Environmental Polling Roundup – May 9, 2025
Headlines
Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC) – Nine in ten Americans use federally-funded scientific data like weather forecasts on a weekly basis, whether or not they realize it; voters strongly believe that federal scientific agencies should be free from political influence [NPR Article, Release, Deck]
Global Methane Hub – Americans continue to overwhelmingly support methane fees on polluters [Release, Deck]
[Western States] National Wildlife Federation (NWF) – Voters in Western states, including MAGA supporters, overwhelmingly reject proposals to lift protections on public lands and increase the use of eminent domain for oil and gas projects [Release, Deck]
GlobeScan – Most Americans say that companies should take active stances on climate change and the environment [Release, Deck]
Key Takeaways
Trump is going against his own voters’ wishes in prioritizing oil and gas development over public lands in the West. The idea of increasing oil and gas drilling on public lands is deeply divisive, but that hasn’t stopped Trump from pursuing the largest ever sell-off of public lands to the oil and gas industry. Underlining how contentious the topic is, National Wildlife Federation polling in Western states finds that even majorities of MAGA supporters in the region oppose proposals to expedite oil and gas development on public lands such as eliminating fees, reducing public input, and increasing the use of eminent domain.
These findings underline how clarifying the hard trade-offs of Trump’s plan to ramp up oil and gas drilling can undermine support for his approach–particularly by emphasizing the impacts on public lands, which are deeply valued by voters of all political stripes in the West.
Messaging about cuts to science funding should focus on direct harms, both to the economy and to people’s health. Polls consistently show that Americans are more concerned about federal budget cuts when they hear about direct, personal impacts as opposed to less tangible budget numbers and program descriptions.
Consistent with this other public polling, new research by the Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC) finds that economic harms such as job losses and public health harms such as the decreased safety of food and medicine rank as the most concerning potential consequences of cuts to federal science funding.
Good Data Points to Highlight
- [Science] 86% of Americans agree that it’s important for experts at federal scientific agencies to make decisions on scientific funding, regulations, and guidance that are free from political influence [Association of Science and Technology Centers]
- [Methane] 75% of Americans support action to minimize methane emissions [Global Methane Hub]
- [Methane] 71% of Americans support the implementation of a fee that oil and gas producers must pay to the U.S. government for wasted methane gas that contributes to pollution [Global Methane Hub]
- [West] At least 84% of voters across eight Western states oppose increasing the use of eminent domain for the purpose of building oil and gas pipelines [National Wildlife Federation]
- [West] At least 73% of voters across eight Western states oppose getting rid of the $5 per acre fee paid by oil and gas companies that helps cover the cost to review whether lands that oil and gas companies want to drill on are appropriate for development [National Wildlife Federation]
- [West] At least 67% of voters across eight Western states oppose reducing the review process and opportunities for nearby communities and local residents to give input regarding decisions about what takes place on national public lands, including potential oil and gas development [National Wildlife Federation]
- [Corporate Action] 71% of Americans agree that CEOs should speak out about the importance of addressing climate change [GlobeScan]
Full Roundup
Association of Science and Technology Centers (ASTC) – Nine in ten Americans use federally-funded scientific data like weather forecasts on a weekly basis, whether or not they realize it; voters strongly believe that federal scientific agencies should be free from political influence [NPR Article, Release, Deck]
The vast majority of Americans use federally-funded scientific data on a regular basis, primarily through weather forecasts. ASTC found that nine out of ten Americans use at least one type of federally-funded scientific data on a weekly basis, with weather forecasts and alerts (used weekly by 84%) by far the most commonly used example that the survey asked about.
However, the survey did not specify or gauge Americans’ awareness that weather forecasts and other types of common information draw from federally-funded data sources. The percentage who realize that they rely on federally-funded scientific data in their day-to-day lives, therefore, is likely significantly lower.
