This may have been an old video since he mentioned something about after the movie comes out so any criticisms of his presentation may be out of date.  I was disappointed about the focus on carbon offsetting.  Going to the website and calculating the figures my result was 3.7 tons/year recommending I spend $48 in offsets.

The problem is the companies selling the carbon offsets are for-profit companies subsidizing other companies which may be for-profit.  Therefore there is a substantial percentage going into someone's pocket rather than programs reducing carbon output.

So I recommend that you take the money that would go to one of these programs and spend it on improved efficiency for your own home, or buy CFLs for someone who doesn't have them so the middleman is cut out and you can see direct results.  Or better yet, take the money and invest in green mutual funds like the Calvert fund.  Therefore you'll not only be supporting socially responsible companies but you can make a profit as well.

So far carbon offsets is a means for companies to whitewash their own pollution by claiming that they are carbon neutral when, in reality, they still pollute as much as they always have.  I really prefer hearing stories like McDonalds running it's fleet on biodiesel (sadly only in the UK) rather than Pepsi not making a change but claiming they are environmentally friendly simply because they gave a million dollars to a company which will skim off it's profit and give the rest to another company.