Coronavirus: is working from home really better for the environment?

s3.reutersmedia.net
Economic crises have historically had a major impact on the environment. As economies falter, there is a reduced demand for commodities, such as timber, oil and other materials produced by the extractive industries, putting less pressure on our forests and rivers.

The impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) is even more widespread. Just over 100 days since countries across the world started shutting down trade and travel, closing businesses and limiting other economic activities in an attempt to control the coronavirus pandemic we are already seeing significant environmental changes. Just as after the 2008 financial crash, when the shuttering of businesses saw levels of atmospheric sulphur dioxide fall 85 per cent in Delhi, and man-made greenhouse gases in Europe and the US drop by 100 million tons, the measures being enacted to control coronavirus are already showing visible, and far reaching, atmospheric environmental improvements.

Social media and the press have been awash with stunning images of improved air quality around the globe. The first images came from NASA, showing how pollution levels were visibly lower across China following its lockdown. Today we see photos of cities, such as Beirut and Los Angeles, once smothered in smog, now with clear air. Emissions from traffic in New York have dropped almost 50 per cent. And Europe, too, shows significant reductions in air pollution. Again, these improvements in air quality are so vast that they are visible from space. The environment, it seems, is having a much-needed, if eerie, reprieve.

.

 

[prk_wp_theme_button type=”theme_button medium” prk_in=”Continue Reading…” link=”https://geographical.co.uk/opinion/item/3653-is-working-from-home-really-better-for-the-environment-doug-specht”]

Image: ESA, via YouTube.