Environmental Polling Roundup - February 27, 2026

EPC Resource Library / Weekly Roundups

Environmental Polling Roundup – February 27, 2026

David Gold

February 27th, 2026

Headlines

GBAO, GSG, Hart Research + Workbench Strategy – With affordability at the top of voters’ minds, advocates have a clear opportunity to make a strong case for clean energy as part of the solution and should emphasize how anti-clean energy politicians are banning clean energy while energy demand and prices are surging [Memo]

Climate Power + LCV – Voters are rapidly losing trust in Trump and Republicans to handle energy prices, but don’t have confidence in Democrats either; utility companies and regulators receive the most blame for rising prices [Website with memo + deck]

EDF Action + Utility Action Alliance – Voters want energy affordability policies that hold utilities and data center companies accountable; positive messaging on clean energy should address voters’ questions about its speed and reliability [Deck]

AP + NORC – The majority of Americans say that they’ve been personally affected by severe cold weather or winter storms in recent years, and most say that it has impacted their energy bills [Website, Topline]

Climate Power – Energy costs continue to top Americans’ concerns about data centers; most would support a data center near their community if it were powered by clean energy but not if it were powered by fossil fuels [Website, Deck]

Key Takeaways

Voters don’t trust either political party to deal with energy prices, as both parties have their own distinct weaknesses on the issue. Newly released polling by LCV and Climate Power finds that voters’ trust in Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress to address energy prices has dropped sharply over the past year. However, this hasn’t corresponded to any meaningful gains for Democrats and voters now similarly distrust both parties to deal with the problem.

Other new polling commissioned by EDF Action and the Utility Action Alliance elucidates the two parties’ respective vulnerabilities. Voters in battleground states see Republicans as catering more to corporate special interests on energy issues. And while they see Democrats as more aligned with ratepayers’ interests and more willing to take on utility companies, they also associate Democrats much more with wanting to “ban” certain energy sources than Republicans.

Voters are eager for leaders who want to expand the energy supply and hold utility companies accountable. Given these dynamics, organizations and policymakers can effectively position themselves in the current moment by demanding an end to policies that selectively block clean energy projects and by showing that they are willing to take on utility monopolies.

Advocates should keep centering costs in their arguments for clean energy, but we also need to address questions about clean energy’s reliability and speed. Clean energy advocates have gained considerable ground in the debate over energy affordability. A few years ago, the public had very mixed perceptions about the cost effectiveness of solar and wind. Now, polls consistently show that voters view clean energy sources (and solar in particular) as more affordable than fossil fuels.

The rapidly declining costs of clean energy, combined with advocates’ consistent communication about clean energy affordability and the public’s own experiences with energy price shocks, have strengthened clean energy advocates’ position in the costs debate. It’s imperative for advocates to keep making the connection between clean energy and affordability to cement and build on these gains.

At the same time, it’s important to recognize and address voters’ concerns about the reliability, speed, and readiness of clean energy. Fossil fuel-aligned politicians are consistently trying to exploit fears about clean energy reliability (“the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow”), and voters have real questions about it. The new battleground state polling commissioned by EDF Action and the Utility Action Alliance shows that voters in battleground states are 20 points more likely to say that clean energy would do a better job of keeping electricity bills lower than gas power plants. However, these voters are split on which of these energy sources would better prevent blackouts and they see gas power plants as more “proven” technologies that can also “bring electricity online more quickly.”

Good Data Points to Highlight

[Clean Energy] Voters support restoring tax credits to jumpstart the production of more wind and solar power by a 41-point margin (64% support / 23% oppose) [EDF Action + Utility Action Alliance]

[Clean Energy + Data Centers] Americans would support a new AI data center near their community by a 25-point margin if it were powered primarily by clean energy like wind and solar (53% support / 28% oppose), but would oppose it by a 16-point margin if it were powered by fossil fuels like coal or natural gas (31% support / 47% oppose) [Climate Power]

[Clean Energy + Prices] 52% of voters believe that producing and using more clean energy like wind and solar would make energy more affordable in the next one or two years, while just 20% believe that it would make energy less affordable [Climate Power + LCV]

[Battleground Voters + Clean Energy] 62% of voters in battleground states would prefer to build new clean energy projects to meet increasing energy demand, compared to 34% who would prefer to build new gas power plants [EDF Action + Utility Action Alliance]

