Poll: Republicans Support Transpo Policies to Avert Climate Change, Too

Judging from the level of our national debate, you would guess we are a nation strongly divided on the issue of climate change. But you’d be wrong, according to a new poll from Yale University.

Americans favor transportation policies that would address climate change, such as increased transit and bike lanes, according to a new poll. Photo: ## http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/how-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-us-transportation/1228## Green Chip Stocks##

A representative survey of 1,010 adults found that 71 percent think that global warming should be a “very high,” “high” or “medium priority” for the president and Congress. Americans overwhelmingly support policy changes that would help address the issue, the poll found. Participants favored developing clean energy sources by a more than 9-to-1 ratio.

“We find very strong bipartisan support for a variety of climate and energy policies in this country,” said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change. “It runs contrary to what you might expect looking at, for instance, the current make up of Congress and the Republican candidates for president.”

Transportation and planning policies to avert global warming also enjoyed wide approval among survey participants: 77 percent said they support adding bike lanes to roads, and 80 percent said they support expanding public transportation service.

This was true even among self-identifying Republicans. Some 74 percent of Republican respondents said they supported bike lanes and 80 percent signaled their support for increased public transit availability.

Majorities also supported expanding mixed-use zoning, reducing sprawl and promoting energy efficient apartments over single-family homes.

Republicans were more evenly split on issues of zoning and sprawl; 59 percent said they opposed zoning for mixed-uses in order to reduce the need for a car. However, Republicans were split 50-50 on using zoning to reduce sprawl and commute times.

While Americans were generally supportive of climate change policy fixes, their commitment did not go as far when their wallets entered the equation. For example, poll respondents generally favored expanding public transit options. But when asked if they would be willing to support a 10 cent fee per gallon of gas to support transit, they were overwhelmingly opposed, Leiserowitz said. Americans are also diametrically opposed to tax increases of all types. Those polled rejected the idea of a carbon tax, even if the revenues would be returned in the form of income tax reductions.

But that doesn’t mean Americans are entirely unwilling to bear some costs to support clean energy, Leiserowitz said. For example, when asked if they would support a a 20 percent renewable energy requirement for utility companies, Americans sign on, even if they are told such a regulation would cost them an additional $100 annually in energy costs.

“There is some element of wishful thinking here.” Leiserowitz said. “It’s not that they’re just against paying more; people support increased energy costs. For whatever reason there’s a taboo around paying at the gas pump that people just don’t like. They also don’t like the word ‘tax.'”

Another interesting finding was that public prioritization of federal action on global warming has been declining since 2008, when Yale began its poll. That is mainly due to the public’s increased concern about the economy, Leiserowtz said.

“People are much more worried about losing their job or their house,” he said. “The threat of climate change just can’t compare.”

  • Anonymous

     Climate Change has done to journalism, science and trusting political agendas what nasty priests and suicide bombers did for organized religion. It’s phony moralized dogma made well intentioned people into fear mongering neocons as billions of children and future children were condemned to a CO2 death. History is watching this madness. Has anyone considered that it was scientists who also gave us cruise missiles, cancer causing chemical cocktails, land mine technology, nuclear weapons, germ warfare, cluster bombs, strip mining technology, Y2K, Y2Kyoto, deep sea drilling technology, AND the cancer causing chemicals and pesticides that polluted the planet originally and made environmentalism necessary in the first place? And just how did these thousands of nameless and faceless scientists strangely out number the protesters? And shouldn’t a “comet hit” of an emergency such as catastrophic climate crisis be mentioned at least once in Obama’s state of the union speech? And still the scientists didn’t “act” like it was still an emergency as they say it is, er was. If this army of saintly scientists marches on Washington, THEN I’ll start to believe in a CO2 crisis.  Climate Change has done to journalism, science and trusting political agendas what nasty priests and suicide bombers did for organized religion. It’s phony moralized dogma made well intentioned people into fear mongering neocons as billions of children and future children were condemned to a CO2 death. History is watching this madness. Has anyone considered that it was scientists who also gave us cruise missiles, cancer causing chemical cocktails, land mine technology, nuclear weapons, germ warfare, cluster bombs, strip mining technology, Y2K, Y2Kyoto, deep sea drilling technology, AND the cancer causing chemicals and pesticides that polluted the planet originally and made environmentalism necessary in the first place? And just how did these thousands of nameless and faceless scientists strangely out number the protesters? And shouldn’t a “comet hit” of an emergency such as catastrophic climate crisis be mentioned at least once in Obama’s state of the union speech? And still the scientists didn’t “act” like it was still an emergency as they say it is, er was. If this army of saintly scientists marches on Washington, THEN I’ll start to believe in a CO2 crisis. If you love the planet, be happy for it and be relieved that the planet you love so much will not experience a life ending crisis of climate change. Climate change was a political and cultural industry, not science and not pollution, or energy or waste or population it was a mistake and a criminal exaggeration served as a comfortable lie. Meanwhile, the UN had allowed carbon trading to trump 3rd world fresh water relief, starvation rescue and 3rd world education for just over 25 years of climate control instead of the obviously needed population control. Nice job!I’m not the only one contacting authorities and law makers and the justice departments to have the leading scientists and NEWS EDITORS charged for this needless panic of a false war called Climate Change. We missed getting Bush………….

