Twelfth Grade Finalists Angela Zhu, Jericho Senior High School Julia Froese, Wantagh High School

THE ENVIRONMENTAL COST OF COVID-19: A PLASTIC PANDEMIC

By Angela Zhu, Jericho Senior High School

While the COVID-19 virus has halted economies and separated families around the world, it has unintended yet devastating consequences on the environment in the form of plastic. From masks to gloves, the personal protective equipment (PPE) that is necessary in the fight against the pandemic is piling up in landfills and polluting oceans. While many other industries have been on the decline during the pandemic, manufacturers of plastic have seen their demand and production increase (1). Everyday, an estimated 1.6 million tonnes of plastic are generated (2). Globally, almost 130 billion face masks are disposed of monthly, making the rate of usage over 3 million masks per minute (3). Furthermore, plastic pollution doesn’t just come from biomedical wastes, common conveniences like delivery cartons and plastic bags also contribute greatly to the rise in consumption. Many cities, like California, postponed mandates for using reusable bags out of precaution that they would more easily transmit the virus. In part, the growth of plastic usage has been due to public perception of its ability to resist COVID-19 transmission. However, public perceptions are often misinformed, as leaders of the plastic industry misuse research to induce fear about using reusable alternatives or promises of recycling. In fact, companies are aware that recycling will likely not address the problem of plastics, however, they continue to push out campaigns highlighting the efficacy of recycling in order to give consumers the illusion that they are more environmentally friendly. Despite promises of large sums of money being allocated to plastic recycling and resusage, many plastic wastes that do not have established or cheap recycling methods ended up in landfills. With less than 10% of plastic actually being recycled, everyday items like PVC containers and food-stained packaging only continue to pollute the environment (1). The plastic problem has actually been worsened due to the pandemic. Because of the unexpected nature of the pandemic, the sudden surge in single-use plastics that pile up in landfills and litter seabeds is on track to reverse the global momentum to reduce pollution (2). Masks have decorated the faces of people across the world, but now studies are showing that they are also invading beaches and oceans. In 2020 alone, over 1.5 billion face masks polluted the oceans, causing plastics to harmfully affect marine health and also our own (4). What’s more concerning is that the sudden surge in PPE waste may pose a threat since companies were not prepared to properly manage them (5). The production of masks rivals that of plastic bottles, but with one major difference - there are no guidelines for recycling masks. Because of the lack of regulations after their sudden boom in usage, researchers are concerned about the environmental impacts that they have. Single-use masks are made of plastics that are not readily biodegradable and can splinter into microplastics which negatively affect the health of ecosystems. The fibers that form face masks may make them prone to releasing more microplastics in a short period of time compared to plastic bags (3). Moreover, the toxins created by plastic face masks extend be- yond microplastics, as researchers found that the dyes used in face mask produc- tion contain traces of poten - tially toxic heavy metals. Es- pecially with face masks being submerged under water, the heavy metals can easily accumulate in aquatic systems (4). With plastics entering oceans and other natural environments, plastics have also made their way into the food chain. As animals ingest mi-

cro plas tics, the process of trophic transfer causes plastic-produced toxins to accumulate, ultimately ending up in our plates (5). Plastics are undoubtedly harmful for the environment, especially in regards to ocean and wildlife health. However, plastic also plays a gargantuan role throughout society,

