Human impact on the environment or anthropogenic impact on the environment includes exchange to biophysical environments  and ecosystems , biodiversity , and natural resources   Caused Directly or Indirectly by humans, Including global warming ,   environmental degradation  (Such as ocean acidification   ), mass extinction and biodiversity loss ,     ecological crises , andecological collapse . Modifying the environment to the needs of society is causing bad effects, which is becoming worse as the problem of human overpopulation continues.  Some human activities that cause damage (or directly or indirectly) to the environment on a global scale include human reproduction ,  overconsumption , overexploitation , pollution , and deforestation , to name but a few. Some of the problems, including global warming and biodiversity loss pose an existential risk to the human race,   andoverpopulation causes those problems.  
The term anthropogenic designates an effect or object resulting from human activity . The term was first used in the technical sense by Russian geologist Alexey Pavlov , and it was first used by British ecologist Arthur Tansley in reference to human influences on climax plant communities.  The atmospheric scientist Paul Crutzen introduced the term “ Anthropocene “ in the mid-1970s.  The term is sometimes used in the context of pollution emissions that are produced as a result of human activities and impacts on the environment.
Overpopulation causes environmental degradation.  As population rises, more land is deforested to clear land to grow the food and to the additional people.  About eight million hectares of forest are lost each year. Deforestation in global warming,  and is also a form of habitat destruction ,  which results in the loss of biodiversity .  People create pollution; more people create more pollution.  Humans have released so much carbon emissions into the atmosphere that they have become the major cause of global warming. 
According to Population Matters :
In the 21st century, the human activity demands more, and threatens the health of the environment on which we all depend. No person who is born here what they need with them. The more of us there are, the more we consume the planet’s natural resources, build in its wild places and pump carbon into its atmosphere. 
Environmental impacts are synergistic and intensified by population size.  John Harte, In Human Population and the Environmental Crisis (1996), points out a common misconception about the role of population in the impact of the environment:
the often-assumed notion that we are roughly linearly proportional to our numbers. In particular, it ignores a host of thresholds, the synergism among multiple threats, and other nonlinear phenomena that are more likely to increase the magnitude of the problem. . 
David Attenborough describes the level of human population on the planet as a multiplier of all other environmental problems.  In 2013, he described the phenomenon as „a plague on the earth“ that needs to be controlled by limiting population growth. 
Some deep ecologists , such as the radical thinker and polemicist Pentti Linkola , see human overpopulation as a threat to the entire biosphere .  In 2017, over 15,000 scientists around the world issued a second warning to theworld that it is the „first driver of many ecological and even societal threats.“ 
Overconsumption is a situation where the resources of the ecosystem are sustainable. A prolonged pattern of overconsumption leads to environmental degradation and the eventual loss of resource bases.
Humanity’s overall impact on the planet is affected by many factors besides the raw number of people. Their lifestyle (including overall affluence and resource utilization) and the pollution they generate (including carbon footprint ) are equally important. In 2008, The New York Times stated that the inhabitants of the developed nations of the world consumed nearly all of the world’s oil and gas resources, and made the majority of the human population. 
The effects of overpopulation are compounded by overconsumption . According to Paul R. Ehrlich :
Rich western countries are now siphoning the planet’s resources and destroying their ecosystems at an unprecedented rate. We want to build highways across the planet to get more rare earth minerals for our cellphones. We grab the fish from the sea, wreck the coral reef and put carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We have triggered a major extinction event … A world population of around a billion would have an overall pro-life effect. This could be supported for many millennia and sustain many others lives in the long term compared to today’s uncontrolled growth and the prospect of sudden collapse … If everyone consumed resources at the US level – which is what the world aspires to – you will need another four or five Earths. We are wrecking our planet’s life support systems . 
