Coronavirus: 'Nature Is Sending Us A Message’, Says UN Environment Chief

The Guardian - Damian Carrington

Exclusive: Destruction of wildlife and the climate crisis is hurting humanity, with Covid-19 a ‘clear warning shot’, say experts

A tree stands alone in a logged area prepared for plantation near Lapok in Malaysia’s Sarawak State. Photograph: Saeed Khan/AFP/Getty Images

Nature is sending us a message with the coronavirus pandemic and the ongoing climate crisis, according to the UN’s environment chief, Inger Andersen.

Andersen said humanity was placing too many pressures on the natural world with damaging consequences, and warned that failing to take care of the planet meant not taking care of ourselves.

Leading scientists also said the Covid-19 outbreak was a “clear warning shot”, given that far more deadly diseases existed in wildlife, and that today’s civilisation was “playing with fire”.

They said it was almost always human behaviour that caused diseases to spill over into humans.

To prevent further outbreaks, the experts said, both global heating and the destruction of the natural world for farming, mining and housing have to end, as both drive wildlife into contact with people.

They also urged authorities to put an end to live animal markets – which they called an “ideal mixing bowl” for disease – and the illegal global animal trade.

Andersen, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, said the immediate priority was to protect people from the coronavirus and prevent its spread. “But our long-term response must tackle habitat and biodiversity loss,” she added.

“Never before have so many opportunities existed for pathogens to pass from wild and domestic animals to people,” she told the Guardian, explaining that 75% of all emerging infectious diseases come from wildlife.

“Our continued erosion of wild spaces has brought us uncomfortably close to animals and plants that harbour diseases that can jump to humans.”

She also noted other environmental impacts, such as the Australian bushfires, broken heat records and the worst locust invasion in Kenya for 70 years. “At the end of the day, [with] all of these events, nature is sending us a message,” Anderson said.

“There are too many pressures at the same time on our natural systems and something has to give,” she added.

“We are intimately interconnected with nature, whether we like it or not. If we don’t take care of nature, we can’t take care of ourselves. And as we hurtle towards a population of 10 billion people on this planet, we need to go into this future armed with nature as our strongest ally.”

An orangutan seeks refuge from a bulldozer as loggers smash the base of a tree in the Ketapang district, West Borneo. Photograph: International Animal Rescue

Human infectious disease outbreaks are rising and in recent years there have been Ebola, bird flu, Middle East respiratory syndrome (Mers), Rift Valley fever, sudden acute respiratory syndrome (Sars), West Nile virus and Zika virus all cross from animals to humans.

“The emergence and spread of Covid-19 was not only predictable, it was predicted [in the sense that] there would be another viral emergence from wildlife that would be a public health threat,” said Prof Andrew Cunningham, of the Zoological Society of London.

A 2007 study of the 2002-03 Sars outbreak concluded: “The presence of a large reservoir of Sars-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats, together with the culture of eating exotic mammals in southern China, is a timebomb.”

Cunningham said other diseases from wildlife had much higher fatality rates in people, such as 50% for Ebola and 60%-75% for Nipah virus, transmitted from bats in south Asia.

“Although, you might not think it at the moment, we’ve probably got a bit lucky with [Covid-19],” he said. “So I think we should be taking this as a clear warning shot. It’s a throw of the dice.”

Wild animals sold at the Wuhan Huanan seafood market in China, linked to first cases of the coronavirus pandemic. Photograph: Courtesy of SAM小K/Weibo

“It’s almost always a human behaviour that causes it and there will be more in the future unless we change,” said Cunningham.

Markets butchering live wild animals from far and wide are the most obvious example, he said. A market in China is believed to have been the source of Covid-19.

“The animals have been transported over large distances and are crammed together into cages.

They are stressed and immunosuppressed and excreting whatever pathogens they have in them,” he said.

“With people in large numbers in the market and in intimate contact with the body fluids of these animals, you have an ideal mixing bowl for [disease] emergence.

"If you wanted a scenario to maximise the chances of [transmission], I couldn’t think of a much better way of doing it.”

China has banned such markets, and Cunningham said this must be permanent.

“However, this needs to be done globally. There are wet markets throughout much of sub-Saharan Africa and a lot of other Asian countries too.”

The ease of travel in the modern world exacerbates the dangers, he said, adding: “These days, you can be in a central African rainforest one day and in central London the next.”

