We need to make some plastic illegal, for real

I want to start a European citizens initiative to forbid some types of plastic. Specifically single use, disposable plastic. Plastic bags for example, they should just be forbidden by law. I just arrived in Amsterdam and I wanted to buy snack at the airport. I am shocked that everything in the small store here was packed in plastic. Just look at this, this is insane! It’s the height of being spoiled when you can’t even chew your own apple, but you need it readily chopped in plastic. Luckily I found an apple and a banana that I could eat zero waste. Yes I can eat normal apples that are protected by peel, because I’m not an old person without teeth.

Last year in September I was out sailing with my mum and my brother. That’s when I decided that this few people being “zero waste heroes” isn’t going to be enough, we need to forbid plastic. My mum had made some sandwiches for lunch for us to take with us. I arrived at her house before we went down to the harbour, and she asked me to pack the sandwiches. I usually do not use plastic bags at all, living zero waste on most days. Not all days but always when I have the energy to go the extra mile to avoid plastic. This time I was stupid, I just took the first thing I found in mum’s kitchen and I packed the sandwiches in a little plastic bag.

Out on the sea, I had just finished my sandwich when the wind started blowing more. Before I could even blink the plastic bag was in the sea. “Noo! Liam, can you turn around the boat?” I asked my brother who was handling the sails. “It’s too windy to be able to precisely aim at that plastic bag…”. For a few seconds I think about jumping into the water but it’s September. The water in the Baltic sea was really cold. So I let the plastic bag go.


Anyone who knows me can be sure that I would do anything to not litter in the sea. But despite this, I ended up throwing a plastic bag in the sea! I’m not generally very dumb or stupid, but I’m not wise enough to be able to handle the responsibility of plastic. Very few people are. Plastic is dangerous, to animal and human health. Plastic is made from fossil fuels but it’s not really a climate issue, it’s a litter issue. A issue of the health of ecosystems and our own healths. There are laws that try to make sure we don’t drive too fast and that we can’t buy drugs. Why are we allowed to pollute with plastic liter without any limit?

I can’t be given responsibility of handling such a material because I cannot guarantee I won’t do harm with it, no matter how much I try. What about people who do not even try? They surely litter even more. The only real solution to this earths plastic pollution problem is to forbid single use plastics, the kind of plastics that end up in nature. Plastic is durable, so we could still use plastic to make things that are meant to last. Just an example, I think pipes and toilet seats from plastic are fine, I’m hardly going to drop my toilet seat in the ocean. But all that packaging waste. All plastic bottles. Plastic straws. You find them at any beach. We need to stop it, make sure we don’t find that litter on the beach in the future. We need to make sure that the plastic most likely to end up in nature is forbidden by law.

It might take some time before we are politically at a place where it can happen, but the sooner we start working towards it the better. We have alternatives to plastic already. There is constantly news about engineers coming up with new sustainable materials, and once we forbid plastic these materials will be so demanded that they can be produced cheaply at scale.

I love the zero waste ideology and I try to follow it myself. What I don’t like is that the view is too individualistic. People are cheered for figuring out how to avoid plastic. The harder challenges you overcome, the more you are cheered. But why is it meant to be difficult to avoid plastic? We need everyone to become more zero waste. Instead of a few determined persons going to specialty stores to buy food because the normal supermarkets are just too full of plastic, we should change the supermarkets. Change all of society, not just ourself. Changing yourself is a great place to start. The best place to start, but we can take it further. You shouldn’t have to struggle and be a hero to avoid plastic, you should be able to live a normal easy life where you don’t need to constantly panic over where to get food that isn’t insanely wrapped in plastic.

If you are a European citizen interested in joining the committee organising a citizens initiative to forbid single use plastics, please comment on the blog and I’ll be in touch! The more the better 🙂


Do you understand climate change? Most people don’t

“What would you care about, in case it was proven that climate change isn’t an issue anymore?”, someone asked me yesterday. I do think climate change is an important issue, but I would hardly lose focus in life if climate change was solved. I’d only be very happy! The thing is, this scenario, where climate change is solved is not some kind of utopia. In fact, we have all the tools we need to solve ut! So, why haven’t we?

Click here to read this text in Swedish.