The applications of technology often result in unavoidable and unexpected environmental impacts, which according to the I = PAT equation is measured as resource or pollution generated per unit GDP. Environmental impacts caused by the application of technology are often perceived as unavoidable for several reasons. First, that the purpose of many technologies is to be exploited, or otherwise, to be improved. Environmental disturbance of these processes is likely to result in negative environmental consequences.  Second, the conservation of massThe first law of thermodynamics (ie, conservation of energy) dictates that every material resources or energy are moved around or manipulated by technology, environmental consequences are inescapable. Third, according to the second law of thermodynamics , only by increasing disorder or entropy outside the system (ie, the environment). Thus, technologies can create „order“ in the human economy (ie, order as manifested in buildings, factories, transportation networks, communication systems, etc.) only at the expense of increasing „disorder“ in the environment. According to a number of studies, increased entropy is likely to be correlated to negative environmental impacts.   
The environmental impact of agriculture varies around the world. Ultimately, the environmental impact depends on the production practices of the system used by farmers. The connection between emissions in the environment and the farming system is indirect, as it also depends on other climate variables such as rainfall and temperature.
There are two types of indicators of environmental impact: „means-based“, which is based on the farmer’s production methods, and „effect-based“, which is the impact that farming methods have on the farming system or on emissions to the environment . An example of a means-based indicator would be the quality of groundwater that is affected by the amount of nitrogen applied to the soil . An indicator reflecting the loss of nitrate to groundwater would be effect-based. 
The environmental impact of agriculture involves a variety of factors from the soil, water, air, animal and soil diversity, plants, and the food itself. Some of the environmental issues that are related to climate change , deforestation , genetic engineering, irrigation problems, pollutants, soil degradation , and waste .
The environmental impact of fishing can be divided into issues that involve the availability of fish, such as overfishing , sustainable fisheries , and fisheries management ; and issues that involve the impact of fishing on other elements of the environment, such as by-catch and destruction of habitat such as coral reefs . 
These conservation issues are part of marine conservation , and are addressed in fisheries science programs. There is a growing gap entre How Many fish are available to be caught and humanity’s desire to catch ‚em, That a problem gets worse as the world population grows.
Similar to other environmental issues , there can be conflict entre les fishermen Who depend on fishing for Their livelihoods and fishery scientists Who Realize That if future fish populations are to be sustainable then some fisheries must Reduce or even close. 
The journal Science published a four-year study in November 2006, which predicted that, at prevailing trends, the world would be run out of wild-caught seafoodin 2048. The scientists stated that the decline was a result of overfishing , pollution and other environmental factors that were reducing the population of fisheries at the same time as their ecosystems were degraded. Yet again the analysis has been made, and many fishery management officials, the industry representatives and scientists challenge the findings, although the debate continues. Many countries, such as Tonga , the United States , Australia andNew Zealand , and international management bodies have taken steps to appropriately manage marine resources.  
The environmental impact of irrigation includes the exchange in quantity and quality of soil and water as a result of irrigation and the ensuing effects are natural and social terms at the tail-end and downstream of the irrigation scheme.
The impacts stem from the changed hydrological conditions in the installation and operation of the scheme.
- the downstream river discharge is reduced
- the evaporation in the scheme is increased
- the groundwater recharge in the scheme is increased
- the level of the water table rises
- the drainage flow is Increased.
These may be called direct effects.
Effects on soil and water are indirect and complex, and subsequent impacts on natural, ecological and socio-economic conditions are intricate. In some, but not all instances, water logging and soil salinization can result. However, irrigation can also be used, together with soil drainage, to overcome soil salination by leaching excess salts from the vicinity of the root zone.  
Irrigation can also be done by (tube) wells . As a hydrological result it is found that the level of the water descends. The effects may be water mining , land / soil subsidence , and, along the coast, saltwater intrusion .
Irrigation projects can have large benefits, but the effects are often overlooked.   Agricultural irrigation technologies, such as high water pumps, dams, and pipelines are responsible for the large-scale depletion of freshwater resources such as aquifers, lakes, and rivers. As a result of this massive diversion of freshwater, lakes, rivers, and creeks are running dry, severely altering or stressing surrounding ecosystems, and contributing to the extinction of many aquatic species. 
