Humanity’s environmental problems can only be fixed by changing the system. The coronavirus offers a chance
First online: 1 December 2020
Graeme
Maxton
Author
and former Secretary General, Club of Rome
me@graememaxton.com
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
DOI: 10.3197/jps.2020.5.1.47
Licensing: This article is Open Access (CC BY 4.0).
How to Cite:
Maxton, G. 2016. 'Humanity’s environmental problems can only be fixed by changing the system. The coronavirus offers a chance'. The Journal of Population and Sustainability 5(1): 47–55.
https://doi.org/10.3197/jps.2020.5.1.47
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Societies need to introduce
much more radical emissions reductions targets than those agreed in Paris if
they are to successfully slow the pace of change. Covid-19 makes this
possible. By forcing aviation and other transportation businesses to
downsize emissions have started to fall. By paying people to stay at home
governments have shown that they can support them during a transition.
Societies should grasp this unique chance for radical social and economic
reform.
Keywords:
COVID-19 pandemic; alternative economic systems; climate change; population
growth; reforming democracy.
Partly
because of the chaotic response by so many governments, it is easy to imagine
that the virus which is causing such widespread and prolonged misery around the
world is rare, if not unique. Yet it is only the most recent example of a
relatively new and worrying trend. While the economic and social impact has
been greater this time, Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is just the latest in a series
of zoonotic viruses to have passed from other species to humans in recent
decades. Others include HIV, SARS, MERS, Zika and Ebola.
The
reason these diseases are being transmitted to humans more frequently is
simple: too many people are encroaching onto the territory of other species. In
areas where natural systems have been badly degraded by human activity, the
number of animals hosting such diseases, such as bats and rats, is 250% higher
than before, while the proportion of animals carrying the pathogens which cause
them is 70% greater (Gibb et al, 2019).
Without
any change, the number of these diseases passing to humans will grow, as will
their economic and social impact. Put simply, unless humans learn to respect
nature more, they face a series of healthcare crises, some of which will be as
serious as that caused by Covid-19.
Changing
the way humans interact with nature is easier said than done, of course. It
will not come about simply by encouraging people to treat the world around them
with greater respect. The imperative to endlessly increase economic output
makes that impossible, even before patterns of individual behaviour and the
rising human population’s need for more land are taken into account. To work,
the change in human behaviour needs to be fundamental. This is doubly so
because the consequences of humanity’s damaging impact on nature are not
restricted to the problem of zoonotic diseases. They are much more widespread.
Another
consequence of human activity is accelerated species loss. According to the UN,
millions of animals, plants, insects, fish and birds are dying every year
because of habitat loss, pollution and climate change, with species die-off
10,000 times the natural rate (Gibb et al, 2019). It is also accelerating.
UN – Species extinction rates
‘accelerating’
Source:
UN (2019)
Another
problem is water pollution. According to the same UN report, between 300
million and 400 million tons of heavy metals, solvents, toxic sludge and other
waste from industrial facilities are being dumped into the world’s waterways
each year. Fertiliser run-off has created 400 ‘dead zones’ in the world’s
oceans where nothing can survive. There are also vast quantities of untreated
human waste flowing into many of the world’s rivers, the radioactive water from
Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant is leaking into the Pacific Ocean, and
hormone, narcotic and other pharmaceutical residues are being flushed away in
cities around the world every day. As with species loss, water pollution is on
a steadily upward trend. This is disrupting natural food-chains and reducing
the volume of clean water available to all living things, as well as future
generations.
The
steady accumulation of micro- and nano-plastics is also creating a wide range
of problems for many animals, birds and aquatic creatures, as well as damaging
human immune systems, bringing the prospect of declining fertility and higher
cancer rates. Though the impact of this plastic waste is not fully understood,
it has been described as the ‘number one threat’ to humankind (Bluewater,
2019).
The
world’s rainforests are also being destroyed at an increasing rate, while
efforts to cut air pollution have largely failed. Though the particles produced
today are much smaller than they used to be, and so less visible, they are
often more deadly. According to the World Health Organisation, ‘9 out of 10
people breathe polluted air ‘ today. It kills seven million people a year, with
respiratory problems the third biggest cause of human mortality (WHO, 2018a,
2018b).
Humanity’s
environmental impact has become so serious largely because the population has
grown so quickly. It has more than doubled in the last 60 years and is eight
times greater than it was a century ago. Even after taking the deaths caused by
Covid-19 into account, the number of people on the planet is growing by a
billion every 12 years – a billion more needing food, water, housing, clothing
and waste management. With the push for ever greater economic output requiring
ever more energy, land and raw materials, as well as rising levels of
urbanization, the accumulated environmental impact of humanity’s activities has
simply become overwhelming. This is especially so when it comes to climate
change, which is by far the most serious environmental problem of all.
