ACT: Time to Think and DO!
6 views
Skip to first unread message
~nathan
Jun 26, 2008, 6:54:58 PM6/26/08
to Northwest Institute for Community Energy, nice-u...@googlegroups.com
The Northwest Institute for Community Energy has begun! We have been
amazingly fortunate in finding an office space in the Sunnyside
Neighborhood and it's only two blocks from the school! Southeast
Uplift, 3543 SE Main St. in SE Portland, has graciously let us set up
camp in their office building and also given us tons of great office
supplies. We are holding office hours from 9-5 Monday through Friday
from now until August 1st, so please come by and say hi!
Our first Weekly "Think Tank Sessions" and "Do Tank Sessions" will
start next week!!!
Think Tank Session:
6:00pm on Tuesday July 2nd at Southeast Uplift. We will be discussing
excerpts from the book "Environmental Ethics" by Pojman and Pojman.
These readings will focus on the "ethics of action." There will be
free food and good company so come by!
Do Tank Session:
5:30pm on Wednesday July 3rd at Southeast Uplift. There will be treats
for people who show up before 6 =) We will do a short training on
canvassing and then hit the streets of the Sunnyside Neighborhood. We
will be speaking to as many people as possible about the SunNE project
to get a feeling for how people feel about the SunNE project. So, if
you want to get your feet on the street, come by this next
Wednesday!
My mom always said, “There are two kinds of people in this world,
thinkers and doers. What are you?” Come figure out which one you are
(I hope you're both!)!
Jesse Hough
NICE Program Director
thenic...@gmail.com
503-438-0738
amazingly fortunate in finding an office space in the Sunnyside
Neighborhood and it's only two blocks from the school! Southeast
Uplift, 3543 SE Main St. in SE Portland, has graciously let us set up
camp in their office building and also given us tons of great office
supplies. We are holding office hours from 9-5 Monday through Friday
from now until August 1st, so please come by and say hi!
Our first Weekly "Think Tank Sessions" and "Do Tank Sessions" will
start next week!!!
Think Tank Session:
6:00pm on Tuesday July 2nd at Southeast Uplift. We will be discussing
excerpts from the book "Environmental Ethics" by Pojman and Pojman.
These readings will focus on the "ethics of action." There will be
free food and good company so come by!
Do Tank Session:
5:30pm on Wednesday July 3rd at Southeast Uplift. There will be treats
for people who show up before 6 =) We will do a short training on
canvassing and then hit the streets of the Sunnyside Neighborhood. We
will be speaking to as many people as possible about the SunNE project
to get a feeling for how people feel about the SunNE project. So, if
you want to get your feet on the street, come by this next
Wednesday!
My mom always said, “There are two kinds of people in this world,
thinkers and doers. What are you?” Come figure out which one you are
(I hope you're both!)!
Jesse Hough
NICE Program Director
thenic...@gmail.com
503-438-0738
Josh
Jul 3, 2008, 7:24:46 PM7/3/08
to Northwest Institute for Community Energy
Hey NICE Tankers,
Glad to have joined the discussion on environmental ethics the other
night.
I'm just getting up to speed on the SunNE and the NICE, so I may be
off base, but I wanted to pose a question and make a suggestion. Q:
To what extent is the organizing you are doing this summer directed
towards John's district heating proposal specifically, and to what
extent are you encouraging people to make individual choices? The
reason I ask is that if the focus is to be primarily on the SunNE
proposal I think it would highly valuable for John to do a training
for all the organizers/volunteers to go over the nuts and bolts of the
project proposal and district heating in general. You're going to be
getting lots of questions from the neighborhood about the project and
it will serve to know the answers.
FYI: The Nature Conservancy recently conducted a survey about the
attitude of Oregonians on global warming. There is a clear majority
of folks who think we need to get serious about addressing our
emission now, but there is also a significant ~20% of people who
aren't yet convinced. It's pretty interesting to look at these kinds
of survey results and I thought I'd pass it along while you guys are
thinking about engaging the community in discussion (trying to meet
people where they are at) and conducting your own survey. (I couldn't
attach the survey to the post, so I'll look for a place to upload it
after I post this message.)
