The restriction of air travel: the measure that not only protects against the coronavirus

Governments should act with the same urgency on climate as on the coronavirus, activists agree, as evidence shows that this public health crisis is reducing carbon emissions more than any policy.

The coronavirus outbreak, which has killed more than 6,600 people and infected more than 173,000, has caused alarm around the world and leaders are acting accordingly. Unlike the response to global warming, political and corporate leaders are demonstrating that radical emergency measures can be taken on the advice of scientists to protect human well-being.

In China, the birthplace of the disease and the world’s largest carbon emitter, the measures taken by the authorities show, without seeking it, that with only a small reduction in economic growth a sharp cut in carbon dioxide of 25% is achieved, as revealed last week by a study by Carbon Brief.

If this trend continues, analysts say it is possible that the first drop in global emissions since the 2008-09 financial crisis is possible, the Guardian reports. A slowdown in CO2 emissions should serve, according to climate change experts, to change negative behaviors for the planet, especially in the case of travel.

Global air traffic declined by 4.3% in February as tens of thousands of flights to affected areas were cancelled. But Rob Jackson, president of the Global Carbon Project, believes this would only be significant if it leads to long-term behavioural change, particularly in aviation, which is one of the fastest-growing sources of emissions.

“If this could change the way we travel… lead to more virtual meetings…,” Jackson says. Otherwise, “I don’t see the positive side of the coronavirus. If gas emissions temporarily decrease great, but there will be no significant long-term change unless we are surprised in a global recession. Nobody wanted that in 2008 and nobody wants it now.”

Reduce travel

Following the advice of health authorities to avoid crowds and displacement, millions of people have been left without classes or have gone to work from home. Tens of thousands of flights have also been cancelled and Italian bishops have stopped giving Mass. In much of central China, factories have been shut down, with repercussions around the world.

The virus has also disrupted several events related to the fossil fuel industry. In recent weeks, the Geneva Motor Show was cancelled, after Switzerland banned all public gatherings of more than 1,000 people. In Houston, CeraWeek’s mammoth annual meeting of oil and gas executives was suspended, as was the Formula One Grand Prix in Shanghai.

International conferences have also been cancelled. Donald Trump postponed the March 14 summit with the leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The London Book Fair, the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, the Game Developers Conference in San Francisco, have also been suspended, which translates into thousands of tons of CO2 less as a result of flights that participants will not take.

Hopeful changes

The 189-nation International Monetary Fund and the World Bank will swap their usual spring meeting in Washington for a virtual teleconference. An emergency measure that economic and carbon savings could make the norm.

The question is whether those changes are only temporary. China’s climate gains, estimated so far at about 200 megatons of CO2, could be short-lived if factories open and ramp up production to make up for lost business. President Xi Jinping has announced that the government will provide additional stimulus packages to help the economy recover.

Some reports suggest it could backfire on the climate if it means increasing coal production or relaxing environmental controls. The last time China suffered a major threat to GDP growth was during the 2008-2009 financial crisis. Within a year, extra government spending ensured that both the economy and CO2 rose again.

Radical actions

Analysts believe it is still too early to tell whether the coronavirus will push global emissions down the path needed for there to be any hope of keeping global warming in the relatively safe range of 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. It will depend on how far the virus spreads and whether the economic effects are prolonged.

Corinne Le Quéré, professor of climate change science at the University of East Anglia, UK, explains to the Guardian that so far the crisis can only slow the growth of CO2, not reverse it.

“Over the last 10 years, emissions have grown at an annual rate of 1%, or about 317 megatons, so it would take a really big reduction to see a drop this year. It’s plausible, but I don’t think we can say it at this stage.”

But, Le Quéré points out that even a slowdown would buy time for action: with technological advances, lower prices for renewables and more social pressure on governments to change course. The coronavirus response could also prove that radical actions can work.

“We are seeing that when governments see that there is an emergency, they act immediately with measures commensurate with the threat. That assessment has not yet been made with climate change, although governments have declared it an emergency,” says the expert.

Source: The Spanish