Similarities between climate change and COVID-19

crises
Although the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change do not immediately appear similar, upon
closer inspection a number of significant shared factors are revealed. Both crises are attributed
to substantial unnecessary loss of life.

COVID-19 is known to impact particularly the elderly and those with underlying health conditions,
causing severe respiratory disease, and climate change affects air quality, drinking water, food
supply and shelter - all factors that are associated with health. Climate change is expected to
cause around 250,000 additional deaths annually between 2030 and 2050. COVID-19 has
already claimed the lives of 2.3 million people worldwide since the start of the pandemic.

Both the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change are known to impact certain demographic
groups more so than others. Research has revealed that the vulnerable and disadvantaged pay
a greater price in both scenarios, with people in poverty suffering the impacts of climate change
and the pandemic more so than the rich. Unfortunately, there have long been disparities between
the poor and rich in terms of health care and exposure to factors that poorly affect health. The
pandemic and climate change highlight these disparities.

Finally, both crises have pushed regional healthcare systems around the world to the limit.
Climate change and COVID-19 have resulted in large numbers of people being hospitalized,
forcing countries to reassess how they manage their healthcare systems

Coronavirus cause largest annual fall in co2 emissions

The global economic slowdown triggered by the escalating coronavirus crisis is on course to
deliver the steepest annual fall in CO2 in history, with a larger reduction in emissions in 2020.
Recent times have seen unprecedented disruption to the global economy, with efforts to halt
further spread of the deadly pandemic resulting in economies going into lockdown, travel
restrictions that drastically have cut down on flights, major industrial and manufacturing closures,
declining energy demand and fewer people using fossil fuels to power cars, trains and boats.

As a result, studies suggest CO2 in Europe has dropped 58 percent since lockdowns began
several weeks ago, while the International Energy Agency (IEA) is projecting 7.5 percent annual
reduction in the United States’ energy-related carbon emissions during 2020. Projections released
by Carbon Brief suggest that, based on several sources of economic and emissions data, the
pandemic could result in a global CO2 reduction in the region of 1,600 million metric tons
compared to 2019, which roughly would equate to a 4 percent fall in emissions. It emphasizes
that such a reduction still would not even come close to bringing the 1.5 degrees Celsius global
warming target set out in the Paris Agreement within reach. Delivering such rapid, deep and
sustained cuts in emissions clearly remains a tremendous challenge for the global economy, and
any emissions cuts this year will have little impact on achieving climate targets unless it is followed
by longer lasting changes to the economy, the analysis points out.

Moreover, as green figures repeatedly have stressed since the scale of the coronavirus crisis
became clearer, the short term cuts in emissions as a result of economic downturns and public
health crises offer little cause for celebration. Not only are people’s lives and livelihoods at risk,
but the current crisis is set to severely hamper investment and rollout of the low carbon economy.

As such, it is entirely possible that emissions could end up dropping even further than Carbon
Brief’s current headline forecast, perhaps by as much as 10 percent — more than double today’s
estimate — should the World Trade Organization’s worst case scenario of a 9 percent fall in global
GDP come to bear in 2020.

Growing calls therefore have been coming for economic recovery packages which focus on
stimulating green infrastructure rather than high carbon projects, although it remains to be seen
how quickly the pandemic can be brought under control, and how long economic restrictions could
be in place.

Influence of COVID - 19 on environment

The following is a brief assessment of COVID-19 on the environment which can be considered
only as preliminary as the scientific data is awaiting further publications.

Medical waste and waste management: Medical waste represents a potential danger as many
disposable materials, such as gloves, facial masks and shoes, are made of materials hardly
decomposable in nature. If not disposed of properly, we can face to its accumulation in our
environment which can be further harmful to all environmental elements

Chemicals in our environment: Another potential negative impact stems from the extensive use
of sanitization chemicals and disinfectants containing toxic material to the environment. Their
extended production and consumption led to an increasing amount of sanitization/hygiene bottles
and packaging that are mostly made of hard-to-decompose plastics.

Additionally, importing of agricultural products seemed to be halted due to this curfew which
resulted in increasing application of pesticides and chemicals by local farmers who are under
pressure to produce more than planned.
Biodiversity: While curfews are still in place in Jordan, we are seeing wild animals in areas and
streets that once used to be densely populated. This, unfortunately, doesn’t mean that our
biodiversity has been improving. Positive changes in biodiversity require a much longer time than
a few months. Moreover, COVID-19 has suddenly become an urgent threat, the danger of
biodiversity loss might be side-tracked.

Pollution: There is a clear link between inequality and vulnerability. Those who are the most
affected by pollution are at the same time at the greatest risk of having severe symptoms of
COVID-19. Therefore, their pre-pandemic environmental vulnerability caused by existing
inequality continues to undermine their health and resilience even in times of the COVID-19
spread. This is also closely related to gender inequality which, in many cases, leads to greater
exposure of women to negative impacts of the degrading environment. Moreover, as the
proportion of women in care occupations in Jordan is traditionally remarkably high, their exposure
to the virus is considered to be very high.

Energy efficiency sector: There is a significant drop in oil prices and demand which has had a
positive impact on the Jordanian economy in the short run, reducing fiscal pressures from imports
negating the need for past oil subsidy payment.

In summary, the impacts of COVID-19 outbreaks seem to be potentially both positive and
negative. It is clear that our response after the crises will decide which side of the same coin will
prevail. We have been already witnessing a shift of many environmental programs towards
COVID-19 responses which have raised the questions whether key donors will truly reconsider
environmental sustainability as their priority and rather invest into the mitigation of the COVID-19
outbreak impacts.