Have a wonderfully independent weekend. See you next week.
Josh
Glad to have joined the discussion on environmental ethics the other
night.
I'm just getting up to speed on the SunNE and the NICE, so I may be
off base, but I wanted to pose a question and make a suggestion. Q:
To what extent is the organizing you are doing this summer directed
towards John's district heating proposal specifically, and to what
extent are you encouraging people to make individual choices? The
reason I ask is that if the focus is to be primarily on the SunNE
proposal I think it would highly valuable for John to do a training
for all the organizers/volunteers to go over the nuts and bolts of the
project proposal and district heating in general. You're going to be
getting lots of questions from the neighborhood about the project and
it will serve to know the answers.
FYI: The Nature Conservancy recently conducted a survey about the
attitude of Oregonians on global warming. There is a clear majority
of folks who think we need to get serious about addressing our
emission now, but there is also a significant ~20% of people who
aren't yet convinced. It's pretty interesting to look at these kinds
of survey results and I thought I'd pass it along while you guys are
thinking about engaging the community in discussion (trying to meet
people where they are at) and conducting your own survey. (I couldn't
attach the survey to the post, so I'll look for a place to upload it
after I post this message.)
Have a wonderfully independent weekend. See you next week.
Josh
Jesse Jenkins
Jul 3, 2008, 7:34:33 PM7/3/08
to Josh, Northwest Institute for Community Energy
FYI, I did a look over of the poll you mentioned Josh and wrote up some thoughts for RNP and Breakthrough Generation. Thought I'd share them with you too if you think it's helpful...
Hope you all have a great Fourth of July! Cheers from a NICE lurker,
Pretty strong support overall for action - this is Oregon after all - but it seems to run pretty shallow right now.
It's telling that most people wouldn't be willing to pay more than $25/month more on energy bills. That doesn't give a lot of leeway for letting carbon pricing go high enough to drive innovation and deployment on it's own, which is of course why we're focusing on finding other ways to drive innovation and clean energy deployment beyond just carbon pricing alone.
Only 44% were convinced by the opposition argument tested here (which actually wasn't as hard hitting as it might have been) and only 11% of those cited the energy costs part as the most convincing part. It'd be interesting to see how much this changed in the last month since the poll was fielded though. Energy costs have skyrocketed into the top american concern in Gallup's monthly poll of top concerns and is now the #1 election issue according to a Gallup/USA Today poll this week. That wasn't the case just a month ago (the poll was fielded May 11th-13th). Concern has risen about as fast as gas prices... which is to say fast. I bet you'd find more people convinced by the "this will raise your energy bills" part. A lot more, especially outside of Oregon.
It's also interesting to see though that people were very convinced by the part that says rich polluters were able to buy their way out. This again indicates strong support for a "polluters pay" principle. Seems to touch on some basic fairness principles. Of course, most folks don't get the fact that they - as consumers - are really the polluters and are going to bear the passed-on cost of compliance for most products...
There's also a pretty sizable number of people who see climate action as going to hurt the American economy (31%) which is a sign that we still haven't quite packaged this right, since we all know how much economic benefit there will be.
Most telling is the part at the end where they test different arguments. The most convincing arguments in support of action are the ones involving opportunity - for farmers and foresters, for innovative entrepreneurs, for America's health and economy, etc. - rather than the ones that stress what we stand to lose or scary consequences.
Josh
Jul 3, 2008, 7:36:24 PM7/3/08
to Northwest Institute for Community Energy
Note: Reading over all this info in this format is a little rough.
I'm sure you can find it online.... but I thought I'd post it anyway.
-J
OR Survey Page 1 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
OREGON GLOBAL WARMING SURVEY
Interview Schedule
Public Opinion Strategies
May 13-15, 2008 N = 500 Registered Voters
Project #: 08308 Margin of Error: + 4.38%
* Denotes result less than 0.5%.
