Worst ways to spend a fortune, and her politics largely align with mine, but..
"funds social movements that want to end the use of fossil fuels"<p>We won't "raise awareness" ourselves to a carbon-free future. We aren't going to vote away the need to heat/cool/power our homes/factories/transport/etc.<p>I'm also let down by "kitchen sink progressives" who while espousing the desire to end fossil fuel usage, are basically funding/promoting just about every left of center activist topic you can think of. I don't think this leads to great success in any one area.<p>I am fairly confident that activist-driven stuff around the edges like banning gas stoves in NYC is not putting a dent in the path to a carbon-free future.<p>The only things that will are nuclear/wind/solar generation, storage tech, transit, smart grid/transmission lines, and all the permitting reform needed to keep the NIMBYs & degrowthers & fake environmental review people from slowing it all down. Basically boring non-sexy stuff that doesn't animate the base.<p>I always find the 2nd/3rd generation philanthropist class a bit opaque as well. At least with the 1st generation, you have a pretty solid idea of their net worth and thus how much of a "sacrifice" their charitable works are (Gates/Mellon/Buffet/etc). With people like Hunt-Hendrix, you have only a pretty spotty record of giving (10s of millions) with no idea how much money she got for being born (50M? 100M? 2B?).