You'd need to be careful that both your credibility and the message
don't suffer. There are many things in the video that are just plain
false.
It would be good to present to a communications class as a way of
showing how you can take myths and half-truths, apply them to a
populist argument, and get away with it very well. But if you are
trying to present sustainability then the falsehoods and obvious spin
will probably result in some students adjusting their view of your
credibility, and then taking the message with a grain of salt -
perhaps even dismissing it as the fad de jure.
My favorite example is the implication that computer manufacturers
change the shape of the CPU so that you can't upgrade. When in fact
the shape hardly ever changes (yes there are a few different formats
but they don't change that often). You normally have to buy a whole
new motherboard for a new CPU because a HUGE amount of the motherboard
has changed (she implies only the CPU changes) and the modern/
replacement CPU requires those changed components for it to work.
The closed loop manufacturing process is a laugh too. You'd need to
hope that no one starts scoffing at the perpetual motion she seems to
imply.
It is useful for critiquing communication and raising awareness that
there's a lot of very slick snake-oil salesmen out there - but it may
backfire in a sustainability class when you actually want to get the
message across and have students accept it.
But hey - due to typical gullibility, in many classes I'd say that a
good 75-90% of students would fall for it. You just have to watch out
for a loud-mouth student not afraid to call B.S., and then take the
class with them.
daveb