  • Good lord. Where to start when the crazies start ranting… If you don’t believe the evil scientists, why don’t you check out the glaciers for yourself?

    While you’re at it, please tell me you also don’t go to hospitals and use medicical technology, which exists because of thsoe evil scientists. Or cars, or electricity. And what are you doing using a computer?

    Everything in your life right now, including food (unless you grow your own like an Amish person) is based on evil science. If you don’t believe in science, you should just go live in a grass hut on a mountain somewhere. Far, far away from other people.

  • carma

    Let me say that Climate Change is real.  you can choose not to accept it but it is real.

    having recently been to alaska to experience what i knew would be gone in 50 years or so.  i was so shocked to see that the magnificent glaciers ARE GONE.

    it is very sad, b/c the nature up in our 49th state is beautiful.  the snow capped mountains hardly have any snow anymore.  what was once magestic snowy mountains are little more than white dustings.

    now lets talk about the hurricanes, the ENORMOUS amounts of rain weve been experiencing.  where does all that water come from.  Yes, you betcha.  that ice thats been melted.

    yes, you can argue that there is something called natural climate change.  but nothing compares to the huge amount of emmissions that modern technology has spewed up into the atmosphere.

    i may not be all draconian and mandate for gas tax and uprooting our lives as we speak, but lets face it..  we have harmed the enviornment in which we live in.  yes, humankind will still survive.   but climate change/global warming or whatever you call it is a real thing.

  • I recently saw a great video podcast from Nova about a woman who’s a climate sciente scientists and an Evangelical Christian. I think she put it brilliantly:

    “As a Christian we’re told that God is not the author of fear. God is love. When we’re acting out of fear, we’re thinking about ourselves. When we act out of love, we’re not thinking about ourselves. We’re thinking about others. Our global neighbors, the poor and the disadvantaged. The people who do not have the resources to adapt. And so I believe that we are called, first of all, to love each other. And second of all, to act!”

    This woman has become one of my heroes.

  • Joe R.

    I personally think environmentalists shot themselves in the foot by using global warming/climate change as the impetus to get us off fossil fuels.  There’s really no need to even get into that when there are a plethora of other great, far less controversial reasons to stop using fossil fuels and reducing auto use yesterday:

    1) Cars and planes spew emissions which cause thousands of cancer deaths per year in the US alone.2) These emissions also cause damaging acid rain.  The particulates in these emissions aggravate asthma and dirty our environment, as well as deteriorate our infrastructure.3) Oil supplies are finite.  We’ll need to wage war to secure what we’ll need if we continue to be dependent upon them.  In fact, we’ve already done that in Iraq and Afghanistan.4) Oil price swings cause severe economic disruption.5) Driving autos on long commutes creates stress which causes many health problems, and also contributes to obesity.6) The congestion and confusion autos create makes cities less liveable.7) Auto accidents kill about 50,000, injure 2 million, and cause billions of dollars in lost productivity.Now with all these GREAT reasons, why do we even need to bring up global warming?  I think if environmentalists had stuck to my list of reasons, especially 1 through 4, we would have already seen significant change.

