When we talk about pollution, thermal pollution rarely comes to our minds. However, with the innumerable thermal power plants and industries mushrooming everywhere, thermal pollution is a real and persistent problem of current times.
Thermal pollution in the broadest sense can be defined as the abrupt change in ambient temperature of a natural water body by any human induced processes. The increase or decrease of water temperature degrades the quality of water and makes it unfit for consumption or the life-systems of aquatic organisms. It could happen in lakes, rivers, oceans or even ponds.
What are the sources of thermal pollution?
The major sources of thermal pollution are heated waste water produced from production and manufacturing plants – coal fired thermal power plants, natural gas plants, nuclear plants, textiles, paper and pulp industries, etc. These units utilize a huge amount of water as a ‘cooling agent’ in lowering the temperature of machinery such as generators and heat engines. Thus, water acts as an efficient sink for heat waste. The heated water is then released back to the source which is either a river or an ocean in most cases causing a disturbance in the thermal equilibrium.
Removal of vegetation or deforestation is another unpopular but significant source of thermal pollution. Vegetation, particularly trees, keeps the temperature of the water cool by providing shades to ponds, lakes, and rivers etc. In the absence of trees, the water bodies are exposed to more sunlight and absorb heat, which raises the normal temperature of the water. Also, soil erosion leads to a raise in the levels of water and shallowing of lakes and rivers which could increase sunlight concentration and warming of water.
Natural processes such as volcanic eruption or geothermal activities under the ocean or land could also increase thermal pollution. The lava (molten rocks) could lead to a sharp rise in the temperature of water.
Ecological impacts of thermal pollution
Thermal pollution is still widely seen as an insignificant problem when compared to other kinds of pollutions such as carbon emissions or solid waste. Many have contested the importance of production plants and industries over the potential ecological threat posed by thermal pollution.
The most vital requirement for survival of aquatic animals is the ambient temperature. A slight deviation from this temperature could bring a detrimental effect on the living organisms and their surrounding ecology. The following are a few important ecological impacts of thermal pollution-
- Decrease in dissolved oxygen – Oxygen, like in the air is equally essential for aquatic life. The warmer the water the lesser is the rate at which oxygen is dissolved in it. Therefore, a slight change in temperature of water could lead to an anaerobic or oxygen deficient condition thus sabotaging aquatic life. Warm water also increases the rate of organic component decomposition which is an oxygen consuming process thus contributing to depletion of dissolved oxygen.
- Most of the aquatic organisms have evolved in such a way that the enzyme systems are functional in a very narrow range of temperature called ‘stenothermic organisms’. A small decrease or increase of temperature may bring a ‘thermal shock’ which sometimes can lead to mass killings of fishes, plants, insects etc (Pollution Issues, 2017). Organisms such as mollusc, sponges, and crustaceans are eliminated easily at temperatures above 37° C (Techgape, 2017).
- On the other hand, there may be sudden increase in metabolism of certain species and impetuous rise in numbers. This disrupts the stability of food chains and alters the species composition in the environment. Thermal pollution is also known to have an adverse affect on the reproductive system of aquatic animals (Conserve Energy Future, 2017).
- Abrupt mass migration of species is another severe problem associated with thermal pollution. The change in temperature may force species to migrate to another habitat creating a hollow food web.
- Corals are highly susceptible to temperature anomaly therefore thermal pollution from run-offs and effluents causes bleaching e.i the expulsion of its symbiont algae and subsequent death of corals.
As an example, it is estimated that, about 46 million adult fish, 2.4 billion eggs, larvae and young fish are killed annually by the effluents from the First Energy Bay Shore Plant on the Maumee River shoreline near Toledo, Ohio. Also, the Monroe Power Plant in Michigan reportedly kills more than 25 million fish each year (Sourcewatch.org, 2017).
Control of Thermal Pollution
A few scientific techniques that could be employed by any industrial units for controlling thermal pollution are – creation of cooling ponds, artificial lakes, and cooling towers. Cooling ponds is one of the simplest and cheapest methods where the heated waste water is stored in a pond before releasing it into the mainstream waterways. It gives enough time to dissipate the heat into the atmosphere through the process of evaporation. Likewise, cooling towers are installed in chemical processing power plants, steel mills, and other manufacturing processes where cooling of the effluent is required before discharge. It involves upward recirculation of a cascade of heated waste water through the towers into the air by evaporative processes. However, these methods are found to be effectively operating in small scale industries limited to the developed nations. Also, change in local meteorological conditions is a concern in cooling towers as large amounts of water vapour enters the atmosphere.