^ Denotes rounding. Due to rounding, some figures may be higher or
lower by less than one-half of one percent.
A. Are you registered to vote at this address?
100% YES
B. Thinking ahead....How likely is it that you will vote in the
November election for President,
Senate and Congress? Is it...
96% VERY LIKELY
4% SOMEWHAT LIKELY
C. Are you, or is anyone in your household, employed by a newspaper,
television or radio station, a
political party, or by an elected official or candidate for political
office?
100% NO
1. And, on a scale of one to ten, with one meaning NOT AT ALL
interested and ten meaning VERY
INTERESTED, please tell me how interested you are in the elections
this November?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
1% * 1% 1% 5% 3% 5% 12% 11% 59% 8.8
OR Survey Page 2 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
2. What would you say are the top two or three most important
environmental problems or issues
today?
39% Global warming
20% Air / air pollution / clean air
13% Water / water pollution / clean water
12% Oil/gas drilling
9% Energy issues/general
8% Pollution (general)
5% Automobile pollution/emissions
5% Natural resources/loss of
4% Climate change
4% Water supplies/drought
3% Forests/loss of
3% Emissions from industrial sites / power plants
3% Overpopulation
3% Renewable energy/alternative fuels
3% Wildlife
2% Deforestation
2% Drought/lack of water
2% Environmentalists/anti-environmental comment
2% Forests/threatened by development/drilling/mining
2% Rivers
2% Recycling
1% Forest fires
1% Development/too much
1% Bush Administration/federal government
1% Growth/too much
1% Light pollution
1% Logging
1% Loss of open spaces/natural areas/etc.
1% Nuclear waste
1% Ozone layer
1% Rainforests/loss of
1% Toxic substances/chemicals
1% Wilderness
1% Wildfire threat
1% Trash/solid waste/landfills
* Beetle kill/insects/trees
* Brown cloud
* Mass transit/not enough
* Noise/noise pollution
* Parks
* Public lands/drilling/development on them
* Smog
* Wet lands
* Traffic/transportation issues
– Mining
– Roadless areas
– Sprawl
5% NOTHING
8% UNSURE
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 3 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Asked of Sample A, N=251
Thinking more specifically, I’d like to focus for a moment on global
warming –
3. How serious do you think the problem of GLOBAL WARMING is – very
serious, fairly serious,
just somewhat serious, or not serious at all?
60%^ TOTAL SERIOUS
37% TOTAL NOT SERIOUS
48% Very serious
13% Fairly serious
23% Somewhat serious
14% Not serious at all
2% DON’T KNOW
– REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
Asked of Sample B, N=249
Thinking more specifically, I’d like to focus for a moment on climate
change –
4. How serious do you think the problem of CLIMATE CHANGE is – very
serious, fairly serious,
just somewhat serious, or not serious at all?
64%^ TOTAL SERIOUS
35% TOTAL NOT SERIOUS
52% Very serious
11% Fairly serious
20% Somewhat serious
15% Not serious at all
1% DON’T KNOW
– REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 4 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Some people use several terms to describe the issue of the earth
becoming warmer due to a build-up of
carbon and other gasses in our atmosphere from such things as burning
fossil fuels like coal and oil or the
loss of forests. For purposes of this survey we are going to use the
phrase GLOBAL WARMING to
describe this –
5. So, from what you know about global warming, which of the following
four statements is closest
to your opinion?
63% TOTAL TAKE ACTION NOW
37% TOTAL LITTLE/NO ACTION
42% Global warming has been established as a very serious problem, and
strong, immediate
measures are necessary.
21% There is enough evidence that global warming is taking place and
some action should be
taken.
21% We don1t know enough about global warming, and more research is
necessary before we
take strong actions.
16% Concern about global warming has been greatly exaggerated.
