Report finds ‘Dramatic’ plunge in London air pollution since 2016

From The Guardian 3rd October 2020, written by Damian Carrington

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/03/dramatic-plunge-in-london-air-pollution-since-2016-report-finds

Air pollution in London has plunged since Sadiq Khan became mayor, with a 94% reduction in the number of people living in areas with illegal levels of nitrogen dioxide. The number of schools in such areas has fallen by 97%, from 455 in 2016 to 14 in 2019.

Experts described the reductions as dramatic and said they showed the air pollution crisis was not intractable. More than 9,000 people in the capital were dying early each year due to dirty air in 2015.

The report from the mayor of London, reviewed by scientists, shows that more than 2 million people in the capital lived with polluted air in 2016, but this fell to 119,000 in 2019. The report, which does not include the further falls in pollution seen after the Covid-19 lockdown began in March, shows levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) by roads in central London fell by 44% between early 2017 and early 2020.

The pollution cuts have been achieved by charges that have deterred dirty vehicles from entering the city centre and have driven up the use of cleaner vehicles. Putting low-emission buses on the dirtiest routes, ending the licensing of new diesel taxis and extending the amount of protected space for cycling have also contributed.

However, Khan said there was still a long way to go, particularly as 99% of London had particle pollution levels above the World Health Organization’s recommended limits, which are much tighter than the UK limit.

Almost a quarter of roads in inner London – between the north and south circular roads – still exceed the legal limit for (NO₂₎, which is mostly produced by diesels. But the ultralow emission zone (Ulez), in which charges are levied for polluting vehicles, is to be expanded to cover all of inner London from October 2021.

Air pollution is the biggest environmental risk to health, according to the WHO, and it may be damaging every organ in the body, a comprehensive global review concluded in 2019. Most urban areas in the UK have had illegal levels of NO₂ since 2010 and the government has repeatedly been defeated in the high court over the adequacy of its plans.

There is also growing evidence that dirty air worsens infection and death rates from coronavirus, and that people from minority ethnic communities fare the worst. Those people are more likely to live in areas with high air pollution.

“Today’s report confirms the transformative impact that my policies have had on our toxic air crisis,” said Khan, who was elected in May 2016. “I’m pleased that Londoners are breathing cleaner air and that we’re saving the NHS billions of pounds.”

“However, air pollution remains a major public health challenge and it’s time for the government to step up,. We can’t sleepwalk from the health crisis of Covid back into complacency over the major impact of toxic air on everyone’s health.”

He said the stricter WHO limits should be included in the forthcoming environment bill as a legally binding target for 2030.

Boris Johnson was mayor of London from 2008 to 2016 and a study by King’s College London looking at the rate of improvement in NO₂ levels during that time found it would have taken 193 years to reach legal compliance. Khan said the city was now on track to meet legal levels everywhere by 2025.

“Breathing bad air has had an intolerable impact on Londoners’ health for far too long [but], starting around 2016, London’s air pollution underwent a dramatic change,” said Dr Gary Fuller, an air pollution expert at Imperial College London.

“The changes in NO2 in central London and along main bus routes were some of the fastest that we’ve ever measured” in 30 years of monitoring, he said. “These successes show that our city’s air pollution is not an intractable problem.”

Prof Stephen Holgate, a special adviser on air quality to the Royal College of Physicians, said: “Air pollution is a scourge on society, especially harming the young and old. What the mayor of London has shown in his first term is that major reductions in toxic pollutants can be achieved and that businesses and the public are willing to make the necessary changes to deliver this.” He said the pollution cuts would have enormous benefits for Londoners.

The report shows there are 44,000 fewer dirty vehicles being driven in central London every day compared with 2017, when charges for polluting vehicles were confirmed. “I am looking forward to seeing the Ulez cover a far greater area with the knowledge that so many more people will benefit,” Holgate said.

Khan has been criticised for backing a new four-lane road tunnel under the Thames at Silvertown. Victoria Rance, of the Stop the Silvertown Tunnel Coalition, said using the funding for public transport, cycling and walking offers far better environmental outcomes. In June a report from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies said the tunnel was incompatible with the Greater London Authority’s aim to become carbon neutral by 2030.

A spokeswoman for the mayor said: “The combination of introducing tolls on both the Blackwall tunnel and at Silvertown – and the extension of the Ulez from 2021 so that Silvertown will be within the area covered – will play a crucial role in tackling congestion and improving air quality.”