[Battleground Voters + Clean Energy] By a 30-point margin, battleground state voters say that clean energy would do more to help make America energy independent (61%) than gas power plants (31%) [EDF Action + Utility Action Alliance]

[Battleground Voters + Clean Energy] By a 20-point margin, battleground state voters say that clean energy would do a better job keeping electricity bills lower (53%) than gas power plants (33%) [EDF Action + Utility Action Alliance]

Full Roundup

This new memo synthesizes the top takeaways from a variety of recent research projects on energy affordability. And while it’s primarily focused on electoral strategy, there is valuable guidance here about how voters think about energy issues that pro-clean energy advocates at all types of organizations can utilize.

Below are the “key takeaways” laid out in the memo:

“Electricity bills have joined groceries, housing, and health care as a top tier issue in the affordability crisis.
Voters broadly support clean energy and view it as one of the few solutions to help lower energy costs.
There is both a need and an opportunity for Democrats to engage on energy costs.
Voters, including many Republicans, strongly oppose Trump and MAGA Republicans taking affordable clean energy off the grid and believe their utility bills will increase as a result.
Democrats need to make it clear that Republicans are the only party trying to ban energy sources, as energy demand is surging by the rise of AI data centers.
Democrats’ message resonates better when they show they’re willing to side with consumers and stand up to monopoly utilities that are making huge profits while driving up rates.”

The memo also provides messaging guidance both to make a positive case for a pro-clean energy agenda and to make a negative case against an anti-clean energy agenda. Again, while it’s presented in a partisan context, this research-backed guidance includes resonant proof points that advocates can adapt in the appropriate way for their own organization.

Pulling the memo’s positive messaging guidance:

“Our number one priority is to make life affordable for people again. That means lowering the cost of housing, groceries, childcare, and electricity.

We can bring down electricity bills by maximizing all existing energy sources and building new wind and solar projects, which are the fastest way to bring new electricity online and cost 30% to 60% less than new gas plants to produce the same amount of electricity.

And we need to increase accountability to prevent monopoly utility companies from padding their profits and executive bonuses by overcharging consumers – and make sure data centers are powered by clean energy and pay for it.”

And below is the memo’s guidance for negative messaging against anti-clean energy politicians:

“After a year of full Republican control in Washington, electricity bills have gone up 13%—more than four times the rate of inflation.

With energy prices rising, we need to bring more energy online as quickly as possible. Yet, Trump and MAGA Republicans have canceled hundreds of clean energy projects that would have helped lower energy bills, even projects that were over 80% complete. They are forcing states to keep outdated and inefficient coal plants, even when utilities don’t want them because they are so much more expensive to operate. (And their order to keep one Michigan coal plant open past its planned retirement has already cost consumers more than $100 million in just a few months.)”

Concerns about the cost of electricity are strong and universal, with clear salience in every region of the country. More than four in five voters nationwide (83%) say that they are concerned about the cost of electricity, including 43% who are “very” concerned.

Further, nearly three-quarters (73%) report that the cost of their household utilities like electricity and heating has gone up in the past year. This includes at least two-thirds of voters in every region of the country, including the Northeast (80%), Midwest (77%), West (71%), and South (67%).

Utility companies and regulators take the brunt of the blame for rising electricity bills, as voters don’t reflexively see it as a partisan issue. Large majorities blame utility companies that overcharge customers and the regulators that allow these high prices for rising electricity bills and home energy costs.

Below are the percentages who say that various factors are at least “somewhat” to blame for rising utility costs:

State regulators that let utility companies charge customers high prices – 79%
Utility companies overcharging customers to increase their profits – 75%
Rising prices for natural gas, the leading source for electric power plants – 62%
Increasing electricity demand from artificial intelligence (AI) and computer data centers – 61%
The decisions by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress to terminate solar power and wind energy projects – 55%
Democrats in Congress mandating the increased use of clean energy instead of natural gas – 50%

Voters believe that increasing clean energy is likely to help with energy prices, but could still use more convincing. Just over half of voters (52%) believe that it would make energy more affordable in the next one or two years if the U.S. were to use more clean energy sources like wind and solar, while only 20% believe that it would make prices worse. Meanwhile, 16% say that it wouldn’t make a difference on costs and 11% acknowledge that they don’t know.

