18
Katrina Campos and Zoe Sabbert
Need to add links to keywords and links to citations in the text. The first two sections have great support via citations, but the last section could use more support from sources. Need to add information (alt text and caption) to image. Also need to check citations. Some seem to be incomplete or lacking links.
Introduction
Whether it be educational, social, or economical, COVID-19 has impacted every aspect of our lives in one way or another. Naturally, the impact extends to the environment as well. Prior to the pandemic, society was in an environmental crisis due to the effects of certain innovations in science and technology, which were implemented without any consideration of their detrimental effects. Therefore, in the early stages of the pandemic, many experts were excited to see the positive environmental impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns, such as a reduction in air pollution. However, as the pandemic continued, negative developments began to arise, including an increase in waste and expanded use of chemical disinfectants.
Connection to STS Theory
The world was already in an environmental crisis before COVID-19 hit. Although the pandemic initially had a positive influence on the environment, it brought about more harmful consequences as time went on. This trend demonstrates “Path Dependency,” the idea that past decisions created a structure in our society that influences future decisions. In the case of this global pandemic, past decisions made by society have had severe repercussions which have worsen as countries continued efforts to control the spread of the disease, and in doing so, make decisions that directly and indirectly harm the environment.
Reduction in Air Pollution
One major positive environmental impact of COVID-19 has been the reduction in air pollution. As many countries implemented widespread lockdowns, climate experts predicted that greenhouse gas emissions could drop to pre-World War II levels. These experts were right, as seen in Europe where government-issued lockdowns led to a reduction of greenhouse gases from decreased automobile use. These reductions were not limited to Europe. In China, the concentration of NO2, which is emitted from the burning of fossil fuels (USEPA, 2016), was reduced by 22.8 μg/m3 (Zambrano-Monserrate et. al 2020), an estimated 10-30% reduction in concentration(Nigam et al., 2021), due to strict traffic restrictions. In addition to contributing to greenhouse gas build up, NO2 is also known to cause acid rain and respiratory diseases in humans (USEPA, 2016). Similar findings were recorded globally, including a 100% reduction in carbon monoxide levels in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Nigam et al., 2021). New York also saw significant changes in air quality, with nearly a 50% decrease in levels of air pollution due to lockdown measures (Henriques, 2020). Many countries implemented travel bans, which also contributed to the reduction in air pollution. In fact, the number of commercial air flights was reduced by 87% during April and May of 2020, which led to cleaner air (Nižetić 2020). Carbon emissions were 17% lower in April 2020 than in 2019, and there was an estimated 4% decrease in carbon emissions for the year overall (Gardiner, 2020; Ford, 2020). The reduction in air pollution is not only beneficial to the environment, but to human health as well. In fact, this reduction can limit the spread of pathogens and infectious diseases, which can be beneficial to everyone’s health (El Zowalaty et. al 2020).
In addition, global fossil fuel consumption decreased during the 2020 calendar year. As of 2019, fossil fuels accounted for approximately 85% of global energy production, 27% belonging to coal specifically. Coal is typically the least efficient fossil fuel and also tends to be the highest in pollution levels. 2020 saw approximately 25% less coal use, which led to an estimated 25% reduction in coal production (Rashedi et al., 2020). Additionally, the decreased consumption of fossil fuels and the following reduction in air pollution decreased global ozone impact by 16%. Ozone can interfere with plant growth, meaning that this reduction carries crop yield benefits and overall global plant health benefits (Rashedi et al., 2020).
