76% of Americans say government not doing enough to address global warming mongabay.com March 15, 2006
A new survey released today by the nonpartisan Civil Society Institute found that 76 percent - including two out of three conservatives - think the federal government is not doing "enough to address global warming and develop alternative energy sources in order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil."
The survey, based on telephone interviews conducted among a sample of 1,029 American adults (512 men and 517 women) aged 18 and over during the period of February 23-26, 2006, also found that more than four out five Americans (83 percent) - including 77 percent of conservatives - said that "in the absence of federal leadership" today, they support the fast-growing number of pushes by "state and local officials to curb global warming and promote new energy resources."
Results from the poll suggest that environmental policy is a top concern of Americans going into an election year. 77 percent of those surveyed think that "developing alternative or renewable energy sources and reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil should be President Bush's top priority for the balance of his term in office" and 83 percent would like to see more attention paid to global warming during the 2006 Congressional elections and the 2008 Presidential elections.
"One of the most striking aspects of these findings is the widespread and decidedly bipartisan nature of the concerns about inaction on global warming and energy solutions," said Graham Hueber, Opinion Research Corporation Senior Research Associate of the Civil Society Institute. "We don't see the party-line polarization that is so evident on many other national issues. This survey will give no comfort at all to politicians who think they can drag their feet on climate change and energy solutions."
While the United States may be known as the land of pickups and SUVs, the survey suggests that a growing number of Americans believe "it is patriotic to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle since it requires less fuel to run, and therefore, can help to reduce U.S. dependency on Middle Eastern oil."
The survey results come a day after NASA announced that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide now stand at 381 per million (ppm), about 36 percent above pre-industrial levels. Carbon dioxide is a principal "greenhouse gas" thought to be driving global warming. Humans boost carbon dioxide levels primarily by the combustion of fossils fuels and deforestation. Presently, the United States is the world's largest producer of carbon dioxide emissions.
Scientists expect higher temperatures to increase the severity of tropical storms and hurricanes in coming years. The damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina has bolstered awareness of climate change among many Americans.
Overview and local actions you can take: http://www.PostCarbon.org =============
= = = = STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON? = = = = Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org More news: UseNet's misc.activism.progressive (moderated) = = = = Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email For more information: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace) And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general)
** ANTI-SPAM EMAIL NOTE: For email "info" and "map" DON'T work. Email instead ** to m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes) at economicdemocracy.org
Roy. Just Roy.
2006-03-24 21:00:21 EST
>> the survey suggests that a growing number
Translation: a small minority. It would be interesting to see the data tables - from what I've read, I would estimate the number of Americans driving smaller cars because they want to (as opposed to can't afford anything else) at around 10%.
I would believe the 77 and 83 percent figures - Americans love to whine and complain, but when it comes to sacrifice, they want somebody else to fix the problem for them.
/Roy
Jimpgh2002
2006-03-24 21:19:21 EST
On 24 Mar 2006 17:42:22 -0800, info@economicdemocracy.org wrote:
>76% of Americans say government not doing enough to address global >warming
And whose fault was it when the earth had ice ages followed by global warming(rinse, repeat) over the millenniums prior to now?
Mark Mywords
2006-03-24 21:22:55 EST
In article <v1a922pllo101g70i6mhr0b3rgk3lg23pl@4ax.com>, jimpgh2002 <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote:
> And whose fault was it when the earth had ice ages followed by > global warming(rinse, repeat) over the millenniums prior to now?
You're right. We should just burn coal like crazy and all drive 10mpg SUVs because we're all gonna die from natural warming soon anyway.
NeoLibertarian
2006-03-24 21:36:27 EST
i*o@economicdemocracy.org wrote: > 76% of Americans say government not doing enough to address global > warming > mongabay.com > March 15, 2006 > > > A new survey released today by the nonpartisan Civil Society Institute > found that 76 percent - including two out of three conservatives - > think the federal government is not doing "enough to address global > warming and develop alternative energy sources in order to reduce our > dependence on foreign oil."
A) It's not the fucking Government's JOB. What kind of moron would be sitting around and waiting for the Government to be creating alternatives energy sources?
The Government won't and can't create innovation. It can only tax innovation.
B) A hundred parts per million increase in the Tropospheric Carbon Dioxide, Amen, cannot be shown to be causing the forcing necessary for observed Global Warming.
Solar Flares are causing the observed Global Warming.
IPCC makes the ignorant assumption that the sun is constant. It is not; it is a variable star. The only way for IPPC to claim that Carbon Dioxide, Amen, is causing Global Warming is to ignore, not only the variable irradiance of sun, but water vapor as well. At one millibar, and 50% humidity, it is impossible to duplicate IPCC's exaggerated claims about the forcing of Carbon Dioxide, Amen.
C) It doesn't matter what opinion polls show, one way or the other.
Unless you're running for office.
