About two weeks ago I commented on an article that dealt with the effect of the epidemic on oil prices and wrote: "With all the sorrow for the lives of the people affected, it turns out that the virus has positive effects. As a direct result of stopping flights, travel and industrial activity - there is a significant decrease in air pollution and the emission of pollutants such as carbon dioxide and methane. A decrease in global economic activity and the blocking of transitions between countries will moderate the madness of globalization and perhaps bring the world to a more sane behavior. and the fear of eating wild animals will moderate the damage to the variety of species.
Now more data is becoming clear about the effect of the corona virus. When the epidemic spreads around the world, industrial plants go on strike, planes are grounded, shops are closed, traffic is silenced and economic activity is minimized. The immediate result is a significant decrease inEmissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases.
The measurements show a decrease in pollution first In China, then in Italy And this weekend it is clear that later on we will see the decline in the entire industrialized western world when large parts of the USA are in a state of emergency.
Just like the impact of climate change due to global warming, so too does the epidemic first of all harm the less able, the marginalized sections of the population and women in failing societies.
The plague does cause a reduction in emissions and an improvement in the state of pollutants in the air, but is this a reason to cheer? Those on the side of the fight against global warming know that just like the impact of the corona virus, so do the emissions, these are also the ones that return to the cycle and the impact will return and intensify again, especially in the marginal and weak strata. Therefore, the response to climate change should be similar to the response to the plague - a global response with the participation of all countries while ensuring social justice. It turns out that those who are first obliged to change are the ones who make the situation worse: Giant industrial corporations and capitalists (tycoons).
That's why governments must consider the good of all citizens and not give in to those who cause most of the pollution and emissions.
The global response to the pandemic should serve as a lesson for the fight against warming and climate change. Governments such as society and various movements must realize that in the fight against emergency situations - it is necessary to ensure justice for all. Everyone must be protected without distinction of class, gender, race or age. Also, it is not possible for one generation to continue with "business-as-usual" knowing that they are safe from the dangers that will harm another generation, in the style of "after the flood".
Some argue that in order to implement the same social justice, there is a need for free health insurance for everyone, payment for sick leave and payment of unemployment benefits for salaried and self-employed workers, so that people will not have to choose between maintaining a livelihood and maintaining their health in times of need, as well as guaranteeing employment and income. Such measures will secure the future of workers who leave jobs in industries that emit carbon and harm the climate.
In order to succeed, there is a need for worldwide solidarity and full cooperation between governments, which will prevent a retreat to national competitive approaches. As in the climate agreements, so also in other worldwide hazards - rich countries must finance and support poor countries. This solidarity already exists partly in poor countries in the south.
In the corona crisis as in the climate crisis, a systemic change is needed. Both crises reveal the injustice of the new economy where powerful corporations prefer profit over the common good and do everything to prevent regulation and regulation. Governments are required to respond to climate change like an epidemic by taking drastic measures while taking into account the needs of citizens and not corporate pressures, such as the call following the epidemic to nationalize health services, so it is appropriate to consider nationalizing the energy, water and public transportation systems.
The response to crises should be strengthening people's skills to deal with future emergencies, just as a response to a pandemic would be to protect society against future pandemics, so must the response to climate change. A response that will provide protection from climate hazards. It is still not too late to act to mitigate the damage, as bad as the situation is, surrender is not a worthy alternative.
When governments hesitated in taking steps to stop the epidemic, there were citizens who called for drastic measures, the company showed its willingness and its ability to accept discomfort such as government intervention in everyday life: fewer flights, less traffic and yes, less unnecessary shopping.
When it is necessary to protect the lives of millions of people, governments must pay attention to citizens and their wishes. That is why there is a need for determination on the part of the public to call on governments to act to mitigate the climate crisis in ways that do not harm social justice, without abusing power.
When we overcome the crisis, whether it is the corona epidemic or climate damage, it is the duty of the governments to cancel the emergency measures and give the citizens back their freedom.
After all of this we will come back and emphasize that there was a positive effect and a significant improvement in air quality, a situation created out of the necessity of the attempts to protect the population from the plague. It is appropriate that all concerned should learn and internalize that according to data accumulated over the years the danger of contamination andThe danger of climate change due to global warming is tens and hundreds of times greater than the plague Therefore, it is appropriate that they act to eradicate warming and pollution at least as much as the activity to protect against the plague.
More of the topic in Hayadan:
5 תגובות
If we had the ability to zoom out on the development of humanity, we would discover a variety of phenomena that, although humanity experienced them as suffering in the short term, in the long term they had a positive effect on our world.
The problem is that we do not recognize the laws of nature.
Laws that if we knew and acted upon we would be able to perfect and upgrade our lives which are the result of the interrelationships and relationships that are at the highest level in nature: the level of thoughts and intentions between human beings.
Asaf
If we have learned anything from history it is that it is not either black or white
To Asaf Hagibla Rosenthal. These choices exist only among members of the libertarian sect. There will be no choice, the world will have to adopt norms of equality and humility. The virus as well as the effects of global warming are hurting everyone, including those who believe in an irresponsible economy
This is an opinion column, not science.
In the end there are two options for humanity, either to live in harmony with nature, not to pollute, not to harm the wild animals and thus go back to living as in ancient times. Live in communities of picker-nomads, live to age 30 at best and die by disease or a predator.
Another possibility is to change the environment for the benefit of man, understand nature and use knowledge for our own consumption. In this way to extend life expectancy and defeat trifles such as hunger, disease, and later global warming and even death.
I prefer the second option