Aaron Bernstein, at the Harvard School of Public Health in the US, said the destruction of natural places drives wildlife to live close to people and that climate change was also forcing animals to move: “That creates an opportunity for pathogens to get into new hosts.”

“We’ve had Sars, Mers, Covid-19, HIV. We need to see what nature is trying to tell us here. We need to recognise that we’re playing with fire,” he said.

“The separation of health and environmental policy is a ​dangerous delusion. Our health entirely depends on the climate and the other organisms we share the planet with.”

The billion-dollar illegal wildlife trade is another part of the problem, said John Scanlon, the former secretary general of the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Thousands of frozen pangolins lie in a pit before being burnt in Indonesia, after a pangolin bust conducted by the police. Photograph: Paul Hilton/WCS

“Importing countries should create a new legal obligation, supported by criminal sanctions, for an importer of wildlife to prove that it was legally obtained under the source country’s national laws,” he said.

“If we can blend taking a hard line against transnational organised wildlife criminals, while also opening up new opportunities for local communities, then we will see biodiversity, ecosystems and communities thrive.”

The Covid-19 crisis may provide an opportunity for change, but Cunningham is not convinced it will be taken: “I thought things would have changed after Sars, which was a massive wake up call – the biggest economic impact of any emerging disease to that date,” he said.

“Everybody was up in arms about it. But it went away, because of our control measures. Then there was a huge sigh of relief and it was back to business as usual. We cannot go back to business as usual.”

Links

• Locust crisis poses a danger to millions, forecasters warn
• Risk factors for human disease emergence
• Flightless bird provides 'spark of hope' amid environmental crisis
• Survival of natural world is in balance, says wildlife chief
• Climate crisis may be a factor in tufted puffins die-off, study says
• Biodiversity crisis is about to put humanity at risk, UN scientists to warn
• ‘Death by a thousand cuts’: vast expanse of rainforest lost in 2018
• UK will miss almost all its 2020 nature targets, says official report

How Changes Brought On By Coronavirus Could Help Tackle Climate Change

The Conversation - Glen Peters

David Sasaki/Flickr

Glen Peters is Research Director, Center for International Climate and Environment Research, Oslo

Stock markets around the world had some of their worst performance in decades this past week, well surpassing that of the global financial crisis in 2008. Restrictions in the free movement of people is disrupting economic activity across the world as measures to control the coronavirus roll out.
There is a strong link between economic activity and global carbon dioxide emissions, due to the dominance of fossil fuel sources of energy. This coupling suggests we might be in for an unexpected surprise due to the coronavirus pandemic: a slowdown of carbon dioxide emissions due to reduced energy consumption.
Based on new projections for economic growth in 2020, we suggest the impact of the coronavirus might significantly curb global emissions.
The effect is likely to be less pronounced than during the global financial crisis (GFC). And emissions declines in response to past economic crises suggest a rapid recovery of emissions when the pandemic is over.
But prudent spending of economic stimulus measures, and a permanent adoption of new work behaviours, could influence how emissions evolve in future.

Global fossil CO2 emissions (vertical axis) have grown together with economic activity (horizontal axis) over extended periods of time. Glen Peters/CICERO

The world in crisis
In just a few short months, millions of people have been put into quarantine and regions locked down to reduce the spread of the coronavirus. Around the world events are being cancelled and travel plans dropped. A growing number of universities, schools and workplaces have closed and some workers are choosing to work from home if they can.
Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has cancelled a critically important meeting and will instead hold it virtually.
The International Energy Agency had already predicted oil use would drop in 2020, and this was before an oil price war emerged between Saudi Arabia and Russia.
The unprecedented coronavirus lockdown in China led to an estimated 25% reduction in energy use and emissions over a two-week period compared to previous years (mostly due to a drop in electricity use, industrial production and transport). This is enough to shave one percentage point growth off China’s emissions in 2020. Reductions are also being observed in Italy, and are likely to spread across Europe as lockdowns become more widespread.
The emission-intensive airline industry, covering 2.6% of global carbon dioxide emissions (both national and international), is in freefall. It may take months, if not years, for people to return to air travel given that coronavirus may linger for several seasons.
Given these economic upheavals, it is becoming increasingly likely that global carbon dioxide emissions will drop in 2020.

