Climate improvement and the virus: Will it last?

By B. Zarzur

It goes without a doubt that the current crisis is one of the worst in history, with death tolls going up and stocks declining, the pandemic seems to have brought only destruction. However, with the virus bringing a halt to human activities, such as traveling and simply leaving the house; emissions have fallen off a precipice. Clear canals in Venice. Closed industries in China. Purer air. Could this be a positive effect of the virus? How long will the decrease of emissions last? And is it even worth it?  
​

Some of positive outcomes: 

• Since the beginning of February, as heavy industries close their doors in China, their emissions have fallen by 25%. This evidently results with purer air and a better environment for the country's population.  
  
• It was estimated in April that emissions could fall 5.5% from 2019; this contradicts many past predictions for this year, as the past years' emissions have followed a certain pattern: they annually increase more and more.  
  

• Satellites from Italy show a decline in nitrogen dioxide concentrations.  
  
• A study from Columbia revealed that carbon dioxide concentrations in New York have declined, with 8-10% less than March 2019. 
  
  
  

Optimists may see this as a good thing; however, by shifting perspectives, you might realize that this isn't the case, and that the positivity is most likely momentary.  
If we look at only the economic side of the situation a clear conclusion is drawn: an economic crisis. With demands plunging down, a collapse in the stock market is inevitable. But how is the economy linked to the emissions?  
The biggest contributor to the rise of emissions are greenhouse gases, which factories emit, and evidently, under lockdown, emissions have taken the pattern of the stocks, and fallen. If factories are no longer open, emissions are tumbling. But what about when the factories reopen? What happens when the economy gets back on its feet? What then? 
Although only time will tell, it is most likely that companies will try to gain what they have lost. With this in mind, how far are companies willing to go in order to reverse the damage done? Could this mean that their production rates will surpass how much they were producing a year ago? And undoubtedly, if this happens (which is very likely), emissions will go up, and may even exceed the hypothetical value emitted if it weren't for lockdowns. 
Another factor to consider is the effect of the economic crisis on the majority, and not only company leaders. If being sustainable is usually a more expensive option, a choice must be made. What will most of the population choose after the downfall of the economy? With peoples’ wallets still recovering, the choice to be sustainable comes heavily taxed.  
Will the economic relapse give out more emissions than the value lost? Will our situation be worse than ever? Only time, (and politicians) will tell.