As of 2007, fossil fuels accounted for approximately 76% of energy production in the world, and fossil fuel burning is responsible for an accumulation of 337 billion metric tons of carbon since 1751 (
Global Fossil-Fuel CO2 Emissions, 2014). As climate change becomes an ever more prevalent issue, pressure to reduce dependence on fossil fuels is mounting. However, while alternative energy sources drastically reduce carbon emissions, they are not entirely "
green" technologies in every sense of the word. The purpose of this blog is to explore the negative implications that alternative energy sources can have on wildlife - for all plant and animal species affected.
The purpose of this blog is not, however, to discourage the transition from fossil fuel burning to the use of alternative energy. On the contrary, it is to illuminate the negative effects so that policy makers and those supporting alternative energy implementation can be educated about conservation impacts and thereby take every precaution to avoid those effects before they get a chance to begin. Hopefully public awareness about the conservation implications of alternative energy can also help create support for changing and bettering existing alternative energy infrastructures, so that innocent species will not continue to suffer at the expense of human's need for energy.
In the pages
Solar,
Hydroelectric,
Wind, and
Biofuels, I describe many of the conservation impacts that each of the respective energies have been found to cause. In the section titled
What Does This Mean?, I address how the findings on the previous pages should affect our decisions on future energy sources and consumption practices.