Americans are only vaguely aware of recent federal actions like budget cuts that could stifle scientific research and innovation. While the large majority of Americans (77%) say they have heard something about federal policy changes, canceled programs, or budget cuts “that could impact science research and innovation,” only 15% are familiar enough with the issue to share specifics about what they’ve heard.
Economic impacts and risks to public safety stand out as the most concerning consequences of cutting science funding. When presented with a long list of potential consequences of science funding cuts, Americans gravitate most to economic impacts (32% top-three concern) and the decreased safety of food and medicine (29% top-three concern) in choosing the impacts that they are most concerned about.
Voters across party lines overwhelmingly agree that federal science agencies should be free from political interference, though Democrats feel more strongly than Republicans. While a significant partisan gap has opened up in recent years over trust in scientists, ASTC finds that more than four-fifths of voters (86%)–including large majorities of both Democrats (94%) and Republicans (82%)–agree that it’s important for experts at federal scientific agencies to make decisions on scientific funding, regulations, and guidance free from political influence.
That said, Democrats feel more strongly about the topic as Democrats (70%) are much more likely than Republicans (48%) to say that it’s “very” important for the government’s scientific experts to do their work without political influence.
Global Methane Hub – Americans continue to overwhelmingly support methane fees on polluters [Release, Deck]
Most Americans recognize human-caused climate change, though the U.S. still lags behind comparable countries in climate awareness. In this survey of 17 different countries, the Global Methane Hub finds that around three-fifths of Americans (58%) recognize that human actions are causing climate change.
This figure is consistent with other public polling, as is the finding that the United States lags behind comparable countries such as the United Kingdom (64%), Germany (63%), and France (68%) in recognizing the reality of human-caused climate change.
While only half of Americans are familiar with methane, the public knows enough about it to say that we should limit emissions. The vast majority of Americans (90%) have at least heard of methane, though only around half (52%) report being at least “somewhat” familiar with it.
Despite their limited familiarity with it, three-quarters of Americans (75%) say that they support actions to minimize methane emissions.
Methane fees on polluters remain overwhelmingly popular. Polls have consistently shown that Americans support the methane pollution fee that was included in the Inflation Reduction Act and recently overturned by the Republican Congress.
Here, Global Methane Hub finds that 71% of Americans support the policy when it’s described as “the implementation of a fee that oil and gas producers must pay to the U.S. government for wasted methane gas that contributes to pollution.”
Yale and George Mason similarly found in December that 74% of voters support strict limits on methane emissions from oil and gas production.
[Western States] National Wildlife Federation (NWF) – Voters in Western states, including MAGA supporters, overwhelmingly reject proposals to lift protections on public lands and increase the use of eminent domain for oil and gas projects [Release, Deck]
Western voters, regardless of their political bent, agree on the need to protect public lands by taking a cautious approach to oil and gas development and putting the public interest first. Surveying voters across eight Western states (CO, MT, ND, NM, NV, SD, UT, and WY), NWF finds that Western voters overwhelmingly agree with each of the following statements about public lands:
“Taxpayers have lost out on billions of dollars in revenue from the oil and gas industry’s development on our national public lands and sometimes been stuck with the bill for cleaning up abandoned wells. We should keep those updated rates in place to protect taxpayers.” (86%+ agree across states)
“Oil and gas development can take place in some areas of national public lands responsibly, but some areas close to rivers and streams or where threatened wildlife migrate are too important to risk. We need to be cautious, allow adequate public input, and not risk potentially impacting sources of drinking water and wildlife habitat.” (85%+ agree)
“When land is leased to oil and gas companies it can limit other uses of that land, including hunting, fishing, viewing wildlife, riding ATV’s and other recreation. We need to ensure the broader public interest is represented in all decisions about how national public lands are used so that future generations of Americans can enjoy them as we do today.” (84%+ agree)
“Increasing oil and gas development will not just affect national public lands, but also farms, ranches and nearby communities. The government has indicated that they may take private land through eminent domain to complete oil and gas pipelines. We need to not only protect our national public lands, but private landowners’ rights as well.” (83%+ agree)
Agreement on these points extends to even the most ardent Trump supporters, with large majorities (73%+) of “MAGA supporters” in every state agreeing with each statement.
