Environmental Polling Roundup – July 28, 2023
HEADLINES
Yale + GMU – Americans have grown more concerned about extreme heat in the last two years [Article]
Climate Power + Data for Progress – Climate change and extreme weather are becoming “kitchen table issues” for voters [Press Release, Poll Memo, Crosstabs]
Premise – Most Americans say that this summer has been hotter than normal, and nearly two-thirds say that the government should take more action on climate change [Crosstabs]
EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund – Voters in key states want stronger limits on methane emissions, and believe that implementing technology to limit methane pollution is more likely to create jobs than reduce them [Battleground State Release, Battleground Poll Memo, TX Release, TX Poll Memo]
Climate Power – Latino voters grow much more supportive of the Biden administration’s clean energy plan in response to positive messaging; proof points about saving consumers money are particularly persuasive [Deck]
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Now is the time to talk about how climate change is causing extreme heat. Lots of data this week highlights how extreme heat has become a salient, everyday issue for Americans. New polling by Premise finds that most Americans recognize that we are experiencing an unusually hot summer, and Climate Power and Data for Progress find that two-thirds of voters call the impacts of climate change and extreme weather “kitchen table issues” in their household. Data from Yale and George Mason, meanwhile, shows that Americans’ concerns about extreme heat have stayed at elevated levels since the record-hot summer of 2021. With this summer’s heat waves coming right on the heels of the Canadian wildfire smoke, there is a window of opportunity to offer climate-related explanations and solutions for these extreme weather events while they have the public’s attention.
- Stronger methane pollution limits are widely popular, including in states that are major producers of oil and gas. Polling by a coalition of groups – including EDF Action, Sierra Club, CATF Action, and Earthworks Action Fund – finds that voters overwhelmingly support stronger EPA limits on methane pollution by the oil and gas industry. This includes voters in political battleground states and in major states for oil and gas production such as Pennsylvania and Texas. Voters are predisposed to see methane as a dirty, polluting gas that harms public health and the climate, and advocates should lean into these negative attitudes about methane while going on offense against the oil and gas industry. The oil and gas industry is deeply unpopular with the public, and the methane coalition’s polling additionally finds that voters are more inclined to believe arguments that implementing new technology to limit methane pollution will create jobs than standard oil and gas industry arguments that these types of regulations will raise costs and kill jobs.
GOOD DATA POINTS TO HIGHLIGHT
- [Climate Change + Extreme Weather] 67% of voters say that the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events are “kitchen table issues” in their household that they often or sometimes think and talk about [Climate Power + Data for Progress]
- [Climate Action] 64% of Americans say that the U.S. government should take more action to stop or slow climate change [Premise]
- [Methane – Battleground States] By a 68%-26% margin, battleground state voters support stronger EPA limits on methane emissions from the oil and gas industry [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Methane – PA] By a 69%-27% margin, Pennsylvania voters support stronger EPA limits on methane emissions from the oil and gas industry [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Methane – TX] By a 66%-28% margin, Texas voters support stronger EPA limits on methane emissions from the oil and gas industry [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Methane + Jobs – Battleground States] By a 55%-41% margin, battleground state voters are more likely to agree that stronger methane pollution limits will create jobs than reduce jobs [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Methane + Jobs – PA] By a 56%-42% margin, Pennsylvania voters are more likely to agree that stronger methane pollution limits will create jobs than reduce jobs [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Methane + Jobs – TX] By a 58%-42% margin, Texas voters are more likely to agree that stronger methane pollution limits will create jobs than reduce jobs [EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund]
- [Issue Priority] More Americans name climate change and the environment as the single “most important issue” to them than any other issue aside from inflation/prices, health care, and the economy/jobs [The Economist + YouGov]
FULL ROUNDUP
Yale + GMU – Americans have grown more concerned about extreme heat in the last two years [Article]
Amid record heat in the United States and around the world, this timely new article illustrates how Americans’ concerns about extreme heat spiked in the summer of 2021 and have remained high since.
Between 2018 and 2020, surveys conducted by Yale and George Mason consistently found that around one-third of Americans (31%-36%) said that they worried about extreme heat in their area.
Since the historically hot summer of 2021, however, Americans have shown more elevated levels of concern about the problem. Between March 2021 and September 2021, the percentage of Americans who said that they worried about extreme heat in their local area increased by 11 points (from 36% to 47%). In three surveys conducted by Yale and GMU since then – including the most recent Yale/GMU survey fielded in April 2023 – 44%+ of Americans have said that they worry about extreme heat.
The percentage of Americans who say that they’re “very worried” about extreme heat has nearly doubled in recent years, as 11%-14% said that they were “very worried” about the problem in surveys conducted from 2018-2020 and 21%-23% have said that they’re “very worried” about extreme heat in Yale/GMU surveys conducted since September 2021.
