Environmental and Ecological Effects of Energy Production and Consumption

The world has made significant strides, especially in the area of energy exploration and consumption in a bid to improve the well-being of humans. In the past, societies relied on natural sources of energy, most notably the sun to grow crops, dry clothes, and grains, as well as provide warmth. Over time, humans have continued to discover new sources of energy which, in turn, paved the way for the Industrial Revolution. The era ushered the use of machines to complement human labor and in this way, enhance mass production to cater to a growing population. Today, societies are driven by solar, nuclear, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydroelectric, and biomass sources of energy. While the discovery of various sources of energy is indicative of progressive societies, it has threatened the core of human existence by interfering with the natural order. Energy production and consumption supports technological advancements and eases human lives but has several negative environmental and ecological effects. The most outstanding of these are land degradation and increased carbon dioxide concentration in the air which, in turn, alters climatic conditions. An analysis of these impacts would be a way of establishing what needs to be done to support human development while at the same time protecting the natural environment.

Environmental and Ecological Effects of Energy Production 

There is an exponential demand for both renewable and nonrenewable energy to support industrial and domestic activities that support human well-being. The rising demand means that more resources are directed towards exploring and producing various forms of energy. A rise in production not only meets local, national, regional, and global demands but also impacts the environment negatively. The best way to understand the nature of these impacts is to focus on how the production of each of the energy sources affects the environment.

Petroleum 

Petroleum is one of the energy sources with high global demand, considering that it is used in all other industries and sectors. In particular, petroleum is the main energy source for powering vehicles, running industrial machines, generating electricity, making plastics, chemicals, and synthetic materials. The wide range of use means that the demand for petroleum is bound to rise in a bid to meet all these needs that sustain livelihoods. Sonnichsen (2021) notes that in 2020, the global demand for crude oil was 91 million barrels per day with a projection of 96.5 million barrels in 2021. The rise in demand paves the way for more negative impacts that are associated with oil production. One of the effects of oil exploration and production on the environment is the contamination of water sources due to the discharge of effluent and seepage that emanates from waste and storage tanks. According to Zabbey & Olsson (2017), oil exploration and production impacts negatively on the quality of water mainly due to leakages and spills when the oil is being transported. Most of the time, oil-producing companies explore dry areas, meaning that there is a likelihood that the available water resources would be exhausted. In the case of offshore oil exploration, the risk is the same as leakages will not only affect the water sources but also their quality. Oil spills which normally occur during transportation or exploration are significant ecological impacts that leave long-lasting effects on water. Mexican Gulf and Niger Delta oil spills are some of the largest in history and which caused major environmental degradation. Zabbey & Olsson (2017) note that lighter oil components dissolve into the water and may remain trapped under the sediment for a very long time. All this while the spill would continue to contaminate the water ecosystem including the marine life.

Adapted from Sonnichsen, N. (2021). Daily demand for crude oil worldwide from 2006 to 2026 (in million barrels). Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/271823/daily-global-crude-oil-demand-since-2006/ 

Bioenergy 

Bioenergy has several advantages over conventional fossil fuels, considering that it occurs in large quantities in addition to being a renewable source of energy. Its renewability and vastness mean that it is reliable in that it paves the way for achieving energy security. However, bioenergy production has proven to present significant and serious environmental impacts and alterations. According to Wu et al. (2018), the push to increase bioenergy products means that the existing feedstocks would need to be expanded to accommodate a rise in demand. In particular, native grass would be replaced with bioenergy plants, most notably switchgrass or Miscanthus. The change in land use would in turn decrease surface runoff, water yield, and streamflow while at the same time increasing evapotranspiration and nitrogen loss. The most outstanding concern with this switch is nutrient pollution which is associated with surface runoff as well as infiltration into the groundwater. Wu et al. (2018) note that corn, the most preferred source of biofuel has a high fertilizer usage but a low nutrient use efficiency as compared to bioenergy crops. As a result, the choice to increase corn plantation frequency would translate to more nitrate in the waterways as well as soils with lower nitrogen content. An insistence on growing corn-ethanol a first-generation fuel producer in the US is associated with significant water stress at both the local and regional scale. The reason for this assertion is the fact that corn utilizes more water as compared to other crops since they consume significant amounts of water at every growth stage. According to Guo et al. (2018), a typical corn-ethanol plant that would produce 100 million gallons of biofuel annually would utilize the same amount of water as a community of 5000 people. The excessive use of water in a bid to support bioenergy productions means that there may not be enough to sustain other industrial and domestic operations.