Increase of Waste
Despite the positive environmental impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were several adverse consequences. As a direct result of the pandemic, there was a dramatic increase in waste observed in both the medical field and everyday life due to an increasing reliance on single-use items (Somani et al., 2020). During the beak of its outbreak, Wuhan, China’s hospitals produced more than 240 metric tons of biomedical waste daily compared to the normal 40 tons (Saadat et al., 2020). If not properly disposed of, the increase in biomedical waste also directly increases the risk of the disease spreading. The virus can survive for up to 3 days on plastics and stainless steel and 1 day on cardboard (Van-Doremalen et al., 2020), so responsible management of used and hazardous material is essential. For proper disposal of protective medical gear such as gloves, masks, and long-sleeve gowns, the waste should be placed in clearly marked containers or safety boxes. The waste should then be treated on site and safely disposed of (Hossain et al., 2020). As one would expect, this process becomes more difficult when waste production is five times higher than normal. However, the increase in biomedical waste cannot be blamed entirely on the healthcare system. Many citizens also contributed to this issue by using disposable masks and gloves. As a matter of fact, one estimate states that 129 billion face masks and 65 billion gloves would be necessary to protect citizens worldwide every month (Silva et al., 2020). It is believed that face masks and other plastic based PPE materials are a potential source of microplastic fibers being found in the environment (Fadare & Okoffo, 2020). In addition, polypropylene which is commonly used to make N-95 masks, and Tyvek which is used for protective suits, gloves, and face shields, take a significantly long time to decompose and may release toxic elements into the environment (Singh et al., 2020). There is also an increase in plastic waste as businesses and consumers focused on price sensitive and affordable options rather than environmentally conscious choices in preventing the transmission of germs (Ford, 2020). For example, the demand for one-time plastic is projected to increase by 40% in packaging and 17% in other applications such as medical use [citation and timeframe needed]. Many states are also reversing or delaying policies that ban single-use plastic. Despite the cited resources being only tangentially related to COVID-19, this letter has gained extensive sway over local and state policies (Hale & Song, 2020). New York and Maine, for example, are postponing their ban from May 2020 to January 2021 (Silva et al., 2020). Unfortunately, state legislation is not the only thing abandoning eco-friendly plans. Many colleges across the country are increasing single-use plastic in dining halls. The president of Sodexo, a food service company used by many schools across America, believes that sustainability has to be compromised in order to re-open establishments safely (Staff, 2020). Unfortunately, even some ‘eco friendly’ options have limited environmental benefit, since many biodegradable plastics, which have gained popularity in recent years, can only be composted in commercial sites which are not always locally or nationally available (Walker & McKay, 2021).
Increased Use of Chemical Disinfectants
To combat the spread of COVID-19, many cities implemented the widespread use of disinfectants. Oftentimes these disinfectants are filled with many hazardous chemicals. While humans may be able to avoid these harmful disinfectants, urban wildlife cannot. Chlorine-based disinfectants have caused respiratory and digestive issues in birds, mammals, and aquatic animals [citation needed]. In many cases, these issues may result in death. For example, hundreds of animals were found dead in Chongqing, China due to the overuse of disinfectants [citation needed]. Although there are some instructions to follow while using disinfectants in medical facilities or at home, there are no guidelines in place when it comes to using disinfectants on such a wide scale. Until guidelines are established, many urban organisms will continue to suffer, disrupting ecosystems and food chains. These disruptions are detrimental to the urban landscape and may even affect humans negatively in the future (Nabi et al., 2020).
Conclusion
The COVID-19 pandemic brought about numerous social and societal changes which, in turn, brought about subsequent environmental changes. A few of these changes were for the better, such as the reduction in air pollution brought about by lockdowns. However, it is also important to acknowledge the harmful ecological effects of increased use of chemical disinfectants and disposable protective equipment. Prior to the pandemic, the world was facing an environmental crisis, and for all its positive impacts, COVID-19 has not changed this fact. A simple application of STS concepts tells us that this is the result of Path Dependency. The choices made prior to the pandemic directly shaped the environmental impact of COVID-19 as we know it. The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the need for comprehensive climate solutions to address these long-term issues while allowing us to preserve the public health.
References
EL Zowalaty, M. E., Young, S. G., & Jarhult J. D. (2020). Environmental Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic – A lesson for the future. Infect Ecol Epidemiol, 10.(1), 1768023. 10.1080/20008686.2020.1768023
Fadare, O. O., & Okoffo, E. D. (2020, June 16). Covid-19 face masks: A potential source of microplastic fibers in the environment. The Science of the total environment, 737, 140279. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7297173/
Ford, D. (2020, August 17). COVID-19 Has Worsened the Ocean Plastic Pollution Problem. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-19-has-worsened-the-ocean-plastic-pollution-problem/
Gardiner, B. (2020, June 18). Why COVID-19 will end up harming the environment. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/06/why-covid-19-will-end-up-harming-the-environment/
Goldbaum, E. (2020, September 3). NASA Funds Eight New Projects Exploring Connections Between the Environment and COVID-19. NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/esd/2020/new-projects-explore-connections-between-environment-and-covid-19
Hale, R. C., Song, B. (2020). Single-Use Plastics and COVID-19: Scientific Evidence and Environmental Regulations. Environmental Science & Technology, 54 (12), 7034-7036. https://pubs-acs-org.libproxy.clemson.edu/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.0c02269
Henriques, M. (2020, March 27). Will Covid-19 have a lasting impact on the environment? BBC news. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200326-covid-19-the-impact-of-coronavirus-on-the-environment
Hossain, I., Mullick, A. R., Bari, S., & Islam, M. T. (2020). Pandemic COVID-19 and Biomedical Waste Handling: A Review Study. Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research, 8.(5), 497-502. : https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v8i5.88
Jacobo, J. (2020, March 18). Venice Canals are Clear Enough to See Fish as Coronavirus Halts Tourism in the City . ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/International/venice-canals-clear-fish-coronavirus-halts-tourism-city/story?id=69662690.
