[MCN] Are Americans becoming increasingly unified about climate change?

[Lance Olsen]

Recently, a team of researchers at George Washington University and North Carolina Central University performed a study <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1075547020951794>, published in the journal Science Communication <https://journals.sagepub.com/home/scx>, on how climate change can be viewed as a non-partisan issue. They had 2015 participants view an episode of the National Geographic documentary “Years of Living Dangerously <https://theyearsproject.com/>” on solar energy, coal use, and deforestation. Participants were polled both before and after the study.


Before watching the documentary, Democrats were more likely to understand the risks of climate change and believe that they could take action against it. After viewing the documentary, this difference between parties went away.

Forbes, Oct 18, 2020
<<https://www.forbes.com/sites/fernandezelizabeth/2020/10/18/republicans-and-democrats-can-agree-when-it-comes-to-climate-change/#2bc038f3537f <https://www.forbes.com/sites/fernandezelizabeth/2020/10/18/republicans-and-democrats-can-agree-when-it-comes-to-climate-change/#2bc038f3537f>>>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
News Release 13-Oct-2020 <https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php>
Before the US general election, evidence of agreement -- and division -- on climate issues <https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php>
 <https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php>
A new survey finds that while partisan divides persist on certain issues, the majority of Americans want action on climate change and believe unchecked warming will be a serious problem. <https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php>
<<https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php <https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-10/rftf-btu100920.php>>>

———————————————————————————————

For many climate change finally hits home <https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEORzAFV3reUQjeu1h7iVwQUqGQgEKhAIACoHCAowyNj6CjDyiPICMJyFxQU?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>
With record wildfires and hurricanes ravaging the United States, the effects of extreme weather events made worse by climate change are becoming more visible ...
CBS News <https://news.google.com/publications/CAAqBwgKMMjY-gow8ojyAg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>

———————————————————————————————

Americans increasingly unified re action to reduce emissions

NEWS RELEASE 23-SEP-2020
From carbon taxes to tax breaks, emission reduction policies have widespread support
A new study surveying public opinion on proposed environmental policies reveals that Americans are widely supportive of climate mitigation measures.

As the general election nears amid a historic season of hurricanes, wildfires, and heat waves, a new survey finds that majorities of Americans are supportive of climate change mitigation measures. This suggests that policymakers can introduce legislation that would enjoy public approval--including a green stimulus package to help deal with the economic downturn associated with COVID-19.

The new report of results from the survey, Climate Insights 2020: Policies and Politics <https://www.rff.org/publications/reports/climateinsights2020-policies-and-politics/>, is the third report in the 2020 series by researchers at Stanford University, Resources for the Future, and ReconMR. The installment offers the public and policymakers an opportunity to consider American appetite for proposed climate policies, as well as the perceived effects those policies may have on Americans' livelihoods and the wellbeing of the nation.

"Large majorities of Americans support federal efforts to reduce emissions," Jon Krosnick, Stanford University professor and report coauthor, said. "Our new results identify some climate mitigation policies that legislators can pursue in the future with widespread--and bipartisan--public support."

Topline Findings

An overwhelming majority of Americans favor government efforts to shift electricity generation toward renewable sources through tax breaks (83%) and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants (81%).
More than three-quarters of Americans favor the government requiring or giving tax breaks to companies to construct more energy-efficient buildings (75%), cars (71%), and appliances (71%).
Increased consumer taxes on electricity and gasoline to incentivize people to use less are the least popular policy options surveyed (favored by 28% and 43%, respectively).
Two-thirds of Americans (66%) believe that future federal stimulus packages should include efforts to create new jobs and technologies to combat climate change.
Majorities of Americans favor policies implemented by the Obama administration but rolled back by the Trump Administration. In particular, more than three-quarters of Americans support the Paris Accord (81%) and the Clean Power Plan (77%).
A majority of Americans are more likely to vote for a candidate that makes "green" statements (64%) and less likely to vote for a candidate that makes "anti-green" statements (67%).
	
"As we head into the first presidential debate, it's tempting to think of climate change as a partisan, polarized issue," Krosnick said. "Our research shows that for many mitigation policies, sizable majorities--and sometimes vast majorities--favor them."

"The findings in this report highlight significant opportunities for leaders to pursue policies that will resonate with Americans--the legislation and the platforms that could enjoy bipartisan support and buy-in from American constituents," he said.

To learn more about these findings, read the policies and politics installment of Climate Insights 2020 <https://www.rff.org/publications/reports/climateinsights2020-policies-and-politics/> by Jon Krosnick, social psychologist at Stanford University and RFF university fellow, and Bo MacInnis, lecturer at Stanford University and PhD economist. You can also try out our interactive data tool <https://www.rff.org/publications/data-tools/climate-insights/>, which allows users to explore the data in greater depth.

Future installments of reports in this series will focus on political dynamics, opinions in the states, and electric vehicles. Previous installments of reports focus on overall trends <https://www.rff.org/publications/reports/climateinsights2020/> and natural disasters <https://www.rff.org/publications/reports/climateinsights2020-natural-disasters/>.

————————————————————————————————

World’s population could easily survive on 60% less energy, says study <https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEF15eQUCRRMDdGURjJ3ijUIqGAgEKg8IACoHCAow-ZzLBzD77Ecw-bS4Bg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>
If global energy consumption were to be cut by 60 per cent by 2050, 10 billion people could still benefit from decent living conditions, a new study has found.

———————————————————————————————

Concentration/inequality of wealth is concentration/inequality of personable, individual, household responsibility for hotter world

Climate change is accelerating because of rich consumers’ energy use. Here are some solutions. <https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEA0EqFkLcnPD9kRepdPOcywqGAgEKg8IACoHCAowlOzSATCaiDUw672eBg?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>
Every energy reduction we can make is a gift to future humans, and all life on Earth.
Vox.com <https://news.google.com/publications/CAAqBwgKMJTs0gEwmog1?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen>
6 hours ago

*********************************************************************************************************************
"For widespread species such as lodgepole pine, a 3C temperature increase would increase growth in the 
northern part of its range, decrease growth in the middle, and decimate southern forests (Rehfeldt et al., 2001)."

Cited in Field, C.B., L.D. Mortsch,, M. Brklacich, D.L.”North America. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability.” 
Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 
M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press
*****************************************************************************************************************************
“Serious thresholds are crossed when forests convert to vegetation types without trees and, as a result, lose valued forest ecosystem services. ”
 
Constance I. Millar and Nathan L. Stephenson. Temperate forest health in an era of emerging megadisturbance. Science  21 August 2015
************************************************************************************************************************
"For example, a study modeling changes in one basin in Glacier National Park predicts …. area now covered by forests of all types will decline 
after the middle of the century, replaced partly by grasslands, which are not now present (Hall and Fagre 2003).”

Cited in Rocky Mountain Forests at Risk <<http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2014/09/Rocky-Mountain-Forests-at-Risk-Full-Report.pdf>>

 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bigskynet.org/pipermail/missoula-community-news_bigskynet.org/attachments/20201019/ceccf881/attachment.html>