There are good reasons not to get too worked up about public-opinion polling on issues like climate change and energy. Polls confirm, over and over, that the public opinion is malleable—so much rides on the wording of questions. And most people don’t analyze policy in their spare time, so why ask them about cap and trade? Only 24 percent of Americans could even identify cap and trade as an energy/environment policy in a May Rasmussen poll. Twenty-nine percent thought it was a Wall Street regulation.
Still, it’s hard not to be troubled by a Pew Research Center poll released today. Conducted three weeks ago among 1,500 adults reached on cell phones and landlines, the poll finds a significant drop in the number of Americans who believe global warming is happening, is human-caused, and is a serious problem.
The poll found that only 57 percent of respondents believe that “the earth is getting warmer,” compared with 71 percent in April 2008. Pew has asked similar sets of questions six times since June 2006 and has never found such a dramatic rise in skepticism.
Those who believe warming is caused by human activity (burning fossil fuels) wavered between 41 and 50 percent in the first five polls. This fall, the figure dropped to 36 percent.
Those who consider global warming a “very serious problem” ranged between 41 and 47 percent in the first five polls. This fall, the figure fell to 35 percent.
The shift was most pronounced among political independents. In that group, those who believe there is solid evidence for climate change fell from 75 percent in the April 2008 poll to 53 percent (that’s 22 points). Democrats who believe there is solid evidence for climate change dropped from 83 percent in the last poll to 75 percent. Republicans slipped from 49 percent to 35 percent.
Other recent polls haven’t found the rise in skepticism that Pew documents. An August Zogby poll found a majority of Americans wanted additional or continued action from Congress on climate change. A July poll from WorldPublicOpinion.org found Americans lagging other countries in demanding a climate plan, yet still asking their government to do more. For a bit of context on what scientists think, yesterday 18 leading scientific organizations sent a letter to U.S. senators reminding them of the scientific consensus that climate change is happening, that it is caused by human activities, and that its effects will be severe.
There were two small (and puzzling) bits of consolation in the poll: many respondents support limiting greenhouse-gas emissions, and many want the U.S. to join an international climate-change plan.
Fifty percent of respondents favor CO2 limits and “making companies pay for their emissions, even if it may mean higher energy prices.” Thirty-nine percent say they oppose this, and 11 percent are unsure or did not answer.
Fifty-six percent of respondents think the United States “should join other countries in setting standards to address global climate change.” Some of them appear to support solutions—even ones that raise the cost of energy—to problems they do not believe in.
There are a number of possible explanations for the rise in skepticism. Although, honestly, the findings are still surprising.
- For one, it’s been a cold summer in much of the country.
- Let's not forget about that years-long, systematic disinformation campaign to confuse the public about climate change.
- Also, the economy. This week a POLITICO poll asked respondents to rank issues of concern. Predictably, the economy came out tops. Pew’s poll didn’t ask respondents to rank their concerns, but there is an (accurate) perception that politicians can only address so many problems. Telling pollsters you’re not so concerned with the climate is a way of telling elected leaders that’s great, now fix the economy.
- A national climate plan has become more likely than ever before. As the policy implications of this become more immediate and concrete, people may decide it’s more convenient not to believe in the phenomenon. Don’t believe in the problem and you don’t have to feel guilty for not responding to it.
- Finally, the campaign against cap and trade might have the inadvertent effect of making people reject the problem along with the solution. “It's quite possible that anti-cap-and-trade messaging has seeped into America's unconscious mind, affecting opinion on global warming even as the public says it's heard very little about the legislation being proposed,” Chris Good writes at the Atlantic.
None of these are especially satisfying answers. It’s not a very satisfying poll. If nothing else, it underscores the importance of using clean-energy arguments to promote an energy and climate plan.
What can China teach us about electric bikes?
Has Big Organic passed its sell-by date?
One year later, a Happy Meal doesn't decompose
Comments
Post a Comment +
Jonathan- I linked to this on my other piece because it shows that our arguments are simply not working.
Set apart the climate change as manifested in unpredictable seasons, drying up water sources, prolonged droughts and devastating floods, ice-melting and more, just to think of the sky in Beijing, human-made climate change might need no further evidence. Polluting toxic chemicals is comparable to the smoking habit that is detrimental to human health. And the numerous intractable diseases are almost certainly due to the toxic chemicals.
Breathing toxic chemicals in the outdoor ...read more
This is an astonishing result, a year after the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report argued that “[w]arming of the climate system is unequivocal†and that “[m]ost of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (human) greenhouse gas concentrations.†It is especially sad given the fact that the supposed scientific debate about the causes of climate ...read more
Call me ignorant, but I don't get it. C02 is rising, GHG quantities keep increasing, they are blamed for the global rise in temps. That I get. But, the warmest year on record was 1998. (how far back do our meteorlogical records go back?) The last 2 years have been cooler than usual. Why aren't we experiencing a stedy increase in global warming as our emmisions of GHG's keep increasing at such a breakneck pace?
Now this is odd -- my previous comment has been deleted. I'll repeat it. I believe the cool summer in North America can account for most of this. People are much more influenced by their immediate experience than by abstract arguments they don't really understand. It will take actually experienced unusual warmth to make the average person believe in the reality of climate change.
Keep in mind that according to some polls, close to half of Americans also don't believe in evolution, and that up to a third of Americans also believe the Earth is only a few thousand years old.
Face it, there'll always be a fair number of flat-earthers. It can't be helped.