Agricultural land loss and soil erosion
The total annual loss of agricultural land is 12 million hectares per year.  In contrast, according to Scherr, GLASOD (Global Assessment of Human-Induced Soil Degradation, under the UN Environment Program) estimated that 6 million hectares of agricultural land per year had been lost to soil degradation since the mid-1940s, and it is noted that this magnitude is similar to earlier estimates by Dudal and by Rozanov et al.  Such losses are attributable to soil erosion, but also to salinization, loss of nutrients and organic matter, acidification, compaction, water logging and subsidence. Human-induced land degradation tends to be particularly serious in dry regions. Focusing on soil properties, Oldeman estimated that about 19 million square kilometers of degraded; Dregne and Chou, estimated at 36 million square kilometers in the world’s dry regions.  The estimated amount of agricultural land, the amount of arable land used in crop production globally increased by about 9% from 1961 to 2012, and was estimated to be 1.396 billion hectares in 2012. 
Global average erosion rates are thought to be high, and erosion rates are generally higher than average.  In the US, sampling for erosion estimates by the US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is statistically based, and estimates the Universal Soil Loss Equation and Wind Erosion Equation. For 2010, annual average soil loss by sheet, rill and wind erosion on non-federal land was estimated at 10.7 t / ha on cropland and 1.9 t / ha on pasture land; The average soil erosion rate has been reduced by 34% since 1982. No-till and low-till practices in the United States of America. Uncultivated cropland, the recent average total soil loss was 2.2 t / ha per year. In comparison with agriculture, it has been suggested that agriculture can not provide a basis for sustainable agriculture. 
Environmental impacts associated with meat production include the use of fossil energy, water and land resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and some instances, rainforest clearing, water pollution and endangerment species, among other adverse effects.   Steinfeld et al. of the FAO estimated that 18% of global anthropogenic GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions (estimated as 100-year carbon dioxide equivalents) are associated in some way with livestock production.  A more recent analysis of global agriculture, including the livestock sector, in 2011 accounted for 12% of global anthropogenic GHG emissions expressed as 100-year carbon dioxide equivalents. Similarly, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has been estimated to be about 10% of global anthropogenic GHG emissions (expressed as 100-year carbon dioxide equivalents) in the following year.  and again in 2010.  The percentage assignable to livestock would be some fraction of the percentage for agriculture. The amount assignable to meat production would be assigned to livestock. FAO data indicate that meat accounted for 26% of global livestock product tonnage in 2011. However, Environmental specialists Jeff Anhang and Robert Goodland with the IFC and World Bank-have put the GHG associated with livestock at 51%, pointing out the FAO postponement failed to account for the 8.769 metric tons of respiratory CO 2 Produced Each year , undercounted methane generation and Use of livestock with livestock, processing, packaging, storing and transporting of animals and animals.  
Globally, enteric fermentation (mostly in ruminant livestock) accounts for about 27% of anthropogenic methane emissions ,  Despite methane’s 100-year global warming potential,  methane emission is currently contributing relatively little to global warming. Over the decade 2000 through 2009, atmospheric methane content was increased by an average of only 6%, while atmospheric carbon dioxide increased by nearly 15,000 Tg per year. At the current rate of methane degradation, the reduction of anthropogenic methane emissions, to about 98% of that decade’s average, would be expected to result in no further increase of atmospheric methane content. Although the reduction of methane emissions would have a rapid effect on warming, the expected effect would be small.  Other anthropogenic GHG emissions associated with livestock production include carbon dioxide from fossil fuel consumption (mostly for production, harvesting and transportation of feed), and nitrous oxide emissions associated with the use of nitrogenous fertilizers, growing nitrogen-fixing vegetation vegetation and manure management. Management practices that can mitigate GHG emissions from livestock production and feed have been identified.    
