Technical note: Mobile open dynamic chamber measurement of methane macroseeps in lakes

Abstract

Abstract. Methane (CH4) seepage (i.e., steady or episodic flow of gaseous hydrocarbons from subsurface reservoirs) has been identified as a significant source of atmospheric CH4. However, radiocarbon data from polar ice cores have recently brought into question the magnitude of fossil CH4 seepage naturally occurring. In northern high latitudes, seepage of subsurface CH4 is impeded by permafrost and glaciers, which are under an increasing risk of thawing and melting in a globally warming world, implying the potential release of large stores of CH4 in the future. Resolution of these important questions requires a better constraint and monitoring of actual emissions from seepage areas. The measurement of these seeps is challenging, particularly in aquatic environments, because they involve large and irregular gas flow rates, unevenly distributed both spatially and temporally. Large macroseeps are particularly difficult to measure due to a lack of lightweight, inexpensive methods that can be deployed in remote Arctic environments. Here, we report the use of a mobile chamber for measuring emissions at the surface of ice-free lakes subject to intense CH4 macroseepage. Tested in a remote Alaskan lake, the method was validated for the measurement of fossil CH4 emissions of up to 1.08 × 104 g CH4 m−2 d−1 (13.0 L m−2 min−1 of 83.4 % CH4 bubbles), which is within the range of global fossil methane seepage and several orders of magnitude above standard ecological emissions from lakes. In addition, this method allows for low diffusive flux measurements. Thus, the mobile chamber approach presented here covers the entire magnitude range of CH4 emissions currently identified, from those standardly observed in lakes to intense macroseeps, with a single apparatus of moderate cost.

A simple and low‐cost open dynamic chamber for the versatile determination of methane emissions from aquatic surfaces

“…The simplified ODC method presented here shares some conceptual similarities with standard ODC methods and, for instance, with previous developments for the measurement of CH 4 macroseeps in lakes (Thalasso et al 2020), or for the measurement of ebullitive fluxes in aquatic ecosystems (Gerardo‐Nieto et al 2019). However, the notable differences of the present method are: (1) the use of atmospheric air as a carrier gas instead of compressed gases, (2) the measurement of both diffusive and ebullitive emissions, in a wide range of magnitude, (3) the stationary deployment of the chamber during measurements, and (4) the use of a medium‐sensitivity detector.…”

“…The floating chamber previously described (Thalasso et al 2020), was self-made from aluminum foils, has a volume of 7.5 Â 10 À3 m 3 and an open area in contact with water of 73 Â 10 À3 m 2 . Inside the chamber, a small 2 in.…”