TASKJUSTICE: Whoever Pollutes Pays


TaskJustice consists of global legal actions to bring lawsuits against highly polluting countries and companies.

The case of the lawsuits filed against France and Switzerland opens the door for this massive process, in which all organizations and citizens of island countries and coastal cities can participate, as well as densely populated cities covered by thick smog (7 million people die per year due to air pollution).

GreenInterbanks forwards pollution complaints against countries and companies to the best international law firms.

Greeninterbanks, as an intermediary, charges a 20% commission. 

There is no exclusive contract. Greeninterbanks only charges for the clients it contributes.
Greeninterbanks donates 70% of the gross profit obtained to Mayday.live so that the organization applies it to humanitarian aid and actions to stop global warming, such as intensive tree planting.

10% covers operating costs.

Another 20% is distributed among lawyers and account executives associated with the system.

It should be noted that if a coastal city of 1 million inhabitants is flooded and becomes uninhabitable, or if before that all its properties lose value due to the acceleration of the rise of ocean waters, the economic losses vary between 20 thousand and 100 thousand million average dollars. Therefore, law firms charging 20% of the amount demanded, can receive between 4 and 20 billion dollars.

Precautionary Principle
The precautionary principle is understood as Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration of 1992:

"In order to protect the environment, states should widely apply the precautionary approach according to their capabilities. When there is a danger of serious or irreversible damage, the lack of absolute scientific certainty should not be used as a reason to postpone the adoption of effective measures based on costs to prevent environmental degradation".

Principle "Whoever Pollutes Pays" Principle 16 of the Rio Declaration:

"National authorities should seek to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the criterion that the polluter should, in principle, bear the costs of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade or investment


"The principle to use for the allocation of pollution prevention costs and control measures that favor the rational use of scarce environmental resources and to avoid distortions in international trade and investment is the so-called Polluter Pays. This principle means that the polluter should bear the costs of implementing the measures mentioned above, decided by the public authorities to ensure that the environment is in an acceptable state".

Common but Differentiated Responsibilities Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration:

"States shall cooperate in a spirit of global solidarity to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem. As they have contributed to varying degrees of global environmental degradation, states have common responsibilities but Developed countries recognize their responsibility in the international pursuit of sustainable development, given the pressures their societies place on the global environment and the technologies and financial resources available to them."

Access to Information, Participation and Justice
Principle 10, in environmental decision-making says:

"The best way to deal with environmental issues is with the participation of all interested citizens, at the appropriate level. At the national level, everyone should have adequate access to information on the environment held by public authorities, including information about hazardous materials and activities in their communities, as well as the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes States should facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information available to everyone. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings must be provided, including compensation for damages and pertinent remedies."



According to the WMO, in the next 5 years the average annual temperature of the planet will exceed 1.5º C

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) warned that there is "a 40% chance that, at least in one of the next five years, the average annual temperature of the planet will temporarily exceed the lower limit of 1.5º C to 1.8º C previously established”.

“This 1.5°C threshold is not a random number, but indicates the point at which the effects of the climate will become increasingly damaging not only for people, but for the entire planet,” explained Professor Petteri Taalas. , WMO Secretary General.

So what awaits us 5 years from now? We are already suffering (2022) a historic drought that affects the United States, Europe and China, drying up rivers, ruining crops, affecting livestock and forcing energy savings because hydroelectric dams are practically empty.

It must be taken into account that if the intercontinental crops fail, hundreds of millions of people will die of hunger in the world. If this doesn't happen in 2022, it will happen in 2023 or 2025. It's just a matter of time. Countries would do well to store grains to be able to get through the bad times that are coming.

The first positive feedback loops for Global Warming have already begun. The intercontinental drought is totally destructive, leaving us without drinking water and without food. By increasing the average temperature to 1.5º C the general situation will worsen.

What are the presidents of the world doing who do not meet to declare a planetary emergency and begin to apply fundamental measures to solve Global Warming? Don't they understand with what is already happening that it is a matter of global life and death for all humanity?

We are on the brink of the abyss. There are detailed plans to establish bases on the Moon and Mars, to mine in space, in the asteroid belt and on the satellites of Jupiter and Saturn, even to colonize exoplanets within a little less than a century. The terraforming of Mars is underway.

