From Power Plants to People: The One Health Implications of Electricity Use and Production
This article is presented by GBL4, a dedicated team championing the implementation of game-based learning for effective behavior change. With a strong emphasis on One Health, we believe in the power of interactive approaches to educate both the public and professional communities. Our aim is to ensure that vital concepts are not just understood but are applied in everyday practice. As professionals in the One Health domain or those with a keen interest in related topics, you'll find value in our discussions on topics ranging from zoonotic diseases to the UN sustainability goals. Dive in to explore the intricate connections between One Health, public health, biodiversity, and more. Visit us at GBL4.org to learn more and see what we are working on.
Objective
Electricity production and consumption are essential for human development, economic growth, and overall well-being. However, as energy systems have evolved, the full spectrum of impacts on health, the environment, and society has become increasingly evident. The One Health framework—which integrates the health of people, animals, and the environment—offers a holistic lens to evaluate the trade-offs and consequences of electricity generation. This article explores electricity production and use through the One Health approach, analyzing how different forms of energy, from fossil fuels to renewables, affect human health, ecosystems, and environmental sustainability.
Electricity Production and the One Health Framework
Electricity is indispensable to modern life, powering homes, industries, and health systems. Its production, however, is a significant source of pollution and environmental degradation. Conventional methods of electricity generation—primarily the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas—have been shown to release a range of pollutants that negatively affect human health, ecosystems, and the global climate.
The One Health framework recognizes that human health is deeply interconnected with environmental and animal health. Pollution from energy production not only contributes to respiratory diseases in humans but also degrades ecosystems, affecting biodiversity and the health of animals that share these environments. Addressing electricity's impacts requires a coordinated approach that balances energy needs with the protection of human and environmental health.
The Broader Implications of Energy Systems
Health and Environmental Costs of Fossil Fuel-Based Electricity
Fossil fuel-based electricity generation, which includes coal, oil, and natural gas, is responsible for the majority of the world's energy supply. These energy sources, however, have well-documented health and environmental consequences. Burning fossil fuels emits pollutants like sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and particulate matter (PM), all of which contribute to air quality degradation and are linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.
For example, coal-fired power plants are one of the largest contributors to air pollution, particularly in developing regions that rely heavily on this energy source. The release of mercury and other toxic metals from coal combustion contaminates air, water, and soil, creating long-term health risks, including neurological damage, particularly in children. Furthermore, coal and natural gas plants are major sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CO2), driving global climate change, which in turn exacerbates health problems, triggers extreme weather events, and disrupts ecosystems.
Transmission and Consumption
The electricity grid, while critical for delivering power to consumers, is not without its own set of health and environmental challenges. Transmission lines and substations contribute to habitat fragmentation, posing threats to wildlife. In addition, energy losses during transmission result in inefficiencies that increase the total environmental footprint of electricity.
From the consumption perspective, household energy use—particularly in affluent regions—has also been linked to excessive energy consumption that goes beyond what is necessary for a decent standard of living. This "overconsumption" contributes significantly to the overall energy footprint and accelerates environmental degradation.
Real-World Examples and Case Studies
1. Coal Power in South Africa’s Highveld Region
The Highveld region of South Africa is home to a dense concentration of coal-fired power stations, making it one of the most polluted areas in the world. Despite the proximity to these power plants, many communities living in the region lack access to reliable electricity. As a result, households resort to burning coal for cooking and heating, which exacerbates both indoor and outdoor air pollution.
The health consequences are dire: residents of the Highveld region experience significantly higher rates of respiratory illnesses such as asthma, bronchitis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Children and the elderly are especially vulnerable to the toxic effects of coal combustion, which produces fine particulate matter (PM2.5) that penetrates deep into the lungs and enters the bloodstream. The burning of coal indoors also results in high levels of carbon monoxide, which can lead to poisoning.
This case highlights a key One Health issue: the intersection of energy inequality and health risks. The environmental and public health toll in regions like Highveld illustrates the compounding effects of limited energy access and reliance on dirty fuels. Beyond human health, the local ecosystem is severely impacted by acid rain caused by sulfur emissions from coal plants, which damages soil quality and biodiversity.
2. China’s Air Pollution Crisis
China’s rapid industrialization has made it one of the world’s largest consumers of coal, with fossil fuels still accounting for a significant portion of the country’s energy mix. The heavy reliance on coal for electricity generation, particularly in urban areas, has led to widespread air pollution, often referred to as the "Airpocalypse" in cities like Beijing.
Air pollution from coal-fired power plants and other industrial sources has created a public health crisis. In 2012, the World Health Organization estimated that outdoor air pollution contributed to more than 1 million premature deaths in China, primarily due to respiratory diseases and cardiovascular conditions. Smog-filled skies are now a common sight in major cities, with particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) levels frequently exceeding safe limits.
