Kropf 1

Reilly Kropf

Professor Guenzel

ENC 1102-21

24 March 2021

COVID-19 V.S. The Planet

Each and every student in the English class I am currently enrolled in has been instructed

to demonstrate how the coronavirus will potentially affect areas within his or her future career.

This being said, my desired research topic correlates with the relevance of some of what are

considered ‘normal’ behaviors as of today, this being numerous social distancing measures and

mask policies forced upon society due to the dangers of COVID-19. It is relatively

uncomplicated to infer and calculate specific economic effects produced by the pandemic; one

can simply observe quantitative information provided by the Internet, books, peers, and

additional forms of media. Having said that, an enticing question arises as one may ponder the

extent to which COVID-19 has affected life outside the financial realm. My intention for this

research project is to attempt to answer the following question: “What does a ‘green’ economy

look like after COVID-19 environment?” Essentially, I am going to be gathering suggestions

regarding global atmospheric conditions following the current pandemic as this research project

sufficiently demonstrates its impact. I genuinely want to see just how people think the Earth is

going to respond to effects and consequences produced from this virus.

 Kropf 2

I have decided to analyze an Internet article written by Martha Henriques titled: “Will

COVID-19 have a lasting effect on the environment?” The author has a background serving as

an editor of Future Planet, demonstrating her commitment to its respective organization. Future

Planet is widely known as the environmental solutions feature section of the program BBC

Future. In addition to this, Henriques is currently both a scientist and environmental journalist

and provides comprehensive data and production support. She effectively puts forth effort in

these areas all while adequately conducting research for BBC’s publications. Moreover, she is

extensively praised for her work with freelancers across the world in an attempt to find global

environment stories directly derived from local workers’ experiences and perspectives.

This article presents thoughtful insight on how the global environment has already

responded to and will continue to react following the coronavirus pandemic. Henriques

ultimately intends to shed a blinding light on the relationship between environmental struggles

and periods of drastic change. In an attempt to do so, she adequately summarizes reports given

by The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, also knowns as the OECD.

The manner in which Henriques conducts her research and relays said data genuinely gives the

planet a voice in this era of desperation. “Will COVID-19 have a lasting effect on the

environment?” is specifically written to theorize whether the current reduction in air pollution

due to effects posed by COVID-19 will return to normal as cases steadily decline. On the

contrast, wild animals have been detected roaming around unusually throughout deserted urban

areas. Airlines have reduced their emissions as a shocking 96% drop in air travel has been

reported within the past year. There is always the possibility of society being temporarily locked

indoors being what the planet needed all along to physically recover. Utilizing Martha
 Kropf 3

Henriques’ work for this research project has already helped me to heighten my textual analyzing

skills. Furthermore, under my knowledge of the contents of this Internet article, I will be further

prepared for the remainder of this research project, including any new material or challenges it

potentially presents.

The author effectively argues her claim, the idea that although the coronavirus’ effects

may have put a halt to surging climate emissions, these atmospheric improvements are

temporary. In other words, current reduced global emissions are expected to rise back up again

after COVID-19 has run its course. The author includes a convincing piece of evidence to

partially back this claim, the known fact that "[t]he financial crash of 2008-09 led to an overall

dip in emissions of 1.3%; however, this quickly rebounded by 2010 as the economy recovered,

leading to an all-time high" (Henriques, paragraph 14). This statistic proves a valid point, and it

makes Henriques’ argument increasingly convincing as this generates the assumption that the

current reduced global emissions due to the coronavirus will come and go in a similar manner

following the events that occurred in 2008. The intended audience for this article is most likely

students and other individuals interested or involved in any type of scientific or environmental

discourse community. That having been said, the nature of this article’s composition allows said

intended audience to easily receive and comprehend its messages. This is primarily due to it

being broken up into multiple issues conjoined by similar characteristics. Each factor’s influence

on environmental and atmospheric conditions is carefully thought out and considered throughout

the report. The exigence in this particular Internet article is the environmental crisis within our

atmosphere. Planet’s Earth’s malnourishment has been brewing for nearly hundreds of years,

threatening the lives of animals and human beings across the globe. Consequently, people have
 Kropf 4

begun to wonder and are ultimately curious as to how what seems to be 'normal' to us, living

through the pandemic, will affect our physical environment and its ecosystems. The intended

audience for this article is most likely students and other individuals interested or involved in any

type of scientific or environmental discourse community.

Counter arguments are never discussed as “Will COVID-19 have a lasting effect on the

environment?” does not include any major objections to Henrique’ argument. s in that I have

noticedIn a sense, the author seems to conduct her own form of a solution by explaining that

although the reduced global emissions resulting from the coronavirus are most likely temporary,

there are other ways in which the pandemic could have a longer-term impact on sustainability; it

houses the potential to generate environmental awareness. This optimistic statement is

adequately backed by data regarding 2021’s position as the 26th annual United Nations Climate

Change Conference, also known as COP26, which is held under the presidency of the United

Kingdom. "The biggest climate event of the year, COP26, is currently still scheduled to be held

in November and is expected to draw a record-breaking 30,000 delegates from around the world"

(Henriques, paragraph 17). marks the 26th annual COP26 I believe this to be true because social

science research suggests that global interventions are always more effective if they occur during

eras of significant change within society.

The author's claim is generally a logical one. As unfortunate as this reality may seem, it

does not make logical sense for a brief two-year quarantine to house the potential of permanently

fixing our environmental crisis. Atmospheric conditions have improved and then simple have

returned to their normal malnourished states after said era of change has run its course. One

cannot plainly see why the same thing would not happen again after this period in time.
 Kropf 5

Considering this viewpoint, I have come to the conclusion that society's environmental status

given the current situation with our global pandemic is not going to prosper for the long term.

Although this perspective may sound pessimistic, there is a more professional approach to

permanently bettering the global environment. Most importantly, however, my thought process

centers around the idea that society must all stand collectively together. Essentially, this means

that each and every person must become capable of making some form of valuable contribution

in the field of improving overall atmospheric conditions. If this approach fails, environmental

conditions are only going to improve for a short amount of time whenever the world suffers

through a traumatic period, rather than remaining in place and housing tangible value. In

essence, this is not something that the human race should strive for ethically. Current minimal

efforts toward the planet should be recognized in the same desperation as with COVID-19.

Society’s pitiful regard to our decaying planet is in need of acknowledgment. One cannot

logically point out any reasonable benefit in improving the conditions of something for only a

short period of time.

 It is necessary to make note of and dissect the main points the author makes in her

Internet article. This being said, it is necessary that society collectively devise practical plans to

not only better our global environment, but to ensure that the positive changes we do make are

not temporary. Rather, they should remain permanent for Earth’s sake. There is no such thing as

Planet B. Contemplating ethical strategies for large-scale environmental improvement is the one

and only way the human race can clean up the mess it has made. Henriques’ wraps up her

argument with more evidence, concluding with the quantitative statement: "[o]verall, 2020 may

see drop in global emissions of 0.3%-- less pronounced than the crash of 2008-09" (Henriques,
 Kropf 6

paragraph 16). This article ultimately represents a realistic post-COVID-19 ‘green’ economy and

acts as sufficient material for the purpose and overall objective of my final research project.

Work Cited:

Henriques, Martha. “Will Covid-19 Have a Lasting Impact on the Environment?” BBC Future,

BBC, www.bbc.com/future/article/20200326-covid-19-the-impact-of-coronavirus-on-the-

environment.