Global air travel is down significantly as a result of the pandemic. Andy Rain/EPA

Coronavirus is not the GFC
Leading authorities have revised down economic forecasts as a result of the pandemic, but so far forecasts still indicate the global economy will grow in 2020. For example, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) downgraded estimates of global growth in 2020 from 3% (made in November 2019) to 2.4% (made in March 2020). The International Monetary Fund has indicated similar declines, with an update due next month.Assuming the carbon efficiency of the global economy improves in line with the 10-year average of 2.5% per year, the OECD’s post-coronavirus growth projection implies carbon dioxide emissions may decline 0.3% in 2020 (including a leap year adjustment).But the GFC experience indicates that the carbon efficiency of the global economy may improve much more slowly during a crisis. If this happens in 2020 because of the coronavirus, carbon dioxide emissions still could grow.

A decomposition of CO2 emissions growth into economic growth (orange) and carbon efficiency improvements (green) to estimate future emissions based on OECD economic growth projections. Glen Peters/CICERO

Under the worst-case OECD forecast the global economy in 2020 could grow as little as 1.5%. All else equal, we calculate this would lead to a 1.2% decline in carbon dioxide emissions in 2020.
This drop is comparable to the GFC, which in 2009 led to a 0.1% drop in global GDP and a 1.2% drop in emissions. So far, neither the OECD or International Monetary Fund have suggested coronavirus will take global GDP into the red.

The emissions rebound
The GFC prompted big, swift stimulus packages from governments around the world, leading to a 5.1% rebound in global emissions in 2010, well above the long-term average.
Previous financial shocks, such as the collapse of the former Soviet Union or the 1970s and 1980s oil crises, also had periods with lower or negative growth, but growth soon returned. At best, a financial crisis delays emissions growth a few years. Structural changes may happen, such as the shift to nuclear energy after the oil crises, but evidence suggests emissions continue to grow.

Global fossil CO2 emissions (in Gigatons or billions of tonnes of CO2) and carbon intensity of world Gross Domestic Product (grams of CO2 per $US, 2000), with the most  important financial crises. Global Carbon Project

The economic legacy of the coronavirus might also be very different to the GFC. It looks more like a slow burner, with a drop in productivity over an extended period rather than widespread job losses in the short term.

Looking to the future
The coronavirus pandemic will not turn around the long-term upward trend in global emissions. But governments around the world are announcing economic stimulus measures, and they way they’re spent may affect how emissions evolve in future.There is an opportunity to invest the stimulus money in structural changes leading to reduced emissions after economic growth returns, such as further development of clean technologies.

Fewer people are expected to use public transport during the coronavirus outbreak. Steven Saphore/AAP

Also, the coronavirus has forced new working-from-home habits that limit commuting, and a broader adoption of online meetings to reduce the need for long-haul business flights. This raises the prospect of long-term emissions reductions should these new work behaviours persist beyond the current global emergency.
The coronavirus is, of course, an international crisis, and a personal tragedy for those who have lost, and will lose, loved ones. But with good planning, 2020 could be the year that global emissions peak (though the same was said after the GFC).
That said, past economic shocks might not be a great analogue for the coronavirus pandemic, which is unprecedented in modern human history and has a long way to go.

Links

• (US) Editorial: Climate Change Is Just As Real As Covid-19. Now’s The Last, Best Chance For Our Government To Treat It That Way
• (AU) Call To Integrate Post-Virus Rebuild With Land And Climate Repair
• (UK) Climate Change Is Still With Us
• Paul R. Ehrlich: A Pandemic, Planetary Reckoning, And A Path Forward
• If We’re Bailing Out Corporations, They Should Bail Out The Planet
• Coronavirus Response Proves The World Can Act On Climate Change
• (US) Where The Virus And Climate Intersect
• The Coronavirus And The Climate Movement
• Coronavirus Response Should Be A Model For How We Address Climate Change
• 'Cabin fever': Australia must prepare for the social and psychological impacts of a coronavirus lockdown
• The emissions rebound after the GFC: why greenhouse gases went up in 2010
• Coronavirus and COVID-19: your questions answered by virus experts

5 Lessons From Coronavirus That Will Help Us Tackle Climate Change

TIME - Christiana Figueres

An empty road is seen during a nationwide curfew in response to the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in Mumbai, India on March 22, 2020. Himanshu Bhatt—NurPhoto/Getty Images

Christiana Figueres Christiana Figueres was executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change from 2010 to 2016. She is the co-founder of Global Optimism, co-host of the podcast “Outrage & Optimism” and is the co-author of the recently published book, “The Future We Choose: Surviving the Climate Crisis.”

