Coronavirus Shows Humanity That It’s Entirely Possible to Avert Climate Disaster

Tiny terror: Coronavirus CG illustration (Image credit: Yuri Samoilo/Flickr)

The global lockdown has given Mother Nature a breath of fresh air.

By Reynard Loki, Independent Media Institute

Amidst all the terrible news about the spreading coronavirus epidemic, a scintillating fact has emerged that can energize the environmental movement: The global slowdown in human activity has given Mother Nature some time to take a much-needed breath of fresh air. Between travel restrictions, reductions in public transport and overall economic activity that generates emissions—such as coal burning, refining oil and producing steel—the climate is getting the kind of rest from destructive human activity it hasn’t gotten since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution.

The lockdown in China (the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases), for example, has cut the nation’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 100 million metric tons in just two weeks, according to an analysis by Carbon Brief, a UK-based climate policy watchdog. That’s down a quarter from the same two-week period in 2019. Observations made by NASA and European Space Agency pollution monitoring satellites appear to confirm the analysis. They show a sudden and steep decrease in nitrogen dioxide (NO2)—an air pollutant emitted by power plants, factories and vehicles—over China during mid-February when the nation entered a quarantine.

“This is the first time I have seen such a dramatic drop-off over such a wide area for a specific event,” said Fei Liu, an air quality researcher at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.

Back to nature: The maps above show nitrogen dioxide values across China from January 1-20, 2020 (before the quarantine), and February 10-25 (during the quarantine). (Image credit: European Space Agency via NASA)

While these are significant and sudden reductions and were achieved over a remarkably brief period of time, they are temporary. The long-term effects on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and other atmospheric pollutants are unclear. On one hand, Chinese authorities may try to boost production after the pandemic is over in an attempt to make up for the lost time. On the other hand, the economic impact of the pandemic may suppress the global demand for Chinese goods for months or even years to come.

“Any sustained impact on fossil-fuel use would come from reduced demand, which initial indicators suggest could have a major impact. For example, February car sales are forecast to fall by 30 percent below last year’s already depressed levels,” writes Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Finland-based Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air. “If consumer demand is reduced—for example, due to unpaid wages during the crisis cascading through the rest of the economy—then industrial output and fossil-fuel use might not recover, even though capacity is available to do so.”

Still, the findings offer climate activists a tantalizing fact: It is technically feasible to achieve big reductions in pollutants that are fueling the climate crisis. All that’s required is a break in economic production and human activity. But while a global pandemic can instigate a break in human activity, the climate crisis hasn’t been able to make a dent in it. Why is that?

For one thing, the coronavirus pandemic has a clear killer: a microorganism. And the global death toll is rising by the hour as the virus jumps from person to person. The climate crisis, on the other hand, doesn’t have a distinct killer. There have been countless deaths tied to all the human activity that is the cause of the climate crisis: heat waves, hurricanes, droughts, and yes, even diseases, like Lyme disease, the normal range of which has spread due to warming climates. And, course, there is the invisible killer that’s not a microorganism: air pollution, which is caused by a number of toxic chemicals, some of which are greenhouse gases that are heating up the planet. But the fatalities associated with climate impacts are many steps removed from the actual causes, which are simply a matter of degree: too many cars and trucks on the roads, too many planes in the sky, too many bulldozers clearing rainforests, too many factories, air conditioners, large-screen televisions, mansions. Ultimately, too many people consuming too many things.

Let’s say COVID-19, the disease caused by coronavirus, ends up killing seven million people this year. That figure would probably shock most people. But that is the same number of people who die from air pollution—every single year. As Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the World Health Organization, writes, “Black carbon, methane, and nitrogen oxides are powerful drivers of global warming, and, along with other air pollutants such as carbon monoxide and ozone, they are responsible for over seven million deaths each year, about one in eight worldwide.”

And that’s just air pollution. Heat exposure, coastal flooding and diseases like malaria and dengue—all increased by climate change—could cause approximately 250,000 deaths annually between 2030 and 2050, according to the World Health Organization. A study led by Oxford University forecast that by 2050, climate-related reductions in food availability (primarily fruits and vegetables) will cause an additional 529,000 adult deaths worldwide.

Sadly, no one knows these statistics, because—tragically for all the people who might be saved, and for the planet—the mainstream news media barely covers the climate. The figures are shocking. Major network news programs devoted barely four hours to the climate crisis over the entirety of 2019, according to a recent study by Media Matters. That amounts to a paltry 0.7 percent of overall evening broadcasts and the Sunday morning news shows.

