While it is generally a useful exercise to analyse the economic efficiency of different climate solutions, the general challenge to effective altruism applies here as well: A strictly technocratic/individualistic evidence-driven approach can easily mislead an effective altruist to conclude that political activism and engagement in the pre-political sphere (which conservative thinktanks/foundations - like the Koch foundation - are sadly and ironically have funded so successfully) are not worth supporting. As a result, the systemic/structural (i.e. rules and norms, economic incentive structures, power structures etc) and cultural (i.e. deep awareness, mindsets, paradigms, worldviews,..) drivers of societal problems are overlooked while the status quo is being cemented: symptoms are being fought, instead of root causes... Interestingly, in my own analysis of those 55 draw down solutions, for which data is available, it looks like the economically most attractive solutions (by far) would be "dynamic glass", and "low -flow fixtures", followed by "managed grazing", "multistrata agroforestry" and "distributed photovoltaics"... https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hpRQHuksT-OFkmtsdOqNDjK9sNJocl1-RH6HIdq0EJU/edit?usp=sharing