What Do Virginians Think About Climate Change?

climate change virginia study

The Miller Center, UVa’s “Center for Public Policy,” made a big deal about a report it just released which studied public perceptions of climate change. Most Virginians think climate change is happening, but less than half of those who think it is happening believe that it’s a human cause.

It seems that Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth has done its job by convincing Virginians that global warming is pretty much going to kill us all.  Despite the criticism to the movie and all the other doomsday news, climate change is something that has become somewhat of a cultural phobia to the good or bad, I have no clue. I digress.

The study’s findings were part of a national effort to study public perception on the topic. Specifically, in Virginia the study found some very interesting things.  The results are after the break:

Attitudes about climate change

Seventy‐five percent of Virginians say there is ʺsolid evidenceʺ that the average temperatures on earth have been increasing over the past four decades. These results largely the same regardless of race, age, education and gender, though partisan affiliation has differs.

Among those who said they believe global warming is occurring:

• 39% of those say they believe itʹs caused by human activity
• Nearly 9 in 10 respondents who believe itʹs happening say itʹs either a very serious (61%) or somewhat serious (28%) problem
• 72% of those said that immediate government intervention is necessary

Who’s responsible for dealing with climate change?

There’s a widespread perception that federal, state, and local governments have either a great deal or some responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming.

• 86% said they think the federal government has some degree of responsibility on this issue
• 85% said state governments have some degree of responsibility
• 77% said local governments have some degree of responsibility
• 69% agreed (38% strongly; 31% somewhat) that ʺIf the federal government fails to address the issue of global warming it is my stateʹs responsibility to address the problem.ʺ
• 75% said state governments will boost their economies by requiring greater use of renewable energy.

How do we deal with climate change?

• 82% support adopting a renewable portfolio standard. Demographic classifications showed little difference, but partisan affiliation showed
more differences in support of such standards (44% of Republicans said they strongly support; 62% Democrats and 55% of Independents strongly support)
• 3 in 5 Virginians did not know whether or not their state had a mandatory requirement for renewable electricity, but they overwhelmingly think itʹs a good idea.
• More than half of Commonwealth residents (55%) expressed strong opposition to increasing gas taxes, and 37 percent strongly opposed
increasing fossil fuel taxes
• A combined 82% of Virginians support clean coal technology (51% strongly; 31% somewhat)
• Virginians also support (49% strongly supported, 28 percent somewhat ) the idea that state government should ʺrequire auto makers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles even if it increases the cost of the vehicle.ʺ Giving tax breaks to those who buy hybrid vehicles received similar support.

[pic]

Popularity: 10% [?]

Tagged as: , , , , , , ,

10 Responses to “What Do Virginians Think About Climate Change?”

  1. 22 Oct 2008 at 9:29 amgleeful badger said:

    Human activity has affected climate change, the real question is by how much and if we stop tomorrow would it go the other way and if so, by how much. There is also much discussion on the latest period of solar flares and when the sun quiets, we will see if that has made a difference.

    The science is clear there is an effect- the cause is less so. The solutions are expensive and unproven. This would lead a reasonable person to want to reduce green house gases but not at a rate that will worsen what will certainly be a severe recession.

    This leads me to think that spending a whole lot of money to fund alternative energy seems the best course of action. It creates jobs and allows the different green tech to fight it out in the marketplace. That and the fact that a whole lot of nuclear plants will be built. YUCCA MOUNTAIN shout out!

  2. 22 Oct 2008 at 9:48 amJareth Cutestory said:

    The summary document released is somewhat disingenuous w/r/t the perceived cause of global warming. Yes, 39% of respondents said they believed it’s caused by human activity alone, while another unmentioned 33% believe it’s a combination of human activity and “natural patterns in the Earth’s environment.” So it’s really a healthy 72% of respondents that believe that human activity has at least something to do with it.

    Otherwise the 72% that believe that immediate action is necessary wouldn’t really make a whole lot of sense.

  3. 22 Oct 2008 at 10:27 ambelmont yo said:

    Peace through extinction.

  4. 22 Oct 2008 at 11:54 amVerbalSniper said:

    What we’re going to see here is the irresistible force (public opinion & politics) vs. the immovable object (economics.) Everybody likes “alternative energy,” but another immovable object (physics) means that we’re a long, long, long way from economically viable alternative energies. (You can try all you like, but (for example) there’s not enough sun hitting Virginia to ever make solar power viable on a broad basis here.)

    Unfortunately, I think our politicians will favor their jobs over a rationale approach, and we’ll end up with more extremely stupid policies that sound good but end up being disasters on net - like our current massive subsidies of corn ethanol. I’ve got zero confidence that if left to politicians - local, state, or federal - that we’ll have good solutions energy/environmental solutions. What we’ll see are plenty of token policies - like city council banning bottled water - but little in terms of bold, broadly effective policies.

    In lieu of the politicians, business is stepping up and making a difference. I’m pretty impressed by how companies like UPS are finding ways to cut fuel needs, how Wal-Mart is changing it’s fleet of trucks to hybrid technology, and how Google (among others) are progressively reducing their environmental footprints AND incubating green technologies.

  5. 22 Oct 2008 at 12:09 pmgleeful badger said:

    I agree with the physic lag. I think if we could get much better batteries the electric car would make a whole lot more sense. It may well be worth making investment in battery tech, sun and wind power much more favorable with better tax policies. You right about ethanol as well- the return for investment may never be there.

  6. 22 Oct 2008 at 1:19 pmEthan said:

    I read an article about a new line of plug in mini Coopers, but you can only go 150 miles on a charge and it costs $850/mo in electricity to operate. That’s worse for the environment than gasoline engines. Until electricity is incredibly less expensive, we’re not going to see affordable plug in electric cars.

  7. 22 Oct 2008 at 2:58 pmTuffy McFucklebee said:

    Dr. Tuffy’s back with a little editorial on this topic. Think of it what you will, but don’t set the bar too high.

    It’s nice to see that people are coming around to at least acknowledge the presence of global warming. I mean, the science is irrefutable. I know this past year, Pat Michaels, a professor at UVA (who was also the state climatologist, god save us!) was more or less nudged out of his position as professor. His funding was very, shall I say, oily, and he was a huge opponent to global warming. It’s one thing to have a contrarian opinion, but at one point, you’re just ignoring the facts.

    Hearing anti-global warming logorrhea just drives me up the wall. It rarely is my place to sit someone down in public and talk sense into them. The most common argument that I’ve heard is that it’s a natural phenomenon, a natural cyclic warming. Sure, that may be part of the baseline, but the increases in CO2, N2O, and other compounds, and the related climatic effects in the last 50 years can only be anthropogenic. It’s just how it is.

    A problem is that the general public is getting their info from the news. The common media outlets do a TERRIBLE job of relaying scientific data to the masses, and to their defense, it’s very hard to do that. It’s very unfortunate, and it ends up either confusing the public, or presenting us with half-baked knowledge.

  8. 22 Oct 2008 at 3:00 pmbelmont yo said:

    or presenting us with half-baked knowledge

    Well I imagine it will be full baked before to long, if current trends hold.

  9. 22 Oct 2008 at 3:12 pmTuffy McFucklebee said:

    @8…and boy, are my arms tired. Thank you! Be sure to tip your waitress, good night everyone

  10. 22 Oct 2008 at 8:09 pmparlie said:

    i think this is about a good a time as ever to point out that DINOSAURS ARE A LIBERAL MYTH.

Leave a Reply