USGS2025
Floating photovoltaic (FPV) systems are emerging as a promising strategy for large-scale clean energy production worldwide. However, by altering key physical drivers such as solar radiation and wind mixing, FPV installations may have also unintended consequences for lakes and reservoirs. Given the wide diversity of freshwater systems globally, understanding the consistency in direction and magnitude of environmental responses to FPV deployment is critical for informed regulatory oversight and sustainable energy development. Here, we used process-based models to simulate the effects of FPV coverage on 11 reservoirs across the United States. This is the first multi-reservoir analysis using a laterally averaged 2D process-based modeling framework to systematically evaluate FPV impacts across diverse climatic and morphometric contexts, enabling direct comparison of magnitude and direction of responses among systems. Specifically, we evaluated changes in (1) surface and outflow temperature, (2) thermocline depth, (3) water column stability, (4) dissolved oxygen concentrations, and (5) potential suitable habitat availability for warm- and cold-water fishes. We quantified changes in these response variables by an iterative approach that simulates increases in FPV coverage and compares them with reference conditions. We summarized responses for winter (January–February) and summer (July–August). As expected, our simulations show that increasing FPV coverage consistently cooled surface waters and altered thermal stratification patterns, but the magnitude and environmental implications of these changes varied among reservoirs. Notably, greater FPV coverage led to increased variability in habitat suitability for aquatic species, with some reservoirs exhibiting distinct and sometimes divergent responses. These findings underscore the importance of considering local environmental contexts when assessing FPV impacts. While large-scale FPV systems offer potential benefits for climate mitigation, their ecological effects, particularly on thermally sensitive biota, require careful site-specific evaluation to avoid unintended consequences to local freshwater biodiversity.
Arkansas, Idaho, Ohio, Oregon, Tennessee, Washingt↗