Pulling from the article linked here, which provides additional context and recommendations for advocates:
“Many Americans are worried about extreme heat and understand it is affected by climate change. In Spring 2023, we found that most Americans (72%) are at least “a little” worried about extreme heat harming their local area – and extreme heat tops the list of worries about climate impacts (e.g., droughts, flooding, water shortages).
Additionally, a large majority of Americans (75%) think that global warming is affecting extreme heat at least “a little,” including 42% who say global warming is affecting it “a lot.”
…
Importantly, the surveys reported here were all conducted before this summer’s extreme heat waves. Worry about extreme heat may be further increasing right now.
It is important for communicators to emphasize the connection between climate change and extreme weather events (e.g., heat waves, wildfires) and how these events directly impact people’s health, the economy, and public infrastructure. Experience with climate impacts can be a powerful teacher. Personal experience and hearing about others’ experiences with global warming can shape people’s climate beliefs. Research also indicates that hot, dry days have been more likely than other extreme weather events to cause people to say they have experienced global warming.”
Climate Power + Data for Progress – Climate change and extreme weather are becoming “kitchen table issues” for voters [Press Release, Poll Memo, Crosstabs]
Also on the topic of extreme weather, Climate Power and Data for Progress find that two-thirds of voters (67%) say that the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events are “kitchen table issues” in their household that they often or sometimes think and talk about.
The salience of climate-driven extreme weather spans partisanship, as majorities of Democrats (81%), independents (62%), and Republicans (51%) say that climate change and extreme weather events are “kitchen table issues” in their household.
The poll results also indicate that climate communicators can make extreme weather events like heat waves even more salient to the public by connecting them to the cost of living and public health.
When asked how people’s experience with extreme weather events has impacted them or their community, the cost of living and health are two of the most common ways that people say they’ve been personally impacted. Here are the percentages of voters who say that extreme weather events like heat waves, floods, wildfire smoke, and droughts have impacted each of the following aspects of their lives:
- My state and the people who live there – 39%
- My finances and cost of living – 34%
- My community and the people who live there – 32%
- My physical or mental health – 27%
- My home or housing – 21%
- My travel and transportation options – 20%
- My job or education – 9%
Premise – Most Americans say that this summer has been hotter than normal, and nearly two-thirds say that the government should take more action on climate change [Crosstabs]
Premise finds that the majority of Americans (53%) report that this summer has been “much” or “somewhat” hotter than normal. Encouragingly, the poll finds that Americans on both sides of the political aisle tend to agree that this summer has been unusually hot – including 58% of self-identified Democrats and 51% of self-identified Republicans.
Partisans have been drifting further apart in their observations about the weather in recent years as climate change has become a more politicized issue, with Democrats and Republicans increasingly interpreting poll questions about extreme weather as proxies for their beliefs about climate change. The level of bipartisan agreement in this poll about this summer’s weather, therefore, is not insignificant.
Premise further finds that the clear majority of Americans (64%) believe that the U.S. government should take more action to stop or slow climate change. About one-quarter of Americans (24%) say that the current level of government action on climate change is “sufficient”, and only 12% want less government action on the issue.
Analyzing these responses by partisanship, four in five Democrats (81%) and nearly three in five independents (59%) say that the government should take more action on climate change. While a little less than half of Republicans (47%) say that they want more government action on climate change, Republicans are still much more likely to prefer more government action on climate change (47%) over less government action (25%).
EDF Action + Sierra Club + CATF Action + Earthworks Action Fund – Voters in key states want stronger limits on methane emissions, and believe that implementing technology to limit methane pollution is more likely to create jobs than reduce them [Battleground State Release, Battleground Poll Memo, TX Release, TX Poll Memo]
This extensive coalition-led methane polling project surveyed voters across seven political battleground states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). The coalition also conducted a robust oversample of voters in Pennsylvania and a separate survey in Texas about the same issues, allowing us to see how methane-related issues play in key states both for politics and for the oil and gas industry.
The coalition finds that voters across battleground and fossil fuel-producing states widely support stronger EPA methane limits. When voters learn that the EPA is considering stronger limits on methane emissions from the oil and gas industry, “including regular inspections of leaks at all oil and gas wells, tougher equipment standards, and monitoring of large emissions events known as super-emitters,” voters across the surveyed geographies widely support these new methane emissions limits:
- Battleground states – 68% support / 26% oppose
- Pennsylvania – 69% support / 27% oppose
- Texas – 66% support / 28% oppose
Underpinning these policy preferences is a sense that methane is a harmful pollutant, both for public health and for the climate. Across the states surveyed, more than two-thirds agree that “methane emissions from the oil and gas industry are harming our air quality” (including 70% in battleground states, 68% in Pennsylvania, and 69% in Texas) and that “methane emissions from the oil and gas industry are harming our climate” (including 68% in battleground states, 70% in Pennsylvania, and 68% in Texas).
