Environmental Polling Roundup – July 17, 2026
Headlines
Yale + GMU – Americans’ climate attitudes are mostly holding steady, though certain beliefs are declining as fewer say that they are hearing about the issue than in past years [Website, Full Report]
Climate Power – Voters are continuing to turn against data centers and increasingly blame them for rising utility costs [Website, Deck]
The Economist + YouGov – Most Americans expect this summer to be hotter than usual and admit that they don’t know much about climate change [Topline, Crosstabs]
Climate Power – Voters recognize that environmental conditions have major health impacts, and expect negative health consequences from recent environmental rollbacks [Website, Deck]
Climate Power – Qualitative research among “MAHA curious” audiences identifies challenges in converting their personal activism into mobilization, as this segment is distrustful of institutions and split on larger environmental topics like climate change [Website, Deck]
Key Takeaways
Americans are hearing and talking about climate change less than in past years. Tracking data from Yale and GMU’s “Climate Change in the American Mind” study finds that Americans’ self-reported exposure to news about global warming in the media has dropped sharply in the last two years. Additionally, Americans say that they are discussing the issue with their family and friends less often than at any point in the last 10 years.
These are troubling trends that line up with other analyses: the University of Colorado’s Media and Climate Change Observatory, for example, found a substantial drop in worldwide media coverage about climate change in recent years.
There are surely multiple causes for these trends, but they help to illustrate why “climate shushing” by Democrats is such a harmful idea. The media and everyday people take cues from political leaders about the relative importance of different issues. Immigration, for example, barely registered as an issue in recent presidential elections before Trump. If political leaders decide to de-emphasize climate change, voters will come to see it as less of a priority.
Voters aren’t hearing much about environmental rollbacks, but expect them to have negative health consequences after learning about them. Climate Power finds that most Americans are hearing little or nothing about changes to environmental and public health regulations.
After hearing about them, however, majorities of voters expect harmful health impacts from changes such as ending federal requirements to make states reduce air pollution that crosses into neighboring states, dismantling protections to limit mercury and other air toxics emitted by power plants, and limiting states’ ability to hold corporations accountable for alleged climate and environmental damages.
Good Data Points to Highlight
[Climate Change] 68% of Americans recognize that global warming is happening, compared to just 16% who deny it [Yale + GMU]
[Climate Change] 66% of Americans are “somewhat” or “very” worried about global warming [Yale + GMU]
[Climate Change + Weather] 53% of Americans recognize that global warming is having at least “some” impact on weather in the U.S. including 35% who believe that it’s affecting weather “a lot” [Yale + GMU]
[Clean Energy] 77% of voters support building more clean energy, including wind and solar, as well as battery storage [Climate Power]
[Environmental Regulation] 72% of voters say that they support stronger regulations of air and water “even if it places an economic burden on companies” [Climate Power]
[Environment + Health] 66% of voters recognize that environmental conditions like air pollution, extreme heat, or contaminated water have a “major impact” on people’s health [Climate Power]
Full Roundup
Yale + GMU – Americans’ climate attitudes are mostly holding steady, though certain beliefs are declining as fewer say that they are hearing about the issue than in past years [Website, Full Report]
Around two-thirds of Americans recognize that global warming is happening, despite some slight recent dips in global warming beliefs. In this latest edition of Yale and GMU’s long-running “Climate Change in the American Mind” study, they find that 68% of Americans recognize that global warming is happening. This represents a four-point dip from the last time they asked this question, in November 2025 (72%).
On other key climate belief metrics, Americans’ attitudes have mostly held steady. Below are the percentages who express various beliefs about global warming, along with the change since November 2025:
- 59% believe that global warming is mostly caused by human activities (+1)
- 54% understand that most scientists think global warming is happening (-3)
- 49% are “extremely” or “very” sure that global warming is happening (-5)
- 47% believe that people in the U.S. are being harmed right now by global warming (+3)
- 46% say that they have personally experienced the effects of global warming (-1)
Concerns about global warming are stable. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (66%) say that they are at least “somewhat” worried about global warming, which is two points higher than in November 2025 (64%). The percentage who say that they are “very” worried about global warming, meanwhile, is identical to what it was in November 2025 (29%).