The role of government in controlling thermal pollution is very crucial in developing countries such as India concerning legal and abatement policy frameworks for wastewater treatment. This could be realised through stringent regulations and constant monitoring of effluent discharges from different industrial sectors.
Receive Daily Updates
Recent Posts
Steve Ovett, the famous British middle-distance athlete, won the 800-metres gold medal at the Moscow Olympics of 1980. Just a few days later, he was about to win a 5,000-metres race at London’s Crystal Palace. Known for his burst of acceleration on the home stretch, he had supreme confidence in his ability to out-sprint rivals. With the final 100 metres remaining,
[wptelegram-join-channel link=”https://t.me/s/upsctree” text=”Join @upsctree on Telegram”]Ovett waved to the crowd and raised a hand in triumph. But he had celebrated a bit too early. At the finishing line, Ireland’s John Treacy edged past Ovett. For those few moments, Ovett had lost his sense of reality and ignored the possibility of a negative event.
This analogy works well for the India story and our policy failures , including during the ongoing covid pandemic. While we have never been as well prepared or had significant successes in terms of growth stability as Ovett did in his illustrious running career, we tend to celebrate too early. Indeed, we have done so many times before.
It is as if we’re convinced that India is destined for greater heights, come what may, and so we never run through the finish line. Do we and our policymakers suffer from a collective optimism bias, which, as the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman once wrote, “may well be the most significant of the cognitive biases”? The optimism bias arises from mistaken beliefs which form expectations that are better than the reality. It makes us underestimate chances of a negative outcome and ignore warnings repeatedly.
The Indian economy had a dream run for five years from 2003-04 to 2007-08, with an average annual growth rate of around 9%. Many believed that India was on its way to clocking consistent double-digit growth and comparisons with China were rife. It was conveniently overlooked that this output expansion had come mainly came from a few sectors: automobiles, telecom and business services.
Indians were made to believe that we could sprint without high-quality education, healthcare, infrastructure or banking sectors, which form the backbone of any stable economy. The plan was to build them as we went along, but then in the euphoria of short-term success, it got lost.
India’s exports of goods grew from $20 billion in 1990-91 to over $310 billion in 2019-20. Looking at these absolute figures it would seem as if India has arrived on the world stage. However, India’s share of global trade has moved up only marginally. Even now, the country accounts for less than 2% of the world’s goods exports.
More importantly, hidden behind this performance was the role played by one sector that should have never made it to India’s list of exports—refined petroleum. The share of refined petroleum exports in India’s goods exports increased from 1.4% in 1996-97 to over 18% in 2011-12.
An import-intensive sector with low labour intensity, exports of refined petroleum zoomed because of the then policy regime of a retail price ceiling on petroleum products in the domestic market. While we have done well in the export of services, our share is still less than 4% of world exports.
India seemed to emerge from the 2008 global financial crisis relatively unscathed. But, a temporary demand push had played a role in the revival—the incomes of many households, both rural and urban, had shot up. Fiscal stimulus to the rural economy and implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission scales had led to the salaries of around 20% of organized-sector employees jumping up. We celebrated, but once again, neither did we resolve the crisis brewing elsewhere in India’s banking sector, nor did we improve our capacity for healthcare or quality education.
Employment saw little economy-wide growth in our boom years. Manufacturing jobs, if anything, shrank. But we continued to celebrate. Youth flocked to low-productivity service-sector jobs, such as those in hotels and restaurants, security and other services. The dependence on such jobs on one hand and high-skilled services on the other was bound to make Indian society more unequal.
And then, there is agriculture, an elephant in the room. If and when farm-sector reforms get implemented, celebrations would once again be premature. The vast majority of India’s farmers have small plots of land, and though these farms are at least as productive as larger ones, net absolute incomes from small plots can only be meagre.
A further rise in farm productivity and consequent increase in supply, if not matched by a demand rise, especially with access to export markets, would result in downward pressure on market prices for farm produce and a further decline in the net incomes of small farmers.
We should learn from what John Treacy did right. He didn’t give up, and pushed for the finish line like it was his only chance at winning. Treacy had years of long-distance practice. The same goes for our economy. A long grind is required to build up its base before we can win and celebrate. And Ovett did not blame anyone for his loss. We play the blame game. Everyone else, right from China and the US to ‘greedy corporates’, seems to be responsible for our failures.
We have lowered absolute poverty levels and had technology-based successes like Aadhaar and digital access to public services. But there are no short cuts to good quality and adequate healthcare and education services. We must remain optimistic but stay firmly away from the optimism bias.
In the end, it is not about how we start, but how we finish. The disastrous second wave of covid and our inability to manage it is a ghastly reminder of this fact.