Before I get started, I have to explain the immensity of fascination I have with maps and data. Also, by now you know that I am an avid climate activist. I am significantly involved with several groups including Citizen’s Climate Lobby and Sierra Club.
I wanted to feature the Yale Climate Opinion Maps of 2016 which break down by county, metro areas, congressional districts, states and nationally. You can get lost looking into each individual section… I sure did!
Additionally, the same group at Yale recently came out with a poll overview of Trump voters and their opinions on global warming, the numbers may shock you and I have listed them below this chart:
About half of Trump voters (49%) think global warming is happening, while fewer than one in three (30%) think global warming is not happening.
Almost half of Trump voters (47%) also say the U.S. should participate in the international agreement to limit global warming. By contrast, only 28% say the U.S. should not participate.
More than six in ten Trump voters (62%) support taxing and/or regulating the pollution that causes global warming, with nearly one in three (31%) supporting both approaches. In contrast, only about one in five (21%) support doing neither.
More than three in four Trump voters (77%) support generating renewable energy (solar and wind) on public land in the U.S. 72% support more drilling and mining of fossil fuels on public land in the U.S.
Seven in ten Trump voters (71%) support funding more research into clean energy and providing tax rebates to people who purchase energy efficient vehicles and solar panels (69%).
Over half of Trump voters (52%) support eliminating all federal subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, nearly half (48%) support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and using the money to reduce other taxes by an equal amount, and almost half (48%) support setting strict carbon dioxide emissions limits on existing coal-fired power plants to reduce global warming and improve public health, even if the cost of electricity to consumers and companies would likely increase.
Half of Trump voters say transitioning from fossil fuels toward clean energy will either improve economic growth (29%) or have no impact (21%).
Nearly three in four Trump voters (73%) say that, in the future, the U.S. should use more renewable energy (solar, wind, and geothermal). One in three (33%) say that the U.S. should use fossil fuels less in the future.
The Climate Reality Project periodically shares common myths on types of clean energy. This particular PDF is full of facts that describe the numbers on wind energy, it’s benefits and the alternatives. Take a look!
It’s rare or near-impossible to find a story or interview without motives beyond sharing news and information. The Atlantic’s Bill Gates interview is no exception to that. Gates shares his opinions about climate change, environmentalists and the future of energy when he is largely invested in companies such as Shell, BP, etc. Despite this, the perspective this article shares is intriguing and sheds light on some interesting opinions on innovation in the energy market, and how government and private companies can get involved.
“People can always say, “Well, my country is such a small part of it—why should I make the sacrifice? Because I don’t know for sure that the other countries are going to do their part of it.” We don’t have a world government. Fortunately, we don’t have that many world problems—most problems can be solved locally—but this one is a world problem. Carbon is not a local pollutant. It mixes in the global atmosphere in a matter of days. So it doesn’t really matter whether it’s a coal plant in China or a coal plant in the U.S.—the heating effect for the entire globe is the same.”
Today, some politicians and influential leaders have the public confused about the facts about climate change. Climate Reality has helped by putting together 10 graphs that outline some of the most basic climate trends for the naysayers. If data is your friend, these graphs will be beneficial to you!
Last month, The Economist posted an article about El Niño and the how the offsets of the disasters can be deceiving when it comes to preparation, especially for poor countries.
“El Niño sees warm water, collected over several years in the western tropical Pacific, slosh back eastwards when winds that normally blow westwards weaken, or sometimes reverse. America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says this year’s Niño could be the strongest since records began in 1950.”
Today The Atlantic features an article that shares predictions of terrifying intolerable living situations due to climate change, and suggests that at the Paris talks this December a consensus needs to be made before it’s too late. “Human inertia will continue challenging Mother Nature, without apparent concern for the fact that nature always wins.”
Rolling Stone outlines a fantastic overview on the effects of the wildfires that have devastated the West this summer including the effects and the problems faced both environmentally and human-caused.
“This is the present, and the future, of climate change. Our overheated world is amplifying drought and making megafire commonplace. This is happening even in the soggy Pacific Northwest, which has been hard-hit by what’s been dubbed a “wet drought.” Despite near-normal precipitation, warm winter temperatures brought rain instead of snow to the region’s mountains. What little snow did hit the ground then melted early, leaving the Northwest dry — and ready to burn in the heat of summer.”
The photos that the Washington Post put together for this article are terrifying but worth a view.
Ken Pimlott, the chief of the California Department of Forestry and Fire has shared that “this is a real marathon, not a sprint. Nothing is going to change until we get significant precipitation, and I don’t mean individual storms, we need sustained rainfall over time,”