Seems relatively well balanced to me; a few minor errors - but then the chap is a journo afterall.
Not sure how the stereo typical reader of The Guardian will react to that article though, not a single mention of carbon footprint (although there was a token mention of environment) I suppose...
... or perhaps I have a twisted image of the stereotypical Guardian reader?
(Oh and before we all start, I read it regularly too - but then again I also read The Mail!).