“The Anthropologist,” a critically acclaimed documentary that offers a fresh viewpoint on the subject narrated by two female anthropologists. Released in June 2016, the documentary was directed by Daniel A. Miller, Seth Kramer, and Jeremy Newberger.
The documentary follows environmental Anthropologist Susie Crate and her teen daughter Katie as they travel the world doing fieldwork, with Mary Catherine Bateson with context and running commentary on her mother’s work and the role of the Anthropologist. The film is brightly colored, moves fast, and revolves around Susie and Katie’s journey from Virginia to Siberia, Kiribati, and Peru to investigate how climate change and culture interact.
The Anthropologist is a profoundly human portrayal of a single mother who is a scientist and has a teenage daughter who grows while traveling to the world’s most remote places and faces the challenges of choosing a career path. It may have been overtaken by history, as is sometimes the case with documentaries, but it beautifully portrays the consequences of climate change worldwide, including in non-Western cultures.
The Anthropologist is a profoundly human portrayal of a single mother field who is a scientist and her teenage daughter. They travel to the world’s most remote places to research the consequences of climate change.
During the film, Katie develops from an eye-rolling 14-year-old to a thoughtful first-year college student. She travels to a Siberian town built on rapidly melting permafrost with her mother. She boards a boat to Kiribati, a small Pacific Island nation where rising oceans have engulfed communities and coconut fields. In the Peruvian Andes, where she witnesses firsthand what’s left of glaciers that have retreated up the mountains, she experiences altitude sickness.
In Kiribati, there were several new characters like a farmer who, due to environmental changes, can no longer grow the puma’s claw potato; a woman who struggles to educate Kiribati people about climate change and their options as the sea level rises.
Katie Crate is stern, delightful, and watchful—a natural anthropologist who observes her professional anthropological mother while interviewing local people, assisting them with their everyday tasks, and rejoicing with them during social events in the usual participant-observation approach.
Despite dealing with such undeniably severe issues, the documentary doesn’t seem heavy loaded with jargon or complex ideas. The film’s lightness and openness may be its most valuable feature. The documentary does not frighten you with facts; instead, it connects at a personal level.
Several documentaries and movies have attempted to depict the severity, complexity, and truth of global warming. The majority of these films try to describe climate change in its fullness, frightening or shocking audiences with the magnitude of the problem. They have action-movie-style compositions and generally include powerful sequences of hurricanes, demolishing houses, and glaciers smashing into the sea. This documentary is a light take on cultural changes due to the eminent global warming.
The Anthropologist isn’t, in the end, a feature on how to deal with climate change. It’s also not meant to persuade us that climate change exists or instill urgency in our minds. It engages audiences with fascinating real-life stories about how climate change affects humans on the planet. By the ending, the audience is not startled when the daughter attends college and follows in her mother’s footsteps. It teaches us that we should believe, like her, that gathering and conveying the stories of people whose lives and cultures are being altered by climate change is critical.
In recognition of his contributions to environmental health and climate change research, Dr. Meghnath Dhimal, a Nepali scientist, has been appointed as one of the esteemed fellows of the International Science Council (ISC). The ISC, a global organization dedicated to advancing science as a global public good, selected Dr. Dhimal as part of a cohort of 100 outstanding scientists worldwide.
Dhimal’s expertise is in the critical relationship between climate change and health. PHOTO Dr Dhimal
Dr Dhimal’s appointment as an ISC Fellow is the highest honor upon an individual by the council, underscoring his significant impact on promoting science for the betterment of society. He has been working for over two decades in research and policy development related to environmental health, climate change, and their intersection with public well-being.
Currently serving as the Chief Research Officer at the Nepal Health Research Council (NHRC), Dr Dhimal has played a pivotal role in advancing scientific understanding in Nepal, Maldives, Timor-Leste, and Germany, where he served as a guest scientist. His expertise lies in environmental health, focusing on the critical relationship between climate change and health.
‘With the SDGs seriously off-track mid-way through Agenda 2030 and the world facing multiple existential threats, the collective efforts of the ISC Fellows and Members to see science used for the global good have never been more important,’ ISC mentioned in its press release.
Dr Dhimal has led many research projects on environmental and climate change, non-communicable diseases, neglected tropical diseases, and health systems research in Nepal. He has also contributed to drafting policies and plans in Nepal’s health, population, and environment sectors and internationally.
Recognizing his outstanding achievements, Dr Dhimal has received several awards, including the “Young Scientists Award of the Year 2015” by the Nepal Academy of Science and Technology (NAST), the “Outstanding Health Research Award 2018” from NHRC, and the “National Science, Technology, and Innovation Award of Health Sector 2022” from the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology, Government of Nepal.
With over 300 technical reports and research articles published in international, peer-reviewed journals, Dr. Dhimal’s impact reaches far and wide. His collaborative efforts with various international organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, UNDP, and others, have further solidified his role as a leading figure in the global scientific community.
Astronomy, for many centuries, has educated us about the wonders of the cosmos. From the first discovery of a supernova in Cassiopeia (a constellation) by Tycho Brahe to today’s powerful telescopes, such as the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) or the James Webb, humanity has made significant technological advancements within the realm of Astronomy. As this discipline has evolved into a global multi-billion dollar industry, questions have emerged about how to sustain excellent research while considering its environmental impact.
Climate change is the most pressing issue humanity faces today, and it is the responsibility of the residents of this only known living planet to nurture and take care of our homes. To avert the crisis, we all should play our roles, especially scientists, in acting upon what is necessary for the environment and engaging in proper advocacy for environmental sustainability as responsible citizens.
A group of astronomers took matters into their own hands and estimated the carbon footprint of astronomical research on the climate of Earth. Hence, it became the starting point for the formation of an organization called ‘Astronomers for Planet Earth’ (A4E). A group where astronomers, using their unique astronomical perspective, mobilize researchers around the world to address the present climate crisis.
Here, we are happy to share our conversation with one of the founding members of A4E, Dr. Leonard Burtscher. He sheds light on the organization’s mission and the importance of understanding astronomy’s carbon footprint.
Aly:Beginning with – could you share about your work and elaborate on your area of research as an astronomer?
Leo: I worked in astronomy for 15 years, during which time I completed my PhD in Infrared Interferometry. Subsequently, I joined the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching at Munich, where I contributed to the development of the new instrument GRAVITY, which led a role in winning the Nobel Prize for my research group leader three years ago. After that, I became a staff scientist at Leiden University, working on the new ELT instrument, METIS. METIS is a mid-infrared instrument designed to characterize Earth-like planets and study active galaxies, which has been my primary focus.
Dr. Leonard Burtscher
However, this is my past to some degree. Approximately one year ago, I switched the courses completely. I am now an energy and climate policy advisor at a small NGO, a non-governmental organization called the Umweltinstitut – The Munich Environmental Institute.
In the past three or four years, I realized that studying distant galaxies and dusty clouds around supermassive black holes, while fascinating, was no longer aligned with my interests. Therefore, I joined this activist group and essentially trying to reduce energy consumption in Germany, which is currently one of my main priorities.