However, Khan said there was still a long way to go, particularly as 99% of London had particle pollution levels above the World Health Organization’s recommended limits, which are much tighter than the UK limit.

Almost a quarter of roads in inner London – between the north and south circular roads – still exceed the legal limit for (NO₂₎, which is mostly produced by diesels. But the ultralow emission zone (Ulez), in which charges are levied for polluting vehicles, is to be expanded to cover all of inner London from October 2021.

Air pollution is the biggest environmental risk to health, according to the WHO, and it may be damaging every organ in the body, a comprehensive global review concluded in 2019. Most urban areas in the UK have had illegal levels of NO₂ since 2010 and the government has repeatedly been defeated in the high court over the adequacy of its plans.

There is also growing evidence that dirty air worsens infection and death rates from coronavirus, and that people from minority ethnic communities fare the worst. Those people are more likely to live in areas with high air pollution.

“Today’s report confirms the transformative impact that my policies have had on our toxic air crisis,” said Khan, who was elected in May 2016. “I’m pleased that Londoners are breathing cleaner air and that we’re saving the NHS billions of pounds.”

“However, air pollution remains a major public health challenge and it’s time for the government to step up,. We can’t sleepwalk from the health crisis of Covid back into complacency over the major impact of toxic air on everyone’s health.”

He said the stricter WHO limits should be included in the forthcoming environment bill as a legally binding target for 2030.

Boris Johnson was mayor of London from 2008 to 2016 and a study by King’s College London looking at the rate of improvement in NO₂ levels during that time found it would have taken 193 years to reach legal compliance. Khan said the city was now on track to meet legal levels everywhere by 2025.

“Breathing bad air has had an intolerable impact on Londoners’ health for far too long [but], starting around 2016, London’s air pollution underwent a dramatic change,” said Dr Gary Fuller, an air pollution expert at Imperial College London.

“The changes in NO2 in central London and along main bus routes were some of the fastest that we’ve ever measured” in 30 years of monitoring, he said. “These successes show that our city’s air pollution is not an intractable problem.”

Prof Stephen Holgate, a special adviser on air quality to the Royal College of Physicians, said: “Air pollution is a scourge on society, especially harming the young and old. What the mayor of London has shown in his first term is that major reductions in toxic pollutants can be achieved and that businesses and the public are willing to make the necessary changes to deliver this.” He said the pollution cuts would have enormous benefits for Londoners.

The report shows there are 44,000 fewer dirty vehicles being driven in central London every day compared with 2017, when charges for polluting vehicles were confirmed. “I am looking forward to seeing the Ulez cover a far greater area with the knowledge that so many more people will benefit,” Holgate said.

By 2021 the London ultra-low emission zone will extend to the North Circular and South Circular roads.

______________________________________________________________________________

More innovation needed to meet net zero carbon goals for UK livestock

Current climate mitigation measures can only deliver one fifth of proposed reductions, according to new report

• Report from Rothampstead Research:
• https://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/news/more-innovation-needed-meet-net-zero-carbon-goals-uk-livestock

A new report assessing the carbon intensity of all UK livestock production systems has identified that currently available technologies cannot deliver the industry’s 2050 carbon emissions reduction goal.

Commissioned by CIEL (Centre for Innovation Excellence in Livestock) , and written by environmental, climate and livestock scientists from eight renowned UK research institutions, including Rothamsted Research, the Net Zero Carbon & UK Livestock Report will be used to inform the debate about climate change and the role livestock can play to reduce emissions that contribute to global warming.

The report drew upon data collected by Rothamsted’s North Wyke Farm Platform. This unique “Farm Lab” is the most instrumented livestock site in the UK and is providing new insights into the challenges farmers will face in meeting climate change targets.

Rothamsted’s Dr Graham McAuliffe, one of the report’s lead authors said, “Our detailed studies on grazing beef systems at Rothamsted, in addition to research on other animal species carried out by our consortium partners, have shown that we need to consider all aspects of livestock farming to be able to make informed judgements on how the sector can become better-equipped in terms of reducing greenhouse gas losses. That means looking at nutrient cycles from soil to slurry, different sward mixes, the welfare and health of animals, as well as livestock efficiency metrics such as feed conversion ratios, growth rates and milk yields. The good news is that as a result of our collective ongoing research, we are able to pinpoint where interventions in husbandry, technology and land management can be most effective in delivering practical climate solutions.”

