Environmental Polling Roundup - September 25, 2026

EPC Resource Library / Weekly Roundups

Environmental Polling Roundup – September 25, 2026

David Gold

September 25th, 2026

Headlines

[Battleground States] Environmental Voter Project – Contrary to the arguments of “climate hushers,” battleground voters would prefer that elected officials pay more attention to climate change and pollution [Website, Report, Topline, Crosstabs]

Navigator – Voters disapprove of the way that Trump is handling data centers, but aren’t convinced that Democrats would do a better job; electricity costs and water use are the two top concerns about data centers across the political spectrum [Website, Deck, Topline]

Centerline Liberties + Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions (CRES) Forum – Solar and wind remain the two most widely supported energy sources; voters are inclined to believe that new energy projects should be easier to build, but a balanced debate about permitting reform leaves them favoring a “thorough approval process” even if it slows projects down [Press Release, Memo, Deck]

Pew – A growing majority of Americans believe that data centers are bad for the environment [Website, Topline]

NBC News – Voters don’t believe that data centers are one of the most pressing issues for the country, but supporting a local data center is still one of the most toxic positions that a candidate can take [Article, Topline]

Fox News – Voters don’t want data centers in their areas, but are amenable to building them far from population centers [Article, Topline, Crosstabs]

Key Takeaways

Polls continue to rebut the arguments behind “climate hushing.” Since the concept of “climate hushing” first emerged in recent months, we’ve seen new polling contradict its central arguments. “Climate hushing,” in short, is the idea that Democrats are penalized for talking about climate change because voters see it as a distraction from their bigger priorities.

UC-Santa Barbara found earlier this year that, all other things equal, hypothetical candidates gain support from voters when climate action is explicitly presented as one of the candidate’s priorities.

And a new survey of voters in U.S. Senate battleground states by the Environmental Voter Project finds that the majority of battleground voters want to hear elected officials talk more about climate change and pollution, while less than one in five want elected officials to talk less about these issues.

The Environmental Voter Project also directly probed the opportunity cost of talking about climate change by asking battleground voters if they find it frustrating when elected officials talk about climate change and pollution “instead of other issues that matter more to you.” Around half of battleground voters say that they do find it frustrating when elected officials focus on climate and pollution instead of other topics–but this is true of nearly all of the other issues that the poll asked about.

The percentage of battleground voters who are frustrated when elected officials talk about climate and pollution (51%), for example, is lower than the percentage who are frustrated when elected officials focus on immigration (55%), about the same as the percentages who say that they’re frustrated by elected officials focusing on foreign policy (52%) or taxes and government spending (51%), and barely even higher than the percentage who say they’re frustrated when elected officials focus on the cost of living and prices (48%). In other words, every single issue priority comes with some opportunity cost and there’s nothing at all special about the opportunity cost of focusing on climate change.

Voters are very malleable on permitting reform, and popular support for it can drop quickly when people learn about the trade-offs. Centerline Liberties and Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions (CRES) Forum find that a plurality of voters believe it should be easier to build new energy projects. The idea of speeding up energy projects has inherent appeal to Americans, who generally back the idea when they aren’t presented with the trade-offs.

When voters do learn about the trade-offs, however, permitting reform quickly shifts from a common sense idea to a deeply divisive one. In the Centerline Liberties/CRES Forum poll, for example, voters end up siding against the idea of expediting energy projects after they’re presented with the following competing arguments:

“Make it faster and easier to approve new energy projects–long delays and paperwork drive up costs”
“Keep a careful, thorough approval process, even if it takes longer, to protect the environment and give communities a say”

Advocates should be wary of over-interpreting polls about permitting reform as negotiations over the issue move forward in the coming months. Voters feel cross-pressured about permitting reform, as they want to get more energy on the grid quickly in order to bring down costs but also don’t want to cut corners when it comes to environmental risks and community input. Any poll that shows a large majority of voters in favor of permitting reform likely hasn’t presented them with a full picture.