And meanwhile, what about planet Earth? There is so far no coherent plan to save it. All intelligence and all human brains are focused on leaving our world, not on solving its problems...

Meanwhile, the vast majority of the population continues indifferently consuming, drugged by marketing, believing that everything will remain the same forever and that technology will fix everything.

Worse times will come for all humanity. Continental crops will fail very soon. There will be a lack of food and there will be a great death of livestock, as a consequence hundreds of millions of people, or billions, will die of hunger. They would do well to save some of the grain for the bad times to come.

These times come because of the unbridled arrogance, selfishness and greed of man who has polluted, plundered and outraged Mother Nature, on which we all depend to survive.

Of what use will the technology of which man boasts so much be, if he lacks water to drink and food to eat?

Likewise, there is still a short time left to avoid complete self-extermination, due to total irresponsibility and recklessness in the administration of the resources of our wonderful planet Earth.


There is now, in August 2022, an international scientific consensus that the climatic anomaly (global warming - greenhouse effect - global polar deglaciation) has human pollution as its main accelerating causal agent, especially the burning of hydrocarbons.

Everyone agrees that the anomaly is irreversible using current technology, that by 2050 or 2100 there would probably be an oceanic rise of between 1 and 6 meters, flooding all the coastal cities on the planet.

This amount of water will come mainly from the complete melting of the glacial massifs in Greenland and the western sector of Antarctica, which make up the so-called Larsen C Barrier. A part of it with ice thicknesses ranging from 1.5 to 3 km. , sits under the sea at depths of up to 300 meters on average.

This means that warm summer ocean currents will impact this front and collapse it. It is only a matter of time, since the physical factors that will make it possible are active. It should be remembered that the perimeter ice of Larsen A and Larsen B disappeared due to complete thawing in 2002 and 2004, respectively. These floating ice shelves protected the 25 Larsen C glacier massifs, which contain enough water to cause a global oceanic rise of between 4/6 meters.

It is also clarified that if the thawing process of both poles accelerates even more, the oceans can rise between 6 to 70 meters
The global flood for 2050 to 2100 is the maximum hypothesis. What is the minimum?: The answer is that the beginning can start from 2030 when the floating ice of the North Pole thaws completely and the methane gas hydrates are released from the bottom of the Arctic Ocean.

How can this be possible? If global average temperature triggers domino effect feedbacks, warming may hyperaccelerate.

These feedbacks range from the melting of Arctic permafrost or permafrost, the complete melting of the floating ice at the North Pole during the next summers in the Northern Hemisphere, the increase in average temperature in the oceans, the saturation in the absorption capacity of C02 by part of the oceans, increase in Antarctic volcanic activity, increase in deforestation. And arrest of the current of the Gulf of Mexico due to a change in the saline density of the Arctic oceanic waters. This will cause the greater thermal load that the oceans accumulate today to be transferred to the southern hemisphere, causing the hyperacceleration of Antarctic melting.

These feedbacks are already active, and they are coupling and accelerating each other. Added to this is the potential for warming of the lower earth's crust, due to a breakdown in the global energy balance.

That is to say, the planet now retains more energy than it emits into outer space and increasingly ENERGY IS RETAINED AND ACCUMULATED. Since 2004 we have recklessly broken the thermoequilibrium of the planet's biosphere, according to NASA measurements, between the energy that enters from the sun and the energy that the planet emits or expels into outer space.

Therefore, it is not possible to trace a linear evolution of the anomaly. All the factors or variables of these interactions and those that will be activated as global temperature continues to rise are unknown.

This means that there is a maximum hypothesis for the average 2050, in which coastal cities will be flooded.

What does this mean for capital and income?

That the credit equation, investment risk and capital recovery must be recalculated.

The construction of tower buildings, through financing and risk coverage, can no longer be adjusted to previous parameters. Today it is necessary to adjust the cost of money or capital to the SHORTEST USEFUL LIFE TIME OF COASTAL CITIES.

In other words, investments in coastal cities are already affected by the anomaly or global warming, and there is global scientific consensus, money cannot be lent or investments made in areas that will be irreversibly flooded without modifying the recovery equation based on time and the real increase of the risk.