Climate change is a problem on a too large scale. You don’t see it, you can’t feel it. You don’t even know how much your personal lifestyle contributes to climate change! The way humans try to comprehend climate change is interesting from a psychological point of view. How can we relate and fully understand it?

Even if most of us really don’t, it is still us who amplify it. It is you and me. We are the ones that buy products made by the industry that pollutes, we are the ones who fly for leisure. For about 150 years, we have been heating up the planet. I have studied how humans and the rest of nature affect each other both at university and in my spare time. I have learnt how little I know, how little I really understand. And I have learned how terribly little most people know and understand. There are so many opinions and perceptions about climate change, and what we need to do to solve it, that are not correct. One of them is the idea that we need to “go back to the stone age” in order to fix the issue, or that “climate change is too complicated, so we can’t do anything about it”.

Is it already a problem?

Climate change is in many ways different to many other problems. It can be discussed whether it even is a problem yet, although it is up to all of us to define what we even think is problematic, do decide what we like and what we don’t like. The earth is now on average about 1 degree warmer, since coal started being burned. In Helsinki, there is rarely much snow in the winters anymore, some animal species have moved away and there is a lot of smelly blue-green algae in the Baltic sea every summer. I am bothered by these things, but maybe most people are not? Maybe it’s not a problem yet, to most people.

Climate change is probably the most complex phenomenon in nature that humans have ever caused and been the subject to. The temperature of the earth is affected by probably a million different factors. Carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases is just a small part of it. Sea currents, solar winds and but also human construction! Locally, things such as large areas of black bitumen absorbs heat and warms up the air, the effect of large black areas could be bigger than local. The circulation of water has an effect too, that is known for sure, but it is very hard to predict exactly where it will rain more or less. All in all, it is very difficult to understand exactly what it would mean if the mean temperature of our earth was 3 C degrees warmer. It’s challenging to scientists, it’s very difficult to normal people. I’m writing my bachelor’s thesis on how media has reported on climate change. They have not done a very good job in the past, is my conclusion.

What’s up with the two degree goal?

You probably know that there is a global agreement that heating should be limited to two degrees. Why two? Last week I visited the national museum in Helsinki, and saw an exhibition about Finland during pre-historical times. About 6000 years ago, Finland was actually two degrees warmer than it has been during the 20th century. When the temperature dropped by 2 degrees, the Finnish human population declined about 80 %. The change in nature was too fast to adapt, and many died. Two degrees colder was a catastrophe, but a sudden two degrees warmer has a negative impact too. We will all survive at two degrees warmer, we have modern technology and science. Two degrees is what the temperature is historically known to have been changing. If we let earth heat up by two degrees, there will be effects but we will be okay. The problem is: with the current pace of emissions, we are heading towards 4 or 5 degrees warmer!! No one knows exactly what happens then, but there are many qualified guesses. In the history of modern mammals, no such rapid temperature changes have ever been recorded. Even when the last ice age in Europe ended, 10000 years ago: the mean temperature on earth changed less than this.

There are some sure things about what will happen. The sea levels will rise. This is a problem especially for poor countries. The Netherlands can probably afford to build a massive wall to keep the sea out. We here in the west, know and care too little about poor island-states. Honestly, most of us here don’t really care that much if some village drowns. We probably have a bad attitude towards these villages, an attitude that they will probably have some disaster anyways and will be poor and miserable with or without climate change. If they are going to be miserable anyways, why bother stopping climate change for their sake? This is not a conscious thought for most people, but probably an unconscious one.

Climate change is a different problem because the changes take place over a long time, they are slow but full of risks. There are signs that are not sure, like is the civil war in Syria now partly a result of drought caused by climate change? The climate of the earth is too complicated to say that because you drove your car to work everyday in the past 10 years, you have caused a civil war in Syria. In theory, it might be, that you and a billion other people with their cars, indirectly caused the suffering of Syrians today. We can’t know for sure about this specific thing, but we know for sure there are effects on people as a result of global warming.

Why are some people engaged in solving climate change, when others are not?

People who think climate problem is an issue, often have a few common ways of thinking.