Aly: Nice! Can you highlight what ‘Astronomers for Planet Earth’ A4E is all about, its mission, and how it came to be? I assume that it has an interesting story behind its formation.
Leo: A4E is now over four years old and stands as the only, and certainly the largest, grassroots organization in astronomy dedicated to sustainability. It was created simultaneously at two locations. The first group, predominantly centered in San Francisco and Yale University, was made up of individuals such as Adrienne Cool and Debra Fischer, who had long been part of the AAS Sustainability Committee for the American Astronomical Society.
The second group, based in Europe, coalesced a few months later and jointly called ourselves‚ ‘Astronomers for Planet Earth.’ They initiated discussions on the social media platform Twitter during the European Astronomical Society annual meeting in Lyon, France, in 2019 — an event marked by a heatwave. The University of Lyon, where the meeting took place, lacked air conditioning, so it was very hot in all the meeting rooms. Not as hot for Pakistani conditions, probably, but hot for European conditions
Some of us began to argue about whether astronomers were part of this problem with frequent flying and extensive use of supercomputing. That is when we said, okay, we need to look into that and improve it by recognizing the need to first reduce the carbon footprint of astronomy itself. Our conviction was grounded in the belief that taking personal action was a prerequisite for advocating change to others.
Therefore, from the beginning, A4E outlined a four-year plan with two central pillars. The first involved reducing the carbon footprint of astronomy research, and the second aimed at utilizing astronomy to communicate what they termed the “astronomical perspective.”
Pale Blue Dot – image taken by Voyager 1 on 14 February 1990.
This perspective was inspired by the iconic image from Voyager 1—the ‘pale blue dot,” where we can see a tiny dot representing Earth from far away out of our solar system, all that we have, as Carl Sagan so beautifully wrote.
“Hence, we see ourselves as the Climate Voice in Astronomy. But also, the Astronomy Voice in the Climate Movement.” That’s how I would describe what A4E is and does.
Aly: It is all about realizing and making astronomical research sustainable. Quite fascinating indeed. A very strong message is visible from nearly all A4E campaigns: “There is no PLANET B”. Certainly, it’s not just a catchy and attractive phrase but the truth. Can you tell me more about how astronomers came to this realization and why you think it is important to emphasize?
Leo: Certainly, one of the statements we, as scientists, aim to affirm, which is often shown at climate demonstrations, is true, and it’s astronomical science that says this.
Astronomers have discovered planets outside our solar system in recent years. The discovery of ‘51 Pegasi b’, where the Nobel Prize was given to Michael Mayor and Didier Queloz in 2019. The Kepler mission further accelerated this revolution, revealing over 2600 exoplanets, and today, our knowledge extends to more than 5,500 planets outside our solar system. Some of these distant worlds bear similarities to Earth, with intriguing atmospheres that could potentially support life, including planets with oceans—a captivating prospect.
However, the story behind Planet B is that, even if you find another planet that’s just like Earth, there’s a catch: you have to be able to get there, and for a scientist, it’s always very clear that this is impossible likely for centuries to come. Therefore, as scientists, we emphasize to the public that while exploring exoplanets is fascinating, it should not be viewed as an alternative to safeguarding our planet.
It is crucial to convey this message and use it as a powerful motivator for discussions on sustainability. The increasing fascination that people have with astronomy makes it an ideal catalyst for encouraging contemplation about our place in space and how unique Earth is. That is why the No Planet B story is so good praise for astronomy.
Aly: Yes, you are right. I will say that the pandemic, on a positive note, was an eye-opener. It showed the astronomy community that online meetings are viable, significantly reducing flight emissions.
It is really important to understand the Carbon Footprint of Astronomy. Could you explain how big the carbon footprint of astronomical research is and how it is affecting our climate?
Leo: I will say that there are some caveats with computing accurate carbon footprints because that requires thorough research. While some researchers, including myself, have delved into this realm, it’s crucial to acknowledge that not all sources of emissions are always accounted for. What is relatively easy to compute is the emissions from flying to conferences. Knowing where people come from and which mode of travel they use, one can compute the emissions for a conference.
Together with my colleagues, I conducted such calculations for the 2019 Meeting in Lyon and the 2020 online European Astronomical Society meetings. We found that the difference in emissions between the in-person and online meetings was a factor of 3000. A single round-trip flight within Europe amounts to roughly one ton of emissions, with even higher footprints for those traveling from Asia, Australia, or the US.
However, even in this seemingly straightforward calculation, there are discussions surrounding the impact of airplane emissions, considering the radiative forcing index. C02 emissions released at high altitudes have different effects than C02 emissions on the ground. Additionally, planes have contrails that have effects that are not fully understood.
Expanding the analysis to the institute level involves accounting for heating, electricity, commuting, and possibly even food emissions. Supercomputing also contributes to emissions, depending on the power source of the supercomputer.
In a comprehensive analysis catering to all the institutes in the Netherlands, we found that total emissions per staff researcher ranged from about 3 to 10 tons per year of CO2 equivalent emissions, including the radiative forcing index for flights.
A more recent study by Jürgen Knödlseder evaluated the carbon emissions of astronomical infrastructure, considering all the necessary concrete and steel. This analysis revealed the emissions were 37 tons of CO2 equivalent per year per astronomers (with quite some uncertainty due to the estimation method). Still, this is probably the single largest source of emissions for astronomy research. We should consider these emissions when discussing new astronomical infrastructure e.g., do we need three extremely large telescopes, or would two be sufficient if we focus more on collaboration instead of competition, perhaps?
We can see from these papers that it’s a bit hard to pin it down to one number.
One of the earliest papers addressing the carbon footprint of research activities initially found a very high carbon footprint for research done in Australia, reflecting the country’s heavy reliance on coal for electricity production. Later, the number was updated when their utility switched to a cleaner form of energy, and the carbon footprint was suddenly a lot smaller, although they used the same machines.
A breakdown of four sources of Australian astronomers’ emissions was analyzed by Stevens et al.
Therefore, it depends on the location and which sources and scopes of emissions you include. One widely accepted carbon accounting standard is the greenhouse gas protocol. “The answer is complicated, but as a rough number, I would say something between 5 and 30 tons currently is probably the carbon footprint per astronomer per year, just for astronomy work!”
Aly: When you first started this initiative and went to the public, how did people react to this idea?
Leo: Among other astronomers, we had mostly positive reactions. When discussing our goals of measuring and reducing our carbon footprint and enhancing public communication, many expressed openness and acknowledged the importance of taking action. They eventually realized that we cannot go on and fly around like crazy and do nothing; we need to take active measures ourselves.
Unfortunately, some institutions, including professional societies, were not as open to embracing this change. They saw the difficulties in changing their meeting format. Sometimes, they see financial challenges in doing hybrid meetings, where they think they need to spend a lot of money to implement these. However, much more economical ways of implementing hybrid meetings are available and have been tested successfully. The European Astronomical Society, for example, shifted back to in-person meetings, expressing a belief that online meetings alone may not align with participants’ preferences. The reactions, therefore, were a bit mixed.
