No actually, I don't think that there is a disproportionate number of green supportes on long flights. Most who fly don't care either way really. I think the point is that many who lecture about the need for you and I to conserve more, aren't necesarily conserving more themselves overall. The Al Gore article is a good example. Much like when you read about preachers/ priests praising abstinence and then being caught in a sex scandal. It is hypocrisy.
We have been down this line before. Al Gore's "home" is an office where he runs a significant business. It is very convenient for him to live there as well, which saves him some commuting time. It also provides him with convenient security services from the government, which is provided to him as a former VPOTUS. They also live in the place you like cites as his "home" when you compare the energy bill he has.
And since he is a rich dude he is able to buy energy at the higher rates that support renewable sources from his utility. There really isn't a lot more he can do, but I know you guys who hate him would like to see him living in a tent. Not because you give a rat's ass about the environment and believe that would make things better, but because you hate him and figure he would be miserable living in a tent. It is irrational, but it is, and I recognize it as such. Like someone who is generally a decent human but when they see a ten year old girl they get a raging, uncontrollable hard on and have to beat off on the spot, in front of everyone. It would be a lot better if they could control their reaction and jack off at home, but hey, people can only do what they can do.