Environmental and Health Impacts of Geothermal Operations in Tiaty East Sub- County, Baringo County, Kenya: A Community-Based Statistical Analysis

Abstract

Background: Geothermal energy is widely regarded as a clean and reliable renewable energy source, particularly in tectonically active regions such as the East African Rift System. Kenya has made substantial investments in geothermal power development; however, the rapid expansion of geothermal infrastructure has raised concerns regarding its localized environmental and public health impacts. In Tiaty East Sub-County, Baringo County, geothermal development occurs within ecologically sensitive landscapes and community dependent resource systems. This study assessed the impacts of geothermal power operations on vegetation cover, water quality, and community health to inform sustainable geothermal development.
Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods approach was adopted using an Integrated Impact Assessment Framework. Primary data were collected through 379 structured household questionnaires and key informant interviews. Water quality assessment employed a quasi-experimental design, comparing boreholes, Lake Baringo, and seasonal ponds within geothermal zones against distilled water as a control. Physical and chemical parameters were analyzed using standard laboratory procedures. Vegetation dynamics were assessed using GIS and remote sensing techniques, including land use/land cover classification and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) analysis of Landsat imagery from 2017, 2020, and 2025. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS (version 21.0) through descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t-tests at p < 0.05, while qualitative data were thematically analyzed.
Results: Vegetation degradation was significantly associated with geothermal operations (χ² = 37.21, p = 0.013), with healthy vegetation cover declining from approximately 18% in 2017 to 6% in 2025 and a corresponding increase in bare land. Water sources exhibited significantly elevated temperatures, turbidity, fluoride, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids, nitrate, and phosphate levels compared to distilled water (p < 0.05), indicating geothermal and hydrogeochemical influence. Community perceptions corroborated laboratory findings, identifying water shortages (67%), contamination, and increased water temperatures as key concerns. A significant association was observed between geothermal activities and increased disease prevalence (χ² = 31.14, p = 0.008), with respiratory illnesses predominating. Most respondents (>60%) considered existing mitigation measures ineffective.
Conclusion: Geothermal power development in Tiaty East Sub-County has resulted in measurable degradation of vegetation, deterioration of water quality, and adverse public health outcomes. Strengthened environmental governance, continuous monitoring, and community-led mitigation strategies are essential to align geothermal energy development with environmental sustainability and public wellbeing.