Jiang Y., Wu, X., & Guan, Y. (2020). Effect of ambient air pollutants and meteorological variables on COVID-19 incidence. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology, 41.(9), 1-1015. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2020.222
Nabi, G., Wang, Y., Hao, Y., Khan, S., Wu, Y., & Li, D. (2020). Massive use of disinfectants against COVID-19 poses potential risks to urban wildlife. Environmental Research, 188, 109916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109916
Nigam, R., Pandya, K., Luis, A. J., Sengupta, R., & Kotha, M. (2021). Positive effects of COVID-19 lockdown on air quality of industrial cities (Ankleshwar and Vapi) of Western India. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1–12. https://doi-org.libproxy.clemson.edu/10.1038/s41598-021-83393-9
Nižetić, S. (2020). Impact of coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic on air transport mobility, energy, and environment: A case study. International Journal of Energy Research, 44(13), 10953–10961. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.5706
Rashedi, A., Khanam, T., & Jonkman, M. (2020). On Reduced Consumption of Fossil Fuels in 2020 and Its Consequences in Global Environment and Exergy Demand. Energies (19961073), 13(22), 6048. https://doi-org.libproxy.clemson.edu/10.3390/en13226048
Saadat, S., Rawtani, D., Hussain, C.M. (2020, August 1) Environmental perspective of COVID-19, Science of The Total Environment, Volume 728, 138870, ISSN 0048-9697, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720323871
Silva, A. L. P., Prata, J. C., Walker, T. R., Duarte, A. C., Ouyang, W., Barcelò, D., & Rocha-Santos, T. (2021). Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations. Chemical Engineering Journal, 405, 126683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126683
Singh, N., Tang, Y., & Ogunseitan, O. A. (2020, June 29). Environmentally sustainable management of used personal protective equipment. Environmental science & technology, 54(14), 8500-8502. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.0c03022#
Somani, M., Srivastava, A., Gummadivalli S.K., Sharma, A. (2020, September)
Indirect implications of COVID-19 towards sustainable environment: An investigation in Indian context, Bioresource Technology Reports, Volume 11, 2020, 100491, ISSN 2589-014X, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589014X20301122
Staff, F. (2020, June 19). What’s the state of sustainability amid COVID-19? Retrieved November 17, 2020, from https://www.foodservicedirector.com/sustainability/whats-state-sustainability-amid-covid-19
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2016). Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Pollution. https://www.epa.gov/no2-pollution/basic-information-about-no2
Van Doremalen, N., Bushmaker, T., Morris, D. H., Holbrook, M. G., Gamble, A., Williamson, B. N., … & Munster, V. J. (2020, March 17). Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-CoV-1. New England journal of medicine, 382(16), 1564-1567. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmc2004973
Volti, R. (2014). Society and Technological Change (7th ed.). Worth Publisher.
Walker, T. R., McKay, D. C. (2021). Comment on “Five Misperceptions Surrounding the Environmental Impacts of Single-Use Plastic”. Environmental Science & Technology, 55 (2), 1339-1340. https://pubs-acs-org.libproxy.clemson.edu/doi/full/10.1021/acs.est.0c07842
Zambrano-Monserrate, M. A., Ruano, M. A., & Sanchez-Alcalde L. (2020). Indirect Effects of COVID-19 on the Environment. Science of The Total Environment, 728.(138813). https://doi-org.libproxy.clemson.edu/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138813
Images
Image 1:
Image 2: “COVID-19” by UNICEF Ethiopia is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0