Biofuels are preferred over fossil fuels since they help in curtailing the emission of carbon dioxide which has been associated with climatic changes and environmental degradation. While biofuels' net CO2 emissions are lower than those of fossil fuels, they have been shown to increase nitrogen concentration in the atmosphere. According to Qin et al. (2016), nitrogen is a significant greenhouse gas as it is global warming capacity is 298 times that of carbon dioxide with agricultural activities fueling its production. Thus, an insistence to replace grasslands with short rotation coppice to increase biofuel production would translate to an increase in nitrogen gas emission. Furthermore, a rise in demand for ethanol means that there will be an expansion in corn-growing which has shown potential for stimulating nitrogen gas emission. Apart from increasing nitrogen gas concentration in the atmosphere, bioenergy products threaten biodiversity and soil organic carbon. Correa et al. (2017) assert that land-use conversion which is occasioned by insistence on biofuel crops is a significant factor since it affects the existing biological abundance. In particular, the replacement of grassland with biofuel crops has proven to hamper local production and interfere with ecosystem functions. In the same way, bioenergy production interferes with soil organic carbon which a crucial index for determining its quality. (Hoekman et al. 2018 indicate that bioenergy production impacts the quality of sol in three ways which include tillage, residue removal, and land-use change. The three pathways alter soil composition by weakening its elements which, in turn, pave the way for soil erosion, thus impacting negatively on agricultural ecosystems productivity.

Hydroelectricity 

Hydroelectricity is not only a clean but also a renewable source of energy, attributes that make it the most preferred option for industrial and domestic uses. The reason for this assertion is the fact that during the production of this alternative source of energy there is no need for burning fossil fuels. Instead, the turbines that generate this form of electricity run naturally and continuously with forceful water being the main force that enhances the hydroelectric production mechanism. However, these advantages are not to say that hydroelectricity production is devoid of negative environmental impacts which threaten ecosystems. According to Fearnside (2016), hydroelectric production requires significant volumes of water which is in turn used to run the turbines to produce electricity, and with a finite amount available, it becomes a problem. Companies that are keen on harnessing hydroelectricity have to create dams and reservoirs to ensure that they have a continuous flow of water for production. While this requirement seems harmless, it is important to understand that most of the rivers have already been dammed, meaning that this resource is already limited. The other negative environmental impact associated with hydroelectricity production is the interference with wildlife breeding and migration patterns. In particular, blocking rivers through dams means that fish that depends on inland rivers which are their breeding grounds which in turn reduces their population and eventually the entire ecosystem. In the same manner, these dams reduce the flow of water and sediment downstream which threatens the wildlife and ecosystems that rely on the rivers that have been blocked. Moreover, the production of hydroelectricity power alters land use in the areas that neighbor the dams with flooding being the main destroyer of wildlife habitats. In as much as this source of energy is clean and renewable, there is evidence that it contributes to the emission of greenhouse gases. Fearnside (2016) asserts that the decay of green matter that finds its way into the dam as well as the materials that have been used during the construction emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere Carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted by the above-water decay of trees left in the reservoir, and initially by below-water decay. Additionally, the water in the dam emits significant amounts of carbon dioxide through diffusion or bubbling. After some time, the reservoirs begin acting as methane factories through the conversion of the atmospheric carbon dioxide into methane as long as the dam exists. This outcome is indicative that while hydroelectricity is considered a clean source of energy it translates to a significant carbon footprint that impacts the environment negatively.

Nuclear Energy 

Nuclear energy is a significant and preferable source of electricity considering that it is associated with low carbon emissions as well as a small ecological footprint. This form of energy is produced through fission where atoms are split this releasing energy. The resultant energy is used to heat steam which, in turn, is used in spinning large turbines for electricity generation. While this process is indicative of clean energy that is devoid of greenhouse gases emission, nuclear energy has significant and negative impacts on the environment. The most outstanding environmental concern is that during electricity generation, there is the production of radioactive wastes. According to Hejazi (2017), while nuclear electricity reactors adhere to strict environmental management agency standards, there is a probability of uncontrolled reactions that would result in widespread water and air contamination. This form of contamination which affects marine life alters the existing balance in the ecosystem. The production of nuclear energy requires the building of large factories which can support rising global demands. Kaur & Singh (2019) note that while the production itself is devoid of greenhouse gas emission, the construction and maintenance of nuclear reactors contributes to higher levels of CO2. In the same way, nuclear power plants incorporate a cooling system that draws water from the ocean and thereafter return it to a warmer state. This exchange of water paves the way for the addition of radioactive wastes which, in turn, threaten the surrounding ecosystems and environments.