As Jonathan said, "For one, it's been a cold summer in much of the country." Actually, one could say it was unusually cold in much of the country this summer. This is inconsistent with the idea "global warming," which, to the average American, means just a consistent, linear temperature increase. However, this oddly cold summer is not necessarily inconsistent with "climate change", even though these two terms are commonly used to describe the same phenomenon. My point is that ...read more
Cervantes- I agree that the unusually cool past summer in the US is big factor in the public's declining awareness of climate change. The irony is that anthropogenic climate change CAN ACTUALLY CAUSE unusually cold weather in some reasons, like our weather here this summer. And thus an effect of climate change (unusually cold weather) is misunderstood by the public as a rebuttal of it, due to our use of the misleading term "global warming."
I think that there are more fundamental reasons the general community is becoming skeptical about climate change, and its stems from the conduct and reactions of environmental groups. I agree that skeptic, nay saying groups are having an effect with silly misinformation, but that is only part of the picture. A basic tenat of human judgment is: "actions speak louder than words."
In my view, there is a growing realization that a high price will be paid in environmental terms ...read more
You're confusing on-site vs. off-site industrial scale energy with whether or not people believe there is global warming.
Frankly, I don't see the connection you're trying to make.
Neither party or group deny there is global warming, and in fact, both groups use the existence of global warming as a way to push the need for their ideas forward.
The atmosphere of the Earth is very dynamic. It carries the variations in temperature from place to place even though the actual heat received from the sun is constant for the whole world. Averages are therefore extremely difficult to arrive at - the best we can do is make estimates, but doing that consistently allows us to get closer to the reality of global warming or global cooling. The simple fact that the worldwide amount of ice (formed from water whose temperature ...read more
Dan has it right, How many SUVs have I seen going around with save the earth stickers. Obama is all talk and no action so far. No sense in convincing people to change until you change yourself. A lot of good things happen when you stop trying to tell others what to do or how to think and you just walk the talk.
I will add to this that it is hard to trust what you hear, the media,governmnet and corporations have lied to us so many times to serve their own interests. Even ...read more
Ok, so the sun heats the earth evenly, If the sun has sunspot activity the whole world is affected the same? Your analogy of the ice in a drink is good, but that could open up the arguement that the world ins experiencing climate equalibrium. Doesn't sound so alarmist, but the affects could be the same. But that brings me to my original question... "how far back do our meteorlogical records go?" It wasn't until just recently (1980's or so) that computers were large enough ...read more
TImeslayer: You say:"As Jonathan said, 'For one, it's been a cold summer in much of the country.' Actually, one could say it was unusually cold in much of the country this summer. This is inconsistent with the idea 'global warming,' which, to the average American, means just a consistent, linear temperature increase."
You point out a common misunderstanding about "climate change" or "global warming" is that warming will occur everywhere. In fact, one of the key physical ...read more
Tasermons: Please see my reply to Timeslayer above.
I suspect you have not been following the naysayer community closely. Take a look at the Lord Christopher Monckton and his traveling band of "climate change debunkers." They are working in conjunction with documentary film makers to cast doubt on "Big Environment" and the past lethal "mistakes" of the environmental community - referred to as "fads." Their message: current global warming is just another environmental ...read more
As some of of here have been saying for years: please do not label the phenomenon in question "global warming".
We should stick to GHG climate change instead. Greater volatility in weather patterns due to the rentention of more solar energy. More severe droughts and storms, and rapid glacier, ice cap, and tundra melt.
The poll question that would help our cause is this: would you favor a shift of US government tax breaks and subsidies from fossil fuel and nuclear power ...read more
AMAZINGDRX: You make a series of good points, but I think it would be helpful if we talk about the physics of global warming: air contaminants absorb more energy as heat, heating the atmosphere, and, as in the case of water warmed on a stove burner, as the atmosphere warms it becomes more agitated. An extreme example is boiling water, but you can see the currents in water as it warms. The same thing is happening due to warming from the sun. This is a simple, accurate and ...read more
Foodprovider - historic records of temperatures are derived from many sources, like tree rings, etc., but the most recent item I heard the other day detailed the ship's logs that seafarers compiled when they were exploring and circumnavigating the world back in the 1500s and 1600s. These records were just recently (I mean this year) dug out of storage in England (story on CBC Radio 1 a week ago) and contained daily entries over many months at various locations. The temperatures were all much lower than current readings and were consistent with one another, comparing hundreds of logbooks over many years.
Good analysis of where we stand in relation to China's growing manufacturing advantage. They have the capital to lead this new global energy economy, while our cash has been squandered on oil wars of choice and bailouts and bankruptcies personal and corporate.
There are a few things that could help us catch up and maybe even pull ahead. And they all depend on our lead in R&D and inovation. We still lead in this and you are right that invention doesn't do us a lot of good ...read more
"...buy it cheaper from the Chinese on the national credit card."
The fees will get you! Hehehey. And intrests rate rises, masked as currency exchange rate "fluctuations". Don't get fluctuated by manipulated currency markets. What a mess.
Pay workers here 20 bucks per hour to operate advanced manufacturing facilities, instead of buying questionably quality controlled products made with decades old factory technology operated by 50 cent per hour labor, we will be way ...read more
Short term climate variability in general and global temperature in particular is influenced primarily by ocean oscillations. The oceans store a tremendous amount of heat. Solar variability from maximum to minimum only varies the energy input into the climate system by ~0.3C. This is an immediate forcing and can be detected when analyzing the temperature record. However, the solar/climate correlation has disappeared over the last 50 years as solar has decreased while ...read more
SKYHUNTER: I have no quarrel with most of what you say about the heating effect of CO2. I do wonder, however, about the statement: "carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for centuries, it's forcing though slight continues to force the trend upwards for decades as the oceans warm and the climate system comes into equilibrium. So unlike solar variability, the CO2 signal is only observable over decades not years."
The notion that CO2 remains in the atmosphere for centuries ...read more