR
Groupe Conseil Inc. présenté à Hydro-Québec. 52 p. et annexes.

Ap2.8

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Appendix 2: Estimating CO2 emissions from lands converted to permanently flooded lands

Therrien, J., Tremblay, A. and Jacques, R. (2005). CO2 Emissions from Semi-arid Reservoirs and Natural
Aquatic Ecosystems. In Tremblay, A., L. Varfalvy, C. Roehm et M. Garneau (Eds.). Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Fluxes and Processes, Hydroelectric Reservoirs and Natural Environments. Environmental
Science Series, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 233-250.
Tremblay, A., Therrien, J., Hamlin, B., Wichmann, E. and LeDrew, L. (2005). GHG Emissions from Boreal
Reservoirs and Natural Aquatic Ecosystems. In Tremblay, A., L. Varfalvy, C. Roehm and M. Garneau(Eds.). Greenhouse gas Emissions: Fluxes and Processes, Hydroelectric Reservoirs and Natural
Environments. Environmental Science Series, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, pp. 209-231.
WCD (2000). Dams and Development a New Framework for Decision-Making, The Report of the World
Commission on Dams, Earthscan Publications Ltd, London and Sterling, VA, 356 p.

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories

Ap2.9