Does the Operation of a Reservoir Alter Its Interactions with the Atmosphere? Investigating the Role of Advective Fluxes on Energy and Hydrological Balances of the Romaine-2 Subarctic Hydropower Reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The hydrological processes of cascading hydroelectric reservoirs differ from those of lakes, due to the importance of the inflows and outflows that vary with energy demand. These heat and water advection terms are rarely considered in water body energy balance analyses even though reservoirs are common man-made structures, especially in North America, and thus may affect the regional climate. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the water and energy balance of the 85-km 2 Romaine-2 northern reservoir (50.69°N, 63.24°W), mean depth of 44 m, highlighting the significant contribution of the advection heat fluxes. The water balance input was primarily controlled by upstream (turbine) inflows (77.6%), while lateral (natural) inflows and direct precipitation represented 21.2% and 1.2%, respectively. As for the reservoir’s heat budget, the net advection of heat accounted on average for 25.0% of the input, of which net radiation was the largest component (73.3%). After accounting for the absence of energy balance closure, latent heat and sensible heat fluxes represented 73.2% and 25.1% of total energy output from the reservoir, respectively. The thermal regime was influenced by the hydrological flow conditions, which were regulated by reservoir management. This played a major role in the evolution of the thermocline and the temperature of the epilimnion, and ultimately, in the dynamics of the turbulent heat fluxes. This study suggests that the heat advection term represents a large fraction of the heat budget of northern reservoirs and should be properly considered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".