The need for innovation

The report reviews current knowledge and identifies areas where there are gaps in our ability to measure or achieve the target reductions in emissions set for UK agriculture. It also aims to provide approximate benchmarks for the carbon footprint of farmed livestock, hotspots where the greatest emissions occur and where there are opportunities to focus future efforts to reduce emissions, all based on best available data.

Lead scientist, Professor Bob Rees, from Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC), stressed the need for new innovations to further reduce emissions beyond the levels that currently known mitigation strategies will deliver.

“Even if all known methods for mitigation of carbon emissions were taken up rapidly, the industry could only deliver 19% of the aspirational carbon reduction target by 2035.

“Livestock farming is an integral part of UK agriculture, our landscape and food systems, but it’s a complex system involving flows of carbon, nitrogen, water and atmospheric gases.

“In order to help balance the reduction in emissions with the production of high-quality nutritious food, a combination of strategies is needed. These must consider all dimensions of sustainable agriculture including carbon efficiency, soil health, animal health and welfare, and much more.

“And for that we need more innovation, collaboration and widespread adoption,” he said.

Ambition is not enough

Dr Elizabeth Magowan, from the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), coordinated the report, and says the intention is for it to be used as a baseline to drive change throughout the livestock supply chain.

“This report is a call to action. While the industry is making steps in the right direction, the ambition to achieve the UK’s target is huge and known technologies and practices can only get us part of the way. A combination of greater investment, improved carbon accounting and education resulting in adoption, are required for the UK livestock industry to achieve its net zero carbon goal within the next 30 years.”

__________________________________________________

£50m Earthshot Prize

https://earthshotprize.org

Prince William, the Duke of Cambridge, has launched a £50 million global environmental prize to help convert climate change doom-mongering into the optimism he believes can save the planet.

Prince William, Duke of Cambridge –

The Duke, whose Earthshot Prize will award one million pounds to five winning innovators each year from now until 2030, said the public needs a “bit of hope, a bit of positivity” that the deep challenges facing the environment can be solved.

Saying he hopes to harness optimism alongside the urgent need to make progress in a “crucial decade” for the planet, he has announced details of “the most prestigious environmental prize in history”, likened to a green Nobel Prize.

The Duke and his team have spent two years consulting leading experts in the field, including those at the Nobel Prize, to develop the format of the award, described as the only truly global prize of its kind.

The Duke said,

“I felt very much that there’s a lot of people wanting to do many good things for the environment and what they need is a bit of a catalyst, a bit of hope, a bit of positivity that we can actually fix what’s being presented.

“And I think that urgency with optimism really creates action.

“And so The Earthshot Prize is really about harnessing that optimism and that urgency to find solutions to some of the world’s greatest environmental problems.

“We believe that this decade is one of the most crucial decades for the environment and by 2030 we really hope to have made huge strides in fixing some of the biggest problems the Earth faces.”

Jason Knauf, CEO of the Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, added that the “sheer scale of the urgent situation”, at a time when people are enduring enough immediate problems of their own, had run the risk of making challenges feel so insurmountable the public “feel little choice to look the other way”.

But “the Duke wanted to turn the pessimism into the optimism and hope that will lead to real action,” he said.

From now, a panel of nominators will seek out the best new ideas, technologies, policies or solutions across five categories: ‘Protect and restore nature’, ‘Clean our air’, ‘Revive our oceans’, ‘Build a waste-free world’, and ‘Fix our climate’.

Each has £1 million in prize money per year which will support environmental and conservation projects agreed with the winners, who could be individuals, a group of scientists or activists, businesses, governments and even a city or country.

The Earthshot Prize takes its inspiration from the Apollo moon landings, nicknamed Moonshot, which helped advance mankind’s technological achievements.

The project is expected to be seen as the duke’s career-defining project, like his father’s Prince’s Trust or grandfather’s Duke of Edinburgh Award scheme, and reflects his growing confidence and aim to play a global leadership role on the issue.

It will see him work with the Prince of Wales, a long-term environmental campaigner, and Sir David Attenborough, with organisations from Greenpeace to the UN forming a global alliance to share its message .

“The plan is to really galvanise and bring together the best minds, the best possible solutions, to fixing and tackling some of the world’s greatest environmental challenges,” said the Duke.

“We’ve got to harness our ingenuity and our ability to invent. The next ten years are a critical decade for change.

“Time is of the essence, which is why we believe that this very ambitious global prize is the only way forward.”