Organizations like the European Southern Observatory (ESO) have taken steps toward sustainability by installing solar panels for telescopes in Chile. Another site, La Silla, has already had a photovoltaic plant for a couple of years. However, they’re having a hard time being smart about flying for observations. While there have been improvements, the pace and extent of change have not met the rigorous standards advocated by A4E.
Aly: Apart from the engaging videos I have seen, what other initiatives or projects have A4E undertaken to advocate the seriousness of the climate crisis? How one can approach spreading this message effectively?
Leo: Activities under the A4E umbrella, apart from these videos, several publications have been produced, including two special issues in Nature Astronomy. Ongoing work, led by Andrea Gokus, is delving into flight emissions of astronomers in 2019 on a global scale, analyzing correlations between emissions, conferences, and the wealth of the country where the astronomers are from.
We also organize events at society meetings, collaborating with entities such as the American Astronomical Society (AAS) Sustainability Committee and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Special A4E-themed meetings have addressed astronomy and sustainability, featuring discussions with climate scientists, experts in light pollution, and representatives from telescope consortia sharing strategies to minimize emissions.
One of the biggest activities we initiated was an open letter to astronomy institutions and societies calling upon them to become active and to do whatever is in their power to reduce emissions. The letter gathered approximately 3,500 signatures within a few weeks, being quite successful.
More recently, A4E has engaged in localized outreach efforts, such as organizing an astronomical organ concert in Germany. This unique event combined the powerful experience of organ music with compelling videos from A4E, evoking emotional responses from attendees. Such events aim to convey the urgency of environmental stewardship and emphasize a positive narrative.
Our key focus is shaping a climate change narrative that goes beyond scientific facts. Recognizing the need for adaptation, the organization advocates framing this change positively. The aim is to frame this narrative not as a loss of conveniences like flying or fashion but as an opportunity to protect the planet and still ensure a high quality of life for all. By sharing this story, A4E endeavors to inspire positive action and a collective commitment to environmental preservation. This is what we all should try to do.
Aly: As we wrap up our conversation, I would love to hear your advice for members of the astronomy community who are eager to spread this positive message about sustainability. What individual actions would you recommend to help tackle the climate crisis?
Leo: Quoting one of the climate communicators in the US, Katharine Hayhoe, who advocates for a climate positivity movement, emphasizes the importance of talking about the climate crisis. The idea is to ensure that individuals don’t feel isolated with their concerns but connect with others to collectively address the challenges. As an individual, you can very quickly get the impression that there’s nothing I can do. While one person may feel limited in what they can achieve, the power lies in the collective effort of many individuals coming together. Some positive examples of movements started with something small, but with a group, they changed the world for the better.
This is the kind of hope that I would like to share with people, and I hope that you’re not alone with this, and this is also what A4E is for. We have a platform to foster this connection and maintain a network where people can share information, resources, and insights. One of the most important aspects of A4E is that it helps people feel like they are not alone and tackle these huge problems as a collective team.
As individual astronomers, the best thing we can do is share the astronomical perspective, particularly the ‘Pale-Blue-Dot’ story. A4E encourages various creative ways to communicate this perspective, such as organizing astronomical organ concerts or hosting discussions during mountain hikes. The key is to incorporate elements that connect astronomy to the broader story of our place in the universe and the importance of protecting our planet. Whether through dance, music, traditional talks, or online meetings, the overarching message is to get people thinking about our place in the universe, about our place on Earth, and that it’s probably a good idea to protect this planet for a little while longer.
The rapid growth of large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-3 and BLOOM, has revolutionized the field of artificial intelligence (AI). These powerful models can potentially automate and enhance various aspects of human endeavour. However, there is a pressing concern regarding the environmental impact of these models. The training and operation of LLMs rely heavily on vast computational resources, resulting in a substantial carbon footprint.
In this article, we will delve into the implications of the growing carbon emissions associated with LLMs and explore strategies to mitigate their environmental impact.
The Hidden Emissions of Language Giants
The evolution of LLMs has been nothing short of meteoric. From the realms of GPT-3, boasting 175 billion parameters, to the behemoths of GPT-4 and beyond, the complexity and capabilities of these models have soared. However, with great power comes an equally significant energy demand. The training and operation of LLMS are intrinsically tied to vast computational resources, which, in turn, are powered by electricity – a commodity predominantly generated from fossil fuels.
The development and deployment of LLMs have led to a surge in energy consumption. The training process alone can emit a significant amount of carbon dioxide. For instance, Hugging Face’s BLOOM model emitted 25 metric tons of CO2 during training, and when considering the entire lifecycle, this figure doubled to 50 metric tons.
These emissions are comparable to the carbon footprint of approximately 60 flights between London and New York. It is important to note that the emissions vary depending on the energy grid used for training, with regions reliant on fossil fuels exhibiting higher pollution levels.
Google’s large language model, PaLM, accentuates the scale of the issue. With a whopping 540 billion parameters, PaLM necessitates tens of thousands of advanced high-performance chips for its training and operation, each contributing to the burgeoning carbon emissions associated with LLMs.
Hugging Face’s BLOOM model emitted 25 metric tons of CO2 during training, and when considering the entire lifecycle, this figure doubled to 50 metric tons.
The Underbelly of Innovation
The carbon emissions associated with LLMs extend beyond their operational phase. The manufacturing of the hardware required to support these models, the maintenance of data centres, and the disposal of electronic waste all contribute to their environmental impact.
Additionally, the post-training operation of LLMs continues to demand significant energy, resulting in ongoing emissions. For example, BLOOM emitted approximately 19 kilograms of CO2 daily post-launch, equivalent to the emissions generated by driving around 54 miles in an average new car.
The development and deployment of LLMs have led to a surge in energy consumption.
Towards Greener Synapses
Efforts to address the carbon footprint of LLMs are gaining traction within the tech community. Several strategies have emerged to mitigate the environmental impact of these language giants:
1. Renewable Energy Procurement
One approach to sustainability in AI is demand-side interventions, specifically load shifting. By rescheduling the demand for electricity to align with renewable energy availability, the carbon emissions associated with LLMs can be significantly reduced. Procuring renewable energy for training LLMs can result in emissions reductions of up to 40% compared to relying solely on fossil fuel-based grids. Load shifting is particularly feasible for non-latency-bound AI technologies like ML training, as compute resources can be distributed across different regions without affecting system performance.
2. Energy Tracking
To optimize energy consumption, it is crucial to track and monitor the energy usage of LLMs during both training and operation. By accurately measuring the power draw of GPUs and CPUs used for hosting computing, it becomes possible to determine the actual energy consumption. This information is vital for decision-making regarding load shifting and migration to more energy-efficient data centres. However, precise quantification of CO2 emissions remains challenging due to limited reporting of the necessary information, such as data centre details, hardware specifications, and energy mix.