Republicans have lost a lot of trust in the debate over energy costs, but voters don’t have confidence in either party to address them. Voters are now 19 points more likely to say that Trump is making things worse on energy prices (50%) than to say that he is making things better (31%). This represents a sharp drop from last March, when voters were only five points more likely to say that Trump was making energy prices worse than to say that he was making them better (41% better / 46% worse).

Voters also feel much more negatively about how Republicans in Congress are handling energy prices now (27% making them better / 48% making them worse, -22 on net) than they were in March (37% making them better / 44% making them worse, -7 on net).

Declining confidence in Republicans hasn’t been to Democrats’ clear gain, however. Voters are 22 points more likely to say that Democrats in Congress are making energy prices worse (44%) than to say that Democrats in Congress are making things better (22%), and this view has hardly shifted since March (20% better / 45% worse, -25 net).

Neither party accordingly holds much of an advantage over the other on energy affordability. Below are the percentages who say that they trust one party over the other on various priorities related to energy costs:

Lowering monthly utility bills – Democrats +6
Dealing with the cost of electricity and home energy costs – Democrats +3
Stopping monthly utility bills from increasing – Democrats +2
Having a long-term plan to meet the country’s energy needs – Democrats +1
Upgrading and improving the reliability of the electric grid – EVEN
Making the U.S. energy-independent – Republicans +4

Positive messaging on clean energy is more effective when it connects the topic to voters’ broader struggles with the cost of living. Out of 13 energy-related messages that the poll tested as hypothetical “statements you might hear from a Democratic candidate running for Congress,” the following message that presents clean energy as part of the solution to the affordability crisis rated as by far the most persuasive as a reason to support the candidate:

[GENERAL COST OF LIVING] “Our number one priority is to make life affordable for people again. That means lowering the cost of housing, groceries, childcare, and electricity. We can bring down electricity bills by increasing our use of cheaper, cleaner energy.”

Strong supplementary arguments include that clean energy gives consumers more control and predictability, that clean energy is the better long-term choice, and that utility companies need to be held more accountable. The following three messages ranked as the next most persuasive statements for a candidate to make:

[CONSUMER CONTROL] “Electricity bills keep rising, and many families see jumps from month to month, sometimes by $50 or $150 or more. Bills are so unpredictable because global oil and gas prices swing wildly from week to week. The best way to give people control over their bills is to invest in lower-cost wind and solar energy, made here in the United States.”
[LONG-TERM GAIN] “Clean energy is the smart choice now and for the future. Wind and solar come from sources that do not run out, and new technology keeps driving costs down. That means more affordable and reliable electricity over the long term.”
[UTILITY ACCOUNTABILITY] “Electric utility companies have been gouging customers with steep rate hikes while making excessive profits. These companies need to be held accountable and share responsibility for spikes in fuel costs, instead of forcing costs onto consumers.”

Negative (or accountability-focused) messaging about energy affordability should focus on how opponents of clean energy are making energy more expensive by canceling clean energy projects and “turning off energy” that comes from clean sources. In addition to the positive statements for hypothetical Democratic candidates, the survey presented 11 negative statements as “things you could learn about a Republican candidate running for Congress.”

Of these statements, the two that raised the most concerns both reinforced how Republicans are blocking clean energy while energy bills rise:

[CLEAN ENERGY JOBS + COSTS] “Republicans supported cancelling 300 clean energy projects, including many in your state that would have helped lower energy bills. This decision killed thousands of good jobs, while Americans’ energy bills have increased 13% in the past year.”
[PROMISES IGNORED] “Republicans promised to immediately lower the cost of living if they were elected. After a year of full control in Washington, electricity bills have gone up 13%–more than four times the rate of inflation–and they’re making it worse by turning off energy if it comes from clean sources.”

Supporters of clean energy should emphasize how opponents are effectively banning it and “reducing energy supply as demand continues to grow.” Voters were particularly likely to connect clean energy cuts to rising costs when they saw this description in a split-sample test, compared to other ways of explaining the problem:

Banning/limiting clean energy, which would reduce energy supply as demand continues to grow – 58% say that this would increase electricity costs in the U.S.
Banning/limiting clean energy – 50%
Banning/limiting clean energy, which comes from the sun and wind and doesn’t run out – 48%
Banning/limiting clean energy (like solar and wind power) – 48%

This release includes data both from a national survey of registered voters and a survey of likely voters in battleground states (AZ, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA, WI), each of which was conducted in January.

