I did a quick skim, and it seems to conflate the idea of Lovins saying what 'could be' with what 'actually happened', which of course is comparing apples to oranges.
For example, from TFA:
"The piece predicted that if the U.S. were to embrace Lovins’s vision, by around 2005 more than a third of the country’s energy would be coming from “soft technologies,”"
Then,
"So how did Lovins’s prediction turn out?"
Huh? the US most definitely did not embrace his vision, so of course the prediction is void.
There's a bunch of that kind of stuff in there. Try again.