Livestock production, including feed production and grazing, uses about 30% of the earth ’s surface free ice: about 26% for grazing and about 4% for other feed production.  The intensity and duration of grazing use of  and these, together with terrain, vegetation and climate, influence the nature and importance of environmental impact, which can be noted below) beneficial. Excessive use of vegetation by grazing can be especially conducive to land degradation in dry areas. 
Considerable water use is associated with meat production, mainly because of water used in production of vegetation that provides feed. There are several published estimates of water use, and the production of salt is estimated. For example, „green water“ uses evapotranspirational use of water; and „green water“ has been estimated to account for 94% of global beef cattle production’s “ water footprint „, and on rangeland, as much as 99.5% of the water use associated with beef production is „green water“. However, it would be misleading simply because it would be beneficial to produce beef, because it would evapotranspirational use even in the absence of cattle. Even when cattle are present, it can be considered to be of importance to the production of soil and biomass for soil erosion control, stabilization of soil structure, nutrient cycling, carbon sequestration consumers, many of which support higher trophic levels, etc. Withdrawn water (from surface and groundwater sources) is used for livestock watering, and in some cases is also used for irrigation of drilling and feeding crops. irrigation water for production of livestock feed and drilling has been estimated to account for 9%;  other withdrawn freshwater use for the livestock sector (for drinking, washdown of facilities, etc.) is estimated at about 0.7%.  Because of the preponderance of non-meat products from the livestock sector  only Some fraction of this water use is assignable to meat production.
Impairment of water quality by manure and other substances in water is a concern, especially where livestock production is carried out. In the US, in a comparison of 32 industries, the livestock industry was found to have a relatively good record of compliance with the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act,  but pollution issues from large livestock operations can sometimes be serious where violations occur. Various measures have been suggested by the US Environmental Protection Agency, among others, which can help reduce the risk of water pollution. 
Data of a USDA study indicates that, in 2002, about 0.6% of non-solar energy in the United States was accounted for by production of meat-producing livestock and poultry.  This estimate is embodied energy used in production, such as energy used in manufacturing and transport of fertilizer for feed production. (Non-solar energy is determined, because solar energy is used in such processes as photosynthesis and hay-drying.)
Changes in livestock production practices influence the environmental impact of meat production, as illustrated by some beef data. In the US beef production system, practices prevailing in 2007 are estimated to have involved 8.6% less fossil fuel use, 16.3% less greenhouse gas emissions (estimated as 100-year carbon dioxide equivalents), 12.1% less withdrawn water use and 33.0% less land use, per unit mass of beef produced, than in 1977. From 1980 to 2012 in the US, while population increased by 38%, the small ruminant inventory decreased by 42%, the cattle-and-calves inventory decreased by 17%, and methane emissions from livestock decreased by 18%; Yet despite the reduction in cattle numbers, US beef production increased over that period. 
Some impacts of meat-producing may be considered environmentally beneficial . These include the use of alternative fertilizers for the control of invasive and other weeds and other vegetation management,  fertilizers that require considerable fossil fuel for manufacturing, grazing for wildlife habitat enhancement,  and carbon sequestration in response to grazing practices,   among others. Conversely, according to some studies appearing in peer-reviewed journalssignificant biodiversity loss is a significant driver of deforestation and habitat destruction.   
Palm oil , produced by the oil palm , is a basic source of income for many farmers in Southeast Asia , Central and West Africa , and Central America . It is locally used as a cooking oil, and is converted into biofuel. It makes up to 10 times more oil per unit area as soyabeans , rapeseed or sunflowers . Oil palms produce 38% of vegetable oil on 5% of the world’s vegetable-oil farmland.  Palm oil is under increasing scrutiny in relation to its effects on the environment .
Introductions and invasive species
Introductions of species, especially plants in new areas, by whatever means and for whatever reasons. Examples include the introduction of Caulerpa taxifolia into the Mediterranean, the introduction of oat species into the California grasslands, and the introduction of privet, kudzu, and purple loosestrife to North America. Rats, cats, and goats have radically altered biodiversity in many islands. Additionally, introductions-have resulted in genetic exchange to native fauna Where interbreeding HAS taken place as with buffalo with domestic cattle, and wolves with domestic dogs.
