Regarding the 'back to normal' and environmental discussions of a few hours/20 pages ago, any notion that the necessary decisions required to deal with climate change overlap with or justify an extension of the current restrictions on individual freedoms can get in the bin. Stopping people being able to live as they did in 2019 in terms of mixing socially, recreation and even foreign travel (outwith the obscenely rich who fly constantly) isn't what's needed to address climate change and wouldn't be a remotely acceptable way for a government to act.
In the extremely unlikely event that governments take the action needed to stop the planet turning into a ball of fire over the next few decades there will be significant changes to our lives with the global economy necessarily being restructured, but targeting individual lifestyles isn't going to achieve anything. Only regulations and laws that drastically overhaul entire industries and governmental practices are going to make a difference.
There is a genuine Covid-related point in discussions of environmental policy, but focusing exclusively on wet markets and regulation of them misses the point. While it's not what happened in this thread, there's an undeniable undercurrent in general media discussion of 'if those Asians were more responsible like us this would never have happened, it's all their fault' and we just need them to adopt Western farming practices and regulations. While there are specific issues with China, this isn't remotely the case.
We know that Covid originated in bats and found itself in a wet market. We have no idea it actually transferred to humans through someone eating a bat though. It could just have easily been bats passing the disease to another animal which humans consumed. Wild bats passing overhead transmitting to farmed pigs was how the Nipah virus infected humans rather than any kind of wet market, so while there are obviously specific issues with wet markets, wild animals and a conversation to be had about meat consumption in general, the argument that this is down to a specific type of meat consumption or practice doesn't stand up when it's happened with farmed animals as well.
There's a wild bat population in daily contact with humans in Wuhan because of deforestation and their natural habitat disappearing. Same as the wild bats who appeared over the pig farms in Malaysia bringing Nipah, same as the wild bats bringing Ebola in Guinea, same with SARS before it, MERS was also passed to camels by migrating bats passing overhead. When you remove bats' natural habitat the stress it places on them weakens them and makes them more susceptible to shedding a virus. Put that in tandem with humans being close to their habitat in cleared forest areas and some bat populations being forced to look for new habitats and travel over a wide area coming into contact with humans, you're asking for zoonotic spillover.
That's where the environment ànd pandemics cross over and that's the recipe for different coronaviruses making the leap again. If you're looking for an obvious environmental change out this, immediately halting deforestation, particularly in SE Asia, and indeed reforestation of many of these areas is not only going to have an environmental benefit by itself but will help prevent further pandemics again.
Drastic action like that against specific industries to prevent ever getting to this stage has to be a better policy both environmentally and economically than letting another virus spill over and having to shut every other sector of the economy at once to stop the spread. However that would require an acknowledgement that these things are entirely in every government's control as Western governments could act on companies operating in their countries driving and profiting from deforestation, with much of that being driven by demand for palm and beef, rather than it all being China's fault.