Good Data Points to Highlight

[Climate Hushing] 57% of voters in battleground U.S. Senate states say that they would prefer that elected officials spend more time talking about climate change and pollution, compared to just 17% who want elected officials to spend less time talking about climate change and pollution [Environmental Voter Project]

[Clean Energy] More voters support generating electricity from solar (79%) and wind (74%) than any other energy sources [Centerline Liberties + CRES]

[Clean Energy + Elections] 58% of voters say that they are more likely to vote for a candidate who “strongly supports” renewable energy, compared to just 12% who are less likely to vote for such a candidate [Centerline Liberties + CRES]

[Clean Energy + Elections] 59% of voters in U.S. Senate battleground states are more likely to vote for a candidate who makes it a top priority to accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy sources like solar and wind, compared to just 17% who are less likely to vote for such a candidate [Environmental Voter Project]

Full Roundup

The clean energy industry is much more popular than oil and gas in battleground states, even in those with big fossil fuel industries. In this poll that was conducted across eight U.S. Senate battleground states (AK, GA, IA, ME, MI, NC, OH, and TX), voters express overwhelmingly positive attitudes about both the solar power industry (70% favorable / 19% unfavorable) and the wind power industry (64% favorable / 21% unfavorable). Meanwhile, battleground voters are divided in their attitudes about the oil and gas industry (45% favorable / 46% unfavorable).

The oil and gas industry is generally well-liked in major fossil fuel-producing states like Alaska (63% favorable) and Texas (56% favorable), but even in these states the solar power industry (75% favorable in Alaska and 67% favorable in Texas) and wind power industry (70% favorable in Alaska and 63% favorable in Texas) are both more popular than oil and gas,

Accelerating the clean energy transition is a winning position in battleground states. By a greater than three-to-one margin, voters across these states say that they are more likely (59%) rather than less likely (17%) to vote for a candidate who makes it a top priority to accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy sources such as wind and solar power.

This dynamic holds true across the battleground, as majorities of voters in each of the eight states say that they are more likely to vote for a candidate who prioritizes the clean energy transition.

Battleground voters would prefer that elected officials spend more time on climate change and pollution. In one of the clearest rebuttals we’ve seen so far to the idea of “climate hushing,” the majority of battleground state voters (59%) say that they would prefer for elected officials to spend more time addressing climate change and pollution. Meanwhile, just 17% say that they want climate elected officials to devote less focus to climate change and pollution.

Battleground voters feel that climate change can take elected officials’ focus away from other priorities–but no more than other issues like immigration, foreign policy, taxes, or abortion. One of the main arguments made by “climate hushers” is that, even if voters support climate action in the abstract, focusing on it can still carry a penalty for politicians because time spent talking about climate change takes away from the time they can focus on higher-priority issues like the cost of living.

The Environmental Voter Project probed this idea directly by asking voters how frustrating they find it when elected officials talk about various issues “instead of other issues that matter more to you.”

When it’s framed in this way, around half of voters (51% frustrating / 47% not frustrating) say that they find it frustrating when elected officials talk about climate change instead of other issues. However, the survey finds that close to half of voters say that it’s frustrating when elected officials talk about any specific issue–even the cost of living. Below are the percentages of battleground voters who say that they do or don’t find it frustrating when they hear elected officials talk about different issues instead of issues that matter more to them personally:

Abortion – 55% frustrating / 40% not frustrating
Immigration and the border – 55% frustrating / 42% not frustrating
Foreign policy – 52% frustrating / 43% not frustrating
Climate change and pollution – 51% frustrating / 47% not frustrating
Taxes and government spending – 51% frustrating / 47% not frustrating
The cost of living and prices – 48% frustrating / 51% not frustrating
Democracy, ethics, and corruption in government – 48% frustrating / 49% not frustrating
Crime and public safety – 47% frustrating / 51% not frustrating
Electricity costs and reliability – 47% frustrating / 51% not frustrating
Health care – 45% frustrating / 53% not frustrating
Jobs, wages, and the economy – 44% frustrating / 55% not frustrating

As this list shows, voters don’t have any particular problem with elected officials talking about climate change. Every single issue priority comes with an opportunity cost, and while some may carry slightly heavier costs than others, the risk that a voter will be bothered by a candidate focusing on climate change and pollution is quite average relative to other issues.

