What we learned from COVID 19 and how it informs our approach to combating climate change
The outbreak of COVID 19 is showing us a little piece of our future, and what tackling other societal threats such as climate change could look like in the years ahead. Throughout this pandemic, we see what both good and bad responses could do for a country’s people and economy. The good led to quick mitigation efforts, fewer deaths, and relatively brief life disruptions in the grand scheme. While the bad led to a scramble, greater life impacts, and inadequate preparation given the magnitude of the pandemic. Given these successes and failures, we must learn from this emergency and use the opportunity to better respond to threats such as climate change and its resulting catastrophes — wildfires, floods, and other natural disasters.
What went right?
Many are hailing the decrease in air pollution as a win for the environment, and COVID 19 may provide for some great opportunities to instill productive and environmentally focused legislation. However, the long-term environmental impact of COVID 19 will not be known until we see how we shape our recovery process. By side-stepping environmental regulations and putting subsidies and economic growth above all other priorities, we could effectively be constructing the infrastructure that will lead to a regression in environmental policy. Many industries are attempting to ride the wave and roll back environmental regulations, from ending recycling programs to plastic bag bans1.
We can even look to China as it is further down the recovery process and may be an example of what to expect once the stay at home orders are lifted. Experts speculate the waiving of many environmental regulations to stimulate the economy quickly2. The step back is a devastating blow when dealing with the substantial greenhouse gas emitters in the world, and American policy should reflect the need to remain on track in limiting our emissions.
The impacts of COVID 19 and the economic recovery efforts will have effects on generations for years to come. Thus, we must address the problem by integrating our recovery process with climate change initiatives.
“Science-Deniers”
However, the United States faced unique challenges in preparation. Many became infected due to late and scattered responses resulting from the dismissal of expert claims. The approach demonstrates how both emergencies, COVID 19, and climate change, are resulting from willfully ignoring experts and data3. Many officials and citizens were and are dismissing the seriousness of the pandemic by proceeding forward with birthday parties and beach outings. Attacks on scientists’ credibility and dismissing advice from medical professionals have led to the circulation of countless conspiracy theories. One thing such narratives are missing is how the consequences of rejecting such sound medical knowledge are currently pointing to unprecedented casualties and economic devastation.
Similar to that of climate change, the United States has been a leader for pro-fossil fuel rhetoric, attempting to sway people from addressing the problem. Our reluctance to roundly agree with accepted climate change science in our federal government has led to the prolonged use of coal subsidies and autonomy to address greenhouse gas emissions on a state-by-state basis.
How can we take this pandemic and avoid future tragedy?
The COVID response has shown us that if we wait to see the impact of threats, it is often too late to stop them. The same is true of climate change, where planning is essential to get ahead of catastrophe. Prioritizing public health, reductions in CO2, and better emergency planning for catastrophic events must become priorities in policy to avoid devastating loss of life. Bailouts for wealthy business interests while dismissing the needs of the people have unfortunately become standard practice. We must remain vigilant in times of crisis to ensure we take the proper steps to develop green infrastructure and invest in a sustainable future. The virus has given us the opportunity to lessen the impacts of climate change, and if we are strategic in our recovery, we can facilitate significant change to reach this end.
We need a plan
A great takeaway from this disaster is that when we do not work together in a centrally unified and cohesive group, many will suffer. From hoarding masks and ventilators to toilet paper and disinfectant, states and people have been forced to compete against one another. Fears of scarcity arise once inaction and improper planning leave us with uncertainties.
Proper planning for climate change mitigation and adaptation is, therefore, necessary to avoid widespread panic. As illustrated by the pandemic, failure to plan and lead can only exacerbate existing fears. Planning to address climate change must be done at the federal level to ensure states and citizens both understand the importance of climate change legislation and implement it.
With the creation of recovery mechanisms moving forward, we must implement public policy to ensure stimulus packages facilitate the development of green infrastructure. In a time of enormous spending, we must provide long-term solutions, not short-term band-aids. Public health and safety must be prioritized through effective environmental and energy policy.
Dr. Aaron Bernstein, a pediatrician and Interim Director of The Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health (Harvard C-CHANGE) called out the response to COVID and the similarities to the Climate Change response directly. Addressing the problems of underfunding in times of crisis, promoting more effective interventions, he stated, “… the amount of funding that has gone into the public health infrastructure in the United States in recent years has been wildly disproportionate to the need. [W]e shouldn’t expect to be ready for problems like this if we don’t support public health financially. We’re in a position of playing catch up because we’ve underfunded the public health infrastructure that would be necessary to respond to this appropriately.”4
Planning and research are necessary to ensure we, as a society, are ready for the effects of climate change. We must trust experts, medical professionals, and scientists to provide immediate individual and collective action.
What have we learned?
Quick government action in the face of a crisis is absolutely necessary to form a united front against common threats. The creation of pacts between western states shows how more cooperative and motivated alliances can address specific problems unique to particular regions. COVID 19 will be an opportunity to make monumental leaps forward in our climate change policy, or it will be a step back to short-term gains. If we take the usual road to re-building, it will cause more work in the future to mitigate disastrous consequences worldwide.
The intangible nature of climate change is one of the most cumbersome factors in the inability of many to internalize the externality. However, similar to the virus, effects will be evident in time. The costs of addressing both issues become more expensive when stalling as the effects of both crises become more devastating with time. The opportunity presented must be used to create better infrastructure.
There is hope for the future. Our responses to societal emergencies whether pandemics or climate change can be improved if we learn from what worked and avoid what did not. We have learned that lack of action and denying the claims of experts lead to problems so devastating that they cannot be alleviated. Let’s not continue to make the same mistakes on our number one existential problem.
References
[1] "The Unexpected Environmental Consequences of Covid-19", Bloomberg News (March 30, 2020) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-30/the-unexpected-environmental-consequences-of-covid-19
[2] Matt Simon,"The Coronavirus Pandemic Is Bringing Down Emissions, but Not for Long", Wired (March 12, 2020) https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-emissions/
[3] Neela Banerjee and David Hasemyer, "Decades of Science Denial Related to Climate Change Has Led to Denial of the Coronavirus Pandemic", Inside Climate News (April 8, 2020) https://insideclimatenews.org/news/08042020/science-denial-coronavirus-covid-climate-change
[4] Neela Banerjee, "Q&A: A Harvard Expert on Environment and Health Discusses Possible Ties Between COVID and Climate", Inside Climate News (March 12, 2020) https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11032020/coronavirus-harvard-doctor-climate-change-public-health