Effects of Mountaintop Coal Mining and the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill - Paper Example

Effects of Mountaintop Coal Mining on Appalachian Rivers

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

A study by Lindberg et al. (2011), investigates the impact of mountaintop mining on the river system in the Appalachian Mountains. The researchers hold the assumption that the removal of waste rock and its subsequent burial in headwater streams, lead to an increase in the level of metal contaminants and salinity in the downstream section. The primary method of data collection in the study was sampling. Lindberg et al. (2011) collected water samples which they tested for the presence of sulfates, nitrogen, selenium, calcium, and magnesium. All analysis was conducted in line with the 29 protocol of the US Geological Survey. Metal ion samples were stored in ice before being dissolved in 0.2 % v/v nitric acid. An inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry was used to analyze the concentration of trace elements. Additionally, the researchers examined the conductivity of the samples (Lindberg et al., 2011).

Lindberg et al. (2011) found out that there was a statistically significant linear correlation between the rate of coal mining activities and the level of contamination in the various water samples. The study also noted that even after closure, mines continued to pollute the surrounding streams and rivers. The research by Lindberg et al. (2011) is important in understanding the ecological impact of coal energy in various ways. First, it shows that current coal mining activities are detrimental to the surroundings. Second, the researchers demonstrate that mountaintop mining has long-term effects on the surrounding ecology that lead to continued degradation. As such, the study acts as a call for responsible extraction of energy resources. The data interpretation by Lindberg et al. (2011) reaches the conclusion that coal mining operations correlate with pollution levels. This statement is convincing because the researchers employed a broad range of testing techniques on hundreds of samples. Also, it goes hand in hand with the simple assumption that the more pollutants you add in an ecosystem, the worse the pollution.

Effects of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill on Coastal Marshland

Research by Siliman et al. (2016) examines the impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on the coastal marshland of Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. The scientists hold the assumption that the degree of oil found on plants along the shoreline correlates with the level of erosion in a particular area. Siliman et al. (2016) make use sampling and survey techniques to collect data from the target sites over a period of three years. Each year they placed polyvinylchloride sticks at certain points along the shore and measured the rate at which vegetation receded inland. The researchers found out that the areas that had been highly polluted by the oil spill experienced significant erosion of about 1.4 meters per year. Also, these areas experienced three times more erosion than the unpolluted sections of the beach. Further, the researchers conducted a meta-analysis of seven peer review studies.

Since Siliman et al. (2016) had not conducted an underground biomass assessment, they used the meta-analyses to determine the effect of the oil spill on the underground biomass. According to the investigators, the oil spill had led to irreversible damage on the coastline marshland. On top of that, they noted that the highest damage occurred when marshes were exposed to 90-100% of stem oiling. This research is important in understanding the environmental cost and impact oil mining because it shows the extent of the damage that can happen when mistakes cause oil spillage. The least convincing argument from Siliman et al. (2016) arises from their statement that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill has led to irreversible damage to the coastline. This claim is made based on a three-year study. More time is needed to determine the long-term effects of the oil spill on the surrounding ecology.

Water Usage for Normal Oil Mining Operations versus Hydraulic Fracturing for Oil and Gas

Scanlon, Reedy, and Nicot (2014) set out to investigate whether alternative methods of mining oil and gas such as hydraulic fracking use more water than conventional techniques of oil extraction. The researchers examined oil mining sites in the Eagle Ford shale. Additionally, Scanlon, Reedy, and Nicot (2014) monitored the energy production output levels from the hydrocarbons obtained via hydraulic fracking in comparison to the amount of water used in the mining operations. The researchers collected water usage data from state-based databases and other sites such as FracFocus.org before estimating the amount of water needed per oil or gas well. After that, they compared the findings of their research with existing data on water usage by conventional wells (Scanlon, Reddy, and Nicot, 2014).

The results of the investigation showed that the Eagle Ford wells used about 4.7-4.9 million gallons of water per well. Scanlon, Reddy, and Nicot (2014) also noted that the Bakken well used around 2 million gallons of water but produced a third of the energy output from the Eagle Ford shale because of terrain challenges. The average water to oil ratio at Eagle Ford was 1.4 while at Bakken it was 0.42. Comparatively, Scanlon, Reddy, and Nicot state that conventional oil extraction yields a water-to-oil ratio of 0.1-0.5. The researchers noted that on average, the amount of water used in hydraulic fracking was similar to conventional oil wells. They attributed the difference in figures to the increase in energy production. Thus, they concluded that fracking does not use more water per well than conventional oil extraction. Instead, it is the fracking operations that have expanded leading to an increase in water usage.

The research by Scanlon, Reddy, and Nicot (2014) is important in understanding the impact of energy extraction and use because it factors in the use of water, which is a precious resource necessary for human survival. Thus, it allows relevant stakeholders to develop a balance between the amount of water needed for human use and the amount of water available for mining operations. The conclusion by Scanlon, Reedy, and Nicot (2014) is the most convincing statement because it is backed by adequate statistical data that factors in the number of wells, well expansions, and the average lifetime of each well.

References

Lindberg, T., Bernhardt, E., Bier, R., Helton, A., Merola, R., Vengosh, A., and Di Giulio, R. (2011). Cumulative impacts of mountaintop mining on an Appalachian watershed. Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, 108(52), 20929-20934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1112381108

Scanlon, B., Reedy, R., & Nicot, J. (2014). Comparison of water use for hydraulic fracturing for unconventional oil and gas versus conventional oil. Environmental Science & Technology, 48(20), 12386-12393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es502506v

Silliman, B., Dixon, P., Wobus, C., He, Q., Daleo, P., & Hughes, B. et al. (2016). Thresholds in marsh resilience to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Scientific Reports, 6, 1-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep32520