HAVE you walked in the road yet?

Social distancing rules, narrow pavements and the absence of cars are combining to make us reclaim the streets.

Running along the carriageway of a perfectly still residential street the other day to get past some pedestrians – a road that is usually a chuntering rat run – I wondered if this was what the Fifties were like. Perhaps it wasn’t so bad back then, the sexism and Sunday trading laws aside.

It’s impossible not to notice the impact of this crisis on the environment, with clear skies breaking out over China and Italy, and increased sightings of hedgehogs and badgers here in the UK.

But these are short-term effects. The potential long-term effects of coronavirus on the environment are a lot bleaker. It may have grounded planes and cleared the roads, but it could make it harder to halt global temperature rises, not easier. This emergency hit the world at a critical moment, when public concern about climate change had finally reached a tipping point and politicians felt empowered to enact the necessary changes.

But now climate change could be sent plummeting down the list of priorities for both politicians and voters.

Without a concerted effort of political will to keep climate mitigation plans on track, 2020 might come to be seen with hindsight as the year efforts to contain one tragedy with the potential to kill millions made it harder to prevent another, likely to kill millions more.

Even the short-term reduction in climate emissions are easy to overestimate. Professor James Curran, chair of the James Hutton Institute and a long-time campaigner on climate change, estimates very roughly that the lockdown will at most cut out only three weeks’ worth of global carbon emissions – that’s assuming an almost 10 per cent shrinkage in global GDP, as mooted by the World Trade Organisation earlier this month as a pessimistic scenario.

The IMF last week predicted a three per cent reduction in global GDP: under that scenario, the carbon “saving” would be one week’s worth of global emissions, before the economy bounced back.

It’s still a cut, but no environmentalist is celebrating it. Climate change campaigners, like public health experts, are in the business of preventing human tragedy. No one wanted this. And no one in their right mind wants anything other than the swiftest possible economic recovery.

But helping the economy recover can’t be done at the expense of climate mitigation measures. There’s no time left: 20 years of foot-dragging have seen to that. If runaway climate change is to be prevented, we have to transition to a net zero emissions economy immediately.

Of course, no government will publicly admit to downgrading efforts to tackle climate change, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen, by stealth, as other more immediate calls on their time and money come to the fore.

Some research released this week illuminates how this could happen in spite of everyone having the best of intentions. Ipsos Mori conducted a poll for Earth Day this week which found that two-thirds of Britons think climate change is as serious a crisis as Covid-19, an impressive response, if below the average for the 14 countries polled.

Asked whether climate change should be prioritised in the economic recovery, the figure drops to 58 per cent, still a comfortable majority.

But the critical question is perhaps the third: should the government take actions which might harm the environment to help the economy recover? This time, slightly more people answer yes than answer no.

This is not surprising, given the awful human consequences of both the virus and the lockdown – if push comes to shove, people want the economic recovery prioritised because the pain it’s causing is immediate – but it underlines the dilemma politicians face.

The International Energy Agency, a sort of global watchdog, saw the way this could go back in March. It noted the danger of the transition to clean energy getting lost “amid the flurry of immediate priorities”.

What governments need is a positive story to tell about tackling climate change in the time of coronavirus, in order to bring the public with them. And the good news is that there is just such a story to be told.

Crises engender innovation in a way the status quo cannot. The stimulus packages being drawn up as we speak by governments in the UK and beyond to help economies recover from coronavirus are an opportunity to help drive down carbon emissions. The IEA identifies three keys ways: creating jobs for those left unemployed by the crisis in areas such as modernising the energy system; using the might of government to drive higher investment in clean energy; and creating jobs and wealth by prioritising energy efficiency, renewables and battery storage.

It’s not just about transitioning to clean energy. The circular economy concept – minimising waste and reusing where possible – has the potential to drive innovation, and with it growth, in many sectors.

The low energy prices resulting from the lockdown are good for reducing fuel poverty, and grateful politicians might be tempted to ease up on their expensive energy efficiency drive as a result, but energy efficiency measures are also crucial for cutting emissions.

This unprecedented event has brought about society-wide “behaviour change”, the holy grail of climate campaigners and something that is difficult to achieve in normal times. Many of us will not return to the grind of a commute – at least not every day. Businesses will no doubt re-evaluate the importance of so much international travel. Some, meanwhile, have discovered an unexpected pleasure in living a simpler life.

Coronavirus has demonstrated how governments and communities can mobilise to respond to an emergency.

Climate change is an emergency, albeit one where the impacts are spread over a longer time frame. If we don’t tackle it, the simple truth is that it too will kill people in their millions.

Crisis, tragedy and loss cause us to reflect on how we live and how we want our lives to change. We have to make sure that in emerging from this crisis we are propelled towards a world where the air is cleaner, communities happier and healthier, and biodiversity richer. But it could so easily go the other way.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.

News from trusted and credible sources is essential at all times, but especially now as the coronavirus pandemic impacts on all aspects of our lives. To make sure you stay informed during this difficult time our coverage of the crisis is free.

However, producing The Herald's unrivalled analysis, insight and opinion on a daily basis still costs money and, as our traditional revenue streams collapse, we need your support to sustain our quality journalism.

To help us get through this, we’re asking readers to take a digital subscription to The Herald. You can sign up now for just £2 for two months.

If you choose to sign up, we’ll offer a faster loading, advert-light experience – and deliver a digital version of the print product to your device every day. Click here to help The Herald.

Thank you, and stay safe.