  1. A fear of risk. A feeling that we do not know what we are doing, and that there might be far-reaching domino effects of changes in our atmosphere. That the effect will be so large both socially and environmentally, that civilisation will end up collapsing. We just don’t want to take the risk. Things might end up much worse than a drowned island in the Philippines and rainy winters in Finland.  Global famines when agriculture collapses if temperatures and rain-patterns end up being totally unpredictable. Global flows of migrants, fighting over the only places that are good to live in anymore. Is the fear exaggerated? I don’t know, I don’t think so. We can prevent this from happening, why take the risk?
  2. Solidarity between rich and poor countries. We should not change the planet in a way that means humans need expensive technology to survive and thrive. It should be possible to live a good life on earth in totally natural conditions. So these natural conditions can’t mean people have to afford huge walls to keep the sea out of their homes!
  3. We think there is a value of its own, in nature. We think it’s wrong to change the climate faster than animals and plants can adapt. Even if everyone would be vegan, humans would kill millions of animals by destroying their homes, if we let the climate climate change too much, too fast.

Most people are not engaged in solving the too fast climate change, that is caused by people. One might feel one’s own impact is too small, you can’t see the effect of your efforts and you don’t get any visible benefits from making an effort. Instead, you prioritise solving concrete problems, that are easily visible to you and affect yourself directly.

Solving problems here or now, or solving hypothetical future problems?

Most human problems are here and now. Such as poverty, both relative and absolute. If you can’t afford something you think is necessary for a decent life, it’s a huge problem right now. We don’t talk about the risk of possibly becoming poor in 20 years. Human trafficking and other human rights violations. We talk about those that happen right now. We help victims who have already been trafficked, by providing them with support, education and integration into mainstream society. Famine. We help people who starve right now. Domestic violence, we talk about it because it happens, not because it might be happening in the future. Mental health problems are also not fixed until they are definitely there, we don’t treat depression proactively.

People who are against strict climate policies say we should not focus on problems that do not fully exist yet. That we should not speculate and treat problems just in case. I think that we should treat climate change just in case, because it probably isn’t just in case, it probably will be just in time. I also think we should treat a whole lot of other problems just in case. Society should support people at risk of becoming depressed and at risk of becoming poor. We should educate girls before they are trafficked as sex-slaves. The reason for not doing this is often stated as money, but preventive measures are usually much cheaper. The same applies for climate change, it makes financially sense to fix it now, not later.

There is already a solution

Renewable energy and vegetarian food. By changing our diets and agriculture, as well as our energy production system: we can already decreased greenhouse gas emissions by about 45 %. On a personal level this means to eat less meat and call your energy provider to ask if you can buy wind or solar power from them. Climate change is an extremely complex problem, but there are a few very easy solutions to fix the largest part of it. The rest of the problem will be fixed when science advances and population growth slows down. So, we already have the solutions, we are just too stupid to use them!

We have the needed technology, we just need to be willing to pay that little extra for it. Both as individuals and businesses. If you and every other private consumer spends 100 euro more per month on supporting renewable energy, and 100 euro less on travelling by fossil fuels, we have already solved a large part of the problem. If you cycle to work, instead of taking your car, we have taken another step. If you own a business, you can transition to renewable energy too, it’s constantly getting cheaper. There are positive possibilities for changes on a state level too. The most obvious example is countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE who really can afford to switch to renewables, and their state economy would benefit from stopping to subsidise oil. In many countries, we can have our public transport run on electricity and biogas. We have the technology, we just need to make the investment. Humanity is now richer than ever, so it’s completely realistic to make these investments.

We do not need to go back to the stone age. I’m always a little bit confused when I talk about slowing down climate change and someone starts talking about the stone age. What do modern photovoltanic solar cells have to do with the stone age? We can fix climate change and still take warm showers, use electricity, enough food and an endless supply of Netflix series! Swap your pulled pork for pulled oats, you won’t even miss pork after a while. Your life won’t look that different after we fix climate change. The difference will be that travelling will be more expensive, when we use less fuels for aviation. Clothes and consumer goods manufactured overseas might get more expensive, when energy and shipping gets more expensive. But when a normal, middle-class Finnish person can afford to fly on vacation to Thailand only every five years, instead of every two years, or one can only buy one new pair of shoes every year instead of five, we can’t really compare it to the stone age, that’s ridiculous.