Could the devastating impact of the new coronavirus pandemic destroy the momentum that the climate movement has built up over the last year? Some say so, fearing that the economic fallout will push climate down the list of priorities for governments, and that travel restrictions will force a delay to the U.N. climate conference.

That can’t happen. What brought us to this point of unprecedented interest in taking climate action is climate change itself. We have witnessed huge, record-breaking fires and floods, from California to Siberia, all in the space of one year. Sadly those negative impacts will continue, both in frequency and intensity. If we thought we could forget about it, I’m sad to say, nature will remind us.

In fact, I believe the last few weeks, as terrible as they have been for so many people, have taught us crucial lessons that we needed to learn in order to enter a new era of radical, collaborative action to cut emissions and slow climate change. Like everyone else, I can’t believe we’ve learned these five lessons in a matter of days.

Global challenges have no national borders. Some people used to think that they would be immune to global crises like climate change unfolding “on the other side of the world.” I think that bubble has burst. No one is geographically immune to the coronavirus and the same is true for climate change.

As a society, we’re only as safe as our most vulnerable people. During the COVID-19 outbreak, the elderly and those with health conditions are more vulnerable to the coronavirus and the poor are more vulnerable to its economic impact. That makes us all more vulnerable too. That lesson has taken us into a space of solidarity that we’ve never seen before. We are taking care of each other both out of altruism and because we want to make sure that we’re safe. That’s exactly the thinking we need to deal with climate change.

Global challenges require systemic changes — changes that can only be activated by government or companies. But they also require individual behavioral changes. We need both. We have seen over the past few weeks that governments can take radical action and we can change our behaviour quite quickly.

Prevention is better than cure. It’s cheaper and safer to prevent people from catching and spreading the virus than to attempt to treat huge numbers of cases at once. That’s always been the case in the health sector. And in climate change it is much better to prevent runaway temperature rises than to figure out how to deal with the enormous consequences.

All our response measures need to be based on science. There are a lot of myths around coronavirus, just as there are a lot of myths around climate change. But the countries and individuals basing their responses on what the health professionals are saying are doing better. Likewise on climate change we must take action in line with what the science tells us, rather than following myths or misinformation.

Of course, there are also key differences with COVID-19 that make responding to climate change a more positive experience. The coronavirus needs to be addressed through personal isolation, while the climate needs to be tackled through coming together and collaborating. Social distancing measures have caused economic paralysis, while our response to climate change should actually strengthen and improve the economy.

Governments and financial leaders are already considering recovery packages for an economy so badly hit by the virus. Surprisingly, these decisions will be the most important decision on climate change. If investments to kick start the paralyzed economy are directed into high carbon assets and industries, we will lock out our current potential to bend the curve of emissions this decade. On the other hand, with interest rates at an all time low, political and financial leaders now have an unprecedented historical opportunity to accelerate the energy transition putting us onto a safe path toward a 50% reduction of emissions by 2030.

I hope that the shock of this pandemic will jolt people out of their desire to ignore global issues like climate change. I hope our growing sense of urgency, of solidarity, of stubborn optimism and empowerment to take action, can be one thing that rises out of this terrible situation. Because while we will, eventually, return to normal after this pandemic, the climate that we know as normal is never coming back.

Links

• How Coronavirus Could Set Back the Fight Against Climate Change
• 2050: The Fight For Earth
• What Coronavirus Means for the Possibility of a Carbon-Free Economy
• (US) Editorial: Climate Change Is Just As Real As Covid-19. Now’s The Last, Best Chance For Our Government To Treat It That Way
• (AU) Call To Integrate Post-Virus Rebuild With Land And Climate Repair
• (UK) Climate Change Is Still With Us
• Paul R. Ehrlich: A Pandemic, Planetary Reckoning, And A Path Forward
• If We’re Bailing Out Corporations, They Should Bail Out The Planet
• Coronavirus Response Proves The World Can Act On Climate Change
• (US) Where The Virus And Climate Intersect
• The Coronavirus And The Climate Movement
• Coronavirus Response Should Be A Model For How We Address Climate Change
• 'Cabin fever': Australia must prepare for the social and psychological impacts of a coronavirus lockdown
• The emissions rebound after the GFC: why greenhouse gases went up in 2010
• Coronavirus and COVID-19: your questions answered by virus experts

New 3d View Of Methane Tracks Sources And Movement Around The Globe

NASA - Ellen Gray

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio

NASA’s new 3-dimensional portrait of methane concentrations shows the world’s second largest contributor to greenhouse warming, the diversity of sources on the ground, and the behavior of the gas as it moves through the atmosphere. Combining multiple data sets from emissions inventories, including fossil fuel, agricultural, biomass burning and biofuels, and simulations of wetland sources into a high-resolution computer model, researchers now have an additional tool for understanding this complex gas and its role in Earth’s carbon cycle, atmospheric composition, and climate system.