The environmental impact of energy harvesting and consumption is diverse. In recent years there has been a trend towards the increased commercialization of various renewable energy sources .
In the real world, consumption of fossil fuel resources leads to global warming and climate change. However, little change is being made in many parts of the world. If the peak oil theory proves true, more explorations of viable alternative energy sources, could be more friendly to the environment.
Rapidly advancing technologies can achieve a transition of energy generation, water and waste management, and food production towards better environmental and energy use practices using methods of systems ecology and industrial ecology .  
The environmental impact of biodiesel includes energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and some other types of pollution. A joint life cycle analysis by the US Department of Agriculture and the US Department of Energy found that substituting 100% biodiesel for petroleum diesel in buses reduced life cycle fuel consumption by 95%. Biodiesel reduced net emissions of carbon dioxide by 78.45%, compared with petroleum diesel. Inorganic emissions, biodiesel reduced particulate emissions 32 percent, carbon monoxide emissions 35 percent, and emissions of sulfur oxides 8 percent, relative to life cycle emissions associated with the use of petroleum diesel. Life cycle emissions of hydrocarbons were 35% higher and emissions of various nitrogen oxides (NOx) were 13.5% higher with biodiesel. Life cycle analyzes by the Argonne National Laboratory has reduced fossil energy use and reduced greenhouse gas emissions with biodiesel, compared with petroleum diesel use.  Biodiesel derived from various vegetable oils (eg canola or soybean oil), is readily biodegradable in the environment compared with petroleum diesel. 
Coal mining and burning
The environmental impact of coal mining and burning is diverse.  Legislation passed by the US Congress in 1990 required the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue a plan for toxic air pollution from coal-fired power plants . After delay and litigation, the EPA now has a court-imposed deadline of March 16, 2011, to issue its report.
The environmental impact of electricity generation is significant because of its large size. This power is generated Normally at power plants That kind of Some Other convert energy into electricity . Each such system has advantages and disadvantages, but many of them pose environmental concerns.
The environmental impact of nuclear power results from the nuclear fuel cycle processes Including mining, processing, Storing and Transporting fuel and radioactive fuel waste. Released radioisotopes pose a health risk to human populations, animals and plants have radioactive particles enter organisms through various transmission routes.
Radiation is a carcinogen and causes numerous effects on living organisms and systems. The environmental impacts of nuclear power plant disasters Such As the Chernobyl disaster , the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and the Three Mile Island accident , Among Others, persist Indefinitely, though Several other factors Contributed to thesis events Including improper management of fail safe systems and natural disasters putting uncommon stress on the generators. The radioactive decay of particles varies greatly, depending on the nuclear properties of a particular isotope. Radioactive Plutonium-244has a half-life of 80.8 million years, which indicates the time duration required for half of a given sample to decay, though very little plutonium-244 is produced in the nuclear fuel cycle and lower half-life materials have lower activity thus giving off less dangerous radiation. 
Oil shale industry
The environmental impact of the oil shale industry includes the consideration of issues Such as land use , waste management , and water and air pollution Caused by the extraction and processing of oil shale . Surface mining of oil shale deposits causes the usual environmental impacts of open-pit mining . In addition, the combustion and thermal processing of waste materials, which must be disposed of, and harmful atmospheric emissions, including carbon dioxide , a major greenhouse gas. Experimental in-situ conversion processes and carbon capture and storage technologies may be of interest to others, such as the pollution of groundwater. 
The environmental impact of petroleum is often negative because it is toxic to almost all forms of life. Climate change exists. Petroleum, commonly referred to as oil, is closely linked to almost all aspects of the present society, especially for transportation and heating for both homes and for commercial activities.
The environmental impact of reservoirs is increasing under the influence of the world’s demand for water and energy increases.