More than any other issue, battleground voters say that Democrats do a better job of addressing climate change and pollution than Republicans. Another curious aspect of “climate shushing” is that it calls for Democrats to unilaterally disengage from one of the issues where they have the clearest advantage in public trust. In fact, the Environmental Voter Project finds that battleground voters are more likely to say that Democrats do a better job than Republicans on climate change and pollution than on any other issue.

Below are the margins by which battleground voters say that one party or the other does a better job of trying to address various topics:

Climate change and pollution – Democrats +25
Health care – Democrats +17
The cost of living and prices – Democrats +12
Abortion – Democrats +11
Democracy, ethics, and corruption in government – Democrats +9
Electricity costs and reliability – Democrats +8
Jobs, wages, and the economy – Democrats +6
Taxes and government spending – Democrats +2
Foreign policy – Republicans +4
Crime and public safety – Republicans +9
Immigration and the border – Republicans +17

Voters disapprove of the way that Trump is handling data centers, but aren’t convinced that Democrats would do better. The majority of voters (54%) disapprove of how Trump is dealing with data centers, compared to just three in ten (30%) who approve.

Data centers and AI also remain the two issues that voters are most likely to say that they don’t trust either party to handle. While voters trust Democrats slightly more than Trump and Republicans to handle data centers (29% Democrats / 26% Trump and Republicans) and AI (28% Democrats / 26% Trump and Republicans), around one-third say that they don’t trust either party on these issues (32% for data centers and 34% for AI).

Voters of all partisan affiliations oppose data centers in their areas. Consistent with all of the polling that we’ve seen in recent months on the topic, Navigator finds that voters oppose data centers being built in their communities by a roughly two-to-one margin (30% support / 58% oppose). This includes majority opposition among every partisan group, including Democrats (23% support / 63% oppose), independents (23% support / 56% oppose), and Republicans (39% support / 53% oppose).

Electricity costs and water use are the two top concerns about data centers across the political spectrum. When asked to choose up to four of their greatest concerns about having a data center in their community, utility costs and water usage are voters’ clear top two fears:

Data centers will use up too much energy and raise utility costs for local residents – 44% choose this as one of their top four concerns
Data centers will use up scarce water resources – 38%
Data centers will make electricity less reliable for local residents – 29%
Data centers are getting approved with too much secrecy and lack of say for local residents – 24%
Data centers will rob us of our open spaces and pave over farm land – 23%
Data centers can cause significant noise pollution for local residents – 20%
Data centers pose a major health risk to those near them and have been linked to increased cancer rates – 19%
Data centers will be prime targets for cyber threats and ransomware attacks – 18%
Data centers will worsen climate change – 18%
Data centers will create more air pollution – 18%
Data centers get huge tax breaks for the companies behind them – 18%
Data centers can be a major eyesore and could lower local property values – 12%

And in another clear sign of how much partisans are seeing eye to eye on data centers, utility costs and water usage rank as the first and second greatest concerns, respectively, among Democrats, independents, and Republicans alike.

Solar and wind remain the most widely supported energy sources, though natural gas isn’t far behind. Large majorities of voters say that they favor producing electricity from solar, wind, and natural gas, while voters are more split on generating electricity from nuclear power and coal:

Solar power – 79% favor / 21% oppose
Wind power – 74% favor / 26% oppose
Natural gas – 71% favor / 29% oppose
Nuclear power – 55% favor / 45% oppose
Coal – 44% favor / 56% oppose

Solar and wind gain more separation over natural gas in the intensity of support behind them, as voters are more likely to say that they “strongly” favor generating electricity from solar (42%) or wind (34%) than natural gas (28%).

Voters overestimate how much of U.S. electricity currently comes from wind and solar. Voters may be even more inclined to support solar and wind power if they understood how small of a share of the country’s energy supply they currently represent. On average, voters estimate that around one-quarter (27%) of the country’s electricity comes from wind and solar when the actual percentage is 10 points lower.

Voters remain much more likely to support solar and wind in their own areas than other types of energy projects. When asked to choose one type of project that they would be most comfortable with having within a mile of their home from a list including solar farms, wind turbines, data centers, natural gas plants, and nuclear power plants, nearly half of voters (47%) choose solar.