* DON’T KNOW
* REFUSED
OR Survey Page 5 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
6. There is a proposal in Congress that would reduce the global
warming pollution produced by the
largest sources in the United States, specifically power plants,
factories and other major
industries. This proposal would achieve a gradual reduction in global
warming pollution of
seventy percent from the pollution levels measured in 2005. This
proposal provides flexibility for
companies to meet their individual target, and would stimulate
strategies for increasing energy
efficiency, use of renewable energy, and other efforts to achieve the
overall reduction in
pollution.
Having heard this, would you tell your Representatives in Congress
they should or should not
support this proposal?
72% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
I’d like to read you two viewpoints about this proposal to reduce
global warming pollution.
7. Supporters say that this proposal to reduce global warming
pollution is modeled after the program
during the FIRST President Bush’s administration that solved the acid
rain problem. It will not
only reduce the pollution that causes global warming, but also allow
us to protect human health,
reduce our dependence on foreign energy, and become a global leader in
the new energy
technology economy. The United States is the single largest
contributor of carbon in the
atmosphere and we should take this first step to make common sense
changes rather than fighting
about whether global warming exists or not.
How convincing is that as a reason why your Representatives in
Congress should support this
legislation? Would you say...
74% TOTAL CONVINCING
22%^ TOTAL NOT CONVINCING
40% VERY CONVINCING
34% SOMEWHAT CONVINCING
13% NOT VERY CONVINCING
10% NOT AT ALL CONVINCING
3% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 6 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
ASK ED OF THOSE WHO SAY “VERY CONVINCING” IN Q7: N=207
8. And if you had to choose, which part of that statement is the
single BEST reason why your
Representatives in Congress should SUPPORT this legislation?
26% United States is the single largest contributor of carbon in the
atmosphere
13% Reduce our dependence on foreign energy
9% Reduce global warming pollution
8% Protect human health
8% Is a first step to make common sense changes
5% Jobs/global leader in new energy technology economy
4% Modeled after acid rain program
4% Better than fighting about whether global warming exists or not
8% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which ONE
thing you
heard would say is the BEST reason they should support this
proposal?)
16% UNSURE
– REFUSED
___________________________________________________________________________________
9. Opponents say that this proposal to reduce global warming pollution
is a hidden tax on consumers
at a time when we are already paying record amounts to heat and cool
our homes and drive our
cars. We should not risk hurting our economy while doing nothing to
ensure some of the world’s
biggest polluters like China and India address this problem. Besides,
we can’t trust big business
to stop polluting, when this legislation allows the richest companies
to buy their way out of
reducing emissions.
How convincing is that as a reason why your Representatives in
Congress should OPPOSE this
legislation? Would you say...
49% TOTAL CONVINCING
46% TOTAL NOT CONVINCING
16% VERY CONVINCING
33% SOMEWHAT CONVINCING
24% NOT VERY CONVINCING
22% NOT AT ALL CONVINCING
5% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 7 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
ASK ED OF THOSE WHO SAY “VERY CONVINCING” IN Q9: N=81
10. And if you had to choose, which part of that statement is the
single BEST reason why your
Representatives in Congress should NOT support this proposal?
22% Legislation allows the richest companies to buy their way out of
reducing emissions
21% Does nothing to ensure China and India address this problem
11% hidden tax on consumers
10% we’re already paying record amounts to heat and cool our homes and
drive our cars.
6% We should not risk hurting our economy
6% Can’t trust big business to stop polluting
– DO NOT BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING
6% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which ONE
thing you
heard would say is the BEST reason they should not support this
proposal?)
16% UNSURE
1% REFUSED
___________________________________________________________________________________
11. Having heard these two viewpoints about this proposal to achieve a
gradual reduction in global
warming pollution, by providing flexibility for companies to meet
their individual target, and
stimulate strategies for increasing energy efficiency, would you tell
your Representatives in
Congress that they should or should not support this proposal?