Considering that less than 30 average years is the maximum hypothesis, what to do with respect to the minimum hypothesis?

It must be clearly assumed that scientists were wrong in their predictions during the 1990s. The error regarding the elevation of the average temperature was 50%.
They were also wrong when they stated that the Antarctic ice sheets would not be affected.

They were wrong about the intensity of the tectonic earthquake of the tsunami that hit the Indian Ocean. The intensity was more than double that expected.

They were wrong when they predicted the intensity of the hurricanes that would hit the Gulf of Mexico in 2005.
He means that scientists are good at measuring effects, not at accurately predicting new phenomena.
They are good at organizing prevention after tragedies, not before.


One of the latent mechanisms to begin to solve the problem is through organized economic pressure.
This has major stakeholders in banks, finance companies and insurance companies.
It is enough that some or all of them request altimetry studies in each coastal city on the planet and redefine the costs of money based on the greatest risk of flooding, for the entire system to really begin to deal with the problem.

It is not good to let time pass, since the melting of the polar glaciers seems to be increasing.

Today there is talk of an increase of 3 millimeters per year.
But since the anomaly is just that, an anomaly, at any moment any feedback can accelerate the phenomenon and go to 5 or 10 centimeters per year.
From there to panic and chaos there will only be half a step.

If the oceans can suddenly rise centimeters, logic will say that at any moment they can rise meters. Then coastal properties will go to zero overnight, and no one else will be able to sell them...

In this, the former British ex Prime Minister Tony Blair is right: Global warming can cause more damage than a world war and even cause a knock-on effect so dynamic and irreversible as to alter the natural terrestrial environmental conditions, which make possible the continuity of the lives of all living things.
Fundamentally, the anomaly is caused by the burning of hydrocarbons.

This adds an unbalancing agent to the energy balance of the terrestrial global ecosystem.

A variable is triggered suddenly in a geological time that does not exist for the history of the planet, so the natural buffers to contain a scale mutation are being overcome.

The increase in temperature in turn activates feedbacks in an exponential sequence, which in turn further accelerates the heating process and may allow it to have its own synergy independent of the injection of C02 through human contamination.

In other words, even if the human contamination stops or is zero, the active feedbacks will drive the anomaly itself.
What is prudent is to stop the sequence, stop the causative agent and reverse the process of excess C02.

To do this from the economic equation, one simply has to consider the tight margins between the maximum and minimum scenarios for global coastal flooding.
This means that construction projects in these locations, with a payback time of over 10 years, begin to have high risk today.

As the anomaly increases, the terms will decrease.

Such a direct relationship causes the cost of investing money in floodplains to rise rapidly, once the full scope of unanimous worldwide scientific confirmation of the anomaly is understood under the economic aspect.

Now, it is not logical to propose long-term projects above the average of 30 years in coastal cities.
And this time of 30 years is subject to the evolution of global warming.

If it worsens and such a worsening of the situation is concretely evident, the term will decrease until any projection of investment in coastal points becomes irrational, without considering the increasing risk of global flooding.

Global insurers and banks, once they understand this equation will immediately change the cost-benefit ratios for such potential investments.
Their objective is not to lose money, so they will finance the necessary studies to adjust the financing models and measure the risk in coastal cities, on a case-by-case basis.

It can also be affirmed that warming can cause an ice age, as suggested by the theory based on ocean haline currents, which especially affect the Gulf of Mexico Current.

In this case, the picture is similar, because the oceans would recede instead of advancing.
In other words, towers with a view of the sea would no longer see the sea. As to whether the balance of the anomaly will be a sustained warming or an ice age, it will be clarified before 2030.

As this affects all coastal cities, there are BILLIONS of dollars at stake, plus hundreds or billions of human lives at stake!!!

To do???

In addition to the reaction of insurers and banks, there are those of NGOs and individuals who will be able to sue the most polluting countries in the face of emerging environmental damage.

In the United Nations there is clearly probative information on which countries pollute the most and how they do it.
Therefore, by resorting to the mechanism of International Law, claims for environmental damages, damage to private property, claims for loss of human life can be channeled.

It is hands and so on, to developed countries.

