Beyond The Crisis

The impact of COVID-19

It goes without saying that the current pandemic has been a tragedy for the entire world.  Any upsides are pretty difficult to focus upon.  However, one good piece of news which can be taken away during this highly distressing time, has been the obvious impact on the environment.  As expected, the fall in economic activity has also led to a drop in CO₂ emissions.  The European Climate Foundation, estimates that the world’s CO₂ emissions in 2020 will be 5.5% lower than in 2019, as a result of the COVID-19 virus.  This can be largely attributed to a rapid fall in in the need for transportation.  During the lockdown people simply haven’t been able to travel.  Additionally, for many white-collar workers across the world, home work has become the new normal.  Furthermore, flying which is widely acknowledged as an extremely polluting form of transportation; has practically ground to a holt.  As a result, transportation emissions have fallen rapidly.  The impact has been so substantial that oil for a brief period of time, became negatively priced.   

However, just before anyone starts feeling too pleased with the fall in emissions, it is worth delving a bit closer into the data.  The total CO₂ emissions predicted for 2020, are still higher than the emissions being produced at the height of economic boom, just before the 2008 world recession occurred.  So, despite a large proportion of the world’s population being locked down, humans are still contributing more CO₂ emissions than when economies were considered to be firing on all cylinders, back in the mid-late 2000’s.  On the other hand, the rate at which global emissions increased from 2008 to 2018, was slightly less than the increase in emissions recorded between 1998-2008.  However, this cannot really be classified as good news, given that emissions were still growing at an extremely alarming rate between 2008 and 2018.

So, why despite the coronavirus, are emissions still higher than they were almost a decade ago? Afterall, action by multiple governments is taking place.  In fact Europe as whole, has seen a steady fall in emissions over the last few decades.  Well, since 2008 there has been a huge increase in emissions from developing economies.  Notable examples of course include both India and China.  The 2008 recession still impacted these countries.  However, it led to a slowdown in growth rather than full blown recessions.  Despite the slowdown, the transformation since the recession for many of these developing economies, has been remarkable.  Unfortunately, the major downside to this is the massive increase in pollution, including greenhouse gas emissions. 

It is tempting for developed economies to argue that they shouldn’t have to make dramatic efforts to lower their emissions, when other developing countries are increasing their own emissions.  For example, China is worryingly still heavily reliant on coal power.  Unfortunately, the argument that developing countries should be grouped into the same boat as developed countries is a difficult argument to make.  Many developing economies, are home to people living in extreme poverty and development is essential in order to lift people out of poverty.  Developed countries don’t have the same dilemma as they have already gone through periods of heavy industrialisation.  Additionally, it must be noted that many developed economies still rely on products  produced through intensive energy industries, which are now based in these developing economies.  Essentially this means that developed economies have outsourced a significant proportion of their emissions, to developing economies.

Consequently, it is extremely difficult for developed countries to tell developing countries, that they must make the same dramatic cuts to their emissions.  In order to succeed in the climate change battle, both developed economies and developing economies must both increase their efforts.  With action being absolutely vital, it is highly important to consider exactly what the medium and long-term implications of the current COVID-19 crisis could be; specifically in relation to emission levels.

The longer-term impacts of COVID-19 on greenhouse gas emissions

The pandemic has caused a dramatic shift in certain areas of society.  These changes could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions as the world emerges from the crisis.  The obvious example which has already been touched upon, has been the momentous drive to towards working from home.  Flexible home working is set to continue and on the face of it, there is a plausible view that this could reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  However, this is not a clear-cut conclusion and there is evidence that actually suggests the contrary.  For example, people who traditionally work from home tend to live further away from their head office.  Hence, as people no need to longer commute regularly, they may choose to live much further away from their head office.  When they do need to actually go into the office, they will be making longer trips which have a much higher carbon footprint.  Thus, the benefits of reduced emissions associated with home working, may not be as great as is initially anticipated.

This is not the only research into the effects of home working upon emissions.  A recent study investigated into how home working could impact emission levels.  Surprisingly the impact was highly dependent on the time of year.  For example, in summer, home working would lead to a fall in greenhouse gas emissions, mainly due to lower transportation emissions.  However, in the winter, heating would be required to heat multiple individual homes, whilst employees work from home.  This would require vast quantities of energy.  In fact, the initial estimates suggest that if employees worked from home all year-round, the increase in heating emissions in winter would outweigh any reduction from transport emissions.  So, working from home if not managed properly, would actually increase emissions.  Making sure companies are managing this aspect of home working, is key in allowing the practice to be an environmental success.  Hence, the real potential of home working really depends upon if companies and policy makers, can create the right incentives.

COVID-19 is also set to have a dramatic impact on emissions, besides just through its impact through flexible working.  For example, the coronavirus has also led to governments racking up high levels of debt in order to adequately to fight the crisis.  This will all have to be eventually payed for.  One way to claw back some of the money, could be cuts to infrastructure projects.  For example, just this week Transport for London indicated that there would likely be cuts or delays to major investment projects, such as the Bakerloo line extension.  Furthermore, just funding public transport is a major concern, with some transport authorities even warning of shutdowns without the necessary government intervention.  Thus, it is already apparent that the coronavirus crisis has clearly impacted the ability of authorities, to invest in and sustain projects which would ultimately lead to lower CO₂ emissions.   

On a much more positive note, investment in fossil fuels has plummeted during the crisis.  Though it must also be stated that renewable energy investment has also taken a hit, but this is to a much lesser extent.  Nevertheless, in order to really make the transition towards renewable energy, investment needs to be increasing.  Thus, the outcome the virus may have on energy production is not entirely positive.

There are also highly specific issues caused by the coronavirus which could mean that greenhouse gas emissions could potentially increase at least in the medium term.  Public transport is a clear example of this.  During the height of the pandemic train services were heavily cut.  The services which were still running, have been essential for key workers to be able to carry out their jobs.  This is of course necessary.  However, in terms of emissions it is extremely inefficient.  This is because the trains are carrying far fewer passengers, whilst essentially consuming the same quantity of energy.  When restrictions are lifted further and more people return to work, many will need to use public transport.  However, public transport’s capacity in the short term may be limited.  For example, many authorities are only going to allow a certain percentage of public transport’s capacity to be fully utilised.  This is necessary to maintain social distancing.  Hence, the lack of available public transport could lead to people turning towards private vehicles in order to get around.  Additionally, many people will feel much safer in their cars, which could further increase car usage as people substitute public transport for private vehicles.  Consequently, it is not entirely far-fetched to suggest that transport emissions may rise dramatically as lockdown measures are eased.  In many countries where the majority of lockdown measures have been lifted, traffic has quickly rebounded. 

On the other hand, authorities have recognised this issue and are making clear efforts to try and combat the problem.  Pedestalisation has been pushed forward in many cities across the world.  This action is needed in order to prevent a huge rise in private vehicle usage.  By implementing such measures, there could be a change in longer term behaviour towards increased waking and cycling.  However, it is important to note that such legislation is only useful for preventing car use over shorter distances.  For longer trips, this is clearly not a suitable solution. 

Not the catalyst for radical change

COVID-19 has emphasised just how vulnerable we are as a species.  Unfortunately, climate change like coronavirus, also has the potential to inflict terrible damage.  The COVID-19 pandemic, has temporarily caused a fall in greenhouse gas emissions.  However, it is unclear whether the virus will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the medium to long term.  Whilst there have been signs of reduced emissions during the pandemic, the coronavirus in some aspects may negatively impact long-term efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Unfortunately, COVID-19 has not been the magical bullet needed to bring about significant change, which is needed to resolve the ongoing climate change crisis.