March 14, 2013 | By Dina Smeltz

It's Not Easy Being Green

President Obama will be in Chicago’s western suburbs to promote his energy policies on Friday at Argonne National Laboratory.  The Administration’s energy strategy has evolved over time, viewing the production of natural gas and nuclear energy as a transitional stage in shifting away from dependence on fossil fuels to reliance on cleaner energy sources.  As new supplies of oil and natural gas have been developed, particularly through fracking, the gains have also had positive knock-on effects for job growth and economic improvement.  Analysts say that within a decade, the US could not only become energy independent, but also a net energy exporter. While this is good news for the goals of energy independence and economic growth, opponents of fracking are trying to raise concern about the environmental risks associated with the process.

As far as American public opinion is concerned, reducing energy dependence is a top priority. While a majority of Americans across the political spectrum favor measures that emphasize the development of alternative energy and energy conservation, they are not willing to personally pay increased taxes to encourage the use of alternative energy.  Moreover, there has a been shift in opinion toward emphasizing energy production over environmental protection. As often happens, question wording plays a role in how people react to energy options.  And this highlights the potential for various messages from different interest groups to affect opinion.

[Polling trends other than Chicago Council surveys can be found at pollingreport.com.]

Reducing U.S. Dependence on Foreign Oil Tops Nuclear Proliferation, Terrorism as Goal

The 2012 Chicago Council Survey finds that nearly eight in ten Americans believe reducing U.S. dependency on foreign oil should be a “very important” foreign policy goal of the US, second only to protecting the jobs of American workers. Energy independence is seen as very important by more Americans than preventing nuclear proliferation, combating international terrorism, and maintaining superior military power worldwide (Figure 1).

Majority Support Tax Breaks for Clean Energy; Oppose Increased Taxes on Gas or Electricity

When asked about various approaches to address U.S. dependence on foreign energy sources, the Chicago Council 2012 survey finds eight in ten Americans favor creating tax incentives for businesses to encourage the development and use of alternative energy sources, such as solar or wind power (78%).   For most Americans, these tax incentives would have little direct impact on them personally, so there are not many downsides to supporting them in a survey question. Two in three also favor increasing fuel efficiency of American cars, even if it resulted in higher car prices (65%). On the other hand, a large majority of Americans (70%) oppose policy options that would require raising taxes on fossil fuels to incentivize individuals and businesses to use less coal and oil (Figure 2).

Other surveys confirm that Americans favor developing alternative energy supplies over production of fossil fuels.  Pew Research/USA Today surveys from 2011-2013 also show a continued preference for “developing alternative sources, such as wind, solar and hydrogen technology” over “expanding exploration and production of oil, coal and natural gas,” though the gap between the two options has narrowed considerably since 2011 (Figure 3).

A Gallup survey from 2012 also find majorities in favor of “setting higher auto emissions standards” (62%) and setting higher emissions and pollution standards for business and industry (70%), as well as spending government money on developing solar and wind power (69%), and the development of alternate sources of automobile fuel (66%).  

Energy Production vs. Environmental Protection

These results in favor of clean energy might lead readers to believe the American public is leaning “green,” but other results show that Americans place less importance now on environmental protection (versus energy production) than they have in the past.

Between 2001 and 2008, more Americans placed a higher priority on environmental protection “even at the risk of limiting the amount of energy supplies, such as oil, gas and coal, which the US produces” over the “development of US energy supplies, such as oil, gas, and coal, even if the environment suffers to some extent.”   But in recent years there has been less consistency (Figure 4).

Between 2009 and 2012, opinion fluctuated between the two options- a consequence of the Gulf oil spill in April 2010.  By 2011, more said that developing energy should be given greater priority, and in 2012 opinion is somewhat divided, with 47 percent placing a greater emphasis on energy development and 44 percent choosing the environment. These changes could be linked to declines in personal economic situations, and perhaps we will see a return to giving the environment precedence if personal financial situations improve.

This is the first post in a series on American attitudes on energy sources:

About

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs highlights critical shifts in American public thinking on US foreign policy through public opinion surveys and research conducted under the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy. 

The annual Chicago Council Survey, first conducted in 1974, is a valuable resource for policymakers, academics, media, and the general public. The Council also surveys American leaders in government, business, academia, think tanks, and religious organizations biennially to compare trends in their thinking with overall trends. And collaborating with partner organizations, the survey team periodically conducts parallel surveys of public opinion in other regions of the world to compare with US public opinion. 

The Running Numbers blog features regular commentary and analysis from the Council’s public opinion and US foreign policy research team, including a series of flash polls of a select group of foreign policy experts to assess their opinions on critical foreign policy topics driving the news.

Archive

#TBT: That Time We All Feared Chemical and Biological Weapons

In the spirit of Throw Back Thursday, Running Numbers is digging out its archived polls to look back at America’s foreign policy feelings of old. This week, we’re looking at Council data on Americans' perceptions of the threat posed by chemical and biological weapons in the late 90s and early 00s.



| By Dina Smeltz

​Polls Measure So Much More than Voting Intentions

The polling community took a lot heat following the failure of forecasters and data journalists to predict Trump's triumph in the 2016 election. But polls measure so much more than voting intentions says Council senior fellow Dina Smeltz.


| By Karl Friedhoff, Craig Kafura

Public Opinion in the US and China

There is perhaps no more important bilateral relationship in the world today than the one between the United States and China—the world’s two most important players in terms of economics and security. Where do the Chinese and American publics stand on key issues in the relationship, and what policies do they want to see their respective nations pursue worldwide? 



| By Diana C. Mutz

How Trade Attitudes Changed from 2012-2016

Trade was an important issue in the recent presidential election, but not in the way the media and many prominent observers have led us to believe.  The dominant narrative in the media was that disgruntled manufacturing workers whose jobs had been sent overseas emerged, understandably, as trade’s strong opponents, thus making Trump with his strong anti-trade rhetoric their natural ally.


Who Run the World? Foreign Policy Attitudes on Women and Girls

In partnership with the New America Foundation, the 2016 Chicago Council Survey included two questions developed to provide better insight about the importance of promoting women's rights and women's participation in societies around the world. 




| By Dina Smeltz

The US-Russian Relationship

The 2016 Chicago Council Survey partnered with the Levada Analytical Center in Moscow to ask Americans and Russians how they feel about each other and—more importantly—each other’s government. 


| By Richard C. Eichenberg

Gender Difference in Foreign Policy Opinions: Implications for 2016

There are three patterns in American politics that take on special significance in 2016: the gender divide in Presidential elections; the low support for Donald Trump among women; and the growing discussion in the foreign policy community about the inclusion of women in the policy process. Nonresident fellow Richard Eichenberg explores the extent of gender difference in the 2016 Chicago Council Survey data and assesses the relevance of any differences to this year’s presidential election.