Proposals to facilitate greater oil and gas drilling on public lands, including removing fees on oil and gas companies and expediting public reviews, face strong pushback in the West. Consistent with the priority that they place on public lands protections, large majorities of voters across Western states oppose each of the following proposals:
- 77%+ in each state oppose requiring that government agencies allow oil and gas companies access to lands they can develop, even if local community members, hunters or anglers, nearby farmers and ranchers, and others raise concerns about impacts on wildlife, water and other resources
- 73%+ in each state oppose getting rid of the $5 per acre fee paid by oil and gas companies that helps cover the cost to review whether lands that oil and gas companies want to drill on are appropriate for development or whether they should be prioritized for wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation or other uses
- 67%+ in each state oppose reducing the review process and opportunities for nearby communities and local residents to give input regarding decisions about what takes place on national public lands, including potential oil and gas development
Western voters are particularly united in their opposition to eminent domain for oil and gas projects. More than four-fifths of voters (84%+) in each state surveyed oppose increasing the use of eminent domain, where the federal government takes a portion of privately owned property, including portions of family farms and ranches, for the purpose of building oil and gas pipelines that move oil and gas from where it is
produced on national public lands to where it can be refined or used.
Further, at least two-thirds of voters (67%+) in each state strongly oppose increasing the use of eminent domain for the purpose of building oil and gas pipelines.
Even among MAGA supporters, clear majorities oppose measures that put oil and gas development ahead of protecting Western lands. As with other Western voters, majorities of MAGA voters in each state oppose each of these proposals to expand oil and gas development on Western lands:
- 73%+ of MAGA supporters in each state oppose increasing the use of eminent domain, where the federal government takes a portion of privately owned property, including portions of family farms and ranches, for the purpose of building oil and gas pipelines that move oil and gas from where it is produced on national public lands to where it can be refined or used
- 62%+ of MAGA supporters in each state oppose requiring that government agencies allow oil and gas companies access to lands they can develop, even if local community members, hunters or anglers, nearby farmers and ranchers, and others raise concerns about impacts on wildlife, water and other resources
- 54%+ of MAGA supporters in each state oppose getting rid of the $5 per acre fee paid by oil and gas companies that helps cover the cost to review whether lands that oil and gas companies want to drill on are appropriate for development or whether they should be prioritized for wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation or other uses
- 54%+ of MAGA supporters in each state oppose reducing the review process and opportunities for nearby communities and local residents to give input regarding decisions about what takes place on national public lands, including potential oil and gas development
GlobeScan – Most Americans say that companies should take active stances on climate change and the environment [Release, Deck]
Most Americans say that companies should take active stances in support of climate action and fresh water protection. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (65%) say that companies should actively support government action to protect fresh water, and just over half (52%) say that companies should actively support government action on climate change.
Americans see more of a role for corporate America on climate and environmental policy than on other issues. While most say that companies should actively support government action on climate change and fresh water protection, the survey finds that Americans are relatively less likely to support companies taking active stances about promoting democracy, LGBTQ+ rights, or a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. Compared to climate change and the environment, Americans are relatively more likely to say that companies should “stay quiet and neutral” on these topics.
While there are substantial numbers who do support companies taking active stances on promoting democracy (48%), LGBTQ+ rights (38%), and a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy (34%), these findings show that Americans view climate and environmental policy as relatively more in the domain of corporate America.
A large majority say that CEOs should talk about the importance of addressing climate change. Americans feel that there is a duty for corporate leaders to be vocal in supporting climate action, with seven in ten (71%) agreeing that CEOs should speak out about the importance of addressing climate change.
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.