3. Load Shifting Large Language Models
Demonstrating the feasibility of load shifting for LLMs is crucial to promote sustainable AI practices. Real-world use cases, such as the load shifting of BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers), have been implemented and evaluated. By automatically moving the compute load for training LLMs across different data centres based on the availability of renewable energy, carbon emissions can be effectively reduced. Using saved model checkpoints ensures continuity and functionality throughout the load-shifting process.
Conclusion
The carbon emissions resulting from the development and deployment of LLMs pose significant environmental challenges. The energy consumption associated with training and operating these models demands urgent attention. However, there are viable strategies to mitigate the carbon footprint of LLMs.
By leveraging renewable energy, implementing load-shifting techniques, and tracking energy usage, it is possible to reduce the environmental impact of LLMs while maintaining their functionality and performance. As the prevalence of large language models continues to grow, it is imperative to prioritize sustainable AI practices to ensure a greener future for this transformative technology.
R. Schwartz, “Green AI,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 54-63, 2020.
A. Lasse, “Carbontracker: Tracking and predicting the carbon footprint of training deep learning models,” Available at link https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.03035
K. Hao, “Training a single AI model can emit as much carbon as five cars in their lifetimes,” MIT Technology Review, June 6, 2019.
M. H. Page, “We’re getting a better idea of AI’s true carbon footprint,” MIT Technology Review, 2022.
P. Dhar, “The carbon impact of artificial intelligence,” Nature Machine Intelligence, vol. 2, no. 8, pp. 423-425, 2020.
The entire greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that a person, business, event, or product is responsible for, directly and indirectly, are called their “carbon footprint.” The total emissions attributable to the creation of raw materials, manufacture, usage, and end-of-life are combined to determine it. GHGs, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), each having a different capacity to trap heat in the atmosphere, may be released during the lifespan or lifecycle of a product. The global warming potential (GWP) of each gas, measured in units of mass of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), accounts for these discrepancies. [1].
Emissions of Carbon Footprints on a Domestic Scale
Most of our houses’ carbon footprint comes from heating and cooling systems. These gadgets are frequently powered by electricity, and the energy-producing method determines how much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. For instance, compared to energy produced from renewable sources like solar or wind power, electricity generated from coal creates a lot more carbon dioxide.
The use of electric vehicles (EVs) to lessen transportation-related carbon emissions is growing in popularity. However, the carbon impact of EVs still depends on the electrical source used to charge them. When electric vehicles (EVs) are charged using coal-generated power, their carbon footprint is more than when they are charged using renewable energy sources.
The world’s leading energy source is fossil fuels, including coal, oil, and natural gas. However, they also contribute significantly to the annual emissions of CO2 into our atmosphere, amounting to billions of tonnes. Fossil fuels leave some of the most significant carbon footprints. Oil emits 970 grams of carbon dioxide per kWh generated, coal 820 grams, and natural gas 490 grams on a life-cycle basis. They are considered dirty energy since they directly contribute to climate change and have several detrimental environmental repercussions.[2].
Eighteen thousand terawatt-hours of energy are produced by electrical power yearly, accounting for around 40% of all energy people use. It produces more than ten gigatons of carbon dioxide annually, the most significant sectoral contribution to outputs from fossil fuels. However, various technologies, including solar, wind, nuclear, and geothermal, may provide energy without releasing any net emissions of carbon from fuel combustion.[3].
Does Electricity Produce Carbon Dioxide Emissions?
Not all Electrical Energy is produced using energy sources that are renewable and clean. In real terms, consuming fossil fuels like coal, natural gas, and oil contributes much of the world’s electrical power. Currently, sources that release carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) account for 63.3 per cent of the world’s energy consumption. Burning fossil fuels produces electricity by rotating turbines or generators, which use heat to produce power. In 2021, the US generated 38 per cent of its energy from natural gas, 22 per cent from coal, and 1 per cent or less from other petroleum products.[4].
The production of electricity globally often involves the combustion of fossil fuels, primarily coal, oil, and natural gas, shown in the figure accordingly; it results in the creation of CO2
Heat and Electrical Energy production accounts for more global CO emissions than other industries. The heat and electricity combined caused 15.59 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide in 2018. In context, the automobile industry produced 8.26 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide in the same year, making it the second-highest emitter.
The combustion of coal is the main contributor to over 90 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions from the production of energy worldwide. Worldwide, coal continues to be the principal fuel used to generate energy. 37 per cent of the power produced worldwide in 2019 came from coal combustion.
How can we calculate carbon emissions from electricity consumption?
Since there are many different ways to generate power, it can be challenging to determine the worldwide emissions associated with electricity use. For instance, the US employs both clean and renewable energy sources, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydropower, biomass, and nuclear power, alongside fossil fuels like natural gas, coal, and oil.
Kilowatt-hours (kWh) are used to quantify power use, and agencies such as the U.S. Energy and Information Administration (EIA) estimate the amount of carbon dioxide released from each kWh.
On a life-cycle basis, green energy’s carbon footprint ranges from 12 to 48 grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh (gCO2/KWh) of electricity produced; here is a complete description of the carbon footprint of certain energy types). [5]
How can we reduce the carbon footprint emissions?
Improving efficiency is the most straightforward approach to reducing the carbon generated during power production. However, these benefits have their boundaries, and there’s the well-known problem that increased efficiency might result in increased consumption.
Therefore, switching to carbon-free power sources is a necessary part of the global response to climate change. This calls for a reexamination of carbon pricing as well as, in certain situations, the development of new technologies, transmission networks, and intelligent grids. Above all, though, larger-scale carbon-free generation from diverse sources is required to meet the world’s growing energy needs.
Carbon capturing and storage: Refusing to discharge CO2 from fossil fuels into the atmosphere is one option to giving them up. Using carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, CO2 is extracted from exhaust gases and stored underground. The method might cut carbon emissions from power plants by 80–90 per cent, but that amount could decrease to as low as 67 per cent when life-cycle considerations are taken into account.[6]
Conclusion
As a more sustainable and environmentally friendly substitute for fossil fuels, now the world’s primary energy source and a significant cause of greenhouse gas emissions, electrical energy has enormous promise. The article emphasises how carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology and energy storage solutions may help with the problems of using renewable energy sources and lowering carbon footprints.
The article’s conclusion emphasises the need for people to support energy efficiency initiatives, invest in CCS technology, and hasten the adoption of renewable energy sources. It inspires people to make little, everyday adjustments to help achieve future carbon neutrality.
Space exploration has led to an unintended consequence: the accumulation of orbital debris or better to call it a silent carbon footprint.
Orbital Debris: A Growing Problem
Orbital debris, also known as space junk, refers to any machinery or debris humans left in space. It can include objects such as explosions of satellites, rocket bodies and fragments from collisions between spacecraft.
Approximately 30,000 pieces of tracked debris zipping through space at speeds of up to 17,000 miles per hour. This debris is an open threat to active satellites and could disrupt essential services such as GPS, cell phone signals, and high-speed internet.