Americans are hearing and talking about global warming less than in past years. One of the clearest trends in Yale and GMU’s recent tracking is that Americans are reporting less exposure to news and conversation about global warming than in the past. Only 31% say that they discuss global warming at least “occasionally” with family and friends, which is the lowest percentage that Yale and GMU have found on this question since 2016.
Additionally, only around two in five (39%) say that they hear about global warming at least once a month in the media. This percentage has held steady in the last few waves of Yale and GMU’s study, but has dropped considerably from past years. In six surveys conducted between September 2021 and April 2024, at least 50% said that they were hearing about global warming in the media at least once a month.
Most Americans recognize that global warming is affecting the weather in the U.S. The majority of Americans (53%) recognize that global warming is affecting weather in the U.S. at least “some,” including around one-third (35%) who believe that global warming is affecting weather “a lot.”
The percentage of Americans who agree that global warming is having at least “some” impact on the weather is at its lowest point in Yale and GMU’s tracking since April 2019, which may be related to the decline in Americans who say that they are regularly hearing about the issue in the media.
Extreme heat and water pollution are the climate-related impacts that Americans are most concerned about. These two consequences stand out when Americans are asked how concerned they are about various environmental harms in their community. Below are the percentages who say that they are least “moderately” worried about different potential harms in their area:
- Extreme heat – 51%
- Water pollution – 48%
- Air pollution – 45%
- Droughts – 42%
- Diseases carried by mosquitoes and ticks – 41%
- Electricity power outages – 41%
- Water shortages – 40%
- Wildfires – 34%
- Flooding – 33%
- Hurricanes – 26%
Americans widely recognize that global warming is an economic and health issue. While Americans are most likely to see global warming as an environmental and scientific issue, most also link it to the economy, health, agriculture, and other domains. Below are the percentages who say that various descriptions apply to global warming:
- An environmental issue – 76%
- A scientific issue – 69%
- An agricultural (farming, food) issue – 65%
- A severe weather issue – 64%
- A health issue – 61%
- An economic issue – 60%
- A political issue – 57%
- A humanitarian issue – 56%
- A moral issue – 43%
- A poverty issue – 35%
- A social justice (fairness) issue – 33%
- A national security issue – 32%
- A religious issue – 10%
Climate Power – Voters are continuing to turn against data centers and increasingly blame them for rising utility costs [Website, Deck]
Voters have turned more against data centers in recent months. Public sentiment toward data centers has soured significantly over the course of the year, and Climate Power finds a particularly large swing in just the last few months. In their tracking data, voters’ net favorability toward data centers shifted from +4 (39% favorable / 35% unfavorable) in April to -17 (31% favorable / 48% unfavorable) in June.
Voters blame a variety of factors for rising utility bills, and frustrations toward politicians and AI / data centers are rising. Climate Power finds that voters point the finger at a range of culprits–including rising fossil fuel costs, foreign conflicts, politicians, utility companies, and data centers–for the increase in utility costs.
And in recent months, their tracking data shows that voters are increasingly blaming politicians and data centers for the problem.
Below are the percentages who choose various factors among the top three reasons for rising utility bills, along with the change since April:
- The increasing cost of gas and oil – 46% (+1)
- Politicians who are failing to pass laws to protect Americans from rising costs – 39% (+9)
- Foreign conflicts, including the conflict between the U.S. and Iran – 39% (+2)
- Utility companies that are trying to maximize their profits – 38% (+7)
- Increasing demand for energy, including from data centers and AI – 36% (+8)
- Aging energy infrastructure that is in need of costly repairs and replacement – 17% (EVEN)
- Clean energy mandates that require more expensive clean energy – 12% (-2)
- Clean energy opponents who are killing clean energy production – 9% (-3)
Messaging on clean energy is particularly effective when it’s paired with corporate accountability. In testing a series of messages in support of expanding clean energy and modernizing the electric grid, Climate Power finds that voters are particularly swayed by the following message that connects clean energy expansion to corporate accountability:
“America needs these energy grid upgrades and expanded clean energy, but families should not have to bear the costs. Utility companies, data centers, and tech companies that benefit from increased energy use should be required to invest in the infrastructure needed to support that growth, protecting consumers from higher utility bills and ensuring corporations pay their fair share.”
