This post includes climate and environment headlines, data points, and key takeaways from recent public polls - including a major new report on the politics of global warming from Yale and George Mason, new national tracking of Americans’ climate attitudes, and new polling on climate resilience and disaster response policies.

 

 

HEADLINES

• Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC) + George Mason Center for Climate Change Communication (GMCCC) - Majorities of voters across the political spectrum support clean energy expansion, energy efficiency investments, and conservation jobs programs; however, there has been a drop in voters’ prioritization of global warming and clean energy this year as the economy and election issues dominate voters’ thinking (Summary, Report)
• Economist + YouGov - Majorities of Americans recognize human-caused climate change and believe the country is headed in the wrong direction on addressing it (Topline, Crosstabs)
• Data for Progress - Voters overwhelmingly support policies to invest in climate resilience and better assist people who are displaced by climate disasters (Memo, Topline)

 

 

GOOD DATA POINTS TO HIGHLIGHT

• 87% of voters support providing tax incentives or rebates to homeowners, landlords, and businesses to make existing buildings more energy efficient [Yale + GMU]

• 85% of voters support federal funding to make national infrastructure, including bridges and electrical grids, better prepared to stand up against extreme weather events [Data for Progress]

• 83% of voters support legislation guaranteeing federal housing assistance and housing placement for individuals who are displaced by extreme weather events [Data for Progress]

• 79% of voters support funding more research into renewable energy sources [Yale + GMU]

• 77% of voters support providing tax rebates to people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels [Yale + GMU] 

• 74% of voters support regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant [Yale + GMU]

• 69% of voters support transitioning the U.S. economy (including electric utilities, transportation, buildings, and industry) to 100% clean energy by 2050 [Yale + GMU]

• 69% of voters support increasing federal funding to low-income communities and communities of color who are disproportionately harmed by air and water pollution [Yale + GMU]

• 66% of voters support a revenue-neutral carbon tax that would require fossil fuel companies to pay a tax on the carbon pollution they produce, with the revenue used to reduce other taxes such as the federal income tax [Yale + GMU]

• 63% of voters support requiring electric utilities to produce 100% of their electricity from wind, solar, and other renewable energy sources by 2035 [Yale + GMU]

• 58% of voters would prefer to vote for a political candidate who supports action on global warming, while just 17% would prefer to vote for a candidate who opposes climate action [Yale + GMU] 

• More Americans say that climate change and the environment is the single “most important issue” to them than any other issue besides jobs and the economy [Economist + YouGov]

 

 

FULL ROUNDUP

 

Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (YPCCC) + George Mason Center for Climate Change Communication (GMCCC)

Majorities of voters across the political spectrum support clean energy expansion, energy efficiency investments, and conservation jobs programs; however, there has been a drop in voters’ prioritization of global warming and clean energy this year as the economy and democracy issues dominate voters’ thinking (Summary, Report)

 

This latest edition of the YPCCC and GMCCC’s biannual “Politics & Global Warming” report finds that voters this year have become less likely to say that developing sources of clean energy (61%, down from 69% in Sep. 2021) and addressing global warming (50%, down from 60% in Sep. 2021) should be “high” or “very high” priorities for the president and Congress. 

 

These drops in prioritization have come from across the political spectrum. For example, the percentages saying that global warming should be a “high” or “very high” priority for the president and Congress have dropped by six points among liberal Democrats (88%, down from 94%), by 12 points among moderate-to-conservative Democrats (68%, down from 80%), by seven points among liberal-to-moderate Republicans (38%, down from 45%), and by five points among conservative Republicans (12%, down from 17%).

 

When put in the context of other major issues of the day, it’s clear that climate and environmental issues remain top-tier concerns for the most progressive voters but don’t have the same wide salience across the electorate as economic issues or protecting democracy.

 

Survey respondents were asked to rate how important 29 different issues are for their vote in congressional elections this year, and free and fair elections (74% “very important”), government corruption (70%), the economy (69%), and inflation (66%) form a clear top tier ahead of any other priorities. 

 

By comparison, 47% say that protecting the environment is “very important” to their vote (11th-highest of the 29 issues in the survey), 39% say that developing sources of clean energy is “very important” to their vote (22nd), and 39% say that global warming is “very important” to their vote (24th).