In response to growing domestic and international pressure, China has begun transitioning to cleaner energy sources, such as wind and solar power, and has invested heavily in electric vehicle infrastructure. Despite this, the legacy of coal dependence continues to affect both human health and the environment. The Chinese government’s “war on pollution” includes strict regulations to phase out older, more polluting coal plants, but the economic cost of retrofitting or shutting down these facilities has been significant.
3. Renewable Energy in Germany: The Energiewende
Germany’s ambitious energy transition, known as Energiewende (energy transition), has positioned the country as a global leader in the adoption of renewable energy. The policy aims to phase out nuclear energy and significantly reduce coal consumption, replacing them with renewable sources such as wind, solar, and biomass.
The benefits of Germany’s energy transition are manifold. Air quality has improved dramatically in regions where coal-fired power plants have been decommissioned, reducing the incidence of respiratory illnesses and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. The transition has also spurred economic growth in the green energy sector, creating jobs in wind turbine manufacturing, solar panel installation, and grid modernization.
However, the Energiewende is not without challenges. The intermittent nature of solar and wind energy has required significant investment in energy storage solutions and grid management. Additionally, the phase-out of nuclear energy has created a temporary increase in reliance on coal in some areas, delaying the full realization of health and environmental benefits.
4. Hydropower and Ecosystem Disruption in the Amazon
Hydropower is often touted as a clean and renewable energy source, but large-scale hydroelectric dams can have profound environmental and social consequences. In the Amazon Basin, the construction of mega-dams like the Belo Monte Dam in Brazil has disrupted river ecosystems, displacing indigenous communities and threatening biodiversity.
These dams alter the natural flow of rivers, affecting fish populations and the livelihoods of communities that rely on fishing. Additionally, the flooded areas behind dams create stagnant water that becomes breeding grounds for disease-carrying insects, such as mosquitoes responsible for spreading malaria and dengue fever. The loss of forested land to reservoirs also releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas, from decaying plant matter submerged underwater.
While hydropower provides low-carbon electricity, the case of the Amazon highlights the need to carefully weigh the ecological and social trade-offs of energy projects, particularly in biodiversity hotspots.
5. Off-Grid Solar in Sub-Saharan Africa
In many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa, access to electricity remains a significant barrier to economic development and public health improvements. Over 600 million people in the region still live without reliable electricity, relying on harmful and inefficient energy sources such as kerosene lamps for lighting and biomass for cooking.
In recent years, decentralized off-grid solar solutions have emerged as a viable alternative to traditional energy infrastructure. Solar home systems and mini-grids have been deployed in rural areas, providing clean and affordable electricity to households and small businesses. This has had a transformative effect on public health. For instance, the switch from kerosene lamps to solar-powered lighting has reduced indoor air pollution, significantly decreasing the risk of respiratory infections and eye problems.
Moreover, the availability of reliable electricity has improved health care delivery in rural clinics, allowing for the refrigeration of vaccines, better lighting for nighttime procedures, and access to life-saving medical equipment. The success of off-grid solar in Sub-Saharan Africa demonstrates the potential of renewable energy to bridge the energy access gap while reducing health and environmental impacts.
6. Geothermal Energy in Iceland
Iceland is a global leader in the use of geothermal energy for electricity generation and district heating. Nearly 90% of Iceland’s homes are heated using geothermal energy, and geothermal power plants provide a significant portion of the country’s electricity.
Geothermal energy is a low-carbon source of power, but it also has specific environmental challenges. The extraction of geothermal fluids can cause subsidence (ground sinking) and the release of gases such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S), which can be harmful to human health if not properly managed. Despite these challenges, Iceland has demonstrated that with careful regulation and investment in emission control technologies, geothermal energy can be a sustainable and clean alternative to fossil fuels.
Moving Toward Sustainable Energy
Addressing the environmental and health impacts of electricity production requires a shift towards renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and hydropower. Renewable energy technologies emit significantly fewer pollutants than fossil fuel plants, resulting in improved air quality and reduced health risks. For instance, electricity generated from renewables like wind and solar produces only a fraction of the GHG emissions compared to coal-fired power plants.
However, transitioning to renewable energy is not without challenges. The production and installation of solar panels, wind turbines, and other technologies have their own environmental trade-offs, such as the use of rare materials and impacts on land use. Thus, it is important to consider a balanced energy mix that minimizes trade-offs while maximizing health and environmental benefits.
Call to Action
The One Health approach provides a robust framework for evaluating the full scope of electricity production’s impacts on health, ecosystems, and the climate. As energy systems evolve, integrating health considerations into energy policy decisions is crucial. Policymakers, industries, and communities must collaborate to promote sustainable energy solutions that protect human health and the environment.
Thank you for taking the time to engage with this article. GBL4 is committed to shedding light on critical topics around zoonosis, patient care, and the broader implications of One Health. We invite you to delve deeper into these subjects by visiting GBL4.org. Stay updated with our latest insights by subscribing to our newsletter and following us on LinkedIn. Your thoughts and feedback are invaluable to us, so please feel free to comment on the article and join the conversation. Together, we can drive meaningful change and foster a better understanding of the interconnectedness of our world.
References