In May 2020, it is hard to think of a time that things seemed “normal” to us; it seems like a lifetime ago to me that the first case of coronavirus was reported in my home state of New Hampshire. In reality, it’s been a little over two months. As we have adjusted to this new state of living, I have found myself barely recalling that the wildfires in Australia were still going strong in January of this year. At times like these, it seems almost impossible - even disrespectful - to talk about the environmental problems that are still occurring, and the general public seems to have forgotten about climate change. However, it is more important than ever to push these issues; we are in a unique position at the moment, when the world is at a standstill. The uncertainty of a return to our old “normal” in the next few months allows us to examine that “normal” from a more objective position. It is important to note a quote by Kimberly Nicholas of Sweden’s Lund University, in regard to COVID-19’s uncertain times: “We know from social science research that interventions are more effective if they take place during moments of change.”¹

My interest in the intersection between climate change and the pandemic started when I began to see posts of the canals in Venice clearing up, and the graphics of decreased air pollution in various cities around the world. However, it all seemed too good to be true to me, and when I started digging, I found a common thread among sources. While there have been both positive and negative outcomes with regard to the environment from this pandemic, the positive ones we are seeing are most likely short-term. NASA’s Earth Observatory noted in late February that while there was a decrease in NO2 pollutants over one of China’s main hubs, there were not necessarily decreases in other pollutants.² Furthermore, in some parts of the US, single-use plastics have been in higher demand due to healthcare demands and have made a comeback because of reusable bag bans. While there is decreased air travel and road travel, these could potentially be overcompensated for when quarantine and social distancing measures are lifted. The largest metric of the potential for an environmentally worse is the striking parallel between the 2008 recession and the current economic downturn. The efforts to recover from COVID-19 will no doubt become similar in scale with regard to economic stimulation. In 2008, many environmental protections were stripped away in order to stimulate the global economy, and the EPA has confirmed that environmental regulations have been relaxed in response to the pandemic.³ However, the current pandemic has offered a glimpse into “the kind of improvements that can be made when drastic action is taken,”⁴ as COVID-19’s safety measures have been successful for the most part. Who’s to say this type of urgency can’t be applied to climate change as well?

A particular glimmer of hope for me was a commentary by the International Energy Agency, which pointed out that stimulus packages that result from the pandemic’s economic downfall should now integrate investment in clean energy technology. Renewable energy sources have been improved and are more prevalent than 12 years ago, such as wind and solar, and investing in renewable energy now has great potential to shift the way consumers buy and invest. While the drop in the market for oil, and resulting cheaper gas prices are less incentive for consumers to retrofit homes or buy more fuel-efficient cars, removing oil subsidies is one step in transitioning financial investment in clean technology.⁵

While all of these analyses are helpful and informative for citizens and consumers, it is important to understand the message that is being sent by both those who study the environment, and by the environment itself. One thread of conversation that I particularly found helpful in organizing my thoughts about sharing this information was a podcast conversation on the Caroline Gleich show, with Dr. Naomi Oreskes, a professor of the History of Science and Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard. One particular comment she made stuck out to me: “Nature doesn’t really care what you think. If you jump out of a 10 story window, you’re not going to be engaged in a discussion about whether or not you believe in gravity.” In this particular analogy, we are at risk if we do not heed the facts presented by science, and there is no room for a discussion of belief when we are hurtling towards both an environmental disaster and a crisis of humanity. Just like the current pandemic, we are looking at the fact that people are suffering unnecessarily by ignoring nature’s warnings of a climate disaster, and we are also looking at a worst-case scenario that results from humans living in close proximity with nature. As Dr. Oreskes noted, “there’s still a lot more to learn about where this virus came from. If it’s not specifically related to climate change, it’s related to the anthropocene. We live in a world where humans are taking over, [and] animals are forced to live in close proximity to us.” This commentary brings up an interesting question: If we are less inclined to take over natural spaces, are we less inclined to see something like this happen again?⁶

The world as we knew it has been stripped away, and, as one writer in Medium put it, in regard to a society of hyperproductivity and consumerist culture, “the treadmill [we’ve] been on for decades has stopped.” On this note, paying attention to how we feel right now is the biggest step we can take towards fixing this societal structure.⁷ There have been improvements made on the environmental front, but how can we not only ensure that they are long-term, but also economically sustainable? Now, more than ever, it is important to demand a new normal, one that builds from one of COVID-19’s heaviest lessons: Humans are not invincible, and we are merely guests on this earth. We must demand better from policy and government, and push for our new normal to be a better one.

Sources:

[1] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200326-covid-19-the-impact-of-coronavirus-on-the-environment

[2] https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/earthmatters/2020/03/05/how-the-coronavirus-is-and-is-not-affecting-the-environment/

[3] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/trump-administration-environmental-rollbacks-epa-coronavirus/

[4] https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/coronavirus-lockdowns-have-sent-pollution-plummeting-environmentalists-worry-about-what-n1178326

[5] https://www.iea.org/commentaries/put-clean-energy-at-the-heart-of-stimulus-plans-to-counter-the-coronavirus-crisis

[6] https://anchor.fm/caroline-gleich/episodes/Everything-You-Need-to-Know-About-Climate-Change-Right-Now-With-Dr--Naomi-Oreskes-Episode-6-eco6h7

[7] https://forge.medium.com/prepare-for-the-ultimate-gaslighting-6a8ce3f0a0e0