-- NeoLibertarian
Dion
2006-03-24 23:14:31 EST
"NeoLibertarian" <cognac756@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1143254187.518155.305510@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > info@economicdemocracy.org wrote: >> 76% of Americans say government not doing enough to address global >> warming >> mongabay.com >> March 15, 2006 >> >> >> A new survey released today by the nonpartisan Civil Society Institute >> found that 76 percent - including two out of three conservatives - >> think the federal government is not doing "enough to address global >> warming and develop alternative energy sources in order to reduce our >> dependence on foreign oil." > > A) It's not the fucking Government's JOB. What kind of moron would be > sitting around and waiting for the Government to be creating > alternatives energy sources?
Bush is giving Big Oil money to find AE. Seems silly really, paying the supplier to find you a different supplier. What incentive is there for them to produce results. Seems like GWBush is giving Big Oil money for nothing. -- Dion
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
"The President has broken the law, and the censure resolution I introduced is intended to hold him accountable. Nobody says that we shouldn't be monitoring suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law. We have yet to hear a reasonable argument from the president or anyone else why it was necessary to break the law." Russ Feingold
C*@yahoo.com
2006-03-24 23:49:28 EST
Dion wrote: > "NeoLibertarian" <cognac756@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:1143254187.518155.305510@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com... > > > > info@economicdemocracy.org wrote: > >> 76% of Americans say government not doing enough to address global > >> warming > >> mongabay.com > >> March 15, 2006 > >> > >> > >> A new survey released today by the nonpartisan Civil Society Institute > >> found that 76 percent - including two out of three conservatives - > >> think the federal government is not doing "enough to address global > >> warming and develop alternative energy sources in order to reduce our > >> dependence on foreign oil." > > > > A) It's not the fucking Government's JOB. What kind of moron would be > > sitting around and waiting for the Government to be creating > > alternatives energy sources? > > Bush is giving Big Oil money to find AE. Seems silly really, paying the > supplier to find you a different supplier. What incentive is there for them > to produce results. Seems like GWBush is giving Big Oil money for nothing. > --
Bush isn't "the Government," dummy. He's your servant.
Your government doesn't produce anything. Except victories in war.
No government discovered a use for petroleum. No government ever created an internal combustion engine.
He throws your money at alternative energy research because you expect him to. Not because anyone seriously thinks that the government will actually produce alternative energy sources.
But it WILL tax it, once produced.
-- NeoLibertarian
DKat
2006-03-25 00:30:40 EST
Actually I think we should blow a few abombs to put enough dust in the air for a few years so we can have an ice age. The anerobic organisms made their world mostly uninhabitable for themselves but gave us a spiffy place to live in. Who know who will take our place when we make it unlivable for a large human population.
"Mark Mywords" <markm@ywords.com> wrote in message news:markm-A26CA3.21225524032006@comcast.dca.giganews.com... > In article <v1a922pllo101g70i6mhr0b3rgk3lg23pl@4ax.com>, > jimpgh2002 <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote: > >> And whose fault was it when the earth had ice ages followed by >> global warming(rinse, repeat) over the millenniums prior to now? > > You're right. We should just burn coal like crazy and all drive 10mpg SUVs > because we're all gonna die from natural warming soon anyway.
Jimpgh2002
2006-03-25 01:07:02 EST
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:22:55 -0500, Mark Mywords <markm@ywords.com> wrote:
>In article <v1a922pllo101g70i6mhr0b3rgk3lg23pl@4ax.com>, > jimpgh2002 <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote: > >> And whose fault was it when the earth had ice ages followed by >> global warming(rinse, repeat) over the millenniums prior to now? > >You're right. We should just burn coal like crazy and all drive 10mpg SUVs >because we're all gonna die from natural warming soon anyway.
Sarcasm noted. How much control over the earth's warming/cooling do you think mankind has?
DKat
2006-03-25 01:21:43 EST
"jimpgh2002" <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote in message news:ean922hk6l6gcot690pioc3dfj0ac37hnv@4ax.com... > On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:22:55 -0500, Mark Mywords <markm@ywords.com> > wrote: > >>In article <v1a922pllo101g70i6mhr0b3rgk3lg23pl@4ax.com>, >> jimpgh2002 <pmojh1@xxnospamxxhotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> And whose fault was it when the earth had ice ages followed by >>> global warming(rinse, repeat) over the millenniums prior to now? >> >>You're right. We should just burn coal like crazy and all drive 10mpg SUVs >>because we're all gonna die from natural warming soon anyway. > > Sarcasm noted. > How much control over the earth's warming/cooling do you > think mankind has?
Many scientist believe that we are reaching the point of no return - that we will have changed to atmosphere enough that we cannot reverse the damage. We have lived in an unusual period of stability and that may be ending - too many variables to tell what we are going to end up with - ice age or dinosaur climate are the two most likely (meaning much less land to live on in either case). If we were wise, we would do all that we could to return the atmosphere to what it was that gave us the stability that had allowed us to thrive. I don't much care because I think life of one form or another will go on and less humans may not be such a bad thing.