INIT INFORMED
72% 72% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ 17% TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% 55% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% 17% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% 6% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% 11% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% 10% DON’T KNOW
1% * REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 8 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
12. QUESTION DELETED
____________________________________________________________________________________
13 Do you think this proposal to reduce
global warming pollution would – help OR hurt the U. S.
economy, or would it not have much impact one
way or the other?
27% HELP
31% HURT
27% NOT MUCH IMPACT
14% DON’T KNOW
* REFUSED
OR Survey Page 9 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
14. As you just heard some critics of this legislation to reduce
global warming pollution say that it
may increase the price we pay to heat and cool our homes at first, as
power plants have to become
more efficient and use more renewable energy. What is the most you
would be willing to pay in
higher energy prices per month to reduce global warming pollution
produced by power plants?
33%^ TOTAL $35 AND OVER
48%^ TOTAL $25 AND UNDER
21% 45 dollars
10% 35 dollars
16% 25 dollars
14% 15 dollars
...OR...
16% 5 dollars
1% MORE THAN $45
3% LESS THAN 5 DOLLARS
13% NONE/OPPOSE INCREASE
6% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 10 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Now I would like to read you a few statements about this issue. For
each one, please tell me if you agree
or disagree with that statement...
TOT TOT STRG SMWT SMWT STRG
AGREE DISAGREEAGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DK REF
The (first/next) one is...
Q15-18, Asked of Sample A, N=251
15. Solving global warming problems now will cost less money than if
we wait until later.
77% 20%^ 58% 19% 7% 12% 4% *
16. It is our moral obligation to reduce global warming.
73%^ 24%^ 56% 18% 9% 16% 2% *
17. Global warming is so urgent a problem that even in these difficult
economic times, we should
take action now.
76%^ 23% 55% 20% 8% 15% 1% –
18. This is a global problem that should be addressed by international
treaties, rather than the United
States acting alone.
79% 20%^ 61% 18% 8% 11% 1% 1%
Q19-22, Asked of Sample B, N=249
19. It is our duty as Americans to reduce global warming.
73% 24%^ 57% 16% 8% 17% 2% 1%
20. It is too late to really do something about global warming.
11% 85%^ 3% 8% 17% 67% 3% 2%
21. Usually I would support this kind of a proposal, but in our
current economic times, I cannot get
behind these changes.
23%^ 72% 14% 10% 18% 54% 4% 1%
22. I understand that reducing global warming will take sacrifices
from all of us, and I am ready to
make some changes.
83% 16%^ 61% 22% 4% 11% * 1%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 11 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Summary of Global Warming Statements By % Strongly Agree
Global Warming Statements % Strongly
Agree % TotalAgree
I understand that reducing global warming will take sacrifices from
all
of us, and I am ready to make some changes. 61% 83%
This is a global problem that should be addressed by international
treaties, rather than the United States acting alone. 61% 79%
Solving global warming problems now will cost less money than if we
wait until later. 58% 77%
It is our duty as Americans to reduce global warming. 57% 73%
It is our moral obligation to reduce global warming. 56% 73%
Global warming is so urgent a problem that even in these difficult
economic times, we should take action now. 55% 76%
Usually I would support this kind of a proposal, but in our current
economic times, I cannot get behind these changes. 14% 23%
It is too late to really do something about global warming. 3% 11%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 12 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Please tell me, for each of the following, whether you think global
warming pollution is currently
contributing to that problem, will contribute to it over the next five
to ten years, will contribute to it
eventually, or will never contribute to that problem in Oregon.
TOT TOT CURRENTLY 5-10 YEAR EVENTUALLY NEVER DK REF
CURRENT/ EVENT/
5-10 YEARS NEVER
The (first/next one) is...