SpaceX and Private Companies’ Contribution to Space Debris
SpaceX and other private space companies have contributed to the growth of space debris through their numerous satellite launches and space missions. The overall increase in space activity has led to a higher concentration of debris in orbit.
SpaceX has significantly contributed to expanding access to space through its Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets. However, these innovative launch vehicles produce debris due to their design.
For instance, the Falcon 9 rocket jettisons its two stages during flight, leaving them to burn up in the atmosphere. But materials like aluminium can survive re-entry, becoming new orbital debris. SpaceX also pioneered the idea of vertical rocket landings, but failures during attempted booster landings have littered the oceans with debris.
However, SpaceX tries to recover boosters and reduce debris; the sheer increase in launch frequency enabled by reusability contributes to the growing orbital clutter problem.
Furthermore, other private space companies are also proliferating launch opportunities while contributing to the space debris dilemma. Blue Origin and its New Glenn rocket are designed to shed expanded rocket stages during launch.
Virgin Orbit’s air-launch system drops stages over the ocean. Even tiny CubeSat satellites from companies like Planet Labs are now criticized as a debris hazard as more get deployed from rockets and the ISS.
As the commercial space sector grows, more players mean more objects sent into orbit, accelerating space junk accumulation. Stronger global regulations and improved debris mitigation practices for private space firms are needed.
Approximately 30,000 pieces of tracked debris zipping through space at speeds of up to 17,000 miles per hour.
The impact of space debris on space exploration
Collision risk
Space debris could disrupt essential services such as GPS, cell phone signals, and high-speed internet. The speed of a satellite could be as high as 19,000 kilometres per hour, which is a more significant risk for functional satellites in orbit.
Overall, across all satellites, hundreds of collision avoidance manoeuvres are performed yearly, including the International Space Station (ISS).
Potential for “Kessler syndrome”
The accumulation of space debris could lead to a scenario known as “Kessler syndrome,” where collisions between orbiting pieces of debris create more debris, rendering near-Earth orbit unusable.
The Kessler Syndrome is a theoretical scenario in which Earth’s orbit is overpopulated with space junk, preventing the use of satellites in certain sections of Earth’s orbit. The Kessler Syndrome applies methods for studying asteroid belts to predict collision patterns for active satellites in Earth’s orbit.
The Kessler Syndrome not only elaborates but also predicts a cascade of orbital debris that could potentially hinder humanity’s space ambitions and activities down the road.
The Kessler Syndrome is named after former NASA scientist Donald Kessler, who laid out the basic idea in a seminal 1978 paper.
The Kessler Syndrome is a hindrance due to the domino effect between objects of sizable mass spalling off debris from the force of the collision. The fragments can then hit other objects, producing even more space debris.
Efforts to Address Space Debris
Various organizations and agencies are working to address the issue of space debris.
NASA, for example, is seeking solutions to detect, track, and remediate small space debris through its “Detect, Track, and Remediate: The Challenge of Small Space Debris” challenge.
The European Space Agency (ESA) is also working on a spacecraft with arms that simulate a Venus’ flytrap to snatch derelict bodies out of orbit, as well as developing a plan to make recycling, refurbishing, repurposing, and reusing objects in space a reality by 2030 via its Zero Debris policy.
Mainly, The European Space Agency’s (ESA) ClearSpace-1 mission aims to become the first to remove an item of space debris from orbit in 2025.
Moreover, a Chinese agency is also working on mitigating space junk projects. They launched the SJ-21 satellite in October 2021 to dump defunct satellites into the ‘Graveyard Orbit’.
Their strategy is to grab the satellite and move it towards the Graveyard Orbit in order to reduce the risk of collision. But NASA seems concerned about their own functional satellites not being grabbed by that Chinese cleaner SJ-21 satellite.
They are constantly monitoring the mitigation strategies as well as the Graveyard orbit for the security of their own missions.
The Need for Sustainable Space Exploration
To tackle the growing problem of space debris, it is crucial to promote sustainable space exploration practices. The United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space has published guidelines for space debris mitigation and long-term sustainability of outer space activities.
These guidelines encourage operators to remove satellites from orbit within 25 years of completing their missions and to follow other practices to minimize the creation of space debris.
However, space junk around Earth’s orbit can also affect our planet Earth. It leaves carbon footprints silently around Earth, and we can not even see or imagine how dangerous this accumulation is. This is a significant threat to satellite communication systems, research carried out in space, and the planet itself.
The influence of climate change on health systems is a significant concern. It has the potential to undermine decades of progress in public health and disrupt the delivery of high-quality care. The increasing frequency and intensity of heatwaves, flooding, and storms, as well as the emergence of new infectious diseases, pose a threat to the health of individuals and communities worldwide.
The healthcare sector, responsible for a significant portion of global greenhouse gas emissions, has a crucial role in mitigating the effects of climate change. By reducing emissions, healthcare providers can contribute to global efforts to combat climate change and improve patient care, staff satisfaction, and cost savings[1].
In addition to preventing the initial health impacts of climate change, mitigation efforts can also lead to co-benefits such as cleaner air, increased physical activity, and more nutritious diets, which can improve overall well-being. These co-benefits can help offset the costs of mitigation interventions, making them a more attractive option for healthcare providers.
Discovering the impact of our carbon footprint can lead to feelings of guilt and shame about our past and current environmental behaviours.
What is Carbon Footprinting?
Carbon footprinting measures the total greenhouse gas emissions, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases, produced directly and indirectly by individuals, organizations, or activities. This measurement aims to assess the environmental impact of our actions and consumption patterns. It considers factors such as energy use, transportation, waste generation, and lifestyle choices that contribute to carbon emissions[2].
Mental Health and Carbon Footprinting
The relationship between carbon footprinting and mental health is an evolving and increasingly significant topic. As we become more conscious of our impact on the environment and the global climate crisis, we also need to understand how this heightened awareness can affect our mental well-being.
Eco-anxiety and Stress
Eco-anxiety, or climate anxiety, is a growing concern. It is the manifestation of anxiety stemming from worries about environmental degradation and climate change. As we grapple with the alarming realities of global warming, individuals may experience heightened stress, sleep disturbances, and overall emotional distress. This anxiety is fueled by the knowledge that our actions, including our carbon footprint, have contributed to this crisis[3].
As former United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted, “Climate change is the single greatest threat to a sustainable future, but, at the same time, addressing the climate challenge presents a golden opportunity to promote prosperity, security, and a brighter future for all.”
The urgency of addressing climate change, coupled with the myriad ways our actions impact the environment, can lead to feelings of stress and being overwhelmed.
Guilt and Shame
Discovering the impact of our carbon footprint can lead to feelings of guilt and shame about our past and current environmental behaviours. These emotions can result in self-blame, contributing to depression and anxiety. The environmentalist Margaret Mead captured this sentiment well when she said, “We won’t have a society if we destroy the environment.”