In a simulated debate about the merits and potential impacts of new EPA methane limits, the coalition’s survey finds that environmental advocates are well-positioned to win the public debate on the issue by focusing on clean air, health, and slowing climate change.
Poll respondents saw or heard a statement in favor of stronger EPA limits (“We need stronger safeguards against methane pollution because it will mean cleaner air, healthier families, and slowing down the rate of climate change”) and a statement arguing against stronger EPA limits (“We can’t afford more burdensome regulations on methane emissions because they will drive up energy prices and kill jobs”), after which they were asked which statement they agree with more.
Following exposure to these two statements, voters said that they sided more with the statement in favor of stronger EPA limits by a 20-point margin across the seven battleground states (59%-39%), by an 11-point margin in Pennsylvania (55%-44%), and by a 21-point margin in Texas (60%-39%).
Additionally, voters are more inclined to believe arguments that new methane limits will have a positive impact on jobs than arguments that these limits will have a negative impact on jobs.
After exposure to a positive jobs-focused argument (“Strengthening safeguards against methane pollution will create more jobs by encouraging innovation and
investments in technologies like methane capture”) and a negative jobs-focused argument (“Creating more burdensome regulations on methane emissions will destroy more jobs by increasing costs and making American oil and gas companies less competitive”), voters agree more with the argument that new methane limits will create jobs by a 14-point margin across the seven battleground states (55%-41%), by a 14-point margin in Pennsylvania (56%-42%), and by a 16-point margin in Texas (58%-42%).
It’s encouraging to see the typical industry arguments about “job-killing energy regulations” failing to persuade the public, especially in major fossil fuel-producing states like Pennsylvania and Texas. Whereas these arguments may have carried more weight in the past, the recent growth of the clean energy industry and public concern about climate change appear to be turning the tide in our favor when it comes to energy jobs. A recent national report from Pew, for example, found that Americans are now about twice as likely to believe that transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables will have a positive impact on energy sector jobs than a negative impact.
Climate Power – Latino voters grow much more supportive of the Biden administration’s clean energy plan in response to positive messaging; proof points about saving consumers money are particularly persuasive [Deck]
Climate Power recently conducted in-depth polling about the Biden administration’s clean energy plan in six key states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. You can find links to their state-specific poll decks here.
This new analysis examines the attitudes of Latino voters in these six battleground states and finds that battleground Latino voters widely believe that President Biden isn’t doing enough to combat climate change (60%). About one-quarter of battleground Latino voters say that Biden is doing “the right amount” on the issue (24%), while only 16% say that he’s doing too much.
While battleground Latino voters are inclined to approve of the clean energy plan passed by Biden and Democrats in Congress (44% approve / 26% disapprove), 30% don’t know enough about the topic to offer an opinion. Positive messaging is accordingly highly impactful in swaying battleground Latino voters’ attitudes about Biden’s clean energy plan, as they shift from approving of the plan by an 18-point margin (44% approve / 26% disapprove) to a 34-point margin (62% approve / 28% disapprove) after they learn more about it.
As with other audiences, messaging about consumer cost savings is critical to improving battleground Latino voters’ attitudes about the clean energy plan. When provided with several proof points about the plan and asked to rate the two or three that are most important to them personally, Latino voters gravitate most toward a statement that the plan “can save consumers tens of thousands of dollars for making their homes more energy efficient, and for many working families the improvements will be free” (56%).
Messaging about climate change and health is also persuasive with this audience, as the next most important proof points for battleground Latino voters are that the plan will “help cut climate pollution by 40% by the end of the decade” (49%) and that the plan “will help avoid up to 3,900 premature deaths and up to 100,000 asthma attacks by the end of the decade” (45%).
Pulling additional takeaways and recommendations from the deck’s “Summary of Findings”:
“Sharing details about the Clean Energy Plan with Latinos increases confidence in the Biden administration to promote investments in clean energy. Most Latinos are generally unaware of the Clean Energy Plan and the progress already made. We can build trust between Latinos and Democrats in Congress and the Biden Administration by pointing to wins both nationally and in their own communities (i.e., more jobs, clean energy projects, and investments). Highlight what we have already accomplished as proof that we can do more to make these goals a reality.
Latinos who shift to approving of the Clean Energy Plan are already largely supportive of Democrats in Congress and the Biden Administration – they just need more information. Once Latinos receive more information about the Clean Energy Plan, their support for the plan increases by double digits. Latinos overall feel favorable toward the policies in the Clean Energy Plan and the potential impacts of the Plan in their states after we give them information.
Latinos feel most favorable toward elements of the Clean Energy Plan centered around job creation and saving consumer costs. Connect the progress of the Clean Energy Plan with creating new, good-paying jobs in the energy sector. Localize the progress with wins in their own communities/state and define the clear relationship between clean energy and economic opportunity. Connect pollution and public health as the problem and the Clean Energy Plan as the solution.”
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.