 

Among self-identified liberal Democrats, more say that environmental protection is “very important” to them in this year’s congressional elections (81%) than any other issue. Global warming (74%”very important”) and clean energy development (68%) also rank as top-five priorities for liberal Democrats.

 

Environmental protection ranks quite highly on the priority list for moderate-to-conservative Democrats as well (7th out of 29), but clean energy (14th) and global warming (16th) are only mid-tier concerns. 

 

Among both liberal-to-moderate and conservative Republicans, meanwhile, each of these environmental issues rank in the bottom half of the 29 issues polled. Underlining the level of partisan polarization around climate change in particular, global warming is the second-lowest priority of the 29 issues in the survey for liberal-to-moderate Republicans and the single lowest priority for conservative Republicans.

 

Despite this extreme partisan divide on climate issues, several specific climate-friendly policy proposals engender majority support from across the political spectrum. Proposals related to conservation, energy efficiency, and clean energy development are particularly likely to draw cross-partisan support, as each of the proposals below are supported by over three-quarters of voters overall - including majorities of self-identified conservative Republicans:

• Providing tax incentives or rebates to homeowners, landlords, and businesses to make existing buildings more energy efficient (87% support overall)

• Providing federal funding to help farmers improve farming practices to protect and restore the soil so it absorbs and stores more carbon (86%)

• Re-establishing the Civilian Climate Corps, which would employ workers to protect natural ecosystems, plant trees in rural and urban areas, and restore the soil on farmlands (86%)

• Generating renewable energy from solar and wind on public land in the U.S. (81%)

• Creating a jobs program that would hire unemployed oil and gas workers to safely close down thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells, which are a source of water and methane pollution (80%)

• Creating a jobs program that would hire unemployed coal workers to safely close down coal mines and restore the natural landscape (80%)

• Funding more research into renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power (79%)

• Providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels (77%)

• Providing federal funding to make residential buildings in low-income communities more energy efficient (77%)

 

The poll also finds encouraging levels of agreement on climate-friendly policies that can be enacted at the local level. When they are presented as policies “for your local community,” large majorities - including 60%+ of conservative Republicans - support each of the following:

• Increasing the availability of public transportation in your county (83% support overall)

• Providing funding to help homeowners make energy-efficient improvements to their homes (82%)

• Constructing bike paths and installing bike lanes on city streets (77%)

 

One key area where partisans diverge is in their relative preference between climate action by the private sector and by the government. While large majorities of Democrats say that they want actors of all kinds to do more to address global warming - including corporations and industry (86%), the U.S. Congress (85%), their local government officials (81%), their state’s governor (78%), and President Biden (74%) - Republicans are much more likely to support climate action by corporate America than by government officials. 

 

For example, Republicans are nearly twice as likely to say that they want corporations and industry to do more to address global warming (45%) than to say they want President Biden (23%) or their state’s governor (23%) to do more to address the problem.

 

Beliefs about the economic impacts of climate policy are another major area of partisan divergence. Overall, voters are 22 points more likely to say that policies intended to transition away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy will have a positive impact on the economy and jobs (52%) than a negative impact (30%). Further, by a margin of 15 points, voters believe that increasing clean energy production (57%) is more likely to create a greater number of good jobs than increasing fossil fuel production (42%).

 

However, Republican voters - especially those who are more ideologically conservative - break sharply with the rest of the electorate by expecting negative economic outcomes from the clean energy transition. Republicans are 35 points more likely to say that the clean energy transition will reduce economic growth and cost jobs (58%) than to say it will improve economic growth and create jobs (23%). While liberal-to-moderate Republicans are split on this topic (41% improve growth and jobs / 39% reduce growth and jobs), conservative Republicans are 51 points more likely to expect negative economic impacts (67%) than positive economic impacts (16%).

 

Additionally, 72% of Republican voters - including 79% of conservative Republicans as well as the majority (55%) of liberal-to-moderate Republicans - believe that increasing fossil fuel production is more likely to create a greater number of good jobs than increasing clean energy production.

 

All of this data reinforces that there is no “one-size-fits-all” way to communicate to general audiences about the climate crisis, as partisans interpret the issue in some fundamentally different ways. Helpfully, the Yale/GMU report provides guidance on the types of messengers that are likely to be most effective with different audiences. 