More voters (37%) rate this message as “very convincing” (9-10 on a 1-10 scale) than any other message tested in the survey in support of clean energy and grid modernization, including messages about the benefits for reliability, price stability, costs, and climate change.
The Economist + YouGov – Most Americans expect this summer to be hotter than usual and admit that they don’t know much about climate change [Topline, Crosstabs]
Most Americans expect this summer to be hotter than usual. Fielding toward the start of this month’s historic U.S. heat waves (from July 3-6), The Economist and YouGov found that the majority of Americans (61%) expected this summer to be hotter than usual. Only 2% expected a relatively cooler summer, while 29% believed that temperatures would be about the same as usual.
As has become the norm in polling about extreme weather and climate impacts, Republicans are far less likely to recognize and anticipate unusual weather than other Americans. In The Economist and YouGov’s poll, Republicans (40%) were 40 points less likely than Democrats (80%) and 23 points less likely than independents (63%) to say that they were expecting an unusually hot summer.
Only around one in five Americans say that they know “a lot” about climate change. In a sign of how malleable Americans’ climate attitudes are, only 19% report that they know “a lot” about climate change. An additional 41% say that they know at least “some” about it, while 40% report knowing “little’” (31%) or “nothing” (9%) about the topic.
Democrats (72%) are more likely than independents (59%) or Republicans (51%) to say that they know at least “some” about climate change, though less than one-quarter from each group say that they know “a lot” about the subject.
Climate Power – Voters recognize that environmental conditions have major health impacts, and expect negative health consequences from recent environmental rollbacks [Website, Deck]
Voters overwhelmingly agree that environmental conditions have major health impacts. Around two-thirds of voters (66%) agree that environmental conditions like air pollution, extreme heat, or contaminated water have a “major” impact on people’s health, including 81% of 2024 Harris voters and 51% of 2024 Trump voters.
Bipartisan majorities weigh health over economic growth when it comes to environmental protections. When forced to choose, voters are far more likely to side with an argument that environmental protections are “necessary to keep families healthy and prevent pollution-related illness” (74%) over a competing argument that environmental protections “often make it too hard for businesses and the economy to grow” (14%).
Voters on both sides of the political divide agree on this point, with 2024 Harris voters siding more with the argument that environmental protections are necessary by an 88%-5% margin and 2024 Trump voters siding more with the argument that environmental protections are necessary by a 60%-22% margin.
Similarly, Climate Power finds that 72% of voters–including 83% of 2024 Harris voters and 62% of 2024 Trump voters–say that they support stronger regulations of air and water “even if it places an economic burden on companies.”
Voters aren’t hearing much about federal environmental rollbacks. Less than two in five voters (38%) say that they’ve heard at least “a little” about recent efforts to change federal environmental and public health regulations, including only 10% that have heard “a lot” about the topic.
Voters see particular harm in the Trump administration’s actions to allow more power plant pollution, limit corporate accountability for environmental damages, and weaken “Good Neighbor” air regulations. When presented with a list of recent environmental rollbacks, voters are more likely to say that each will be more harmful than beneficial to public health. These include:
- Reversing a federal finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public and should be regulated under environmental law – 33% beneficial / 42% harmful
- Ending federal requirements that make states reduce air pollution that crosses into neighboring states – 25% beneficial / 56% harmful
- Limiting states’ ability to hold corporations accountable for alleged climate and environmental damages – 29% beneficial / 58% harmful
- Dismantling protections to limit mercury and other air toxics emitted by power plants – 22% beneficial / 62% harmful
While there are deep partisan splits on each of these policies, around half of Republicans recognize that dismantling protections to limit mercury and other air toxics emitted by power plants (53%) and limiting states’ ability to hold corporations accountable for alleged climate and environmental damages (49%) will be harmful to public health.
