Why isn’t Climate Change Taken as Seriously as a Global Pandemic?

Written By Guest User

We are in the midst of a “double crisis,” as termed by environmental activists. No matter where we are in the world, every single one of us is dealing with the consequences. On the one hand, there is the climate crisis that has been an ongoing issue for a very long time, and on the other hand, there is COVID-19; a global pandemic that ended up killing millions of people in just over one year. Both are ongoing as of the time of writing this piece.

If you turn on your TV, or go on Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube, you will come across countless videos and posts about the pandemic, its effects, how to protect yourself from it, as well as governmental plans to lower rates of infection. It is, without a doubt, a devastating issue that must be addressed inventively and consistently; even if it means creating strategies, such as lock downs, that have the potential of causing permanent harm to the economy.

Climate change, on the other hand, is a different story. We all know how serious of a crisis it is, and it is a topic that is discussed frequently in the media and by the government. However, action taken to improve it is not quick nor consistent. According to a senior economist at the Inter-American Development Bank’s Climate Change division: “governments are taking urgent action to ease the pain of the COVID-19 pandemic with substantial fiscal and liquidity support packages, far less effort has been extended to make economies resilient to climate change and de-carbonize energy, transport, and agricultural sectors.”

Governments are aware that if nothing is done to curb climate change, our hotter planet will face catastrophic impacts, from lower agricultural yields, to mass extinctions and increased rates of disease. If climate change is that big of an issue, then why isn’t it taken as seriously as the COVID-19 pandemic?

 
unsplash-image-rnr8D3FNUNY.jpg
 

THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ARE SLOW IN COMPARISON TO THE EFFECTS OF THE PANDEMIC

The effects of infectious diseases are tangible and easily-grasped. We hear of people getting sick and dying, and when we’re sick, we become limited in our activities due to the disease’s bodily side-effects and we feel forced to stay away from others to avoid spreading it. Not only that, the economy is taking a hit; as businesses are forced to shut down. It is affecting us directly and personally, and so, rational action is taken to contain the disease and minimize rates of contraction. In contrast, the tangible changes of climate change are much slower to unfold and easier to miss, and their dangers seem less personal. It is easy to say: “I didn’t cause this,” or “it’s not going to affect me or my area directly,” unlike what one says when they or someone they know contracts an infectious or deadly disease. It takes years for the Earth’s temperature to change, however, the consequences of rapidly changing from one biome type to another and decimation of ecosystems will affect human communities, global economies, and landscapes within the next 100 years. Because of this slow, accustomed process, we adapt to those changes without easily noticing them, and don’t feel the need to act as quickly as opposed to when human lives are suffering en masse.

 
unsplash-image-loa7A85vsBI.jpg
 

THE PATH TO SOLVING THE CLIMATE CRISIS IS WAY MORE COMPLICATED AND NON-LINEAR

The increasing growth in global populations, using economic prosperity as a primary guiding ideology, and the use of inefficient and damaging energy sources are all different factors that contribute to the rise in carbon emissions and the worsening of the climate crisis. Each of these factors is its own problem with its own solution. However, the compounding effect certainly complicates matters. This forces us to look in different directions for different ways to tackle each contributing factor. Solving climate change is and will remain complex as no factor is isolated. In the midst of addressing causes, global, national, and local governments and organizations must account for the needs of billions of people and the reality that society runs mostly on fossil fuels. This takes a lot of time and effort, but it is not impossible. A global pandemic, on the other hand, has a clearer, more linear path to resolution. Lockdowns, curfews, and mandates to limit access to certain places and people are concrete tactics. The development of vaccinations and treatments in a global race to subside the pandemic offers pragmatic solutions that the individual can partake in and feel like they are contributing to the solution. Small scale satisfaction goes further for morale when facing the macroscopic issues of climate change and global pandemics. Unfortunately, its much more feasible to achieve this for a pandemic with immediate consequences.

 

IS CLIMATE CHANGE TOO EXPENSIVE TO FIX?

According to an article by MIT Technology Review, avoiding catastrophic climate change by stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions is possible and can be done at a relatively low cost. Unfortunately, we’ve been delaying the overall switch to sustainable energy sources and the abandonment of fossil fuels for quite some time, and because of that, it is much harder to stabilize emissions, and is far more expensive. In 2012, the IEA estimate for the cost of switching to low-carbon energy was only $36 trillion - a staggering $8 trillion less than 2014! These are only the financial costs, without mention of the time and effort it will take to reduce emissions to acceptable rates. Some sources state that the damage has been done, and there is nothing we can do to reverse the effects, but only to maintain them, making sure not to make them worse.

To solve a global pandemic, like COVID-19, projected expenses are also very high. It’s cost not only trillions of dollars, but also the health of the economy, people’s jobs and mental health. Despite this though, we’ve reacted immediately and developed policies and vaccines to defeat it and get life back to a state of normalcy. Compared to solving climate change, it is much easier, requires less effort, and is a short-term issue, with lots of light at the end of the tunnel.

 
 
 

WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE US?

Bill Gates says that if we do not take immediate action towards solving climate change, our entire ecosystems will die off and there will be parts of the Earth that will become uninhabitable. He argues that the actual economic and death toll from climate change will be much greater than what we’ve experienced with the current pandemic. Maybe if the media covers the climate crisis the same way it covers infectious diseases, we will be more motivated to take immediate action. The effects of climate change and every other problem that comes with it should be highlighted and emphasized by governments and the media. Laws and policies should be set in order to force people and businesses to adapt to practices that are better for the environment. We should strive to fix the problem together, or it will get much harder to do so in the future.

 

References 

Guest User
Previous

The Many Forms of Sustainable Fashion
Next

Net-Zero Energy Homes: Could They be the Homes of the Future?