23. Drought and water shortages
60% 33%^ 43% 17% 17% 17% 5% 1%
24. Coastal erosion and rising sea levels
58% 33% 42% 16% 18% 15% 8% 1%
25. Shrinking glaciers
66% 27% 55% 11% 13% 14% 6% 1%
26. Wildfires
58% 34% 45% 13% 14% 20% 6% 1%
27. Heat waves
55% 34%^ 38% 17% 17% 18% 9% 1%
28. Reduced snowpack in the mountains
55% 35% 40% 15% 18% 17% 8% 1%
29. Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife
61%^ 33%^ 49% 11% 14% 18% 6% 1%
___________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 13 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Summary of Contributing By % Currently
Global Warming Contributing % Currently % Currently/
5-10 Years
Shrinking glaciers 55% 66%
Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife 49% 61%
Wildfires 45% 58%
Drought and water shortages 43% 60%
Coastal erosion and rising sea levels 42% 58%
Reduced snowpack in the mountains 40% 55%
Heat waves 38% 55%
____________________________________________________________________________________
30. And which ONE of those I just read is most concerning to you as a
problem facing Oregon?
25% Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife
22% Drought and water shortages
14% Wildfires
9% Reduced snowpack in the mountains
7% Coastal erosion and rising sea levels
5% Shrinking glaciers
3% Heat waves
4% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which one is
more
concerning to you?)
7% NONE
5% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 14 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
As we mentioned before there are two main phrases that are used to
describe the issue we’ve been
discussing –
31. Which one phrase is most CONCERNING to you –
37% Climate change
...OR...
48% Global warming?
13% NO DIFFERENCE
1% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
32. Which one phrase BEST describes the issue we’ve been discussing of
the earth becoming warmer
due to a build-up of carbon and other gasses in the atmosphere from
such things as burning fossil
fuels like coal and oil or the loss of forests such as in the
tropics? Is it...
41% Climate change
...OR...
46% Global warming?
7% NO DIFFERENCE
4% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 15 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
I am going to read you some statements that people have made IN FAVOR
OF the legislation to reduce
global warming pollution. After I read each one, please tell me
whether the argument is very convincing,
somewhat convincing, not too convincing or not at all convincing as a
reason why your Representatives
in Congress should SUPPORT this legislation.
TOT TOT NOT VERY SMWT NOT TOO NOT AT DK REF
CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV ALL CONV
The (first/next one) is...
33. This legislation creates new markets for farmers and ranchers by
providing incentives to create
new energy sources from crops like switch grass or even agricultural
waste. Farmers and ranchers
will have a new way of earning money and we will have cleaner energy.
73%^ 24% 34% 40% 11% 13% 2% 1%
34. This legislation benefits Oregon foresters, by providing
incentives to grow trees longer to reduce
global warming pollution and improve the quality of the air we
breathe.
77%^ 20% 38% 40% 9% 11% 1% 1%
35. Some of the carbon emissions that we produce today will still be
in our atmosphere one hundred
years from now. We have a responsibility to future generations to do
the responsible thing and
start making common sense changes today.
81%^ 17% 50% 30% 8% 9% 1% 2%
36. Carbon pollution threatens to dramatically change our world for
the worse. We have a
responsibility to be good stewards of the earth and take care of the
creation God has given us.
76% 20% 46% 30% 10% 10% 2% 1%
37. The legislation may include incentives for companies to help
reduce the loss of the world's
rainforests, whose loss contributes about twenty percent of global
warming pollution around the
world. Companies that pay for efforts to reduce forest loss will get
credit for saving carbon.
Because these activities are very cost-effective, allowing this
approach will reduce the overall
costs of the program for American businesses and consumers.
68%^ 27% 29% 38% 14% 13% 5% 1%
38. Global warming is hurting some of Oregon’s major employers that
rely on our natural resources.
The health of our forests and timber industry has been hurt by
droughts which weaken trees and
leave them vulnerable to insects. Our fishing industries are hurt by
changes in ocean temperature
that negatively affect the health of fish. And tourism may even
suffer if there is less snow for
skiers or more extreme weather.
68% 29%^ 40% 28% 13% 15% 2% 1%
39. While global warming is an enormous challenge, it is not
insurmountable. From the clean air act,
to putting a man on the moon, we have used tested science and new
innovations to solve big
problems successfully. Tackling the global warming challenge is no
different.