Environmental and Ecological Effects of Energy Consumption 

Energy consumption just like production is associated with various adverse environmental and ecological impacts. While there are policy frameworks that are there to regulate usage in a bid to minimize the ecological footprint, air, soil, and water pollution is still a prevalent issue. A focus on each of the common energy sources will help in establishing their specific impacts on the environment.

Petroleum 

Petroleum is one of the most consumed sources of energy, thus paving the way for misuse which in turn impacts negatively on the environment. Before petroleum products can accomplish industrial or domestic purposes they must undergo combustion since it is the means they produce energy. This combustion is associated with various environmental impacts, most notably air and water pollution as a result of gasoline or its additives. Zhang et al. (2019) note that gasoline comprises hydrocarbons thus the combustion of petroleum and its products contribute to global warming owing to the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Apart from carbon dioxide, petroleum combustion results in five other air pollutants namely carbon monoxide, oxides of sulfur and lead, particulate matter, and oxides of nitrogen. These compounds usually combine with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to form low-level ozone which impacts negatively on sensitive ecosystems and vegetation. Combustion is not the only way through which consumption of petroleum and its products harms the environment. The release of effluent containing petroleum into the ground as well as water sources disrupts the ecological balance by introducing non-biodegradable chemicals (Zhang et al., 2019). In particular, the effluent clogs pore spaces in the soil, meaning that there is reduced water infiltration and aeration which in turn affect plant growth. In the same way, the effluent that gets into water sources affects marine life including animals and plants by reducing aeration as well as penetration of sun rays which are required for photosynthesis and growth.

Bioenergy 

Biofuels, most specifically ethanol, biodiesel, biogas, and green diesel are considered as an alternative to fossil fuels as they are renewable. However, there are concerns about their environmental impact, especially if they are used alongside fossil fuels. Ethanol, one of the most common biofuel is used as a gasoline additive in a bid to reduce emissions of air pollutants Jeswani et al. (2020) notes that ethanol works by oxygenating the gasoline, meaning it reduces carbon dioxide while improving combustion efficiency. While this assertion indicates that ethanol and other bioenergy sources are the best approaches for dealing with greenhouse gas emissions, they too have negative environmental impacts. Scovroncik et al. (2016) experimented with Sao Paulo, Brazil one of the leading producers and consumers of ethanol. The study established that a transport policy that would promote the use of ethanol over gasoline would result in higher levels of tropospheric ozone and particulate air pollution. The results indicate that an insistence on biofuels does not solve the issue of greenhouse gas emissions since they too are associated with inferior air quality. Ethanol amount in gasoline is dependent on both the prices of oil and corn, factors that may pave the way for higher levels of greenhouse gas emissions. High oil prices allow for more ethanol to be blended with gasoline as a way of cushioning consumers. On the other hand, higher corn prices mean that it would be uneconomical to divert attention to ethanol production as opposed to producing animal feeds (Jeswani et al., 2020). Either way, ethanol and other bioenergy sources of energy do not guarantee that they will curb environmental degradation that is associated with a high concentration of greenhouse gases.

Hydroelectricity 

Hydroelectricity is a popular source of renewable and clean energy which is used to support both domestic and industrial processes. The energy source which is derived from water-powered turbines is in particular used in lighting, powering machines with automobile manufacturers being keen on adapting to cars. The intensity at which hydroelectric power is used in the modern world, however, does not mean that it is devoid of negative environmental implications. Household appliances that use a significant proportion of the electricity that is produced at hydroelectric plants are a major cause of environmental degradation. According to Hischier et al. (2020), large electrical appliances including refrigerators, washing machines, and dishwashers are associated with environmental degradation. In particular, the use of household and industrial appliances is associated with the release of radioactive elements which in turn contribute to climate change and ozone depletion. Apart from these aspects that directly affect climatic patterns, the consumption of hydroelectric energy sources interferes with the ecosystems. The reason for this assertion is because electric power lines, as well as other distribution infrastructure, affect adjacent vegetation. At times, hydroelectric companies would opt to clear the path to facilitate the passage of power lines, actions that threaten significant ecosystems

Nuclear Energy 

There has been an exponential rise in demand for nuclear power, considering that it is clean and a renewable energy alternative to fossil fuels. However, this energy source raises concerns, especially when it comes to associated environmental impacts during consumption. The use of this form of energy results in radioactive waste which presents a major environmental challenge owing to its storage requirements. Ho & Kristiansen (2019) note that nuclear waste can remain radioactive for more than a thousand years, meaning that the likelihood of environmental degradation is heightened. A failure to adhere to strict guidelines during the consumption of this form of energy paves the way for high-magnitude disasters with the capacity to eliminate major ecosystems. In the past, the work has witnessed several nuclear-related accidents which have led to the assumption that this source of power does not support sustainability. According to Ho & Kristiansen (2019), the use of nuclear weapons is associated with thermal radiation which in turn increases the likelihood of fires with the capacity to destroy significant ecosystems. The detonation of nuclear weapons in forested areas for instance would result in wide-ranging destruction from the resultant fire. This example is indicative of the fact that in as much as nuclear energy is the future of industrialization, wrong handling has significant and lasting ecological impacts.