You’ll still be able to afford lots of shoes, but bought secondhand. You can still take the more energy-efficient train to Thailand every year (current route is by the Trans Siberian to Beijing, and via Hong Kong and Vietnam down to Thailand). On top of this, you’ll be able to travel anywhere by virtual reality! The point of stopping climate change isn’t to stop human development. The point is to stop shooting yourself in the foot. Why make climate change worse when we have the means to fix the issue?

The change we should make in our daily lives is so minor,  and still it could do a great deal to solve a difficult issue with huge risks. Why take the risk if we don’t have to?

Climate change can be solved. And don’t worry about me, I’ll have stuff to do after that’s solved. I think I’ll start with problems such as the out of control population growth, littering of the oceans, helping poor people both near and far, supporting development to end hunger crises, support gender equality to have an impact on domestic violence and sex-trafficking, and of course: support my loved ones around me to feel mentally well. And myself, make myself happy too. So lets fix climate change so I can get more time to deal with these other problems too!


I’m so happy she’s running in the local elections

Amanda_Pasanen_lokaatio_KP-5WebShe is wise, she is educated, she’s brave and she’s humble. My friend Amanda Pasanen and I share a lot of political values, which made it easy for me to support her all the way through her campaign. Sometimes we disagree on a few points, but both of us has an attitude towards always wanting to learn more which makes even those discussions really good. I’ve known her for 7 years, now she’s running in the local elections for the green party.

Voting in local city elections is extremely important. After I went to Dubai I have been even more interested in city planning, because that was in my mind an example of a complete disaster. Bicycling in Dubai was practically impossible. A well planned city is crucial because it makes it easier to live a sustainable lifestyle. And green areas! Who doesn’t like plants and trees? A nice park to hang out in with your friends? I think Helsinki could become even greener and more beautiful. Tourists could be attracted to come here if they knew they are able to get both city life and nature experiences in just one place. Helsinki has a lot to improve when it comes to energy production as well: coal power stations are bad anywhere but here they are placed in central areas that could instead be beautiful seaside restaurants and leisure areas. I get quite excited when thinking about how Helsinki could develop!

I give Amanda my full support. She knows environmental science really well and could do Helsinki a great favour in that aspect. But she knows more than that. She has studied economics, she know there aren’t endless resources but still she thinks the priority of a society should be to take care of each other. Making economically sense and wanting to take care of each other shouldn’t be seen as contradictions. I think Amanda has a healthy mix of realism and idealism. After all, you can have a city making economically sense and still put priority into taking care of the weak ones!

One of her particular priorities is young people – making sure they do not become marginalised. The “economical benefit” of a young person who escapes unemployment, substance abuse and poverty is very difficult to measure. By investing in the future, we can have benefits over the next decades.

She envisions a green Helsinki in the future, literally a green one where plants can flourish. Save the city forests and use land more wisely by building high buildings. Helsinki has a huge influx of new inhabitants. The majority of people moving here are young people. If the city incentivises building houses where flat-sharing is easily possible, where rooms are properly isolated to give privacy but bathrooms and kitchens can be shared, this would reduce the living cost for many young people.

Tomorrow’s the election, I think you can guess who gets my vote 😉

I lost money on a solar investment but I’m not sad


Solar panels have powered our summer cottage since the 1970´s, the modern ones are much more efficient though.


The price of  the First Solar Inc shares has gone down, a lot. You don’t need to know much about investments to understand that -44,56% doesn’t look very good.Some people save for a house or a car. As a student, I’m lucky to be able to save at all and it will be a while before I have saved enough for a house or an electric car, so I though investing in renewables would be best for some of my savings right now. If I would sell the shares I bought today, I would have lost almost half of what I invested.

Is this bad? No, it’s actually great news! For my personal finances perhaps yes, it is bad, but the investment made wasn’t too big, so I’ll survive. For the rest of the world, the answer is no, it is not bad at all! First Solar is an American company and the reason they do poorly is not that demand for solar power has decreased, on the contrary. Demand is on the rise, because globally prices for solar panels keep getting lower and lower! Prices have decreased by 30% just this year!

The mistake I did, was choosing to invest in the wrong solar company, the one who sells solar panels at ‘the old’ more expensive prices. Additionally, Trump became president which could be catastrophic for American solar cell companies. However, since the technology has improved so much solar power isn’t necessary dependent on any political subsidies. Go home Trump, you can’t fight the power of the market in America!