In this way, International Trade, protected by International Law, will be affected by the potential volume of claims.

And the most polluting countries will be forced by the same international system to have to pay the costs, for everything they pollute, and thus they will be the first to concentrate resources to find urgent and concrete solutions for the first time in the last almost 4 decades that the problem has been faced.

How to start??? Nothing prevents any citizen who is aware of the problem, who is affected by the problem or who considers that their right to life and the right to life of their descendants is affected and diminished by the destructive potential of the climatic anomaly, file lawsuits against the countries and multinationals that currently lead the highest pollution rates.

The problem is caused by irrational human greed, it can only be solved by the same greed directed in a positive way.

To date no one has taken concrete steps to solve the problem within the short time available between the maximum and minimum hypotheses.
We simply indicate the global strategy for organized and peaceful survival, using the same instruments of the capital system to face and resolve the conflict of a global situation that places us as a whole Humanity before a final option of Life or Death for everyone on the planet.

The contradiction between the interests of global coastal income and oil exploitation capital will stop overconsumption.

International lawsuits against polluting countries will cause their entire GDP to be seized, so they must focus quickly and concretely on the replacement of technologies and strive to fulfill their moral duties with the rest of Humanity at risk.

Because there are clearly divided positions, these initial strategies have a high chance of success.

Finance capital will immediately resist losing money, and individual selfish greed will quickly channel energy into international lawsuits, aided by legal advisors, studios, middlemen and the entire known trouble-making system; but also solutions.

By explaining and spreading these two simple strategies, the big picture changes immediately. Before, the vast majority of people did not want to invest half a fingernail, not even half a second of their time, in helping others at risk... Now, large sectors, if they do nothing, will lose money in a cascade, and many who did not want to do nothing they will be able to make money filing lawsuits.

Some colleagues have consulted me regarding the inconvenience of disseminating this information.

The answer is the following: "The problem of global warming-flooding places the entire humanity at risk of extinction. Our first moral duty towards human beings at risk, regardless of their country, whatever their race, Whatever their creed, whatever their sex, whatever their age, it is to attend to these needs with the maximum of our solidarity and organized capacities”.

And this duty of solidarity is based on simple rational egotistical logic, given that if all of humanity does badly, no one individually can do well. If they all die, one also dies.

Regarding the possible and eventual downward impact caused by the technical and professional management of this variable, that is, the concept of increased risk of flooding in properties located on the coastal limit, the worst thing we can all do is hide the obvious and confirmed information. 

The attitude of defending the interests on the value of the income ignoring fundamental conditions that alter it is false. Everyone should know that their investments in coastal cities are at high risk of suffering declines in value.

Such global falls in rents for coastal cities respond to the potential for global flooding caused by global warming. Therefore, to the extent that each owner takes care of initiating the corresponding legal actions, for example against highly polluting countries, they will be protecting their immovable capital, collaborating in a concrete and materially effective way, to help save the lives of the entire planet, the lives of each and every one of us and their loved ones and their own.

To the extent that there is a positive, organized and peaceful collective reaction, the world capital system will be forced to respond to the pressure of demand and the growing contradiction with real estate income affected by the climatic anomaly.

According to the intensity, quality and speed of the possible responses of the world system to the problem, the risks of global flooding of all coastal cities will decrease, they will move away in time and therefore, there will be no global fall of world income or in any case, will tend to rise.

At the level of the real estate business itself, this factor creates conditions of high investment and capitalization mobility.

Until now, the impacts of global warming in Southeast Asia, India, Pakistan, the Gulf of Mexico, the Arctic/Antarctic ice sheets and other points are seen as tragedies that happen to others and that at a certain time They can happen to all of us.

But on the issue of the potential drop in global rent in coastal cities, this will immediately affect the pockets of hundreds of millions of property owners, with a good level of education and the capacity for organized action and institutional claim.

It should be clarified, in case it were missing, that the dissemination of this American solidarity emergency strategy and plan is carried out solely with the purpose of avoiding the complete extinction of all humanity due to irrationality.

As in numbers, 2+2=4


Roberto Guillermo Gomes (written in 2009).

Master Planetary Emergency Plan

Campaign to Gaia Team Sci entists

Contac us