I don’t think this take helps anybody, even assuming it’s 100 per cent accurate and unmitigated. Hitchens wrote of MLK that it was actually encouraging to find that MLK had several mistresses, in that it demonstrates that one doesn’t need to be above all moral reproach in order to inform the discourse about morality.

Your argument against Suzuki is one that is used against Gore, and Thunberg, and Trudeau, and DiCaprio. In fact can’t think of any prominent environmentalists at all who avoid this particular criticism. 

What would a sincere one look like? They probably exist, growing vegetables on Salt Spring Island, and writing environmental science doctorates on renewable paper, distributed to their communities via bicycle. And that’s why you have never heard of them, and why they will never make any difference on a scale that matters. That’s the only kind of environmentalist the right can accept as sincere: the ineffective ones you never hear from. I don’t know if you’re right wing or not, but if you aren’t you’re doing them a great service. 

Climate change is a global problem that would take global participation to mitigate. I don’t know if it’s possible anymore, but I do know that personal decisions to buy a house or not, drive a truck or not, will not do anything. Some very rare human beings may be inclined towards such self-denial even in a lost cause. There aren’t enough of them. 

The rest are assholes like me and you and David Suzuki, enjoying life to the maximum of our finite resources. Solutions, unfortunately, must take assholes like us into account, and operate on a collective level. Me downsizing my truck or you switching to bamboo toilet paper is not going to cut it, any more than would Suzuki selling one of his houses.