Voters primarily understand rising energy prices as the result of increasing demand, an outdated grid, and utility company greed. These three factors stand out above all others when voters were asked to choose the top three reasons for increasing electricity prices:

Increasing demand for electricity, including from data centers – 44% chose this as a top-three reason
The need to upgrade an aging electricity grid – 38%
Utility companies seeking to maximize their own profits – 33%
The need to replace and upgrade power lines because of hurricanes, wildfires, and extreme weather – 24%
Oil and gas companies seeking to maximize their own profits – 23%
The federal government killing wind and solar energy projects – 21%
The increasing cost of natural gas – 21%
High tariffs on imported electricity – 21%
The need to build more transmission lines to move electricity around the country – 16%
Green energy mandates to build wind and solar instead of natural gas – 15%
Foreign conflicts, like the war between Russia and Ukraine – 9%

Voters accordingly support policy solutions that invest in the grid, hold utility companies more accountable, and increase the supply of clean energy. Large majorities support each of the following policies to address energy affordability, and their support for stronger accountability on utility companies and data centers is particularly intense:

Upgrading the electric grid and building more energy storage and transmission capacity – 82% support, including 46% who “strongly” support it
Limiting the amount that utility companies can increase the pay of CEOs and executives when they are raising rates on consumers – 80% support, 61% “strongly”
Requiring data centers to pay for the electricity and infrastructure they say they need, instead of regular customers – 80% support, 58% “strongly”
Requiring utility companies to pay for part of the cost when the price of fossil fuels to produce electricity goes up – 76% support, 44% “strongly”
Requiring utility companies to harness the existing energy supply, like residential solar panels and batteries that can provide electricity back to the grid, to help meet electricity demand when needed – 76% support, 41% “strongly”
Utilizing existing gas power plants to meet growing demand – 76% support, 37% “strongly”
Requiring your state to have an open procurement process for new energy projects to determine which option is the cheapest and fastest to build, rather than allowing utilities to pick their preferred energy source – 72% support, 38% “strongly”
Cutting red tape and streamlining the permitting and approval process for wind and solar projects so that they are on a level playing field with oil and gas projects – 68% support, 39% “strongly”
Restoring tax credits to jumpstart the production of more wind and solar power – 64% support, 35% “strongly”

Battleground state voters widely prefer to address rising energy demand with clean energy rather than gas power plants. When asked which option they would choose to meet increasing demand, voters in battleground states prefer new clean energy projects (62%) by a 28-point margin over new gas power plants (34%). This includes a nearly two-to-one margin among independents (63% clean energy / 32% gas).

Battleground voters believe that clean energy is better than gas in nearly every dimension, but are relatively less confident about its reliability and speed. Battleground voters encouragingly see clean energy as the more affordable choice by a considerable margin, but this data also shows that advocates need to reinforce that clean energy is proven and can bring electricity online quickly and reliably.

Below are the margins by which battleground state voters say that each of the following descriptions better applies to clean energy projects or gas power plants:

Would do a better job at reducing pollution and protecting public health – Clean energy +59
Would be a better long-term solution to our power generation needs – Clean energy +36
Would do more to help make America energy independent – Clean energy +30
Would do a better job keeping electricity bills lower – Clean energy +20
Would create good-paying jobs – Clean energy +5
Would do a better job at preventing blackouts and keeping our electricity reliable – EVEN
Proven technologies – Gas +8
Would bring electricity online more quickly – Gas +9

Battleground state voters see Democrats as more focused on keeping electricity prices lower and more willing to take on utility companies, but also as the party that wants to ban certain energy sources. When it comes to perceptions of the two political parties’ energy policies, battleground voters see Democrats as more aligned with ratepayers’ interests but also more supportive of “banning” energy sources. These results indicate that Democrats would be well served to emphasize how they plan to increase the energy supply quickly and cost-effectively.

Below are the margins by which battleground voters say that various descriptions better apply to one party or the other when thinking about energy policy specifically:

Want to ban the use of certain sources of energy – Democrats +18
Will fight to prevent utility companies from unfairly raising rates – Democrats +14
Are focused on keeping electricity prices lower – Democrats +7
Are focused on what’s best for America’s future – Democrats +2
Are focused on the right things – Democrats +2
Want to bring as much electricity online as quickly as possible – Republicans +6
Care more about the profits of their special interest donors than what’s best for regular people – Republicans +16

Battleground voters oppose a variety of Trump actions on energy after learning about them. There is particularly strong opposition to Trump canceling solar and wind projects and to forcing costly coal plants to stay open.