Since the Industrial Revolution, methane concentrations in the atmosphere have more than doubled. After carbon dioxide, methane is the second most influential greenhouse gas, responsible for 20 to 30% of Earth’s rising temperatures to date.

“There’s an urgency in understanding where the sources are coming from so that we can be better prepared to mitigate methane emissions where there are opportunities to do so,” said research scientist Ben Poulter at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.


Credit: NASA/Scientific Visualization Studio. This video can be downloaded at NASAs Scientific Visualization Studio.

A single molecule of methane is more efficient at trapping heat than a molecule of carbon dioxide, but because the lifetime of methane in the atmosphere is shorter and carbon dioxide concentrations are much higher, carbon dioxide still remains the main contributor to climate change. Methane also has many more sources than carbon dioxide, these include the energy and agricultural sectors, as well as natural sources from various types of wetlands and water bodies.

“Methane is a gas that’s produced under anaerobic conditions, so that means when there’s no oxygen available, you’ll likely find methane being produced,” said Poulter. In addition to fossil fuel activities, primarily from the coal, oil and gas sectors, sources of methane also include the ocean, flooded soils in vegetated wetlands along rivers and lakes, agriculture, such as rice cultivation, and the stomachs of ruminant livestock, including cattle.

“It is estimated that up to 60% of the current methane flux from land to the atmosphere is the result of human activities,” said Abhishek Chatterjee, a carbon cycle scientist with Universities Space Research Association based at Goddard. “Similar to carbon dioxide, human activity over long time periods is increasing atmospheric methane concentrations faster than the removal from natural ‘sinks’ can offset it. As human populations continue to grow, changes in energy use, agriculture and rice cultivation, livestock raising will influence methane emissions. However, it’s difficult to predict future trends due to both lack of measurements and incomplete understanding of the carbon-climate feedbacks.”

Researchers are using computer models to try to build a more complete picture of methane, said research meteorologist Lesley Ott with the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office at Goddard. “We have pieces that tell us about the emissions, we have pieces that tell us something about the atmospheric concentrations, and the models are basically the missing piece tying all that together and helping us understand where the methane is coming from and where it’s going.”

To create a global picture of methane, Ott, Chatterjee, Poulter and their colleagues used methane data from emissions inventories reported by countries, NASA field campaigns, like the Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) and observations from the Japanese Space Agency’s Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite (GOSAT Ibuki) and the Tropospheric Monitoring Instrument aboard the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-5P satellite. They combined the data sets with a computer model that estimates methane emissions based on known processes for certain land-cover types, such as wetlands. The model also simulates the atmospheric chemistry that breaks down methane and removes it from the air. Then they used a weather model to see how methane traveled and behaved over time while in the atmosphere.

The data visualization of their results shows methane’s ethereal movements and illuminates its complexities both in space over various landscapes and with the seasons. Once methane emissions are lofted up into the atmosphere, high-altitude winds can transport it far beyond their sources.

When they first saw the data visualized, several locations stood out.

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio 

In South America, the Amazon River basin and its adjacent wetlands flood seasonally, creating an oxygen-deprived environment that is a significant source of methane. Globally, about 60% of methane emissions come from the tropics, so it’s important to understand the various human and natural sources, said Poulter.

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio

Over Europe, the methane signal is not as strong as over the Amazon. European methane sources are influenced by the human population and the exploration and transport of oil, gas and coal from the energy sector.

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio

In India, rice cultivation and livestock are the two driving sources of methane. “Agriculture is responsible for about 20% of global methane emissions and includes enteric fermentation, which is the processing of food in the guts of cattle, mainly, but also includes how we manage the waste products that come from livestock and other agricultural activities,” said Poulter.

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio

 China’s economic expansion and large population drive the high demand for oil, gas and coal exploration for industry as well as agriculture production, which are its underlying sources of methane.

