Studies debunk ‘nature is healing’ narrative from 2020 lockdowns

[UngulateNerd92]

• Several new studies have tried to tally up the costs and benefits to the environment as a result of lockdowns around the world last year in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
• One study showed that emissions of indirect greenhouse gases like CO and NO2 decreased significantly, but one of its authors says this likely won’t have much of an impact over the long term.
• Another study debunks the media hype behind the “animals are reclaiming the cities” trend last year, attributing the increased sightings to the fact that people forced to stay at home finally had time to start noticing the wildlife around them.
• In India, researchers concluded there were more negatives than positives for the environment, including a surge in the use of plastic packaging and PPE, as people shopped online and masked up.

When the world went on lockdown, nature got a reprieve, or so it seemed. Dolphins swam in the Hudson River, Los Angeles’ famed smog dissipated, and wild animals were reportedly reclaiming cities. The narrative presented in the media was clear: the COVID-19 lockdowns last year allowed nature and the environment a temporary reprieve. But how much did lockdown really impact air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions? And did animals actually move back into cities?

https://news-mongabay-com.cdn.amppr...is-healing-narrative-from-2020-lockdowns/amp/