Nanning,
I cannot understand why others in-the-know, like on this forum, can go on with having any direct emissions (car, heating etc.) or have a negative effect on the remaining living nature (consumerism, tourism, pets etc)."
Let me tell you a story: For many years, my work led me to travel across the globe to fight climate change. Many extra trips were considered, but the bottom line always was: Does this trip contribute more to global warming reduction than to global heating. My decisions were not always based on solid facts, but if my - scientifically based - expectation was that I could make a difference abroad, I would go, no matter how far away from home it was. I do remember, flying back from a Pacific island 50 hours away, that I certainly hoped I could make a difference by being there on behalf of the EU.
Last year, I decided not to fly at all. I kept my promise, but the world did not live up to my expectations.
This week, I decided to borrow my wife's car to visit potential new customers, who had an interesting idea (and proof of concept technology in the garage) in order to support them in their endeavours to bury carbon in the ground.
Should I be blaimed for spending a tankful of diesel on this adventure. In my oppinion, no!. I take risks, I drive through the night to remote places, I engage with people, who are willing to make a difference. I look for opportunties to scale simple solutions to global succes stories. Not to get rich, but to show that making the right choices at the right time is essential both for me and to the benefit of the globe.