both for protection against the pandemic and also daily conveniences. For example, the packaging of food often seems wasteful but is a luxury that is often overlooked in America. Without cheap plastics, food security in underdeveloped countries continues to be a big issue and actually generates more food waste due to improper packaging. There is also a balance that must be struck between plastic and plastic alternatives. Plastic is cheap and easy to produce, not generating as much greenhouse gases and water inputs compared to cotton or recycled bags. However, plastic bags are typically single-use items and, because of their non-reactiveness, take years to degrade in a natural environment (5). Thus, the question becomes, how can we properly manage personal and industrial plastic waste while also being mindful of societal limitations? Considering the benefits of wearing a mask and other PPE, banning masks themselves may not be an effective solution. Instead, new materials and waste management standardization should be enacted to ensure that face masks no longer pose as great an environmental threat (6). Thus, just as with any majorly produced waste, new, pandemic-relevant recycling and management standards must be implemented across the country (3). Additionally, as governments hope to recover economies, there is hope to rebuild businesses and industries that can produce reusable PPEs or those made of alternative materials (2). From mask-only waste bins to mask alternatives that are biodegradable or reusable, steps must be taken to reduce the environmental impact of the pandemic (3). While big industries should play a role in reducing plastic usage, the everyday person and the internet can play a big part in making sustainability a continuous trend, especially with the world going virtual. In the past years, sales of reusable cups and bottles have skyrocketed, showing that people are becoming more environmentally-focused (7). This large rise in environmental consumers stems greatly from young environmental advocates and growing trends online of choosing sustainable alternatives like buying second hand and supporting local or sustainably-certified businesses (8). Moreover, social media has become a great platform for researching easily-applicable ways to reduce one’s footprint and also marketing for environmentally-friendly brands (7). With large companies and the common consumers consciously choosing to value the environment while still saying safe, we can all play a role in reducing the environmental cost of the pandemic. References

1. D. Glaun, The plastic industry is growing during COVID. Recycling? Not so much. PBS, (2021). 2. N. Benson, D. Bassey, T. Palanisami, COVID pollution: impact of COVID-19 pandemic on global plastic waste footprint. Heliyon 7, e06343 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021. e06343. 3. E. Xu and Z. Ren, Preventing masks from becoming the next plastic problem. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering 15, 125 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-021-1413-7 4. Z. Malin, How to reduce face mask pollution, according to experts. NBC News, (2021). 5. Plastic in food chain. Plastic Soup Foundation. 6. Covid: Disposable masks pose pollutants risk, study finds. BBC, (2021). 7. O. Valentine, Social media’s influence on green consumerism. We Are Social, (2019). 8. S. Nielsen, Retailers and the rising trend of sustainability: what marketers need to know. Sprout Social, (2020).

Graphics illustrated by Komal Grewal `23

THE FUTURE OF EDUCATION: A BLENDED APPROACH TO VIRTUAL LEARNING

By Julia Froese, Wantagh High School

In the past decade, technology has experienced a pattern of exponential growth within industry, business, and now, education. With the advent of the digital age, communication has become much more fluid and accessible, leading to a rise in investments regarding social media and computer science. However, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, educational institutions had only touched the surface of the possibilities grounded within the field of technology. There had yet to be the introduction of webinars and recording services within the classroom and it was still unclear as to how these advancements could be incorporated into an existing curriculum. Interestingly enough though, despite all of the tragedy and loss associated with the pandemic, the situation helped to open educators’ eyes to the opportunity vested within the use of digital advancements. Instead of rejecting technology, as it was previously seen as enhancing cheating and creating unavoidable distractions in class, they started to rely on it as students were unable to safely return for in-person instruction (1). In fact, according to UNESCO, an agency aimed at promoting world peace, 1,500,000,000 students across the globe were unable to attend school at the start of the pandemic (2). During such distressing times, virtual systems helped schools stay open, ultimately making educators realize the value in incorporating technology within the classroom. However, there were still a few caveats to online learning, starting with the fact that not all students had equal access to technology. Furthermore, these digital devices could cause permanent psychological issues, damaging academic performance. Therefore, while introducing virtual learning processes into the classroom ultimately benefited students in a time of crisis, there were still some striking flaws ridden within existing systems, resulting in the need for a blended model where there is a balanced approach between education and technology. While technology can make many tasks such as homework and test-