It’s
easy to get confused about climate change. The endless headlines can be as
numbing as the endless inter-governmental reports. The problem is presented as
urgent and yet people are also told that the most serious consequences are
decades away. There is a great deal of misinformation out there too, with
fossil fuel firms and others deliberately sowing seeds of doubt about the
science or denying there is a serious problem.
The
truth, unfortunately, is that everything that societies are currently doing in
response to climate change is not working. All those investments in wind farms,
solar energy, electric cars, and recycling are not having any meaningful
effect. Though the annual volume of greenhouse gases fell slightly in 2020,
thanks to the economic slowdown caused by the coronavirus, it was still much
too great for nature to reabsorb. So the pace of global warming has continued
to accelerate, with the surface of the planet now warmer than at any time in
the last 3 million years.
If
the concentration of greenhouse gases continues to grow at the current rate
(and there is no reason to think otherwise right now) the world will reach a
catastrophic tipping-point in the mid-2030s. If this is breached, a
chain-reaction will begin which will make further warming impossible to
control. The polar ice will melt faster, reducing the planet’s ability to
reflect some of the sun’s heat, accelerating the pace of warming. The
permafrost in Siberia and northern Canada will also melt more extensively and
many of the world’s forests will gradually die. Both of these changes will
release even more greenhouse gases, as will the rising number of wildfires,
increasing the pace of warming even more. By the middle of the century the
average temperature will have reached its highest level in 10 million years. By
2100, the Earth will be on track to become as hot as it was 45 million years
ago.
If
this happens, it will take many centuries for the temperature to return to how
it was before the industrial revolution. Many parts of the planet will become
uninhabitable in the second half of this century, with almost all of it
uninhabitable long term, putting the survival of up to 95% of the human
population at risk (Spratt and Dunlop, 2017)[1].
By 2050, more than 500 cities will have to be depopulated because of rising sea
levels, while many countries around the Mediterranean, as well as much of
Australia and large parts of the United States will be too hot and too dry for
people to live. This is also what will happen if all of the conditions of the
2015 Paris Climate Accord are met, by the way. What has been agreed by
governments so far will not avoid this catastrophe, nor delay it one second.
A
large number of people are working to avoid this outcome, of course, and make
societies more sustainable. Green groups around the world are also pushing
governments and businesses to invest in renewable energy. Even so, none of
these activities will achieve anything like the change needed in the time
available. Even if everyone in America – all 330 million people – had
some sort of green epiphany tomorrow and lived without generating any damaging
gases for the next decade, it would only delay the start of the atmospheric
chain-reaction by a couple of years. The US is responsible for only 15% of
emissions, which is a lot, as it has just 4% of the global population, but if
those responsible for the other 85% continue as now, America’s efforts alone
would not avert disaster.
The
only way to avoid the chain-reaction is if almost everyone reduces their
greenhouse gas emissions by at least 7% a year (UNEP, 2019). In practical
terms, this means 20% fewer cars in three years, as well as 20% fewer planes,
20% fewer coal-fired powered stations, and 20% fewer ships. In the following
three years there needs to be another 20% reduction. And the longer societies
take to begin this process, the steeper the cuts will have to be. To work,
emissions must be at least 60% lower in 2030 compared to today (Breakthrough,
2020). By 2040 they need to be zero – and not “net-zero” as some fossil fuel
companies, airlines, and governments suggest is okay. Trying to offset
emissions in some way, such as planting trees, which take decades to grow, will
not have anything like enough impact on what is happening, just as taking
exercise cannot offset the effects of a 20-a-day cigarette habit when someone
has been diagnosed with lung cancer.
Societies
also need to stop all deforestation and change the way they grow food. They
will also need to build thousands of carbon capture and storage plants across
the world and run them at full-blast for more than a century to bring the CO2
concentration in the atmosphere back to safer levels. Even then, having done
all this, humanity’s chance of avoiding that chain-reaction will be little
better than 50:50.
It
will also, unfortunately, take time before societies can be sure that their
efforts have paid off, because what will happen to the temperature in the next
25 years is already largely locked-in (Breakthrough, 2020). Cutting emissions
now, no matter how sharply, will take decades to show any visible impact.
Reducing
emissions on the scale necessary requires a radical change in how humanity
thinks about development and progress. Societies have to dismantle vast swathes
of the current industrial system, regardless of the short-term cost, with
almost everyone changing the way they live, whether they want to or not. The
most polluting businesses – fossil fuel firms and cement companies – have to be
closed quickly, most flights have to be permanently cancelled, and vehicle use
has to be hugely curtailed.
Until
recently, a change on this scale was thought to be impossible, because the
economic disruption it would cause in the short term would be too great.
Covid-19 has shown, however, that such radical change is actually
possible.
