New Yale Study Shows Majority of Americans Support Climate Education and Carbon Regulation

A new study released today by Yale University in conjunction with George Mason University finds the majority of Americans favor regulating carbon emissions and educational programs related to climate change. While the recently released Yale poll which found Americans opinions on the urgency of acting to control greenhouse gases declining and skepticism rising, the new study entitled titled Climate Change in the American Mind:Public Support for Climate & Energy Policies in January 2010 finds broad based public support for action on climate issues regardless of political preferences.

The new poll found that a majority of Americans support:

Protecting the environment, even if it reduces economic growth (63%).

Schools should teach our children about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions
to global warming (70%)

Our government should establish programs to teach Americans about global warming (60%)

Our government should establish programs to help Americans reduce their own
greenhouse gas emissions (65%)

Our government should establish programs to teach Americans how to save energy (75%)

Overall, protecting the environment Improves economic growth and provides new jobs (67%)

When there is a conflict between environmental protection and economic growth, protecting the environment is more important, even if it reduces economic growth (63%)

The poll also found that the vast majority support renewable energy research (85%) and a 10 point drop in support for new nuclear power plants from 2008. 61% are in favor of the US signing an international treaty that requires the United States to cut its emissions of carbon dioxide 90% by the year 2050 and 71% favor regulating carbon dioxide (the primary greenhouse
gas) as a pollutant.

 

Follow Jerry Cope on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jercope

Comments

[realpolitic]

11:28 AM on 02/10/2010

"Cap-and-Trade. The last five organizations to release polls on cap-and-trade (AP/Stanford, ABC/Post, CNN, Pew, Rasmussen) actually show it favored by the public by a 51-40 margin, on average. It is likely that a significant fraction of the public does not understand what cap-and-trade is; nevertheless most of these polls provided descriptions of the bill's contents. Eight House Republicans voted for the climate bill in June; the Senate has yet to consider the measure."

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/republicans-not-obama-more-often-on.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Judy Bonds]

09:58 AM on 02/05/2010

I can't believe with all the crazy weather we have been having- along with the science that proves Climate Change/Global Warming-- there are people out there that want to use "protected stupidity" to deny the fact that we are leaving our children an unlivable Earth. Shame!
If we are wrong about Climate Change and still act- we get a cleaner environment - new jobs and economy and energy independence but if we don't act our children will suffer mightily andn the human species is at risk.
A smart, moral person would chose life for their children! We told our children to clean up their rooms and look at the mess we are leaving them to clean up.

[boston998]

11:49 AM on 02/05/2010

What crazy weather? And don't tell me Katrina, that was in 2005. And we have not had another one like it since.
Up in New England, we had the blizzard of 78, and have not had one like it since.
did you ever hear of weather cycles??

[Benblanken]

06:08 PM on 02/04/2010

As a further indication of warming proponents' skill in burying unhelpful results, see the recent Wall Street Journal report by Anne Jolis about a UK study's slant:

"Mr.[Nigel] Arnell’s paper, funded by the U.K. government, was duly cited in the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s supposedly authoritative 2007 assessment report. But the IPCC uses Mr. Arnell’s research to give the opposite impression, by a form of single-entry book-keeping. While it dutifully tallies the numbers of people he predicts will be left with less water access, it largely ignores the greater number likely to see more water courtesy of climate change"

[realpolitic]

11:28 AM on 02/10/2010

Who will see more water and how? Precipitation in many areas will become less frequent and more intense. Also, mountain glaciers are melting so the runoff from them in future years will be limited. If you make assertions so at least some evidence, though deniers feel above evidence.

[Benblanken]

05:57 PM on 02/04/2010

"While the recently released Yale poll which found Americans' opinions on the urgency of acting to control greenhouse gases declining and skepticism rising..." Yes, please do go on and quote the findings on the subject. In other words, what percentages said "what's the hurry?" and "What do those cheating climate scientists know that they're still hiding from us?"

Fair and balanced reporting? No, it's just like most of the pro-warming literature, slanted to gain continued taxpayer support for grants to global warming drumbeaters.

[seakat]

08:17 PM on 02/04/2010

So, you have a problem with grant money, yet you have no problem with government subsidies to the oil companies? Sure, that makes a lot of sense to me.

Just in Lobby Money Spent:
ExxonMobil -$55 million in Washington since 1998
ChevronTexaco -$32 million dollars
Marathon Oil - $29 million
BP - $28 million
Royal Dutch/Shell Group - $27 million
American Petroleum Institute $20 million
Occidental Petroleum - $12 million

Total: $203,000,000

2007 PROFITS for oil companies:
Exxon’s $40.6 billion
Shell $31.3 billion
Chevron $18.7 billion
ConocoPhillips $11.9 billion
BP $20.8 billion

Total: 123.3 billion

The global warming crowd has procured 50 billion dollars in funding since 1990,

[Virgil Kane]

08:23 AM on 02/05/2010

End all energy subsides from the government! Taxpayers shouldn't be on the hook for oil, windmills, whatever. Just look what a waste of money Ethanol from corn was.

[climastrology101]

12:17 PM on 02/06/2010

"global warming crowd has procured 50 billion dollars in funding since 1990,"

A scam the equal of Bernie Madoff.

[bowebb]

06:22 AM on 02/05/2010

Fair and balanced? The reporters role is to seek the truth and then report the truth. Too many people are bagged by the idiotic Fox spin shows. Know the truth and the truth shall set you free.