ing much easier, it can also lead to disastrous psychological repercussions. According to Jonathan Haidt, a professor and psychologist at New York University, time spent using technology may be associated with increased anxiety, depression and other mental health ailments (3). Additionally, since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a dramatic rise in the need for mental health services within the United States (4). These two phenomena are no coincidence, as the increase in social distancing made individuals more reliant on technological services, therefore worsening the severity of the mental health epidemic. When translating this to education, it is evident that too much technology in the classroom may create more problems than solutions. There are already a number of distractions within a normal school setting, let alone one where teachers cannot continually monitor the activity of their students. Educators even found that virtual learning made it harder for students to focus and understand lessons during the pandemic than before (5). Similarly, in a study conducted about online education, more than half of the student participants indicated a lack of engagement in class, difficulty in maintaining their focus, and Zoom fatigue after attending multiple online sessions (6). While it is important that educators take into account the advantages of incorporating virtual lessons within an existing curriculum, it is also important that they recognize the downsides as well. One of the most striking flaws with a virtual education is that not all students have equal access to digital resources. According to Cathy Li, the Head of Media at the World Economic Forum, while virtually all 15-yearolds from privileged backgrounds said they had a computer to work on, nearly 25% of those from disadvantaged backgrounds did not in the United States (7). If virtual learning were to be permanently woven into existing educational systems, it could impact the amount of schooling one student gets over another based on their economic status. Furthermore, poor internet connection or an unreliable service can cause educational inequities as well. According to Carlo Patilan Cortez, a researcher at the Southeast Technical College, without stable and efficient connection, students face many frustrations instead of developing their education (8). Due to the unreliability associated with online learning, it should not be instated as a permanent educational system. Instead, technology should be used within the classroom for in-person instruction. Local, state, and national governments could set aside funds to provide students with digital devices to equalize learning opportunities. Large corporations such as Microsoft and Apple should also provide programs which give all students a fair technological experience in school, ultimately bridging the gap in education between the wealthy and the poor.

... since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a dramatic rise in the need for mental health services...

After weighing the pros and cons of a virtual education, it is clear that a blended approach is necessary. Technology should be present within the classroom, such as using SMART Boards and giving students school-owned devices, however full-time virtual education systems should be avoided. Students are taught best when they are physically in the classroom and it is critical that teachers are able to monitor the activity of their students on a daily basis. If

they cannot do this, students will be unable to focus and will

ultimately

learn less. However, that does not mean that virtual learning should be totally abandoned. Accord- ing to a study on the effectiveness of e-learning in hospitalized children, virtual learning improved their test scores, made it easier for them to receive an education, and improved their social and psychological well-being (9). Due to the clear benefits of a virtual education for students with chronic illnesses, digitized systems should stay in place for individuals who cannot attend school regularly. Furthermore, virtual learning can also improve access to education overall, as students from across the globe could learn the same material from universal educational platforms, such as Khan Academy. All students should have equal access to technology within the classroom. However, virtual learning should remain an accessory to in-person education, rather than a replacement.

References

1. M. Teras, et al., Post-COVID-19 education and education technology ‘solutionism’: a seller’s market. Postdigital Science and Education 2, 863-878 (2020). 2. COVID-19 education disruption and response. UNESCO, (2020). 3. J. Haidt and N. Allen, Digital technology under scrutiny. Nature 578, 226-227 (2020). 4. J. Kluger, The coronavirus pandemic may be causing an anxiety pandemic. TIME, (2020). 5. M. Hebebci and S. Alan, Investigation of views of students and teachers on distance education practices during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science 4, 267-282 (2020). doi: 10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.113. 6. S. Asgari, et al., An observational study of engineering online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLOS ONE 16, 1-17 (2021). 7. C. Li and F. Lalani, The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever. Here’s how. World Economic Forum, (2020). 8. C. Cortez, Blended, distance, electronic and virtual-learning for the new normal of mathematics education: a senior high school student’s perception. European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education 1, 1-6 (2020). doi: 10.30935/ejimed/8276. 9. Z. Aghakasiri, et al., Effectiveness of e-learning among hospitalized elementary students with chronic diseases. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences 11, 191-199 (2020). doi: 10.30476/ijvlms.2020.86703.1038.