  • “I personally think environmentalists shot themselves in the foot by
    using global warming/climate change as the impetus to get us off fossil
    fuels.”

    I don’t think they picked global warming. I think global warming picked them. When you look down the road and see the devastating consequences of a particular action, any sane person would freak out and start telling people about it. I don’t call myself a “peak oilist” because I think this is the best way to get people to stop driving. I call myself  peak oilist because the
    consequences of not dealing with the fact of oil depletion freaked me the eff out.

    Anyway, it doesn’t matter which tactic you use. The oil/car forces would have found some way to undermine whatever environmentalists picked. This is a solid theory that any moron would have to accept, unless you’ve been totally brainwashed by Fox “News” to believe otherwise.

  • carma

    see the biggest problem is that most evangelical christians are shut about the realities of the world.  its hard to balance god and science together.  but seriously, assume that god did create the world.  wouldnt it still be in your good faith to protect the world that was created?

  • Ubbnetwork12

    http://www.ubbnetwork.com/

     business valuation

    I have become a
    great fan of your blogs!!

  • We need more livable streets and more walkable cities and neighborhoods, and we need things like bike lanes and better access to transit.  How, indeed, to pay for these things is always an issue, but we either pay for them now, or pay later for having neglected them.  Emissions from too many single commuter cars can be easily reduced, even before clean car standards (60 mpg by 2025) are realized.  Take the bus. Car pool. Take a bike safety class and ride. Advocate for those bike lanes…I just read an article today showing that the installation of bike lanes has been a boost to local economies.  Steps like these make sense of all kinds of reasons, the clearest of which is public health. 

  • Michael Lewyn

    If you’re against science, maybe you should stop utilizing doctors, dentists et al.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Climate Change and Health Care: A Tale of Two Polls

|
As health care reform remains the No. 1 item on Washington’s agenda, the brewing Senate battle over climate change legislation — which has the potential to dramatically reshape transportation policy — is remaining in the background. The audience at a Houston rally against Congress’ climate bill, staged by the oil industry. (Photo: NYT) Looking at […]

Yes, Local Transportation Agencies Can Measure Their Climate Impacts

|
It’s going to be a tough sell for those who claim that greenhouse gas performance measures for transportation can’t possibly work, when plenty of transportation agencies say it would be no problem. That’s according to transportation officials in several regions across America who responded to a survey commissioned by the Natural Resources Defense Council. The responses were […]

Obama’s Climate Speech: Mostly Mum on Transportation

|
President Obama announced a sweeping package of measures to address climate change today. But with a couple of exceptions, he was largely silent on the 27 percent of carbon emissions that come from the transportation sector. One of the most important reforms the president announced is presidential memorandum he plans to issue to the EPA to […]

Survey: Americans Want DOTs to Factor Climate Change in Their Decisions

|
Should we continue to let state transportation departments spend tens of billions of dollars in federal funds each year without regard to how highway expansions contribute to climate change? Right now U.S. DOT is looking to inject some accountability into a process that has created a very carbon-intensive transportation system, and a new poll suggests most Americans […]

Poll: Voters From All Walks Support Transportation Improvements, Reform

|
Don’t be fooled by the high-pitched rhetoric in Washington. The vast majority of Americans are united, at least when it comes to the topic of transportation. That’s the conclusion of the Rockefeller Foundation poll released earlier this week. A bipartisan polling team questioned 1,000 American voters nationwide about their attitudes toward the nation’s roads, bridges […]

Joel Kotkin on Smart Growth: The Streetsblog Re-mix

|
When columnist Robert Samuelson published an alarmingly misguided attack on high-speed rail last month, the St. Louis Urban Workshop fired back in a unique fashion: with a "re-mix" of Samuelson’s op-ed that cleverly edited the piece to better reflect reality. Joel Kotkin (Photo: NAF) The format was so intriguing that Streetsblog Capitol Hill couldn’t resist […]