Conclusion 

The world has made significant strides in the area of energy production and consumption owing to insistence on sustainability and profitability. The Industrial Revolution, in particular, paved the way for large-scale exploration, production, and consumption of nonrenewable sources of energy most specifically coal and petroleum. However, with time, these sources of energy were deemed unsustainable since they are easily depleted. Moreover, nonrenewable sources of energy are associated with a significant ecological footprint due to a rise in water, soil, and air pollution. These energy sources release high levels of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and in this way cause climate change, land degradation, and global warming. These negative implications have forced stakeholders to explore cleaner sources in the form of renewable energy sources. Currently, there are various options which include bioenergy hydroelectricity, solar, wind, and nuclear sources of energy. While renewable sources of energy are associated with more sustainability, they too have significant environmental implications. The production of these sources of energy requires significant resources which can only be sourced through using fossil fuels. Hydroelectricity, for instance, would require the destruction of the nearby ecosystems as a way of creating land for constructing the water reservoir. In the same manner, the production of bioenergy sources would require a change in land use, a practice that threatens diversity. These outcomes are indicative of the fact that energy production and consumption have related negative environmental impacts. To this end, there is a need for stakeholders to establish a common ground that is focused on reducing the ecological footprint for both renewable and nonrenewable energy sources.

References 

Correa, D. F., Beyer, H. L., Possingham, H. P., Thomas-Hall, S. R, & Schenk, P. M. (2017). Biodiversity impacts of bioenergy production: Microalgae vs. first-generation biofuels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 74 (3), 1131–1146 DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.068

Fearnside, P.M. 2016. Greenhouse gas emissions from hydroelectric dams in tropical forests . John Wiley & Sons Publishers.

Hischier, R., Reale, F., Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2020). Environmental impacts of household appliances in Europe and scenarios for their impact reduction. Journal of Cleaner Production , 267 (5), 19-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.

Guo. T., Cibin, R., Chaubey, I., Gitau, M., Arnold, J. G., Srinivasan, R., Kiniry, J. R, & Engel, B. A. (2018). Evaluation of bioenergy crop growth and the impacts of bioenergy crops on streamflow, tile drain flow, and nutrient losses in an extensively tile-drained watershed using SWAT. The Science of the Total Environment , 614 (12), 724-735. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.148.

Hejazi, R. (2017). Nuclear energy: Sense or nonsense for environmental challenges. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 6 (2), 693-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.07.006

Ho, S. S., & Kristiansen, S. (2019). Environmental debates over nuclear energy: Media, communication, and the public. Environmental Communication , 13 (4), 431-439. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2019.1603018

Hoekman, S. K., Broch, A., & Liu, X. (2018) Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the US: A literature review. Part I—impacts on water, soil, and air quality. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81 (3), 3140–3158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.050

Jeswani, H. K., Chilvers, A., & Azapagic, A. (2020). Environmental sustainability of biofuels: a review. Proceedings: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 476 (2243), 345-378. doi: 10.1098/rspa.2020.0351

Kaur, G., & Singh, J. (2019). Effects of radiation on the environment. In Vijay Kumar (Ed.), Radiation effects in polymeric materials (pp. 1-34). Springer.

Scovronick N, França D, & Alonso, M. (20160. Air quality and health impacts of future ethanol production and use in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13 (7), 695-720. doi:10.3390/ijerph13070695

Sonnichsen, N. (2021). Daily demand for crude oil worldwide from 2006 to 2026 (in million barrels) . Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/271823/daily-global-crude-oil-demand-since-2006/

Wu, Y., Zhao, F., Liu, S., Wang, L., Qiu, L., Alexandrov, G., & Jothiprakash, V. (2018). Bioenergy production and environmental impacts. Geoscience Letters, 5 (3), 14-35.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40562-018-0114-y

Zabbey, N., & Olsson, G. (2017). Conflicts: Oil exploration and water. Global Challenges, 1 (5), 30-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201600015

Zhang, J., Wei, Y., & Fang, Z. (2019). Ozone pollution: A major health hazard worldwide. Frontiers in Immunology, 10 (3), 58-78. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2019.02518