I don’t regret investing in American solar power, I want to contribute to showing the Americans that the market wants clean energy. Solar might be a risky investment but if you want to contribute to a better world, I recommend it anyways.  I see it as donating to charity with the possibility of winning more money! This isn’t the most conventional investment strategy, but I generally think no-one should make any investments without considering moral implications. That money does  better things to the world like this, than at a savings account or spent on travelling.

I have not only invested in solar shares, I’m a consumer too. I buy solar-electricity from the Helsinki energy company Helen. Almost 20% of the energy I used in the past year, has been from solar power. Remember, this is in one of the northernmost cities in the world!! That truly shows the possibilities solar power has globally. If you live in Helsinki, get solar electricity for your house or flat here. If you live elsewhere, use new eco-friendly search engine Ecosia too look up solar power-plants in your region.

The globally lower prices of solar power is so great news that I can’t even be sad over my loss! In fact, the payback time for the best solar panels in sunny locations is as low as 2 years! Price competitive, clean energy: finally you are here! I’ve been waiting for you!


Production of solar power plant in Helsinki that produces my electricity, built in 2014.

Rain in January

It’s raining in Helsinki today. In January, it’s not meant to rain in Finland. It’s meant to be snowing! So today seems like a good day to post a video I made two years ago. My thought behind making this video, was to encourage people to put more pressure on politicians, to vote and demand that our politicians make sustainable decisions. My little sister, who’s 7 years old in in the video is an example of someone who really isn’t causing climate change, but will have to live with the consequences.It has English subtitles so everyone understands even if we speak Swedish and Finnish in the film. Scroll down to watch!

Most climate scientists think climate change is going to have an especially drastic impact on Arctic regions. Half of Finland is within the artic circle, and we might really loose very unique nature. In Lapland, winter-sports tourism will suffer from a lack of snow and in the future Finnish children might also not be used to playing in the snow every winter.

Some might say that they don’t like the cold and are happy for a warmer climate, but I think it’s sad if we loose our diverse nature. The EU makes it really simple to move further south if you don’t like snow. The climate on earth has always changed, but the changes that are happening now would naturally take thousands or even millions of years. Now humans are speeding up that change to a level that only catastrophic events like massive erupting volcanos or meteorits have ever caused before. By doing that, humans are only making things worse for themselves.

In the next election where you can vote, do you think you will consider climate policy when choosing your candidate? You can comment below to answer!

Trump, how much damage will he do?

Will he do any damage at all when it comes to climate politics? We can’t really know but we can speculate. On the day Trump won the US presidential elections I wrote a blogpost where I expressed serious concern over the future of the Paris agreement. A lot of people I know were and are still very worried about his impact. 

I’m still concerned but there are several things giving me hope. First of all, new clean technology has come so far and is offered at quite competitive prices. No matter what Trump does, if solar power is actually cheaper than coal, then why would someone use coal? We’re not quite there yet but we’re really close. In some locations, solar is already cheaper. The second reason to be positive is Trumps recent comments to New York Times: he’s open to look into whether human caused climate change could actually be a threat.

There is still a lot of hope in making the goals of Paris agreement happen!

Trump can do what he wants in the US, but what about everyones climate?

A lot of the hope the Paris agreement gave me, has been blown away by the results of the American presidential elections. Many americans are known to often have different values and ways of looking at things than us here in the Nordic countries. That’s fine, having different values in different places is okay.

If you want astronomic university fees and no taxes? Fine by me, you do you, at your place.

If you want to carry guns everywhere? Fine by me, you do you, at your place.

If you don’t want to help people from poorer countries? Fine by me, other countries with other political wills are going to help instead. You do you, at your place.

If you want to vote for a candidate who doesn’t stand for gender equality? Fine by me, if women voted this way or didn’t manage to get their brothers, husbands and fathers to vote differently, that’s really your problem. If the majority of Americans want all women to be left in the kitchen, fine by me.

The list could go on with things I disagree with but there’s one point where the answer isn’t the same.

Trumps climate policy stance affects the entire world. It affects the entire world for centuries. It affects me, it affects my future children. I want to be able to go out with them and play in the snow, not in the rain! But by the time the snow will be gone, Trump will be dead. Not because of assassinations, just because of age. Who are we going to blame then? Who are we going to make pay for fucking up our world?