 

The poll asked how much respondents trust 21 different potential sources of information about global warming, and the most trusted sources vary widely by audience. While Democratic voters respond most to authorities with specific expertise on global warming (e.g., climate scientists and environmental organizations), Republican voters are relatively more likely to trust people they have personal relationships with - including friends, family, and primary care doctors. And among people and institutions in public life, NASA has the most credibility on global warming overall and among Republican audiences specifically. 

 

Below are the messengers trusted the most among voters overall and among Democratic and Republican audiences.

 

Most Trusted Messengers Overall

• NASA - 74% trust at least “somewhat”

• Family and friends - 73%

• Climate scientists - 70%

• Your primary care doctor - 67%

• The EPA - 65%

• Television weather reporters - 64%

• Environmental organizations - 63%

 

Most Trusted Messengers by Democratic Voters

• Climate scientists - 93% trust at least “somewhat”

• Environmental organizations - 90%

• The EPA - 89%

• NASA - 88%

• President Biden - 85%

• Television weather reporters - 85%

 

Most Trusted Messengers by Republican Voters

• Family & friends - 70% trust at least “somewhat”

• Your primary care doctor - 61%

• NASA - 61%

• Climate scientists - 49%

• Television weather reporters - 46%

 

Economist + YouGov

Majorities of Americans recognize human-caused climate change and believe the country is headed in the wrong direction on addressing it (Topline, Crosstabs)

 

The latest Economist/YouGov national tracking survey finds that a stable majority of Americans (55%) believe that the world’s climate is changing as a result of human activity. An additional 23% believe the world’s climate is changing naturally, while 8% deny that the climate is changing at all and the remaining 13% are unsure.

 

Further, nearly half of Americans (47%) say they’ve already felt the effects of climate change and an additional 11% say they haven’t felt the effects of climate change yet but believe they will experience the effects during their lifetimes.

 

The poll also finds that the most commonly held view around the effectiveness of climate action continues to be that it’s possible to avoid the worst effects of climate change if we make major changes. When asked to choose which description best reflects their views, two in five (41%) say that “we are still able to avoid the worst effects of climate change but it would need a drastic change in the steps taken to tackle it.” For comparison, just 14% believe that it’s “already too late to avoid the worst effects of climate change” and only 13% believe that we will be able to avoid the worst effects of climate change “if we broadly carry on with the steps currently being taken.”

 

This dissatisfaction with the current steps being taken to address the climate crisis also comes through elsewhere in the poll, as Americans are three times more likely to say that the country is “off on the wrong track” on the issues of climate change and the environment (60%) than to say it is “generally headed in the right direction” (20%).

 

And on the heels of the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia vs. EPA, Americans side by a 14-point margin with the argument that the EPA should be able to write regulations to protect the environment even if these regulations might hurt individual industries (44% should be able to / 30% should not be able to).

 

Relatedly, the poll finds that Americans have generally positive attitudes about the EPA as 53% view the agency favorably and 31% view it unfavorably. 

 

Data for Progress

Voters overwhelmingly support policies to invest in climate resilience and better assist people who are displaced by climate disasters (Memo, Topline)

 

A common finding in climate polling is that voters across the political spectrum, even segments that are dubious about climate change, widely support investments to mitigate the damage caused by climate change. 

 

To that end, this new polling from Data for Progress finds overwhelming support from voters of all political stripes for the following policies to protect the country from extreme weather:

• Federal funding to make national infrastructure, including bridges and electrical grids, better prepared to stand up against extreme weather events (85% support)

• Legislation guaranteeing federal housing assistance and housing placement for individuals who are displaced from their homes due to extreme weather (83%)

• Legislation guaranteeing federal grants for extremely low-, low-, and moderate-income victims of extreme weather events, as well as other vulnerable groups (78%)

• Federal funding to make homes and buildings in high-risk areas, including wildfire zones and flood plains, better prepared to stand up against extreme weather events (74%)

 

The poll finds that displacement due to natural disasters is a common worry, as 47% of voters say that they are at least “somewhat” concerned about being displaced from their homes due to an extreme weather event such as a hurricane, flood, or wildfire. Additionally, voters’ confidence in the federal government to help in the event of natural disasters is quite low: over half (52%) say the government isn’t providing enough support for disaster relief, while just 35% say the federal government is providing enough support and only 3% say it’s providing too much.