70%^ 28%^ 31% 38% 14% 13% 2% 1%
TOT TOT NOT VERY SMWT NOT TOO NOT AT DK REF
OR Survey Page 16 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV ALL CONV
Q40, Asked First Night Only, N=151
40. Global warming can lead to increased instability in some of the
most volatile regions of the world
and poses a threat to America’s national security. The U.S. should
commit to a stronger national
and international role to help reduce global warming and avoid
significant disruptions to global
security.
59% 40%^ 22% 37% 17% 22% 1% 1%
Asked of Sample A, N=251
41. This legislation provides a system that will spur American
entrepreneurs to seek out innovative
energy-saving technologies. By putting the power of the free market to
work, we will reduce
more pollution, do it more efficiently and do it better than if
government sets up more arbitrary
rules and regulations.
73% 24% 33% 40% 15% 9% 2% *
Q42, Asked First Night Only, N=151
42. Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to lower food
production, such as the rice
shortages that have led to food riots in many third world countries.
This trend will only continue
unless we manage to reduce global warming.
54% 45%^ 25% 29% 20% 24% – 1%
Asked of Sample A, N=251
43. We spend too much time fighting about whether global warming
exists, and not enough time
making common sense changes to protect our earth. Even as scientists
learn more about this issue,
we all know more needs to be done to reduce air pollution. This
proposal will protect human
health, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and help us become a
worldwide leader in new
energy technologies.
87% 10% 53% 34% 5% 5% 1% 1%
Q44-46, Asked of Sample B, N=249
44. This proposal offers the opportunity for American technology and
know-how to take our
country’s energy solutions in a new direction. It creates incentives
for companies to be more
energy-efficient and use low-carbon sources of energy, which in turn
can help reduce our
dependence on foreign oil.
82%^ 15% 53% 30% 6% 9% 3% –
45. Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to a greater
chance of large, severe
wildfires that threaten homes and people’s lives. This trend will
only continue unless we manage
to reduce global warming.
69% 27% 36% 33% 11% 16% 2% 1%
46. Warmer temperatures are leading to coastal erosion that affects
wildlife, changes in ocean
currents and river temperatures affect fish and marine life, while
droughts lead to a greater
chance of large, severe wildfires that threaten forests . This
legislation provides money to Oregon
to cope with these challenges.
77% 19% 45% 32% 8% 11% 2% 2%
____________________________________________________________________________________
Summary of Statements In Favor Of Legislation By % Very Convincing
OR Survey Page 17 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Statements In Favor of Legislation % Very
Convincing % TotalConvincing
We spend too much time fighting about whether global warming
exists, and not enough time making common sense changes to protect
our earth. Even as scientists learn more about this issue, we all
know
more needs to be done to reduce air pollution. This proposal will
protect human health, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and help
us become a worldwide leader in new energy technologies.
53% 87%
This proposal offers the opportunity for American technology and
know-how to take our country’s energy solutions in a new direction.
It
creates incentives for companies to be more energy-efficient and use
low-carbon sources of energy, which in turn can help reduce our
dependence on foreign oil.
53% 82%
Some of the carbon emissions that we produce today will still be in
our atmosphere one hundred years from now. We have a responsibility
to future generations to do the responsible thing and start making
common sense changes today.
50% 81%
Carbon pollution threatens to dramatically change our world for the
worse. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of the earth and
take care of the creation God has given us.
46% 76%
Warmer temperatures are leading to coastal erosion that affects
wildlife, changes in ocean currents and river temperatures affect
fish
and marine life, while droughts lead to a greater chance of large,
severe wildfires that threaten forests . This legislation provides
money
to Oregon to cope with these challenges.
45% 77%
Global warming is hurting some of Oregon’s major employers that
rely on our natural resources. The health of our forests and timber
industry has been hurt by droughts which weaken trees and leave them
vulnerable to insects. Our fishing industries are hurt by changes in
ocean temperature that negatively affect the health of fish. And
tourism may even suffer if there is less snow for skiers or more
extreme weather.