The £50 million prize fund will be provided by the project’s global alliance founding partners, including the Paul G Allen Family Foundation, created by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, and the Jack Ma Foundation, the charitable body of the founder of the Chinese online retail giant Alibaba.

Key contributors also include the Aga Khan Development Network, Bloomberg Philanthropies, DP World in partnership with Dubai EXPO 2020, and US internet entrepreneur Marc and Lynne Benioff.

Every year an Ipsos Mori poll will be conducted to measure whether the public feel more optimistic about humanity’s ability to solve the big issues.  

Nominations for the prize open on November 1 with an annual global awards ceremony to be held in a different city each year, starting with London in autumn 2021.

Association of Clinical Psychologists UK statement on the need for action to address the climate crisis

ACP-UK recognises the urgency of the climate and ecological crises and the need for action. As scientist-practitioners we actively seek reliable evidence to inform our positions and we recognise that environmental scientists have repeatedly warned us that the science is clear: the crises are real, human-made and pose a clear existential risk to the survival of our species and countless others on the planet.[1], [2]

It is normal to feel powerless and hopeless given the facts of the climate emergency and stark reality of the crises.  Our profession values the importance of acknowledging emotions; but still many of us will struggle to engage with the magnitude of what is happening to our world because doing so necessarily requires us to contemplate all that we have lost and stand to lose in the years to come. Climate change is our shared trauma.

As a profession we are well trained to reflect on our reality and to support others to engage with the resulting distress in containing ways. The profession has also come a long way towards recognising the importance of social action on issues such as racism and inequality[3], [4]. We believe that collective action is good for personal wellbeing, and also has far greater impetus for political change than individual actions. And so we must connect with the despair and work through our denial, supporting others to do so too, including those with power, because we must act. The window of opportunity has not yet closed, but it soon will; and we need action for there to be hope.

“We will see acute trauma on a global scale, in response to extreme weather events, forced migration and conflict. This would be in addition to the chronic trauma associated with long-term risks, such as the threat of danger to life. For children growing up in a landscape of ever-increasing danger and parental stress, we risk developmental trauma becoming a ‘normal’ part of childhood experience.”

 – Practitioner psychologists and the trauma of climate change. An open letter demanding immediate and effective action

Last year, ACP-UK endorsed an open letter[5] that was signed by over 1000 psychologists. The letter considered some of the psychological impacts of the environmental emergencies, such as the effects of traumatic events, forced migration, conflict, and the likely increase in prevalence of developmental trauma that would follow from the predicted collapse of society.[6] In solidarity with other professional groups,[7],[8] the letter supported peaceful protest as ‘the reasonable choice for responsible individuals’ and called for governments and media to tell the truth about the environmental emergencies and to take action to achieve carbon neutrality within the timeframe specified by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).[9]

In September, MPs from across the political spectrum condemned actions by the environmental action group Extinction Rebellion for blockading delivery of a Murdoch owned newspaper. The Home Secretary subsequently referred to Extinction Rebellion activists as ‘criminals’, responsible for a ‘shameful attack on our way of life, our economy and the livelihoods of the hard-working majority’.[10] Although ACP-UK recognises that the views of its members on the action of blockading newspapers will be diverse, the current statement is offered to support the underlying intentions of non-violent environmental activists throughout the globe; this includes clinical psychologists who have already been arrested following peaceful actions[11] to highlight the urgency with which the climate and ecological crises need to be responded to.

ACP-UK has thus produced this position statement with four main points:

1. Peaceful protest is a cornerstone to participation and progress in democratic society. To condemn non-violent climate action would be to be complicit in environmental harm.
2. ACP-UK believes that clinical psychologists should consider participation in peaceful protest to highlight the urgency of the crises as part of their professional obligations.
3. ACP-UK pledges to engage in dialogue with the HCPC and unions to call for timely and sensitive responses to those convicted for non-violent actions of moral protest, where these are undertaken away from the workplace.
4. ACP-UK publicly rejects the notion asserted by the Home Secretary that non-violent environmental protesters represent a ‘threat to democracy.’[10] As clinical psychologists, we recognise the power language has to dangerously vilify individuals and groups, whilst drawing attention away from the failings of global governments to act.

