People who have money and a stake in green energy have the motivation and means to actively fight against the movie, while part-time volunteer activists don't.
That doesn't make the content of the film any more accurate [1], nor does it mean that the technologies put forward by profiteers of green energy less valid. This article too seems to cherry-pick problems without comparing the size to alternatives (which it doesn't offer).
It's ironic that the solution would lie in the hands of common people (change their consumption, become active), but prefer to blame rich people, left and right.
Billionaires don't drive billions of cars or eat billions of beef steaks, the "average Joe's" do.
That doesn't make the content of the film any more accurate [1], nor does it mean that the technologies put forward by profiteers of green energy less valid. This article too seems to cherry-pick problems without comparing the size to alternatives (which it doesn't offer).
It's ironic that the solution would lie in the hands of common people (change their consumption, become active), but prefer to blame rich people, left and right. Billionaires don't drive billions of cars or eat billions of beef steaks, the "average Joe's" do.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmNjLHRAP2U