Dams and the reservoirs can be used to supply water , generate hydroelectric power, increasing water supply for irrigation, provide recreational opportunities and flood control. However, adverse environmental and sociological impacts have also been identified during and after many reservoir constructions. Although the impact varies widely between dams and reservoirs, common criticisms include preventing sea-run fish from reaching their historical mating grounds, less access to water downstream, and a smaller catch for fishing communities in the area. Advances in technology have provided solutions to many of the effects of these threats. Whether reservoir projects are beneficial or detrimental-to-both the environment and surrounding human populations-has been debated since the 1960s and probably long before that. In 1960 the construction ofLlyn Celyn and the flooding of Capel Celyn provoked political uproar which continues to this day. More recently, the construction of Three Gorges Dam and other similar projects throughout Asia , Africa and Latin America have generated considerable environmental and political debate.
Compared to the impact of traditional energy sources, the environmental impact of wind power is relatively minor. Wind powered electricity generation and no fuel pollution , unlike fossil fuel power sources. The energy consumed to manufacture and transport the materials used to build a power plant is equal to the new energy produced by the plant within a few months. While a wind farm may cover a large area of land, many land uses such as agriculture are compatible, with only small areas of wind turbine and infrastructure made unavailable for use. 
There are reports of birds and fish at wind turbines, as well as other artificial structures. The scale of the ecological impact may  or may be  be significant, depending on specific circumstances. Prevention and mitigation of wildlife fatalities, and protection of peat bogs ,  affect the operation and operation of wind turbines.
Artificial light at night is one of the most obvious physical changes that humans have made to the biosphere, and is the easiest form of pollution to observe from space.  The main environmental impacts of artificial light are due to be used as an information source (rather than an energy source). The hunting efficiency of visual predators generally increases under artificial light, changing predator prey interactions . Artificial light also affects dispersal , orientation, migration , and hormone levels, resulting in disrupted circadian rhythms . 
The environmental impact of cleaning agents is diverse. In recent years, measurements have been taken to reduce these effects.
Nanotechnology ’s environmental impact can be broken into two aspects: the potential for nanotechnology, and the possibility of nanotechnology. As nanotechnology is an emerging field, there is a great deal of interest in nanomaterials and affect ecosystems.
The environmental impact of paint is diverse. Traditional painting materials and processes can have harmful effects on the environment , including those of the use of lead and other additives. May be taken to reduce environmental impact, which may be used in such a way that it is minimized, use of paints, coatings, The United States Environmental Protection Agency and Green Star guidelines are some of the standards that can be applied.
The environmental impact of paper is significant, and it is important that both business and personal levels. With the use of modern technology such as the printing press and the highly mechanized harvesting of wood, paper has become a cheap commodity. This is a high level of consumption and waste. With the rise in the environmental awareness of the lobbying by the environmental organizations and with the government is now a trend towards sustainability in the pulp and paper industry .
Some scientists suggest that by 2050 there could be more than fish in the oceans. 
The environmental impact of pesticides is often more Over 98% of sprayed insecticides and 95% of herbicides reach their intended species, including nontarget species, air, water, bottom sediments, and food.  Pesticide Contaminants land and water when it escapes from production sites and storage tanks, when it runs off of fields, when it is discarded, when it is sprayed aerially, and when it is sprayed into water to kill algae. 
The amount of pesticide that is being affected by its chemical properties: its propensity for binding to soil, its vapor pressure , its water solubility , and its resistance to being broken down over time.  Factors in the soil, such as its texture, its ability to retain water, and the amount of organic matter contained in it, also affect the amount of pesticide that will leave the area.  Some pesticides contribute to global warming and the depletion of the ozone layer . 
Pharmaceuticals and personal care products
The environmental impact of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) is largely speculative. PPCPs are substances used by Individuals for personal health or cosmetic Reasons and the products used by agribusiness to boost growth or health of livestock. PPCPs have been detected in water bodies throughout the world. The effects of these chemicals on humans and the environment are not yet known. 
