Planet of the Humans (Apes) By James Reed

     The religion of climate change has been given a slap in the face by socialist Michael Moore’s new film, Planet of the Humans, which is an obvious allusion to the Planet of the Apes move franchise. Moore has upset the environmentalists by attacking the sacred of sacreds, renewable energy. Here is Rolling Stone on this:
  https://theconversation.com/3-times-michael-moores-film-planet-of-the-humans-gets-the-facts-wrong-and-3-times-it-gets-them-right-137890
  https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/bill-mckibben-climate-movement-michael-moore-993073/

“Basically, Moore and his colleagues have made a film attacking renewable energy as a sham and arguing that the environmental movement is just a tool of corporations trying to make money off green energy. “One of the most dangerous things right now is the illusion that alternative technologies, like wind and solar, are somehow different from fossil fuels,” Ozzie Zehner, one of the film’s producers, tells the camera. When visiting a solar facility, he insists: “You use more fossil fuels to do this than you’re getting benefit from it. You would have been better off just burning the fossil fuels.” That’s not true, not in the least — the time it takes for a solar panel to pay back the energy used to build it is well under four years. Since it lasts three decades, it means 90 percent of the power it produces is pollution-free, compared with zero percent of the power from burning fossil fuels. It turns out that pretty much everything else about the movie was wrong — there have been at least 24 debunkings, many of them painfully rigorous; as one scientist wrote in a particularly scathing takedown, “Planet of the Humans is deeply useless. Watch anything else.” Moore’s fellow filmmaker Josh Fox, in an epic unraveling of the film’s endless lies, got in one of the best shots: “Releasing this on the eve of Earth Day’s 50th anniversary is like Bernie Sanders endorsing Donald Trump while chugging hydroxychloroquine.”

     Words, words, words. But renewable energy does have its costs, and it is highly unlikely that it could fuel the consumer society we know and love. A bit of googling yielded this reference which is written from the environmentalist side, but rejects the idea that renewables can fuel industrial society, and in fact the author wants to move to a simpler post-industrial conserver society, with local self-reliance and organic agriculture/permaculture. But, that is poisonous the political Greens who are globalists first, and who put the environment, way down the list:
  https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9781402055485
  https://www.amazon.com/Renewable-Energy-Sustain-Consumer-Society/dp/140205548X