List all the environmental impacts that occur during the life span of gasoline; that is, from mining ...

(Answer to question 1 )  Exploratory work has a small impact on the environment through the drilling operation and the need to have access to the area. Roads, if created for the exploratory work, fragment habitats and increase human access to areas.
Extraction impacts the immediate environment by the building of roads (fragmentation of habitat), the disruption of habitat for the drilling and extraction, and possible spills. Once oil is extracted there is a need to transport the oil, usually via a pipeline to a collection point. Building and maintaining pipelines disrupts habitats. If the pipeline needs to be heated (as in Alaska), then there will be additional impacts during the daily operation of the pipeline.
Once the oil has been collected at a central point, it needs to be transported to a refinery. This could involve ocean transport or further transport via pipelines. Ocean transport includes the possibility of accidents, sabotage, and environmental contamination from normal operation (seawater used as a ballast in the tanker). The refinery is a major source of air pollution and is likely to result in local habitat destruction along with water pollution.
Transportation of refined oil to the point of consumer purchase is typically done with tanker trucks. There is always the possibility of an accident resulting in a spill of refined fuel. The soil and water will be contaminated during this process.
Air pollution results from the dispensing and use of gasoline.

(Answer to question 2 )  The three types of population growth curves are the constant population growth rate, the J-curve (exponential growth) and the S-curve (logistic growth). The constant population growth rate remains constant over time and results in a straight line when plotted on a growth curve (population number vs. time). It is highly unlikely that this type of growth would be found in nature. The J-curve demonstrates population growth under optimal conditions, with no restraints. The S-curve shows a population at equilibrium. The J-curve is caused by exponential growth of a population and the absence of mechanisms to cause the population to level off; exponential growth can occur in nature. Humans, for example, have been growing exponentially for many generations now. J-curve growth is not sustainable and the consequence of this type of growth is a population crash and a reduction in the carrying capacity. The S-curve is caused by exponential growth of a population until natural mechanisms cause the population to level off at the carrying capacity (K) and continue in a dynamic equilibrium. The causes of this type of growth are the various biotic and abiotic factors that limit a population's size.

(Answer to question 3 )  Students would have to come up with their own conclusions, but here are some arguments for both sides.
Pro Side
- It does promote large amounts of phytoplankton growth when tested.
- Huge cores of phytoplankton have been found in ice from various ice ages.
- In the deeper parts of the ocean the carbon would be sequestered for thousands of years.
- Approximately one-half of the photosynthesis takes place in the oceans but oceans make up three-fourths of Earth's surface. Seeding would help equalize this disparity.
- The Earth's warming is reducing the productivity of the oceans. Iron seeding could help reverse this trend.
- The process is simple: dump a tanker of iron into an open part of the ocean.
Con Side
- It promotes large amounts of zooplankton growth.
- Some are also worried that the increased mass of plankton will release additional methane and nitrous oxide, which might increase greenhouse gases, and have a counterproductive effect.
- May give people the feeling they have a license to pollute because carbon is being sequestered elsewhere (i.e. people drive more or use more electricity).
- Iron disperses in the ocean rapidly so it would be a very short-term gain and would take huge amounts of iron to sustain bloom activity.
- There is little regulation of the ocean so there is a high probability of something going wrong.
- It is 10 to 100 times less efficient than other natural means of carbon sequestering.
- Iron seeding could trigger an ice age (started by a quip by John Martin, the first to suggest iron seeding in 1993). (Earth Magazine, 1996)
- The amount of iron needed is too expensive in comparison to the benefits.
- May interfere with natural food webs in the area.
- Currents and upwelling from the deep vary from one area of the ocean to another and both must be considered when planning the seeding.

(Answer to question 4 )  One method to regulate energy use and to reduce the impact of power shortages would be to install thermostats that could be controlled by utility companies. If a power shortage is imminent, the thermostat settings could be lowered or raised by a few degrees. This would reduce the energy demand tremendously but would not be as noticeable to the individual as rolling brownouts or blackouts. This method could also be used to reduce peak loads, thus reducing the number of power plants needed.
It would also be possible to alter pricing. To use power during peak demand times would cost the consumer more. Dishwashers could be run at night when demand was less, and the cost to run the dishwasher would be less. Some businesses could alter when they use the greatest amount of electricity (e.g., automated production runs could occur at night rather than at peak demand times).
Consumers and businesses could be encouraged to switch to energy-efficient appliances and lighting. A program to pay a portion of the cost of the new appliance or lighting would encourage the switch. A recycling program for large appliances (refrigerators, washers, and dryers) could be instituted with the recycling of copper and other metals paying for the recycling operation, and possibly offsetting the costs of the program.
A program to increase the efficiency of electronics and computers could be instituted. A recycling program for these consumer goods would reduce the impact from switching and could offset the cost of the program.
Reducing the number of power plants needed or the amount of energy that is produced would reduce the quantity of air pollution (all but hydroelectric). The amount of environmental damage from siting the power plant and from extracting the fuel (all but hydroelectric) would be reduced. Recycling appliances and other consumer goods would reduce the impact of disposal of the discarded appliances and the manufacture of the new appliances.

Now I'm convinced to ask more questions