Question

To Rabbi Michi, have a good week!
The birth of my daughter raised again a question that comes back and resurfaces for me from time to time in different forms, mainly in the area of environmental quality, but not only there—and this time in the form of cloth diapers. As is well known, disposable diapers are a significant factor in the accumulation of environmental waste, since they take hundreds of years to decompose. Therefore, in recent years there has been an ecological call to use cloth diapers (not the kind from the Mandate period, but innovative and comfortable ones, etc., etc.). This may sound like a silly example, but as I said, it stems from a fundamental question: what is the limit of my moral responsibility? This is certainly something that is "outside the norm," so it could be replaced with dozens of other questions—recycling, vegetarianism and veganism, concern for citizens suffering from hunger and disease in many parts of the globe, buying cheap products that are manufactured under conditions of coercion and slavery. Already here a question begins: do I have to "step outside the norm"? I feel that many people, and sometimes I too, have some basic instinct that if something is not customary, then there is no need to make an effort for it. As if the world has some kind of "inner pace" and I am not responsible for everything.
On the other hand, suppose I do act, since this is a small and private act that does not involve much trouble and will only raise a few eyebrows, nothing more. Then the question arises—so what? After all, if only I do it, the effect on the environment / on the issue in question will be extremely slight. According to the categorical imperative and basic moral intuition, if the hoped-for change is really to happen, I need to work for it actively—through persuasion and mobilizing the public, through policy changes. I am not well versed in these issues, but I know that from a halakhic standpoint there are limits to the scope of a person's responsibility in fulfilling commandments (coercion, up to a third of one's assets, your life takes precedence over your fellow's life, etc.), but are those relevant here as well? We seemingly live our lives as usual, study law or computer engineering and sit down to watch Netflix in the evening, waiting for someone to change the norm regarding the environment / animals / the citizens of Africa so that the situation will change—but meanwhile the world keeps getting polluted, animals keep suffering, and the citizens of Africa keep dying. It is clear to me that the general situation really is improving, but the pace is quite slow compared to the capabilities we have in our hands. To what extent am I required to perform the moral act—even if it would cause me to lose my standing in society, my friends, my money, my family, my personal dreams, and so on? Maybe I am simply not brave enough and not serious enough? Seemingly, if all of us got up and acted in what society today sees as "extreme," the norm itself would change, and what was extreme yesterday would be considered normal today.
I hope I was clear enough; I would be glad to hear your opinion.