“All health professionals have a duty and obligation to engage in all kinds of non-violent social protest to address the climate emergency”

– Richard Horton, Editor of the Lancet[12]

It is not just our identities as clinical psychologists that should compel us to act to address the climate emergency, but also our very existence as moral human beings: The climate and ecological crises are deeply intertwined with issues of racism, inequity, and social justice, with those suffering most being those least responsible for the harm to the planet.[13],[14],[15]

“Once we take even the smallest step, we start to recover our sense of effectiveness and power, and our spirits lift: Once we start to act, hope is everywhere”

– Greta Thunberg

“Something that gives me a lot of hope is seeing so many different people fighting for this common issue and realizing that I am not alone”

– Jurwaria Jama

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QdWn7PCDqNUQvzmPaJPMEYqsXKAVcuE0MPxcJVdaKjw/edit#

[2] https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

[3] https://acpuk.org.uk/acp-uk_statement_on_trainers_conference/

[4] https://acpuk.org.uk/rapid_response_george_floyd_murder/

[5] https://acpuk.org.uk/climate_change/

[6] https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdU6L3NM12ikT-34ZPlp1yv-6nHcM5aqhmid6nK-M3plZGu3A/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1

[7] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/27/doctors-call-for-nonviolent-direct-action-over-climate-crisis

[8] https://www.lawyersforxr.com/

[9] https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

[10] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/08/extinction-rebellion-criminals-threaten-uks-way-of-life-says-priti-patel

[11] https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/i-took-my-turn-friday-be-arrested

[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEVGNeneYug

[13] https://www.nature.com/articles/srep20281

[14] https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/climate-justice/

[15] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2020/sep/22/climate-change-action-bangladesh-paris-agreement

Dr Gareth Morgan, ACP-UK Member
Dr Tori Snell, Joint Director for England
Dr James Randall, Joint Early Careers Director

October, 2020

ACP-UK Statement on the Need for Action to Address the Climate Crisis

Global Ocean Alliance: 30 countries are now calling for greater ocean protection

Published 3 October 2020 From: Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs and The Rt Hon Lord Zac Goldsmith

30 countries have now joined the Global Ocean Alliance championing an international commitment for a minimum 30% of the global ocean to be protected through Marine Protected Areas by 2030.

At the 75th session of the UN General Assembly, the UK again reiterated its commitment to protecting the environment and halting biodiversity loss.

The UK’s global leadership on ocean protection has seen it on track to establish a ‘Blue Belt’ of marine protected areas spanning 4 million square kilometres across its Overseas Territories and a £500 million Blue Planet Fund, to be launched next year, that will protect marine resources from key human-generated impacts, including climate change, plastic pollution, overfishing and habitat loss.

The UK is celebrating 30 countries joining the Global Ocean Alliance in support of the UK-led 30 by 30 initiative, an international commitment to protect at least 30% of the global ocean in Marine Protected Areas by 2030, through the UN Convention on Biodiversity in 2021.

The Global Ocean Alliance has grown from 10 to 30 members in just 12 months, and the countries which alongside the UK have committed to trebling existing targets are: Belize, Belgium, Cabo Verde, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Ecuador, Finland, Fiji, Gabon, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, Italy, Kenya, Luxembourg, Maldives, Monaco, Nigeria, Palau, Portugal, Seychelles, Senegal, St Kitts, Sweden, Spain, United Arab Emirates and Vanuatu.

International Marine Minister, Zac Goldsmith, said:

I thank and commend the 30 countries that have now joined the Global Ocean Alliance. Our shared ocean is facing unprecedented pressures, and together we are making a powerful case for increased protection.

I encourage other nations to join us in this campaign. In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, we have an opportunity to make sustainability and resilience the lens through which we map our respective recoveries, and that is what we should commit ourselves to doing.

Without a healthy ocean there would be no life as we know it. The ocean generates 50% of Earth’s oxygen and it is our planet’s climate regulator, absorbing 93% of the additional global heat as well as 25% of human-driven CO2 emissions.

With 12 million tonnes of plastics entering the ocean every year, the UK Government is also working to tackle the scourge of plastic waste globally and through the Commonwealth Clean Ocean Alliance and the Commonwealth Litter Programme, which are driving forward ambitious action to reduce plastic pollution in the ocean in support of meeting Sustainable Development Goal 14: ‘Life Below Water’.

The UK is also taking action to protect the ocean with 36% of UK waters protected in a network of marine protected sites; a ban on plastic straws, stirrers, and cotton buds which has come into force in England this week; a pioneering ban on microbeads in rinse-off personal care products; and the 5p single use bag charge extended to all retailers from April 2021 with the charge increasing to 10p – taking over 15 billion plastic bags out of circulation.

______________________________________________________________________________

Covid-19, population profiles and climate change

As we face 1 million Covid-19 deaths, can some climate change benefits come out of the pandemic?