Clearly, we cannot rely on the media. And we can’t rely on world leaders, either. According to a recent report by a panel of world-class scientists, “The Truth Behind the Paris Agreement Climate Pledges,” the majority of the carbon emission reduction pledges for 2030 that 184 countries made under the international accord aren’t nearly enough to prevent global warming from exceeding 2° Celsius above pre-industrial levels, which is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. The authors further note that some nations won’t even meet their pledges, and some of the biggest polluters will even increase their emissions.

It’s up to you and me, and every single individual who wants a healthy planet for ourselves, our children and future generations. And environmental activists should use this moment in history to help people understand that we can, we should and we must make changes to our behavior, our lifestyles, and our consumption habits.

Across the globe, the coronavirus pandemic has changed daily human life in ways small (like the length of time we wash our hands) and big (like how we work and play). It also demonstrates one salient fact: Our everyday activities impact so many things—not just our own personal health, but the health of our local communities and even the entire planet. Coronavirus is a killer, but it can also be a teacher. Let’s learn all of its lessons.

This article was produced by Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute.

Reynard Loki is a senior writing fellow and the editor and chief correspondent for Earth | Food | Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He previously served as the environment, food and animal rights editor at AlterNet and as a reporter for Justmeans/3BL Media covering sustainability and corporate social responsibility. He was named one of FilterBuy’s “Top 50 Health & Environmental Journalists to Follow in 2016.” His work has been published by Truthout, Salon, BillMoyers.com, EcoWatch and Truthdig, among others.

Earth | Food | Life (EFL) explores the critical and often interconnected issues facing the climate/environment, food/agriculture and nature/animal rights, and champions action; specifically, how responsible citizens, voters and consumers can help put society on an ethical path of sustainability that respects the rights of all species who call this planet home. EFL emphasizes the idea that everything is connected, so every decision matters.

Click here to support the work of EFL and the Independent Media Institute.

Questions, comments, suggestions, submissions? Contact EFL editor Reynard Loki at [email protected]. Follow EFL on Twitter @EarthFoodLife.

Many New Voting Systems Debuted in 2020 Aren’t Ready for Prime Time

Put aside, for now, foreign meddling in U.S. elections, social media propaganda and partisan voter suppression. The newest emerging threat to elections in 2020 is new voting systems that have been insufficiently tested and phased in, but have been debuting in many of 2020’s presidential primaries and caucuses.

Since the Iowa Democratic Party’s presidential caucuses, there has been a string of new technology-based failures and frustrations—despite officials’ and voting system designers’ intentions. The failures share some common elements, from data connectivity issues to machinery breakdowns to poor planning—whether in party-run or government-run contests.

While some defenders of the newest systems praise efforts to counter cybersecurity threats since 2016’s Russian hacking, what is indisputable is that 2020’s opening contests have been marred by hours-long delays, malfunctioning machines and counting issues, frustrating voters, poll workers and campaigns.

The problems are wider and deeper than has been acknowledged. Unless steps are taken to understand what failed and address causes, they could recur in the fall’s even-higher-stakes elections, when voter turnout will likely be double or more than early 2020’s nominating contests.

Election officials who have prioritized cybersecurity in the post-2016 environment may have distracted from planning surrounding the more mundane, human aspects of voting. They assumed new equipment would work and voters would quickly adapt to new poll locations, early voting, new check-in procedures, new balloting and more. But new technology and processes have not always worked.

Voters don’t expect their elections to be hacked. Nor do they expect to wait for hours, see iPads with registration files go down, see costly new ballot-marking devices fail, see paper ballots clog new scanners, and not get honest explanations from officials about what is happening when results are delayed or inaccurate.

If these frustrations seem like expecting too much, the question of “how good is good enough” will resurface in November, when the stakes will be much higher than they are now.

Read more at Truthdig.

How Progressives Can Recapture Seven Deeply Held American Values

In recent years, my work at the Face to Face project and beyond has largely involved seeking to identify common good values, policy ideas, messages, narratives and a coherent worldview that have the power to engage across lines of difference. I have also been cultivating an approach to social change that starts with humility, curiosity, deep listening, and an abiding faith in people. I have been privileged to listen to folks from many walks of life, who have helped deepen my understanding of what binds us and the very real ways we disagree. It has been a journey beyond our political crisis and into the deeper spiritual crisis we face.