Below are the percentages who oppose each of the following actions that Trump has taken on energy:

Forcing states to keep decades-old coal plants open past their planned retirement dates, even though utilities found they were no longer needed and were costing ratepayers hundreds of thousands of dollars per day – 70% oppose, including 50% who “strongly” oppose this
Canceling hundreds of wind and solar projects, including many which were over 80% complete – 69% oppose, 53% “strongly”
Implementing new rules and regulations to make it much harder to build new wind and solar projects – 69% oppose, 49% “strongly”
Eliminating the requirement that oil and gas companies pay a fee when they emit methane pollution into the air for the next 10 years – 64% oppose, 44% “strongly”
Eliminating tax credits that encourage the production and use of clean energy like wind and solar – 63% oppose, 43% “strongly”

The most persuasive messages both in favor of a new energy agenda and against existing energy policy emphasize accountability for utility and data center companies. The national survey introduced and then tested messages in support of a new, clean power-focused energy affordability agenda. Half of the sample saw this agenda described in partisan language (as Democrats’ energy agenda) and half saw it with nonpartisan language (as a group of policies “that some have put forward.”)

Whether presented in a partisan way or not, out of seven messages in favor of this new energy agenda, the following two messages stood out as particularly convincing:

[UTILITIES] “Monopoly utility companies are cashing in, increasing electricity rates twice as fast as the rate of inflation and earning tens of billions of dollars overcharging American consumers every year. These companies have made record profits and paid out millions to their execs while raising rates on customers who have no choice. We need to hold utility companies accountable so that they stop gouging consumers.”
[DATA CENTERS/AI] “Data centers can be a good thing, bringing jobs and investment. But that progress shouldn’t require families who are already struggling with rising costs to pay higher electricity bills. We can be both pro-data center and pro-accountability. That means making sure that data centers pay their fair share for the power and infrastructure they say they need so that families and small businesses are not paying higher electricity bills.”

The top-testing message that centered on clean energy used the example of Texas to make a case for expanding solar and wind power nationwide:

[TEXAS] “Monopoly utility companies make higher profits from gas power plants, so they often only seek proposals for new gas plants, even when solar or wind might be the better choice. We should be following the example of Texas by forcing utilities to let all energy sources compete fairly and decide what to build based on what is cheapest, fastest, and most reliable. Texas now has more wind and solar than any other state in the country and the expansion of clean energy there has saved the average Texas resident about $200 per year on their energy bills.”

In the battleground survey, a test of negative messages against the “MAGA” energy agenda also found that messages about data centers and utilities rose to the top as the most persuasive. Battleground voters rated the following two messages as the most concerning out of eight messages tested about the “MAGA” energy agenda:

[DATA CENTERS] “A single data center can use as much electricity as the city of Pittsburgh and tech companies are building hundreds across America, driving up energy demand – and most utility companies are raising rates on regular consumers to pay for the energy they need. Yet, Trump and Republicans want to give data centers, and the tech billionaires who own them, free rein to use as much of our electricity as they want with no accountability, even though that will cause electricity prices to skyrocket for families and small businesses.”
[UTILITIES] “Monopoly utility companies are increasing electricity rates twice as fast as the rate of inflation, making record profits, and paying out millions to their executives by overcharging American consumers, who have no choice on where to get their electricity. Yet, Trump and Republicans have opposed every effort to increase accountability on monopoly utility companies because these companies contribute millions of dollars to their campaigns.”

Most Americans now say that they’ve personally been affected by cold weather or winter storms in recent years. The majority of Americans (57%) say that they have personally experienced severe cold weather or winter storms in the past five years, representing an eight-point increase from a year ago (49% in February 2025) and the highest point since AP-NORC began tracking this question in April 2023.

Compared to a year ago, self-reported experience with extreme winter weather has risen by 23 points in the Northeast (from 46% to 69%), by 11 points in the South (from 51% to 62%), and by four points in the Midwest (from 68% to 72%). In the Western U.S., which is experiencing a historic snow drought, residents are now 10 points less likely to say that they’ve faced extreme cold weather in recent years (24%) than they were a year ago (34%).