The
Coronavirus has shown societies that it is possible to cut emissions, downsize the
aviation industry, reduce vehicle use, and support people financially during a
crisis. When it comes to dealing with the climate problem, of course, the
changes would have to be much larger and made permanent. It requires a
structural transformation. Until Covid-19 however, there was a widespread
belief that the changes needed to cut emissions had to be financially attractive.
Covid-19 has shown that this is wrong.
Of
course, the virus has brought enormous social upheaval, a deterioration in the
mental health of many people and rising political tensions. Yet this also shows
societies what they need to focus on if they are to slow the pace of climate
change successfully. The difficulties have shown governments how hard it will
be to close all the unnecessary, wasteful, and polluting industries, and
support people financially.
Covid-19
has taught people how much they need to invest in the transition if they are to
do what is necessary. Before, societies did not really understand what they
were up against. They did not understand the consequences of cutting emissions
sharply or know how hard those who want to maintain the status quo would fight
back. Now they do. That is a huge step forward.
Thanks
to the virus, societies have a unique opportunity to change. Rather than seeing
the current economic crisis as a problem, they should look on it as the
greatest chance for a radical transformation they have had in decades. Instead
of bailing out polluting companies such as airlines and car manufacturers, as
they presently are, governments should close them. Instead of trying to return
economies to their past levels of output, societies should permanently downsize
them. Instead of being wedded to the outdated goal of maximising economic
growth, people should focus instead on building an entirely different
development system, which can coexist with nature. Instead of expecting
everyone to be financially independent, governments should pay a basic income
to everyone during the transition, even if this is for many years. They should
retrain people to work in the new economic sectors which will be needed, such
as materials recovery, emissions capture, repairing, sharing, and recycling. To
pay for the transition, governments can print money, just as they did after the
2008 financial crisis. While there is a risk that this could lead to currency
crises or even state bankruptcy, these problems will be much easier to handle
than runaway climate change.
Covid-19
also gives countries a unique opportunity to come together and work
cooperatively, to create a better and more sustainable future for everyone.
Unlikely as this might seem, there is now the small chance (albeit a very small
one) that governments will learn to work together for the benefit of all. It
is, after all, the only way they will eradicate the virus and respond to
climate change effectively.
Whatever
societies do, there will be a transition to another system of
human development within the next decade, because the many failures of the
current economic system, the impact of climate change, and the planet’s other
many environmental troubles will come together and force change.
Covid-19
offers humanity the chance to choose the path we take.
Graeme Maxton’s latest book, A
Chicken can’t lay a duck egg: How Covid-19 can solve the climate crisis (upon
which this article is based), written with Dr Bernice Maxton-Lee, was published
at the end of 2020.
Notes
[1] Kevin
Anderson, former Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research,
considers that “a 4°C future [relative to pre-industrial levels] is incompatible
with an organised global community, is likely to be beyond ‘adaptation’ “If you
have got a population of nine billion by 2050, and you hit 4°C, 5°C or 6°C, you
might have half a billion people surviving” (Spratt and Dunlop, 2017).
Bluewater,
2019.The
global plastic calamity. [pdf]
Stockholm: Bluewater and the Mirpuri Foundation. Available at:
https://www.bluewatergroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Bluewater-Hormones-White-Paper-Final-180219.pdf
[Accessed 6 November 2020].
Breakthrough,
2020. Climate Reality Check 2020. [online] Melbourne: Breakthrough – The
National Centre for Climate Restoration. Available at:
https://www.climaterealitycheck.net/ [Accessed 6 November 2020]
Gibb,
R., Redding, D.W., Chin, K.Q. et al., 2020. Zoonotic host diversity increases
in human-dominated ecosystems. Nature 584, pp.398–402
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2562-8
Maxton,
G. and Maxton-Lee, B., 2021. A chicken can’t lay a duck egg.Arlesford:
Changemakers Books
Spratt,
D. and Dunlop, I., 2017. Disaster alley: climate change,
conflict and risk.Melbourne:
Breakthrough – National Centre for Climate Restoration.
UN,
2020. Report: Nature’s dangerous
decline ‘unprecedented’; species extinction rates ‘accelerating’. [online] United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals. Available at: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/ [Accessed 8 November 2020].
UNEP,
2019. Emissions gap report 2019. [pdf] Nairobi: United Nations Environment
Programme. Available at:
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30797/EGR2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
[Accessed 8 November 2020]
WHO,
2018a. 9 out of 10 people worldwide
breathe polluted air, but more countries are taking action. [online] Geneva: World Health
Organisation. Available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/02-05-2018-9-out-of-10-people-worldwide-breathe-polluted-air-but-more-countries-are-taking-action [Accessed 6 November 2020].
WHO,
2018b. The top 10 causes of death. [online] Geneva: World Health
Organisation. Available at:
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
[Accessed 9 November 2020].