Credit: NASA's Scientific Visualization Studio

 The Arctic and high-latitude regions are responsible for about 20% of global methane emissions. “What happens in the Arctic, doesn’t always stay in the Arctic,” Ott said. “There’s a massive amount of carbon that’s stored in the northern high latitudes. One of the things scientists are really concerned about is whether or not, as the soils warm, more of that carbon could be released to the atmosphere. Right now, what you’re seeing in this visualization is not very strong pulses of methane, but we’re watching that very closely because we know that’s a place that is changing rapidly and that could change dramatically over time.”

“One of the challenges with understanding the global methane budget has been to reconcile the atmospheric perspective on where we think methane is being produced versus the bottom-up perspective, or how we use country-level reporting or land surface models to estimate methane emissions,” said Poulter. “The visualization that we have here can help us understand this top-down and bottom-up discrepancy and help us also reduce the uncertainties in our understanding of the global methane budget by giving us visual cues and a qualitative understanding of how methane moves around the atmosphere and where it’s produced.”

The model data of methane sources and transport will also help in the planning of both future field and satellite missions. Currently, NASA has a planned satellite called GeoCarb that will launch around 2023 to provide geostationary space-based observations of methane in the atmosphere over much of the western hemisphere.

Links

• NASA: Methane emissions in Arctic cold season higher than expected
• NASA-led study solves a methane puzzle
• NASA: Which is a bigger methane source: cow belching or cow flatulence?
• NASA Flights Detect Millions of Arctic Methane Hotspots
• NASA: Unexpected future boost of methane possible from Arctic permafrost
• NASA: GRACE, GRACE-FO Satellite Data Track Ice Loss at the Poles
• NASA: Greenland, Antarctica Melting Six Times Faster Than in the 1990s
• NASA Satellite Offers Urban Carbon Dioxide Insights
• NASA: Visualizing the Quantities of Climate Change

(US) Editorial: Climate Change Is Just As Real As Covid-19. Now’s The Last, Best Chance For Our Government To Treat It That Way

Los Angeles Times - LA Times Editorial Board

A resident walks past shadows cast by trees during a sunny day in Beijing on March 3. China’s far-reaching efforts to control the spread of the new coronavirus have resulted in a steep drop in carbon emissions and other pollutants. (Ng Han Guan / Associated Press)

There is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic is the crisis of the moment, and a terribly serious one at that, threatening not only human lives but also the global economy.

But it’s not the only crisis the world is facing, and we ought not, while confronting the immediate menace, disregard the other immense threat looming over us: global warming. Rather, somewhat counterintuitively, we should use the current pandemic to learn some lessons and glean some insights about the other perils we will soon be facing.

We’re not suggesting that climate change contributed to the coronavirus outbreak; there seems to be no direct link, although experts say a warming world could accelerate pandemics of insect-borne diseases (the coronavirus is spread person to person). But the global response to this pandemic does show that the world can come together to confront a shared threat. That could bode well for addressing climate change — if we treat it as seriously.

The pandemic is putting a chokehold on economic activity in hard-hit regions of the world — China, Europe and here in the U.S. When factories and businesses are closed, workers and customers stay home (here in California and in New York, by order of the governors). With few people traveling long distances, airlines slash flights. Sure, people and businesses continue to use energy, but not at the levels they did just a month ago. And that reduction in energy use in turn reduces fossil fuel consumption and emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Little of this will be long-lasting. Once the epidemic subsides, economic activity will resume and so, presumably, will emissions.

But the crisis offers opportunities for change, and we ought to be mindful of them as the pandemic and the economic crisis play out. Businesses are learning how much of their workforce can do their jobs remotely, which offers guidance for how they might operate in the future with a lighter carbon footprint. Consumers are undergoing a forced experiment in changed patterns of shopping and consumption.

Congress and President Trump also are negotiating a series of bailouts and other support packages to help people and businesses survive. They should take this opportunity to press for changes in how some of these industries operate.

The airline industry, for instance, should be asked to do more to reduce its carbon emissions, which have soared in recent years and will continue to rise as air travel itself is projected to increase. A September paper from the International Council on Clean Transportation used industry data to conclude that commercial air operations account for 2.4% of global carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels, and that industry emissions in 2018 were 32% higher than five years before.

One available emissions-reducing alternative is the use of so-called sustainable aviation fuels, including biofuels, but they are more expensive than conventional jet fuel. And airline companies can be pressured to adopt aggressive plans to replace older, higher-polluting planes. That would be in line with the demand for increased fuel efficiency commitments that the Obama administration attached to its bailout package for the auto industry.