About one year ago, I had the good fortune of connecting with Richard Kahlenberg from the Century Foundation, and together we embarked on a journey to explore what Robert F. Kennedy’s political coalition can teach us about progressive politics in our time. Rick has done extensive work studying RFK, and together we have spent countless days exploring different approaches for unearthing the values, worldview, and priorities of a broad cross-section of Americans.

Today, we’re excited to release the fruits of that labor, a co-authored report: How Progressives Can Recapture Seven Deeply Held American Values.

This report provides a thorough examination and analysis of the ways in which RFK managed to have crosscutting appeal, in part because he championed seven values that Americans cherish. Although the world has changed a great deal since 1968, evidence from polls, and our direct experience working with leading organizations on the ground, suggests that these basic values still animate millions of Americans, and it is our shared belief that progressives need to be comfortable talking about these seven values if they want to connect with voters in 2020.

The report was covered this week by Tom Edsall in The New York Times and is featured in a piece we wrote that appeared in The Nation yesterday.

I hope you will take the time to read our report, share your thoughts and reactions, and share it with others.

The report was informed by Rick’s extensive learnings about the RFK coalition of 50 years ago and the ways in which Kennedy was able to pull together a diverse group of working-class voters, coupled with my experiences being immersed in organizing, engaging, and working with white, working-class Americans. But we were also able to strengthen this endeavor thanks to about 40 thought leaders who joined us for a series of lunch briefings to hear about what we’ve been exploring and offer their wisdom and guidance for how to connect these learnings with today’s voters.

I’d love to hear your reactions to the report and hope you will consider sharing with your friends and colleagues. Here’s a handy tweet that outlines the seven values we cite:

What Progressives Can Learn from Bobby Kennedy to Build a Working-Class Coalition

  1. Punch up, never down at workers
  2. Represent the importance of family
  3. Embrace patriotism as a progressive ideal
  4. Respect Americans’ religious faith
  5. Underline the dignity of work
  6. Offer a moral vision beyond material benefits
  7. Emphasize the importance of rule of law

Check out the report here.

Best,

Simon Greer
Writing Fellow
Face to Face Project

Voting Booth’s Reporting From Iowa Explains Likely Causes of Caucus Meltdown

Voting Booth’s coverage of the Iowa Democratic Party’s presidential caucus began in 2019 with delving into its plans to use telephone keypad voting for remote voters. After the DNC Rules Committee rejected that idea as unreliable and a security risk, we tracked the rest of their system’s novel features: an app to report from caucuses and their paper trail for recounts.

Our first story before the caucuses looked at what would happen next if the app failed in Iowa (and Nevada, where it was also to be used).

After the IDP delayed releasing Iowa’s results because of “partial data” and “inconsistencies” in analyses, we were first to explain what that description could mean (where clashing figures could come from) and noted there was a paper backup plan. (No other U.S. reporter attended the IDP app demo on Friday.)

Two days after the caucus, we found the IDP operations center and found a trove of training materials, scripts, app FAQs and other details, which we asked voting technology experts to assess for their inadequacies. That report not only noted what the IDP failed to anticipate but also offered lessons for Nevada’s upcoming 2020 caucuses.

Up next is an analysis separating post-Iowa facts from fiction (and conspiracy theories).

Jeff Bryant’s Commentary on Charter School Funds Waste Published in Chicago Tribune

The following is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Chicago Tribune on December 17, 2019.

Click to read the full article online.

Commentary: Millions wasted on charter schools

BY JEFF BRYANT | TRIBUNE NEWS SERVICE | DEC 17, 2019

Between 2006 and 2014, the federal government gave the state of Iowa millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded grants to open 11 new charter schools. Ten of them promptly failed, after burning through more than $3.66 million of taxpayers’ money.

During the same period, Kansas received $8.9 million in federal grants to finance 29 new charter schools. Twenty-two of those schools 76% closed or never opened for even a day, wasting almost $6.4 million.

Georgia received 140 federal grants for charter schools, with more than half the schools closing, at a cost of $23 million. Delaware’s federally funded charter schools had a nearly equal attrition rate eight out of 14, a loss of $3.6 million.

These are just a few of the jaw-dropping findings in a new report from the Network for Public Education, an advocacy group started by Diane Ravitch and other educators to support public schools and oppose efforts to privatize education.