Eco-grief
Eco-grief is a specific form of grief linked to the loss and destruction of natural environments and biodiversity. Those deeply concerned about their carbon footprint may experience grief over the state of the planet and the potential loss of ecosystems and species. As environmental activist Jamie Anderson said, “Grief is just love with no place to go.” This grief can be emotionally draining and lead to mental health issues.
Social Isolation
Attempts to reduce the carbon footprint can sometimes result in feelings of isolation. It is not uncommon for individuals to feel alienated from friends or family who don’t share their environmental concerns or are not making similar efforts to reduce their carbon footprint[4]. In the words of Lady Bird Johnson, “The environment is where we all meet, where we all have a mutual interest; it is the one thing all of us share.”
Overwhelm
The complexity of understanding and mitigating carbon footprint can be overwhelming. The urgency of addressing climate change, coupled with the myriad ways our actions impact the environment, can lead to feelings of stress and being overwhelmed[5]. Naturalist John Muir eloquently stated,
“When we tug at a single thing in nature, we find it attached to the rest of the world.”
Inaction Paralysis
When confronted with the enormity of the climate crisis, some individuals may become paralysed by inaction. They may feel that their individual efforts would not make a difference, leading to a sense of hopelessness and contributing to mental health issues. Yet, as an unknown source reminds us,
“When you realize the impact of your carbon footprint, it can be overwhelming, but it’s essential to remember that small actions by many people can lead to significant change.”
It is essential to recognize that while carbon footprinting can have adverse effects on mental health, it can also serve as a source of motivation for some individuals. Taking meaningful action to reduce carbon footprint and being part of the solution to environmental problems can provide a sense of purpose and improve mental well-being.
To address these mental health challenges, individuals can consider seeking support from mental health professionals who can help them cope with eco-anxiety, guilt, and other emotional responses to climate-related concerns. Additionally, engaging in support networks and community organizations focused on environmental issues can provide a sense of belonging and empowerment, which can counteract some of the negative mental health impacts of carbon footprinting.
References:
Hanmin, D. et al., Do carbon emissions impact the health of residents? Considering China’s industrialization and urbanization. Science of The Total Environment, 2021. 758: p. 143688.
Steven, T., Anxiety disorders, climate change, and the challenges ahead: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 2020. 76: p. 102313.
Xu, R., et al., Wildfires, Global Climate Change, and Human Health. New England Journal of Medicine, 2020. 383(22): p. 2173-2181.
Julie, D., Kate, and W. Philip, Does biodiversity improve mental health in urban settings? Medical Hypotheses, 2011. 76(6): p. 877-880.
“Our planet is at a crossroads, and our decisions today will shape the world our children inherit. Carbon footprints are at the heart of this dilemma, as they are a primary driver of climate change.“
Every Step Counts: Unveiling the Secrets of Your Carbon Footprint
In a world grappling with environmental challenges, it’s crucial to understand the carbon footprints we leave behind. Your carbon footprint is the sum of all greenhouse gas emissions directly or indirectly associated with your activities. From your morning commute to your shopping choices, every action contributes to it.
The carbon footprint (the greenhouse gas footprint) compares the overall quantity of greenhouse gases emitted by an activity, product, firm, or nation. Carbon footprints are often presented in tons of CO2- equivalent emissions per unit of comparison, such as per year, person, kg protein, km driven, and so on.
The carbon footprint of a product comprises emissions over the whole life cycle, from manufacture through the supply chain to final use and disposal. The term “carbon footprint” is often quantified as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) emissions per unit of comparison. It encompasses the cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from various economic activities, events, organizations, services, and more.
Imagine our daily life as a series of interconnected threads, each leaving its mark on the environment. The energy we consume, the transportation we use, the food we eat, and even the products we buy all weave together to form this intricate tapestry of emissions.
With the proper knowledge and a commitment to sustainable living, we can unravel this carbon web and reduce our impact on the Earth’s climate. Small changes in our daily routine can lead to substantial reductions in our carbon footprint. It’s not about sacrificing our lifestyle but about making informed choices that benefit us and the environment.
Greening Our Footprints: Why It’s a Matter of Survival?
Our planet is at a crossroads, and our decisions today will shape the world our children inherit. Carbon footprints are at the heart of this dilemma, as they are a primary driver of climate change.
Reducing our carbon footprints isn’t just an eco-friendly trend; it’s a matter of environmental sustainability and, ultimately, the survival of our planet. Picture a world where the effects of climate change, driven by soaring carbon emissions, have gone unchecked.
More extreme weather events, rising sea levels, dwindling resources, and ecological disruptions would become the norm. The consequences would extend far beyond melting glaciers and scorching temperatures. It would affect everything we hold dear: our homes, our health, our communities, and the biodiversity that makes our planet rich and diverse.
But here’s the glimmer of hope: each of us possesses the power to alter this trajectory. By recognizing the significance of our carbon footprints and taking proactive steps to reduce them, we can contribute to a collective effort that could change the course of history. The choices we make in our daily lives ripple outward, influencing industries, policies, and global efforts to combat climate change.
It’s crucial to understand that reducing our carbon footprints isn’t just about being environmentally responsible; it’s about safeguarding the future for generations to come. Our actions today will determine whether our children inherit a planet on the brink of catastrophe or one where sustainable living is the norm.
More extreme weather events, rising sea levels, dwindling resources, and ecological disruptions would become the norm.
From Carbon-heavy to Carbon-light: Your Blueprint for Sustainable Living:
Everyday activities play a substantial role in contributing to carbon emissions, which in turn accelerate climate change. The burning of fossil fuels for transportation, heating, and electricity generation is a significant source of carbon emissions. Additionally, the production and transportation of food, especially when it involves long supply chains, contribute to carbon emissions.
Furthermore, waste generation and its decomposition in landfills produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas. The use of energy-intensive consumer goods and the extraction of natural resources also play their part in carbon emissions.
The significance of individual actions in mitigating climate change cannot be emphasized enough. As per findings, over 70% of worldwide carbon emissions are attributable to the choices made by individuals, ranging from their energy consumption habits to their preferences in transportation.
Every endeavour to curtail carbon emissions at the individual level, whether through the adoption of energy-efficient practices, waste reduction, the selection of sustainable transportation modes, or the conscious choice of environmentally friendly foods, contributes to a collective reduction in emissions.
These personal actions wield a dual impact: they directly decrease emissions while simultaneously conveying a potent message to industries, governments, and society at large, spurring broader systemic changes essential for a sustainable future.
Thus, individual actions play a pivotal role in the global battle against climate change, showcasing the capacity of individuals to enact positive change on a worldwide scale.
From choosing sustainable transportation options to reducing energy consumption, we hold the power to shape a greener, more sustainable future.
Practical Tips and Strategies in Reducing Carbon Footprint in Daily Life: Paving the Way to a Greener Tomorrow
This series of articles aims to empower you with practical tips and innovative strategies to make sustainable living an attainable reality. By exploring various facets of daily life, we’ll guide you on a journey towards a more environmentally conscious existence, demonstrating that each choice you make holds the power to drive positive change and contribute to a greener, more sustainable world. So, let’s embark on this transformative path, where small actions lead to significant impacts and where a sustainable future is within reach for all.