In a previous posting, I discussed some of the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that occurred during lockdown and how these were very temporary.  In this post, I want to look at population statistics and how these might be influenced by coronavirus deaths.

We have known for many years that human population growth has been in exponential territory for many years and is rapidly approaching 8 billion worldwide, as shown in the graph below, which shows the world population increasing ever since the industrial revolution began.  

Many people have written at length about population growth; for example, the eugenicists love to speculate on how we might improve the genetic make-up of the entire human population, usually by ethnic cleansing. I believe this to be a distraction from the real issues associated with population growth.

However, human population growth does need to be addressed. The more people that live on the earth, the more crowded the planet becomes and the less food there is for everyone.  With increases in consumerism, fuelled by big business and rampant advertising, there is also more waste and fewer places to dispose of it safely, so that we are filling oceans with junk, affecting marine life, as well as contaminating the countryside with land-fill sites. Over-crowding is also causing increases in migrants, seeking a better life elsewhere, where they think food and jobs will be more available. Over-crowding also means that humans are encroaching on the habitats of the creatures we share this planet with, leading to their extinction and possibly also, the release of killer viruses like Covid-19, as we come into closer territorial contact with wildlife.

The Chinese addressed their high population increases in recent years, by limiting each family to the birth of one child. However, this policy created other problems, such as an age imbalance in the country and a shrinking work force. So it was abandoned but the birth rate there has continued to decline (see the yellow line in the graph below).

The relationship between human population size and climate change is discussed in chapters 5 and 9 of my book, where I include population growth as one of 10 interrelated factors which are working together to exacerbate climate change and the consequent destruction of all life on the planet.

So, if there are too many people already living on this planet, should we not embrace a reduction in numbers caused by deaths from the coronavirus, however tragic that might be for the families and communities who have lost their loved ones? The saddening fact is that the loss of one million people to the virus, is not enough to make a significant impact on the overall numbers of humans on the planet.  The tragic loss of 20 million people during World War I had little impact on the overall population number, which soon continued on its relentless upward trend.

So, the reality is that 1 million Covid-19 deaths, will have little impact on human numbers, unless of course the pandemic cannot be controlled and the coronavirus continues to wipe out huge numbers of people worldwide. Statisticians are already predicting that there will be 2 million deaths before a vaccine becomes available.

In a related way, the lockdown introduced by many countries to control the virus, did, for a short period, reduce greenhouse gas emissions in industrial areas, but these too have continued on their upward trend, as lockdown is eased.  As we rebuild the economy, there needs to be a determined effort to stop using fossil fuels, alongside properly thought-out strategies to reduce the other factors which work together to exacerbate climate change, shown in the graphic above.

One of the things that the pandemic is demonstrating is the Darwinian principle of “Survival of the Fittest”, for it is the old and frail and those with underlying health conditions, that are most likely to succumb to the virus. Some people are advocating that we allow “herd immunity” to develop, even though there is evidence that people who contract the virus do not develop immunity and may catch it again later. The herd immunity idea is a corollary to the “survival of the fittest” principle, though relying on it shows little compassion for those in society who are not fit and who succumb to the virus.

So, there are a number of issues here and questions that need to be answered. Over the last century, there have been huge breakthroughs in medical care, surgical and intensive care practices and the production of antibiotics and other life-saving drugs.  These have allowed us to keep people alive for longer, with more and more people living into their 90s and 100s, whatever their quality of life may be. This has all contributed to the surging population numbers. And so, we have created a society in which the age balance has changed and the financial burden of caring for the frail elderly has become phenomenal. Is Covid-19 bringing that balance back to what it was in the last century? Should we be keeping people alive in care homes and hospitals beyond their normal life expectancy, especially if dementia has taken hold and they lose their dignity and no longer know who they are or even where they are? No, I am not supporting the “right to die” or “assisted dying” movements – the arguments for this are very different and the movement already has its vocal advocates.

But, in a way, the coronavirus has created an irony where, to a large extent, children and the youngest members of society are hardly affected by it and the old are disproportionately targeted. So, gradually it is moving the age profile downwards to a younger society. There is evidence that younger people are very aware of climate issues, as the “Fridays for the Future” movement takes off across the globe. So, one good thing may have come out of this terrible pandemic – that the ardent young will be able to bring about the changes needed to address climate change and the sustenance of all life on this planet.

Fridays for the Future demonstration

______________________________________________________________________________