It’s important to note that these types of questions about people’s experiences with extreme weather are very prone to recency bias, and accordingly fluctuate depending on the season in which they’re asked. The percentages who reported being affected by extreme heat in recent years, for example, have been much higher in AP-NORC surveys conducted in the summer than in the winter–even though the surveys ask about a five-year time frame.

That said, the comparable data from past surveys that were conducted in the winter or spring indicates that this year’s winter storms have made extreme winter weather a much more salient issue than in past years.

Most say that severe cold or winter storms have increased their energy bills in the past year. Roughly two-thirds of Americans (68%) say that winter storms or extreme cold have caused their electricity or gas bills to be higher than usual in the past year. Substantial minorities also report other disruptions from severe cold weather in the past year, including work or school cancellations (42%), power outages (35%), and travel cancellations or delays (30%).

Americans who have experienced extreme weather or natural disasters widely agree that climate change was a contributing factor. Among Americans who report personal experience with any type of extreme weather in the past five years (making up around 80% of poll respondents), nearly two-thirds (66%) say that climate change played a role.

Most Americans are hearing news about data centers, but few feel well-informed on the topic. Around two-thirds of Americans (66%) say that they’re hearing at least “a little” about the construction of new data centers in the U.S., but only around one in ten (11%) say that they’ve heard “a lot” about the topic.

When it comes to data centers being built in their own communities, less than half (45%) report hearing anything and only 9% say that they’ve heard “a lot.”

These findings are consistent with other public polling that shows that Americans are broadly familiar with the topic of data centers but aren’t receiving in-depth information about them.

Americans lean against the construction of data centers in or near residential communities. Just over half of Americans (52%) say that they don’t support the construction of data centers “close to where people live.” Around one-quarter (24%) say that they do support building AI data centers close to where people live, including about one in six (16%) who say that they would support building a data center in their own community.

A poll by POLITICO last month indicated that Americans are relatively more amenable to data centers being built in their areas (with 37% saying that they would support a local data center), though all the polling that we’ve seen about data centers is clear that Americans haven’t made up their minds about the issue. This makes people’s responses much more sensitive to the ways that questions are asked. Climate Power’s poll question, for example, gave respondents the explicit choice to say that data centers shouldn’t be built near residential communities at all whereas the POLITICO poll question did not.

Energy costs continue to rank as the most salient concern about data centers. Climate Power presented respondents with several randomized pairs of statements about data centers and asked them to identify which statement was more concerning. In this exercise, concerns about energy costs rose to the top as the most worrying aspect of data center expansion.

Concerns about grid overload and tech companies taking over community land also tended to resonate more than others.

Below are the most concerning statements tested, ranked by the percentage who chose each one as more concerning when it was presented in a randomized pair:

Data centers’ energy consumption drives up utility costs for families living nearby – 64% chose this as the more concerning statement when it was presented
Tech companies will pressure local governments to give up public lands or farmlands to be used for the construction of data centers – 60%
Data centers’ energy consumption can overload the electrical grid and lead to power outages – 59%
Data centers do not provide long-term jobs to offset the workers eliminated by AI – 58%
Data centers are often approved without meaningful input from local residents – 58%
The public may end up subsidizing the private companies that build the data centers through higher taxes or fees – 56%

The way that data centers are powered makes a big difference to the public, as most say that they would support a clean energy-powered data center in their community but not one that’s powered by fossil fuels. By a 25-point margin (53% support / 28% oppose), Americans say that they would support an AI data center being built in their community if it were powered primarily by clean energy sources like wind and solar.

Meanwhile, Americans would oppose a data center being built in their community by a 16-point margin (31% support / 47% oppose) if it were powered primarily by fossil fuels like coal or natural gas.

Americans of all political ideologies are more amenable to the idea of clean energy-powered data centers than fossil fuel-powered data centers in their own community. Utilizing clean energy rather than fossil fuels increases support for a hypothetical local data center by 36 points among liberals (from 20% to 56%), by 24 points among moderates (from 28% to 52%), and by eight points among conservatives (from 42% to 50%).

Related Resources

David Gold Aug 2021

Environmental Polling Roundup – August 6th, 2021

This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.

View Resource

David Gold Aug 2021

Environmental Polling Roundup – August 23rd, 2021

This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.

View Resource

David Gold Aug 2021

Environmental Polling Roundup – August 27th, 2021

This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.

View Resource