[…]

The above is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Chicago Tribune on December 17, 2019.

Click to read the full article online.

Art & Activism Guide Make It Right in Charleston This Fall

This fall, I was honored to spend time in Charleston, South Carolina, and to take part in three arts-focused events.

On the evening of October 1, the Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art hosted a conversation between me and local visual artist Colin Quashie. The museum is currently exhibiting Quashie’s latest series, titled Linked, in which the artist “juxtaposes images of well-known Black figures with other representations of artifacts to comment on stereotypes as they exist today.” The discussion covered a range of topics within that vast arena, including the meaning of monuments, their impact on our public spaces and what it would mean to remove those figures.

A few weeks later on October 29, I participated in a Halsey Talk—part of an ongoing series of discussions hosted by the museum around converging issues and topics within art. Led by the museum’s manager of exhibits and programs, Bryan Watson Granger, the theme of the night was “Art and Activism.” The Make It Right Project has made arts activism a centerpiece of our work, and the conversation began by looking back at some of the most powerful arts interventions we’ve employed in multiple genres and disciplines. We also discussed some other examples of artists using their work to create—or at the very least, nudge—social change. Many thanks to the attendees, who made this a genuinely compelling discussion.

On November 12—following a delay caused by Hurricane Dorian—I finally got to take part in Charleston’s 35th annual PechaKucha Conference. This year’s event was part of the Charleston Arts Festival and held at the Charleston Music Hall. PechaKucha (Japanese for “chit chat”) is a super-short-form storytelling format that invites speakers to present on pretty much any topic of interest—provided they show 20 images, and speak for just 20 seconds while each picture appears. I talked about the long and often hidden history of Black resistance to racist monuments in Charleston.

Thanks so much to everyone at the Halsey, particularly Bryan Watson Granger and museum Director and Chief Curator Mark Sloan. Thanks also to Charleston Arts Festival Co-Founder and PechaKucha Artist Liaison Terry Fox; Charleston Music Hall Executive Director Charles Carmody; and everyone who took part in this year’s event.

Kali Holloway
Director of the Make It Right Project

MIR Director Kali Holloway Interviewed in H-Net: Humanities & Social Sciences Online

The following is an excerpt of an interview that was originally published on H-Net: Humanities & Social Sciences Online. Click to read the full interview online.

Confederate Symbols in Monument and Memory is an H-Slavery discussion series on monuments and memorials commemorating the Confederacy and historical memory. It follows ongoing contests over the placement of monuments to the Confederacy and other forms of commemoration on public grounds and examines debates over their purpose and implications.

This post features an interview conducted by H-Slavery editor Alex Tabor (Carnegie Mellon University) with Kali Holloway, Senior Director of the Make It Right Project—an Independent Media Institute initiative to “do more than just ‘raise awareness’ or ‘start a national conversation’” about Confederate monuments and statues that instead “aims to genuinely move the needle, creating measurable, visible change.” Ms. Holloway is currently a Senior Writer at the Independent Media Institute and the co-curator of the Theater of the Resist at the Metropolitan Museum of Art; she has contributed to several HBO and PBS documentary films and her writing has appeared in the Guardian, TIME, and The Huffington Post, among several other outlets.

H-Net’s interview with Kali Holloway can be accessed here. Visit here to learn more about Kali Holloway and the work of the Independent Media Institute or Make It Right Project.

How does the Make It Right Project relate to other initiatives hosted by the Independent Media Institute (IMI)?

Great question. At the time of the Independent Media Institute’s founding in 1987, there was a clear and pressing need for greater public access to, and elevation of, progressive journalism that covered news often overlooked by mainstream outlets, and which engaged perspectives ignored by the corporate press. In the decades since, that need has grown exponentially. We’re at a point of staggering hyper-partisanship and disinformation in conservative media, and ever-increasing corporatism within mainstream media overall, both factors that have had devastating consequences on the political, social and cultural shape of this country. IMI’s approach to addressing those issues is essentially holistic. We serve as a platform—a clearinghouse of sorts—for independent journalism dedicated to addressing systemic issues across the board via projects/verticals dedicated to topics from voting rights, to education, to the economy, to climate/environment. The Make It Right Project’s journalistic output is part of IMI’s larger effort to produce crucial media that then appears in over a dozen major progressive and independent outlets in the U.S. IMI’s collective journalistic output shows how none of these issues are siloed—and IMI’s coverage of those topics illuminates their interrelatedness. We think of IMI’s work, which touches on so many areas, as offering a broad vision look at the critical issues we’re facing on every front and where they intersect, with incisive ideas on how to address them and create substantive social change. 