Promoting Public Transportation and Carpooling
One of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions from personal travel is by promoting public transportation and carpooling. By sharing rides or opting for buses, subways, or trains, individuals can significantly decrease their carbon footprint.
This not only eases traffic congestion but also contributes to cleaner air and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Imagine a future where fewer cars clog the streets, thanks to a collective commitment to sustainable commuting options.
Emphasizing the Benefits of Walking, Cycling, and Electric Vehicles:
Walking and cycling, besides promoting healthier lifestyles, are eco-friendly transportation choices. They produce no emissions and serve as excellent options for short-distance travel.
Moreover, electric vehicles (EVs) are becoming increasingly popular, offering a clean and energy-efficient means of transportation. Thanks to advancements in EV technology and the expansion of charging infrastructure, EVs are becoming more accessible and affordable for those who prioritize environmental sustainability.
Electric vehicles (EVs) are becoming increasingly popular.
Opting for these transportation modes isn’t just a move towards sustainability; it’s a significant stride towards a more environmentally friendly future.
Importance of Energy-Efficient Appliances
Energy-efficient appliances are the unsung heroes of sustainability at home. They consume less energy, lower electricity bills, and reduce carbon emissions. Investing in appliances with the ENERGY STAR label, which meets high energy efficiency standards, is a smart move for both your pocket and the planet. It’s about making your home a beacon of sustainability.
Harnessing renewable energy sources like solar panels and wind turbines is a transformative step towards a sustainable home. These technologies generate clean electricity, reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and often result in net energy savings. By becoming your own energy producer, you’ll not only reduce your carbon footprint but also enjoy the benefits of green energy.
Reducing Waste: Unlocking the Green Gateway to Carbon Reduction
Waste management isn’t just about tidying up; it’s a powerful lever for slashing carbon emissions and fostering a sustainable future. The carbon footprint of waste is profound, with landfills emitting methane, a potent greenhouse gas. But here’s the good news: by embracing strategies for reducing, reusing, and recycling, we can dramatically curtail the carbon toll of waste.
Moreover, composting, a humble practice, plays a pivotal role in carbon reduction. It not only diverts organic waste from methane-producing landfills but also enriches our soils, acting as a carbon sink. Together, these waste-wise practices represent a potent toolset to shrink our carbon footprint and tread more lightly on the planet.
The Importance of Fixing Leaks and Using Efficient Fixtures
Water conservation is crucial not only for preserving the resource but also for reducing carbon emissions. Wasted water leads to the unnecessary use of energy in its treatment, pumping, and heating. According to the EPA, American homes with leaks waste over 10,000 gallons of water annually, contributing significantly to household carbon emissions.
Therefore, addressing water waste is a critical step in environmental sustainability. Simply put, “Fix the Drips, Trim the Emissions!” When you fix leaks and install efficient fixtures, you’re not just saving water; you’re cutting down on the energy required to treat and distribute it.
This not only reduces your water bill but also your carbon footprint. So, whether it’s repairing a dripping faucet or replacing old, inefficient toilets and showerheads, these actions aren’t just drops in the bucket; they’re meaningful steps toward a more sustainable future for both water and the planet.
CONCLUSION
In a world where the future of our planet hangs in the balance, we each must take responsibility for our carbon footprint. As we’ve explored practical strategies and tips in this article, remember that every small action can make a significant impact.
From choosing sustainable transportation options to reducing energy consumption, we hold the power to shape a greener, more sustainable future. So, let’s embark on this journey together, leaving behind a legacy of conscious choices and a planet that thrives. As we step forward, let’s remember that it’s not just our carbon footprint. We’re
reducing – it’s our footprint on the pages of history, etching a story of positive change for generations to come.
In an era where the boundary between reality and fantasy becomes ever more blurred, the power of documentaries to transport us to the front lines of our planet’s most astonishing events remains unparalleled. “Earth Storm” emerges as a tour de force in the documentary world, expertly weaving together science, human stories, and breathtaking cinematography to create an unmissable cinematic experience.
The documentary doesn’t just showcase the beauty and terror of Earth’s most extreme weather events; it challenges us to consider our role in the changing climate.
“Earth Storm” is more than just a documentary; it’s an adrenaline-pumping journey into the very heart of Mother Nature’s most incredible and terrifying phenomena. From hurricanes and tornadoes to volcanic eruptions and earthquakes, this film captures the awe-inspiring and destructive forces that shape our planet. Directed by the brilliant filmmaker Sarah Morrow, this two-hour spectacle promises to leave you breathless and profoundly moved.
What sets “Earth Storm” apart from the many nature documentaries that have come before is its unparalleled access to the heart of the action. With state-of-the-art camera technology and a fearless crew, the filmmakers ventured into the very eye of the storm, capturing footage that is nothing short of mesmerizing. Watching a tornado form from thin air or witnessing the raw power of a volcanic eruption feels like an otherworldly experience, and it’s a testament to the dedication of the filmmakers who put themselves in harm’s way to bring these images to life.
The storytelling in “Earth Storm” is masterful. The documentary is more than just a series of jaw-dropping visuals; it’s a profoundly human narrative that weaves together stories of individuals who have experienced these cataclysmic events first-hand. Through their testimonies, we are reminded of the fragility of human life and the indomitable spirit that keeps us moving forward, even in the face of impossible odds. Their stories add an emotional layer to the documentary, making it not just about science but the resilience of the human spirit.
In a world where streaming services bombard us with content daily, “Earth Storm” is a welcome reminder of the unique power of the cinematic experience.
The film is guided by expert scientists and meteorologists who provide context and explanations for the natural disasters that unfold on screen. Their insights are accessible and engaging, breaking down complex phenomena into terms the average viewer can understand. “Earth Storm” educates as much as it entertains, leaving the audience with a deeper understanding of the natural forces that shape our world.
Perhaps one of the most remarkable aspects of “Earth Storm” is its commitment to environmental advocacy. The documentary doesn’t just showcase the beauty and terror of Earth’s most extreme weather events; it challenges us to consider our role in the changing climate. With the planet facing unprecedented challenges due to climate change, “Earth Storm” is a powerful call to action. It reminds us that the world is not just an abstract concept but our shared home, one that we must protect and cherish for future generations.
The musical score of “Earth Storm” is a triumph in its own right. The soaring, symphonic compositions add emotional depth to the visuals, enhancing the overall experience. The music underscores the tension of approaching storms, the majesty of erupting volcanoes, and the resilience of people facing these natural disasters. It’s a soundtrack that will stay with you long after the credits roll.
In a world where streaming services bombard us with content daily, “Earth Storm” is a welcome reminder of the unique power of the cinematic experience. It’s a film that demands to be seen on the big screen, where the full force of its visuals and sound can envelop you. The awe-inspiring images and the emotional narrative are not something to be taken lightly, and this documentary will resonate with you long after you’ve left the theatre.