The environmental impact of mining includes erosion , formation of sinkholes , loss of biodiversity , and contamination of soil, groundwater and surface of water by chemicals from mining processes. In some cases, additional forest logging is done in the vicinity of mines to increase the storage of debris and soil.  Containing contamination, including contamination from chemical products of the local population. Mining companies in a few countries are required to follow up on their original state. Some mining methods may have significant environmental and public health effects.
The environmental impact of transport is significant because it is a major user of energy , and burns most of the world’s petroleum . This Creates air pollution , Including nitrous oxides and particulates , and is a significant contributor to global warming through emission of carbon dioxide ,  for qui transportation is the fastest-growing sector issuance.  By subsector, road transport is the largest contributor to global warming. 
Environmental regulations in developed countries however, this has been offset by an increase in the number of vehicles, and more use of each vehicle.  Some pathways to reduce the carbon emissions of road vehicles to be studied.  Energy use and emissions vary between modes, cause environmentalists to call for a transition from air and road to rail and human-powered transport, and increase transport electrification and energy efficiency .
Other environmental impacts of transport systems include traffic congestion and automobile-oriented urban sprawl , which may consume natural habitat and agricultural lands. By reducing the emissions globally, it is predicted that it will be significant positive effects on Earth’s air quality , acid rain , smog and climate change. 
The health impact of transport emissions is also of concern. A recent survey of the studies on the effect of pregnancy on the effects of pregnancy and other diseases. 
The environmental impact of aviation OCCURS Because aircraft engines emit noise , particulates, gases and qui contribuer to climate change   and global dimming .  DESPITE Emission reductions from automobiles and more fuel-efficient and less polluting turbofan and turboprop engines, the rapid growth of air travel in recent years Contributes to an Increase in total pollution Attributable to aviation . In the EU , greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006. Among other factors leading to this phenomenon are the Increasing number of hypermobile travelers  and social factors That are making air travel commonplace, Such As frequent flyer programs . 
There is an ongoing discussion on the possible taxation of an emissions trading scheme, with a view to ensuring that the total external costs of aviation are taken into account. 
The environmental impact of highways (public roads ) such as noise, light pollution , water pollution , habitat destruction / disturbance and local air quality ; and the effects of climate change . The design, construction and management of roads , parking and other related facilities as well as the design and regulation of vehicles can change the impacts to varying degrees.
The environmental impact of shipping includes greenhouse gas emissions and oil pollution . In 2007, carbon dioxide emissions from shipping were estimated at 4 to 5% of the global total, and estimated by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to rise to 72% by 2020 if no action is taken.  There is also a potential for introducing invasive species into new areas through shipping, usually by attaching themselves to the ship’s hull.
The First Intersessional Meeting of the IMO Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Emissions  from Ships took place in Oslo , Norway on June 23-27, 2008. It was tasked with developing the technical basis for the mechanisms that may form part of a future IMO scheme for the control of greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping, and a draft of the discounting mechanisms themselves, for further consideration by IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC). 
There is a significant environmental impact of war. Scorched earth methods during, or after-war-have-been in use for much of recorded history aim with modern technology war can cause has far Greater devastation on the environment . Unexploded ordnance can render land unusable for further use or possible access across it dangerous or fatal. 
Environmental degradation effects
Human activity is causing environmental degradation , which is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems; habitat destruction ; the extinction of wildlife; and pollution. It is defined as any change or disturbance to the environment perceived to be deleterious or undesirable.  As indicated by the I = PAT equation, environmental impact (I) or degradation is caused by the combination of an already growing and increasing human population (P), continually increasing economic growthor per capita affluence (A), and the application of resource-depleting and polluting technology (T).  