Around one in five (21%) say that they would be most comfortable with wind turbines, 16% would be most comfortable with a data center, and few say that they would be most comfortable with a natural gas power plant (9%) or nuclear power plant (7%).

Solar is by far the most preferred option among Democrats (55%), independents (47%), and Republicans (38%) alike.

Most voters say they’re more likely to vote for candidates who strongly back renewable energy. Similar to what the Environmental Voter Project found among battleground voters when asking how a candidate’s support for accelerating the clean energy transition would impact their vote, Centerline Liberties and CRES Forum find that the majority of voters nationwide (58%) would be more likely to vote for a candidate who expresses “strong support” for renewable energy. Meanwhile, just 12% say that they would be less likely to vote for such a candidate.

Voters are inclined to say that it should be easier to build new energy projects–but side against expediting projects when exposed to back-and-forth arguments. A plurality of voters (40%) say that it should be easier to “permit, site, and build energy projects,” compared to 35% who prefer no change and 24% who say that it should be easier to approve and build energy projects.

While this data suggests that the electorate tilts in favor of permitting reform, voters actually side against the idea of expediting energy projects by a 20-point margin (60%-40%) when presented with the following two competing statements about approving new energy projects:

“Keep a careful, thorough approval process, even if it takes longer, to protect the environment and give communities a say” – 60% agree more with this statement
“Make it faster and easier to approve new energy projects–long delays and paperwork drive up costs” – 40% agree more with this statement

Pew – A growing majority of Americans believe that data centers are bad for the environment [Website, Topline]

A growing majority of Americans believe that data centers are bad for the environment. In newly released data, Pew finds that the percentage of Americans who believe that data centers are bad for the environment increased by 15 points between January and August (from 39% to 54%). Beliefs that data centers are mostly bad for local home energy costs (from 38% to 50%, +12) and mostly bad for the quality of life of people nearby (from 30% to 49%, +19) have also increased substantially.

The notion that data centers are bad for the environment is gaining traction among both Democrats (62%, +12 since January) and Republicans (47%, +16 since January), as the backlash against data centers continues to intensify across the electorate.

Voters don’t believe that data centers are one of the most pressing issues for the country, but supporting a local data center is one of the most toxic positions that a candidate can take. We don’t often see data centers included as a response option in questions about the most important issues facing the country, but NBC News included it in their latest poll and found that it ranked low among voters’ priorities.

Below are the percentages who name each of the different issues presented as one of the two most important facing the country:

Inflation and the cost of living – 44%
Government corruption – 36%
Threats to democracy – 27%
Jobs and the economy – 23%
The war with Iran – 21%
Immigration and border security – 15%
The cost of healthcare premiums – 12%
Abortion – 5%
Data centers – 5%

However, from a list of 15 different candidate characteristics–including issue positions and endorsements from major political figures–more voters say that supporting a data center in their community would make them less likely to vote for a candidate for federal office than anything else.

The majority of voters (11% more likely / 64% less likely) say that they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supports building a local data center, including half (51%) who would be much less likely to vote for such a candidate. This makes supporting a local data center more toxic for candidates than supporting the war in Iran (57% less likely, including 48% who are “much” less likely to vote for such a candidate), being endorsed by Donald Trump (52% less likely, 46% “much” less likely), wanting to abolish ICE (53% less likely, 43% “much” less likely), or supporting many of the Democratic Socialists of America’s proposed policies (50% less likely, 42% “much” less likely).

Fox News – Voters don’t want data centers in their areas, but are amenable to building them far from population centers [Article, Topline, Crosstabs]

Voters are relatively more amenable to data centers if they’re far from population centers. Fox News finds that, while voters oppose building AI data centers in their own areas by an overwhelming margin (27% favor / 71% oppose), a narrow majority would support building AI data centers “in remote locations, away from densely populated areas” (52% favor / 44% oppose).

The idea of locating data centers in “remote areas” elicits the most opposition from rural voters. Given how resistant voters are to data centers in their local areas, rural voters understandably raise the most objections to siting data centers in remote areas. While urban voters (50% favor / 46% oppose) lean toward the idea and suburban voters (57% favor / 40% oppose) support it by a wide margin, rural voters are more likely to oppose than support it (46% favor / 51% oppose).

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