Public health, corporate accountability, and water pollution continue to resonate in messaging about environmental regulations. Climate Power and Blue Rose find that the two messages below rank highly in their persuasive effects, when compared to other political messaging. (While these messages and their percentile rankings refer to how effective they are for political persuasion, the findings that public health, corporate accountability, and water pollution strengthen environmental messaging are broadly applicable and backed up by other research.)
Clean Air, Safe Water, Affordable Healthcare (81st Percentile): “[Republicans’] policies are hurting our families’ health and wallets. After promising to put America first, Republicans are letting big corporations off the hook, leading to higher healthcare costs and sicker communities. Families across America deserve clean air to breathe, safe water to drink, and affordable healthcare, but Republicans continue to prioritize corporate profits over our well-being. Democrats are fighting for common-sense solutions that protect our health and lower costs for working families, by holding big polluters accountable.”
Polluted Water (78th Percentile): “[Republicans are] siding with big polluters instead of protecting your family’s drinking water. These dangerous ‘forever chemicals’ called PFAS are in our water, and they’re linked to terrifying health problems like cancer and organ damage. Millions of American families are already drinking water contaminated with these poisons. Instead of forcing polluters to clean up their mess, Republicans are making it easier for them to keep contaminating the water you and your children rely on every single day.”
Climate Power – Qualitative research among “MAHA curious” audiences identifies challenges in converting their personal activism into mobilization, as this segment is distrustful of institutions and split on larger environmental topics like climate change [Website, Deck]
Climate Power adds to a growing body of research about the MAHA movement and related environmental topics with this new qualitative research deck, which includes findings from an online discussion board, in-depth interviews, and focus groups held this year.
Below are the “Key Learnings” from the deck about Americans who support at least part of the MAHA agenda.
“Key Learning: Talking about the environment in the right way is critical to creating consensus.
Agreement on environmental progress occurs when environmental topics are seen as negatively impacting their health and well-being. What goes into their bodies is the primary driver: Clean air, water, and food are universally seen as non-negotiable foundations of health (not as environmental policy / political party fodder).
When environmental progress is not tied to these tangible and bodily/health concerns, it stops generating consensus. Thinking about environmental progress on a more global or macro level (e.g., climate change) feels abstract and overwhelming (causing people to shut down or disengage). And it introduces the topic of politics, which polarizes and interferes with people’s ability to focus on the environmental-health connection.
A key lesson learned in our study: engagement requires a clear villain. Climate doesn’t have one; food and water do. People can rally against PFAS and microplastics because there is a clear villain / source of the problem – and a concrete idea about what needs to be done to change the situation / protect themselves against it.
Key Learning: Getting people to ‘act’ beyond the confines of their homes is a real and persistent challenge.
When it comes to addressing environmental topics that impact their health, most people’s actions do not extend beyond the confines of their household – and in some ways, people seem to have made peace with that…
It comes down mostly to agency. It is a conclusion reached by people who have looked at the scale of the problem, looked at their own resources, and decided to win where winning feels possible. Feelings of helplessness and futility suppress broader engagement. People don’t feel small because they’re indifferent — they feel small because the scale of corporate and systemic power makes individual action feel pointless: Without a credible theory of change, action stalls.
Distrust of institutions means people protect rather than petition. In today’s context, government and corporations are largely seen as adversaries, rather than allies. People feel the need to verify everything before acting, which can be overwhelming, depressing, and unmotivating.
People are caught in a logical trap: the institutions they distrust are the only ones they see as big and capable enough to solve the problem. Participants simultaneously believe government and corporations are untrustworthy AND that government and corporations are responsible for solving environmental health problems. This contradiction produces frustration and detachment. If the only actors capable of change are also the actors you can’t trust, there is nowhere to put your energy.
And finally, finite time and energy are real structural barriers, not excuses. People working 50+ hour weeks, managing childcare, and pursuing education at night feel little bandwidth for civic engagement (unless receiving a clear and credible call to action).”
Related Resources
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.
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.
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.