And actually, never mind the snow or not! Half the world will struggle with getting food when crops fail. Trump has no stance on climate policy at all, and my last hope is that the reason for that is just to keep an image to get votes. But the republican party, who is in power now, is known for funding fake research institutes to prove human intensified climate change doesn’t exist. That’s alarming enough to become upset. Trump has time after time proved that he does not care much about science or facts.

The rest of the world will have to compensate a lot for still making sure the Paris agreement is held, if America drops out.


The view from my bedroom window. I love waking up and watching the snow. I want my children and grandchildren to experience the same.

ps. I apologise for possible spelling mistakes in this text, I’m in a hurry to a lecture.

Today we got an action plan to avoid catastrophes! The Paris agreement enters into force

I had a quite unusual reminder on my phone this morning. It says “The Paris agreement enters into force!”. Having a phone reminder for this sort of thing is a bit silly or even funny to some, but I’m just so happy that there is finally a binding climate deal!

Entering into force simply means that enough countries have now officially joined the agreement.73 countries and the European Union have joined the Agreement. They have not only signed it but also taken national measures in for example the parliament, to decide how they will reduce their emissions. Regular meetings will now be held under the Paris framework, making sure that the world leaders keep discussing this urgent issue.

The next meeting will start in just 3 days in Marrakesh, Morocco. The meetings are extremely important but the irony of the increased flight traffic to get to thos meetings is a bit sad. I hope virtual reality improvement will mean these meetings can be held without everyone flying somewhere. Here you can see a map on how the Paris Agreement is adopted in different countries, it’s lovely to see that the majority has joined!  If you want to read details, here is the United Nations report on the agreement.

Now the real work begins. Now we’re comitted to the targets, now we need to work out how to reach them. It will be tough but if there continues to be enough political will on every level, it will be done. The Paris agreement target of keeping warming below 1,5 degrees is very unlikely to be met. There should be even more clear structures and rules in the agreement even to met the 2 degrees target. For example, flight emissions aren’t mentioned in the agreement at all which is quite a big problem. But it’s a great step in the right direction!


Still too many cars versus cycles in both London and Helsinki

Every single person over 18 years in a democratic country has their fair share of responsibility for trying to get as close to the Paris Agreement target as possible. The most important thing you can do though is to use your political power, making sure this stays an urgent topic at all times. The municipal elections are coming up in Finland next spring, vote for a candidate who takes climate change seriously! The Mayor elections in London that were held last spring while I lived there, showed that Londoners want something to be done about air-pollution. Sadiq Khan, who was elected, seems very ambitious when it comed to reducing London’s pollution levels. Helsinki has much fewer inhabitants and therefore no air quality crisis but we could definitely do our part of emission reductions too.

The goal of the agreement: keeping global warming below 1,5 degrees, doesn’t really translate into emission reductions countries have comitted to. The existing commitments will lead to an estimated warming of about 2,7 degrees. This is a bit problematic. There is also a commitment to reaching zero net emissions sometime between 2050 and 2100. 

2100 is quite far away. I’ll be dead or 106 years old. I will still experience climate change during my life, having emissions goals for 2100 is to wait too long with reductions. The temperature is likely to have risen with up to 2 degrees already by 2050. I’ll be 64  by then and all my holiday destinations will have been destroyed when I finally retired! The Paris agreement is just a bit too little too late, to quote the famous JoJo hit from 2009. So I’m cheering myself up by listening to that silly pop-music and hoping for a more ambiotious agreement soon!

In the agreement, there is also some kind of comittment to financially help developed countries to adapt to climate change. In the long run, it would be cheaper to just phase out fossil fuels in the next 10 years instead of hundreds of years of adaptive measures.

Even if the Paris agreement isn’t as ambitious as to phase out most fossil fuels in the next 10 years you can do your part: use trains instead of flying, use cycles or electric cars and pay a bit extra for renewable energy to your home. And to say it once more, make sure vote in a way that supports the goal of the Paris Agreement!


The Paris climate agreement is entering into force. Now comes the hard part.

Washington Post Article 





“Try to discuss climate change with anyone and they just tune out” – Leonardo DiCaprio

I really relate to that quote. Most people are just a bit awkward on the topic. You shouldn’t be. You should be informed, a little angry and demand more from our political leaders! Everyone should have an opinion on how to solve issues relating to climate change. The opinions can differ, someone wants to buy a hybrid car whereas someone else wants to ban private cars altogether. The point is, everyone should know enough on this to have an opinion. And that’s where “Before the Flood” becomes important.