How does the Make It Right Project differ from other initiatives that seek to draw attention to Confederate monuments and inform different audiences about their history and meaning?

We frequently work in collaboration and coalition with other groups around the country that are either singularly dedicated to removing Confederate markers—and we also partner with organizations whose mission stretches beyond, but also includes, the removal of Confederate memorials. The latter includes local chapters of groups like Black Lives Matter, NAACP, DSA, the Women’s March and SURJ; the former describes partners such as local divisions of Take Em Down, Chapel Hill’s Move Silent Sam, and De-Confederate Austin. One slight difference between us and some of our collaborators is that, while we endorse every good-faith effort to take down tributes to the Confederacy—in whatever form those tributes take, including roads, schools, building and city names—Make It Right is focused specifically on the removal of monuments and statues. We also place an emphasis on journalism and media as a means of public outreach and engagement, a focus informed both by the fact that I come to this work as a journalist and IMI’s background is in independent media. That said, we are always more than happy to bolster the work of like-minded groups with differing targets. 

[…]

The above is an excerpt of an interview that was originally published on H-Net: Humanities & Social Sciences Online. Click to read the full interview online.

New Investigative Series Finds Systemic Corruption in School Leadership

The following is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Progressive. Click to read the full article online.

Investigations Unearth Systemic Corruption in K-12 School Leadership—and Students and Teachers Lose Out

Much of the blame lies with an education reform movement that has exhorted schools to operate more like businesses and mimic corporate hiring processes.

Revelations of corruption in business and government are becoming an everyday affair, with example after example of people in leadership positions using elevated status for personal gain rather than for the public good. The deluge of stories about lying and cheating politicians, industry lobbyists, and corporate executives can lead to easy cynicism about how things work in business and politics. 

But what about when corruption flourishes in public schools?

A recent series of investigative articles I reported for Our Schools, an education project of the Independent Media Institute, found numerous instances of school purchases and personnel being steered toward decisions that rewarded opportunistic leaders and well-connected companies rather than students and teachers. And even though a number of such exposés suggest systemic corruption, media accounts generally frame these scandals as singular examples of corrupt behavior.

[…]

The above is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Progressive. Click to read the full article online.

Make It Right’s Kali Holloway on Controversy in Charlottesville in the Daily Beast

Charlottesville Confederate Statue Defender Sues Paper, Prof, for Reporting His Family’s Slaveholding History

Edward Dickinson Tayloe II is suing the city to save the statue behind the Unite the Right rally—and says the paper implied he is “a racist and an opponent of people of color.”

By Kali Holloway

The following is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Daily Beast. Click to read the full article online.

Edward Dickinson Tayloe II is the descendant of a “First Family of Virginia,” a euphemistic way of saying white, rich, socially prominent before the American Revolution and—through the Civil War—slaveholding. 

The Tayloes’ legacy as one of the largest slaveowning families in the state is well-documented. Amidst nearly 30,000 historical papers donated to the Virginia Historical Society by the family itself are plantation ledgers detailing the expansion of the Tayloes’ enslaved work force over the 19th century, an evidentiary accounting of how the exploitation of free black labor allowed the family to amass wealth, land, and political power. 

Facts about the Tayloe family’s slaveholding past—including the regularity with which it engaged in the heartless practice of splitting up enslaved families—appeared in a brief profile of Edward Tayloe published this March by the Charlottesville, Va., newspaper C-Ville Weekly. In response, Tayloe employed a strategy once frequently used by those of means to silence critics that’s seen a resurgence in recent years: He filed a lawsuit alleging defamation and demanding a fortune in damages.

The profile of Tayloe was a brief section in a longer article about the plaintiffs in Monument Fund v. Charlottesville, another piece of litigation in which he is involved. In March 2017, roughly one month after the Charlottesville City Council voted to take down a local Confederate monument, Tayloe and 12 other co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the city to prevent the marker’s removal. That statue—a grand bronze depiction of Confederate General Robert E. Lee on horseback—would gain national notoriety in August 2017 when neo-Nazis (whom President Trump later called “very fine people… there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name”) descended on Charlottesville to violently oppose its planned removal. 

[…]

The above is an excerpt of an article that was originally published on the Daily Beast. Click to read the full article online.