Mass extinction, defaunation, and decline in biodiversity
Biodiversity refers to the variety and variability of life on Earth, and is represented by the number of different species on the planet. Since its introduction, Homo sapiens (the human species) has been killed by these species, or indirectly (such as by destroying habitats ), causing the extinction of species at an alarming rate. Humans are the cause of the current mass extinction , called the Holocene extinction , driving extinctions to 100 to 1000 times the normal rate.  Though most experts agree that human beings have accelerated the rate of extinction, some scholars have postulated without humans, the biodiversity of the Earth would grow at an exponential rate rather than decline.  The Holocene extinction continues, with meat consumption , overfishing , ocean acidification, and the amphibian crisis being a few general examples of an almost universal, cosmopolitan decline in biodiversity. Human overpopulation (and continued population growth ) along with profligate consumption are considered to be the primary drivers of this rapid decline.  A 2017 statement by 15,364 scientists from 184 countries warned that, among other things, this sixth extinction event could have been canceled out by many people. 
Defaunation is the loss of animals from ecological communities. 
It is estimated that more than 50 percent of all wildlife has been lost in the last 40 years.  It is estimated that by 2020, 68% of the world’s wildlife will be lost.  In South America , there is believed to be a 70 percent loss. 
Death of coral reefs
Because of human overpopulation, coral reefs are dying around the world. In particular, coral mining, pollution (organic and non-organic), overfishing, blast fishing and the digging of canals and access into islands and bays are serious threats to these ecosystems. Coral reefs also face high dangers from pollution, diseases, destructive fishing practices and warming oceans. In order to find answers for these problems, researchers study the various factors that impact reefs. The list of factors is long, including the ocean’s role as a carbon dioxide sink, atmospheric changes, ultraviolet light, ocean acidification , biological virus , impacts of dust storms carrying agents to far flung reefs, pollutants, algal blooms and others. Reefs are well-known beyond coastal areas.
General estimates show approximately 10% of the world coral reefs are already dead.    It is estimated that about 60% of the world’s at risk is destructive, human-related activities. The threat to the health of reefs is particularly strong in Southeast Asia , where 80% of reefs are endangered .
Decline in amphibian populations
Global warming is the result of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations which is mainly caused by the combustion of fossil energy sources such as natural gas, coal, and natural gas, . Such massive alteration of the global carbon cycle has only been possible because of the availability and deployment of advanced technologies, ranging from fossil fuel exploration, extraction, distribution, refining, and combustion in power plants to automotive engines and advanced farming practices. Livestock contributes to climate change both through the production of greenhouse gases and through the destruction of carbon sinkssuch as rain-forests. According to the 2006 United Nations / FAO report, 18% of all greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere are due to livestock. The Rise of Farming and the Land of the Land of Reunion. Ninety-one percent of all rainforest land deforested since 1970 is now used for livestock.  Potential negative environmental impacts caused by increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations are rising global air temperatures, altered hydrogeological cycles resulting in more severe droughts, storms, and floods, and ecosystem disruption. 
Land degradation is a process in which the value of the biophysical environment is affected by a combination of human-induced processes acting upon the land.  It is viewed As Any change or disturbance to the land Perceived to be deleterious or undesirable.  Natural hazards are excluded as a cause; such human activities can affect these phenomena as floods and bush fires.
This is regarded to be significant year topic of the 21st century due to the implications of land degradation HAS upon agronomic productivity , the environment, and Its effects are food security .  It is estimated that up to 40% of the world’s agricultural land is seriously degraded. 
Disruption of the nitrogen cycle
Of particular concern is N 2 O, which has an average atmospheric lifetime of 114-120 years,  and is 300 times more effective than CO 2 as a greenhouse gas .  NO x produced by industrial processes, automotive and agricultural fertilization and NH 3 Emitted from soils (ie, as an additional byproduct of nitrification)  and livestock operations are transported to downwind ecosystems, and nutrient cycling influençant N Losses. Six major effects of NO x and NH 3 emissions have been identified: 
- Ammonium aerosols (fine particulate matter [PM])
- elevated ozone concentrations
- ozone and PM affects human health (eg respiratory diseases , cancer )
- increases in radiative forcing and global climate change
- Decreased agricultural productivity due to ozone deposition
- ecosystem acidification  and eutrophication .
Effects on human health
Human impacts on the environment, such as pollution and global warming, in turn affect human health.