Climate Protection That Matters

​

"They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick."

 

We should protect people from climate change negative impacts, with best effects for used resources.

1. Location

2. Action with effect

3. Respect science, math and economics

1. Location; we want to use the funds of a rich country in such countries, where the results are highest.

Climate actions may not be optimal in a welfare nation, such as Finland, which in all aspects is nr. one in climate change prevention. Why? Any more use of Euros or Dollars does no more bring positive impacts, but they just cause costs.

Conclusion: We'll do more in developing countries and in other highly polluting locations.

​

2. Action; we want to solve real problems and in addition to minimize pollution, excess energy use and excess CO2 production.

Action that matters should not be superficial or even negative. If we close a top clean factory in a rich country and then open a new polluting factory in a poor country, we are just fooling everybody.

Conclusion: A best choice is waste management in a developing country.

It has the primary effect - clean city and healthy people.

And secondary effects - energy from waste

And tertiary effect - reducing extra CO2 and methane production.

​

3. Respecting science, math and economics, requires understanding the logical impacts, and calculation and comparing actions between choices.

​

Economics say that there is the law of Falling Marginal Benefits in all investments. After certain limit all more benefit need more input than is the value of the output.

Conclusion: We shall do our math and not act based on good intentions only.

​