In conclusion, “Earth Storm” is a triumph of documentary filmmaking. It’s a heart-pounding, eye-opening, and emotionally charged journey through the raw power of our planet’s most incredible natural phenomena. It’s a testament to the resilience of humanity and a call to action for environmental stewardship. Under the masterful direction of Sarah Morrow, “Earth Storm” is a cinematic tour de force that leaves an indelible mark on the viewer. It’s a film that inspires us to look at the world with new eyes and to appreciate the delicate balance between humanity and nature. Don’t miss the opportunity to experience “Earth Storm” on the big screen; it’s an unforgettable ride that will leave you in awe of the world we call home.
The hydrological cycle, commonly referred to as the water cycle, is the cyclic flow of water in the form of vapors, droplets, crystals, and compounds from the earth’s surface (including underground) to the atmosphere and back from the atmosphere to the earth’s surface.
This cyclic flow of water maintains the overall balance of the ecosystem. As a whole, plant and animal life, organic and inorganic factors of the planet rely on water for their growth and energy flow. Any disturbance in this cyclic flow of water can bring drastic changes in the chemistry of the entire ecosystem.
Change in the atmospheric conditions
Since the beginning of the 21st century, the atmospheric conditions of planet Earth have been tormented by harsh conditions. The so-called industrial revolution and technological takeover of the organic planet have embedded multiple layers of carbon dioxide in the air. Carbon dioxide concentrations are rising due to the burning of fossil fuels for energy purposes.
Fossil fuels like oil and coal are the leading causes of returning carbon to the atmosphere that they absorbed from plants millions of years ago. Still, the difference is carbon absorption took thousands of years, and its return is happening in just a few hundred. Consequently, the emissions from burning fossil fuels have increased multifold every decade, from almost 11 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year in the 1960s to an estimated 36.6 billion tons in 2022, according to the Global Carbon Budget 2022.
New research carried out at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL; Richland, Washington) claims that in equatorial and tropical regions, due to human activities and changing atmospheric conditions, the pattern of the monsoon season has changed i.e., it arrives approximately 4 days later than usual.
This is a slight delay; however, it might increase the severity of pre-monsoon heat wave patterns and wildfires at a considerable rate. Consequently, it delays crop production in the area, which later poses severe threats to the economy of the local communities.
“The global warming has already been attributed to human activities with high confidence,” PNNL atmospheric scientist and study co-author Ruby Leung said in a release. “But historically, we have not been very successful in pinpointing the footprint of human activity in the hydrological cycle. This study shows that the later onset of monsoon rainfall, paired with future warming projected by climate models, has already emerged.”
Effects on water
This overall embedding of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere affects every inch of the atmosphere adversely. The most affected parameter is the water that is present on Earth in various forms: as solid in ice, as a liquid in reservoirs, as gas in vapors, as a compound, as a soluble solute, as an insoluble solute, as a solvent, and as a part of mixtures too.
Water is a universal entity found everywhere and is almost entirely affected. According to the director of Columbia Water Center, Upmanu Lall, most global warming and climate change impacts primarily affect the water.
The global warming has already been attributed to human activities with high confidence
Greenhouse gas effects
The increased amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere might be the underlying cause of the intensification of the water cycle. According to the laws of physics, the saturation of vapour increases by 7% when the temperature rises by 1°C (as explained in the Clausius-Clapeyron Equation).
Carbon dioxide is a non-pollutant gas in the atmosphere and a minor constituent of air (approximately 356 parts per million), but it has the ability to change the global climate. Hence, this is why it is one of the severe concerns. Among most of the gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, carbon dioxide gas is primarily responsible for the change in climate and consequently contributes to climate change or global warming.
How are carbon footprints lined with the water cycle?
Global warming triggers changes in the global water cycle and primarily impacts the increase in vapour pressure in the atmosphere. This leads to vigorous changes in the precipitation patterns regarding frequency, intensity and overall moisture in groundwater.
How does the change in the environment affect the water cycle? The answer to this question is simple; it’s not directly the carbon dioxide that goes up to get incorporated in any of the water cycle steps, yet it’s the chain of events that causes the disturbance in the whole cyclic system.
Like, when the global temperatures increase, the evaporation rate also increases; the more the evaporation, the more condensation and precipitation. However, the high rates of evaporation and precipitation are not evenly distributed around the world. Some areas experience intense precipitation; some areas become more prone to drought.
The meteorological data predicts that the coastal regions will become wetter comparatively, and the middle of the continents will experience dry conditions in the coming few years.
When the air gets warm, its moisture-holding capacity also increases. As a result, the warm air will suck up more water from water reservoirs like oceans, lakes, soil, and plants. More water escaping the earth’s surface means more dry conditions left behind, which will obviously have negative but long-lasting impacts on drinking water and agriculture.
On the flip side, the warmer air threatens all forms of life, including humans. One of the studies carried out at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory found that the higher rate of humidity will intensify the temperatures in the future in some places on Earth by blocking the cooling effect caused by our sweat.
What happens to the respiration?
Meteorologically, precipitation is the product formed after the condensation of water vapours in the form of clouds and falls afterwards due to gravitational pull. The primary forms of precipitation are drizzle, sleet, ice pellets, snow, hail, and graupel.
The intensification and strengthening of the water cycle have profound effects on climate change, and this effect has been observed since 1980. Also, the intensification of precipitation events negatively affects the availability of freshwater reservoirs, oceans, ice sheets, atmosphere, and land surfaces.
When the water vapours start condensing, the extra warm and wet air cools down, resulting in heavy rain showers or snowfalls followed by stormy winds. Since 1979, the Northeastern and Central regions of the U.S. have experienced a drastic shift in weather patterns, with the most significant increase in heavy precipitation and frequent thunderstorms.
The changing climate has not only accelerated the evaporation of water vapors on the oceans and earth’s surface, but it has also accelerated the water cycle, which in turn altered the global precipitation patterns at large.
Graphically, the precipitation curves regarding the average annual precipitation in California vary considerably but generally follow a steady declining trend. Snowfall rather than rainfall is predicted to increase in the future, and high precipitation is likely to put a strain on California’s water supplies.
The carbon footprint continuously impacts the environment’s biotic and abiotic factors, which leads to the significant unbalancing of a whole natural biome. The lead author Estrella Olmedo of the Institute of Marine Sciences (ICM) in Barcelona, about the changes in water cycle patterns due to carbon footprint and climate change, stated, “The acceleration of the water cycle has implications both at the ocean and on the continent, where storms could become increasingly intense”.
The normality of the ecosystem is on the verge of drastic disturbances, and the top contributor is water. The limiting laws might control the climatic crisis; otherwise, the atmospheric disturbances are irreversible.
![On a life-cycle basis, green energy's carbon footprint ranges from 12 to 48 grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh (gCO2/KWh) of electricity produced; here is a complete description of the carbon footprint of certain energy types). [5]](https://scientiamag.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/CO-emission-2.jpg)