I have to say I’m quite surprised there are not more celebrities speaking out about climate change. Precisely for that reason, Leonardo DiCaprios engagement in climate issues is so admirable and so important. He might live a typical western lifestyle on many aspects but the attention he brings to these issues can inspire the rest of us to live more sustanable lifestyles than he does. And Leonardo, meanwhile you should stop flying private jets.

The movie is very informative and well done. A lot of the information I already knew, but it was interesting to get an insight into how oil is actually extracted from sand. I also like it how they bring attention to the environmentalism in Sweden, they do seem to be very progressive in environmental politics in our western neighbour country. I do recommend watching it, especially if you think you don’t know too much about climate change. “It seems to be aimed a bit at Americans who don’t have a clue about climate change” was what my boyfriend thought. Perhaps some of the facts are things I consider to be quite general knowledge but it’s not a waste of time to watch even for those of  us who know more. It’s a really good summary of many things, a good way of getting a overview on climate action.

I think the most important thing this movie does, is to be one more reminder than we need to change our society. We need those reminders over and over again.

In 2015, I did not fly at all. I took the bus all the way to Lithuania from Finland when I wanted to travel. In 2016 I didn’t do as well, I have been on an airplane for a total of 14 times in this year. Seven short roundtrips in Europe emits an enormous amount of CO2.

I know flying is not good for the environment, I need more reminders like this. I’m not likely to stop flying altogether but this movie made me decide that next time I go to London, I will take the train. Not because that makes a difference in emissions, but to raise attention to the utter stupidity of travel prices: within the UK, within Finland and within Norway domestic flights cheaper than trains! Not to speak of international travel, a trainticket from Stockholm to London is three times more expensive than a flight. On top of that I also have to pay for the boat from Helsinki to Stockholm. We need to politically change these prices with taxes and subsidies! I can’t make trainrides more popular than flights on my own, but I’ll do something to show our leaders that they need to set the taxes right on this.

I hope the movie inspires you too, to fight for a change. To fight for our leaders to set the legislation and taxation is such a way, that it’s easy for us to live environmentally friendly lives. I wonder what Leonardo would think if there was a global aviation ban on private jets…

We need reminders, constantly, or we turn lazy. So thanks, Leonardo DiCaprio for once more motivating me to keep trying to live a more environmentally friendly life. It is up to all of us!

Send every girl to school!

Today we´re celebrating the International Day of the Girl Child. The UN initiative is really needed because a third of girls in most developing countries still get married before 18. Getting married usually means dropping out of school.

When a girl is sent to school she learns about her own rights. Girls with schooling are usually the ones to stand up to old traditions such as female genital mutilation. I have great respect for other cultures and other ways of doing things than in my society but when there is serious violation of someones basic health I cannot even mention respect, it’s disgust.

The greatest global impact of educating girls is to be able to stop population growth! Everyone will be able to live a better life if there are fewer humans to divide the scarce resources among. Overfishing problems, deforestation, greenhouse gas emissions will all be smaller if we´re fewer.

Turns out, educating women is the best way to control population growth. If a girls in school, it delays the age she gets married. She will know about her right to choose on reproduction. She will know about contraception methods. She will be healthier and happier. Educated women often chose to have fewer children than uneducated ones. Having just 2 children instead of 8 makes a huge difference globally.


Wayyy to many babies // Vigeland Park in Oslo

I’m sitting at a lecture at uni and I’m so happy to be a girl in today’s world. I have never even questioned that I will have the opportunity to get an education, like of course I have it! But nevertheless I am so grateful for it. I’m so grateful that women today get to chose about marriage and reproduction. I couldn’t imagine something worse than pregnancy after pregnancy, taking care of 8 children and finally dying giving birth to the 9th one. I’m so happy I got to grow up always feeling equal to boys around me, always feeling like I’m strong and I can decide for myself.


Growing up thinking I can do anything, even magic tricks!

Girls should be girls, not brides! If you want to make a global impact, I suggest donating a small sum to these organisations doing so important work: Girls not brides or Population Services International .

Go girls!!