Of course, extracting climate-friendly concessions will vary by the industry seeking bailout help, so we won’t get too prescriptive here. The main imperative for the government is to keep climate policy in mind as it devises a plan to rescue the economy.

But wait, you think. This is the Trump administration, which at best shrugs at the science and ignores global warming. True enough, but Congress also is involved, and it can place climate considerations on the table
.
Here’s a good place to start: The government should not be bailing out the oil and gas industry at a time when we should be focusing on expanding production of renewable energy and the infrastructure to store and deliver it.

In recent days, early coronavirus scoffers — including the president — have come around to the reality that this pandemic is a deadly threat and have finally begun taking strong steps to address it.

Yet global warming is a larger and longer-lasting threat to humankind. We have about a decade, according to the experts, to make significant reductions in carbon emissions to avoid the worst ramifications of climate change. The world already is seeing the effects in longer and more severe droughts in some places, record flooding in others, stronger and more intense tropical storms and regional temperature rises that are making parts of the word nearly uninhabitable.

The science confirms all this, as it has confirmed the spread and dangers from the novel coronavirus. So maybe accepting the reality of COVID-19 will lead the administration to recognize the reality of climate change and work with Congress to begin addressing it in meaningful ways.

Links

• (AU) Call To Integrate Post-Virus Rebuild With Land And Climate Repair
• (UK) Climate Change Is Still With Us
• Paul R. Ehrlich: A Pandemic, Planetary Reckoning, And A Path Forward
• If We’re Bailing Out Corporations, They Should Bail Out The Planet
• Coronavirus Response Proves The World Can Act On Climate Change
• (US) Where The Virus And Climate Intersect
• The Coronavirus And The Climate Movement
• Coronavirus Response Should Be A Model For How We Address Climate Change
• With Coronavirus And Climate Change, It’s About Time

Water Is An Under-Used Weapon In Climate Change Fight, UN Says

Reuters - Megan Rowling

Residents of the village of Shangshak in India's northeast Manipurcarry state carry water home on Saturday after finding four springs dry. | AP

 
BARCELONA - Using water more efficiently in everything from daily life to agriculture and industry would help reduce planet-warming emissions and curb climate change - a potential benefit that has yet to be widely recognised, the United Nations said on Sunday.

In a report issued on World Water Day, U.N. agencies said global warming would “affect the availability, quality and quantity of water for basic human needs”, threatening the right to water and sanitation for “potentially billions of people”.

But as well as using limited supplies more wisely and fairly, policymakers and businesses should also seek to manage water resources better to economise on the electricity and fuel needed to pump, clean and deliver water, the report said.

“If you save water, you’re saving energy and reducing the greenhouse gases to produce that energy to bring the water,” said Richard Connor, the report’s editor.

Using less energy cuts down further on the water needed to produce electricity, creating a virtuous circle, he said.

Even more water can be saved by switching to less-thirsty clean power sources like wind instead of fossil fuels, he added.

Water use has increased six-fold over the past century and is rising by about 1% a year, said the United Nations World Water Development Report 2020.

It outlined ways water could be used and recycled more effectively to limit emissions, alongside looking after nature.

Restoring and protecting wetlands, for example, is of “critical importance” because they store twice as much carbon as forests, while also preventing floods, purifying water and providing a habitat for animals and birds, the report said.

Conservation agriculture - a green farming approach that causes minimal disturbance to the soil - also helps reduce carbon emissions and the huge amounts of water needed for crop irrigation in intensive farming systems.

Treating more wastewater would also make a big difference, said the report, noting 80%-90% of wastewater is discharged to the environment without any form of treatment.

Untreated wastewater is a major source of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, while wastewater treatment accounts for an estimated 3%-7% of all emissions, due to the energy and biochemicals required for the process.

The best solution, the report said, is to invest in modern techniques that extract methane from organic matter in wastewater and use this biogas to generate the energy needed to treat the water - a method already used in some water-scarce countries like Jordan, Mexico, Peru and Thailand.

As a result, public utilities there have reduced carbon emissions by thousands of tonnes, while making financial savings and providing a higher-quality service, it added.

Policy ‘Disconnect’
One of the main barriers to these types of approaches is a lack of cooperation between government officials working on climate change and those tasked with managing water.

“The disconnect remains abundantly clear at the policy level,” said Connor.

For example, the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change does not mention water, the U.N. report noted.

The national climate action plans submitted by countries under that pact generally acknowledge the importance of water, but few have so far presented and costed specific projects, it added.

“When it comes time to move from talk to action - be it finance or otherwise - the talk falls on deaf ears and water gets put aside and ... left behind,” said Connor.

More concrete efforts to adapt to rising water stress and cut emissions from water use will require joint planning between climate change and water specialists, as well as greater investment to put them into practice, the report said.

Water management, water supply and sanitation services are under-funded, it added - but by tackling global warming as well as water challenges, projects could aim to capture a larger share of climate finance.

In 2016, only 2.6% of $455 billion invested in climate change measures was allocated to water management, it noted.

That may be starting to change. In the past four years, the Green Climate Fund, for example, has approved two projects in Sri Lanka to upgrade village irrigation systems, protect water catchments, and promote climate-smart farming practices.

"Water does not need to be a problem – it can be part of the solution," said Audrey Azoulay, director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Links

• Water Wars: Early Warning Tool Uses Climate Data To Predict Conflict Hotspots
• All That Perfectly Good Water Dumped Into The Ocean Like Some Sort Of Enormous NATURE TOILET!
• 'Quite Scary': Rising Temperatures Threaten Melbourne, Sydney's Water Security
• NSW Towns Including Dubbo And Tamworth Face Water Emergency Within Months
• Australian Insurers Say 'Act Now' On Climate Change
• Scientists Warn Australia's Water Security Threatened By Climate Change
• Redrawing The Map: How The World’s Climate Zones Are Shifting
• Pay More Attention To Forests To Avert Global Water Crisis, Researchers Urge

(AU) Call To Integrate Post-Virus Rebuild With Land And Climate Repair

Farmonline



COVID-19 stimulus and budget initiatives should align with investment and policies working on land, climate and economic repair, the Carbon Market Institute says.
In welcoming the Climate Change Authority's latest policy toolkit report, CMI's chief executive officer John Connor said the government should plan now to integrate both the recovery from COVID-19, and the huge public stimulus, with the recovery from Australia's black summer bushfire season.
"Aligning the three tasks of land, climate and economic repair will give clear long-term signals to investors, business and farmers who are managing risks and seizing the opportunities in the transition to net-zero emissions economy. These signals can help ensure the long-term safety and prosperity of Australia," he said.
"It is imperative that we use the public funds that are available now well, but plan for when public taxpayer funding will need to be reduced," added Mr Connor.
This can be done by evolving policies such as the Government's safeguard mechanism so that its carbon reduction regulations or 'baselines' for emissions intensive industries align, at least, with national carbon reduction targets.
Farmers have been winners from the Government's Emission Reduction Fund with $100 million being invested in land sector projects.
"The ERF is throwing lifelines and new revenue streams to farmers who have been struggling with drought, but these policies need more to be put on more sustainable footing, and be less dependent on public taxpayer funds," said Mr Connor.
Next week will see the tenth ERF auction after the last auction priced carbon reductions at $14.15 a tonne.
"The Government's commitment to add almost $2 billion to the ERF over the next 15 years is welcome but we should be planning to transition to policies - such as stronger Safeguard Mechanism baselines - that make business the drivers of this market, not the taxpayer," said Mr Connor. This week's report by the Climate Change Authority "Prospering in a Low Emission World: A Policy Toolkit for Australia" also recommends declining baselines and measures to maximise the potential of the land sector in carbon reduction.
CMI believes we can and must reform with smart policy that manages emissions intensive companies' trade exposure and supports affected workers and communities.
CMI's January 2020 bushfire recovery workshop report noted that recognising climate change as a factor in the unprecedented bush fire weather conditions meant that emissions reduction is hazard reduction. It called for an integration of land and climate repair tasks, now we need to also integrate economic repair with these tasks.
"Finally, it is worth noting that the South Korean Government, so successful in containing COVID-19's impacts, is announcing policies for net-zero emissions for 2050 and boosting its carbon pricing mechanism, setting the course for a clean and more resilient post-COVID-19 economy, Australia should do the same," said Mr Connor.

Links

• Plan now: Integrate post-virus repair plan with land and climate repair
• Prospering in a low-emissions world: An updated climate policy toolkit for Australia
• 'Unprecedented' globally: more than 20% of Australia's forests burnt in bushfires
• Net zero: why is it necessary?
• Emissions control policies
• National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting: Baselines
• Climate Solutions Fund - Emissions Reduction Fund