40% 68%
This legislation benefits Oregon foresters, by providing incentives
to
grow trees longer to reduce global warming pollution and improve the
quality of the air we breathe.
38% 77%
Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to a greater
chance of large, severe wildfires that threaten homes and people’s
lives. This trend will only continue unless we manage to reduce
global warming.
36% 69%
OR Survey Page 18 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
This legislation creates new markets for farmers and ranchers by
providing incentives to create new energy sources from crops like
switch grass or even agricultural waste. Farmers and ranchers will
have a new way of earning money and we will have cleaner energy.
34% 73%
This legislation provides a system that will spur American
entrepreneurs to seek out innovative energy-saving technologies. By
putting the power of the free market to work, we will reduce more
pollution, do it more efficiently and do it better than if government
sets up more arbitrary rules and regulations.
33% 73%
While global warming is an enormous challenge, it is not
insurmountable. From the clean air act, to putting a man on the moon,
we have used tested science and new innovations to solve big
problems successfully. Tackling the global warming challenge is no
different.
31% 70%
The legislation may include incentives for companies to help reduce
the loss of the world's rainforests, whose loss contributes about
twenty
percent of global warming pollution around the world. Companies
that pay for efforts to reduce forest loss will get credit for saving
carbon. Because these activities are very cost-effective, allowing
this
approach will reduce the overall costs of the program for American
businesses and consumers.
29% 68%
Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to lower food
production, such as the rice shortages that have led to food riots in
many third world countries. This trend will only continue unless we
manage to reduce global warming.
25% 54%
Global warming can lead to increased instability in some of the most
volatile regions of the world and poses a threat to America’s
national
security. The U.S. should commit to a stronger national and
international role to help reduce global warming and avoid
significant
disruptions to global security.
22% 59%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 19 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Sometimes after hearing a little more, people feel somewhat
differently, so let me ask you again about the
proposal in Congress to reduce global warming pollution produced by
power plants, factories and other
major industries.
47. Having heard more about this issue, would you tell your
Representatives in Congress they should
or should not – support this proposal?
INIT INFO POST
72% 72% 73% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ 17% 18% TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% 55% 58% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% 17% 15% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% 6% 5% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% 11% 13% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% 10% 7% DON’T KNOW
1% * 3% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
On a scale from one to ten where ten represents a description that is
perfect for you and one a description
that is totally wrong for you, how well do each of the following
describe you? You can, of course, use
any number between one and ten.
To what extent do you regard yourself as...
48. An environmentalist
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
5% 2% 4% 5% 18% 10% 13% 21% 8% 11% 6.5
49. A supporter of business interests
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
7% 5% 8% 6% 23% 11% 12% 13% 2% 9% 5.7
50. A supporter of religious conservative groups
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
33% 9% 7% 5% 12% 4% 6% 7% 3% 9% 4.1
OR Survey Page 20 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
And for statistical purposes only –
D1. First, in what year were you born?
4% 18 - 24
10% 25 - 34
23% 35 - 44
18% 45 - 54
19% 55 - 64
25% 65 AND ABOVE
2% REFUSED
D2. And what was the last level of education you COMPLETED?
22% GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL OR LESS
28% SOME COLLEGE
48% COLLEGE+
2% TECHNICAL OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL
26% SOME COLLEGE
26% GRADUATED COLLEGE
22% GRADUATE/PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL
3% REFUSED
D3. How would you describe the area where you currently live?
50% CITY/SUBURBS
47% TOWN/RURAL
23% A big city
27% A suburban area
26% A small town
21% A rural area
* DON’T KNOW/NOT SURE
3% REFUSED
OR Survey Page 21 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
D4. Have you purchased a hunting or fishing license in last three
years?
18%^ HUNTERS
31% FISHERS
66% NON-SPORTSMEN
3% YES/HUNTING ONLY
16% YES/FISHING ONLY
15% YES/BOTH
64% NO
2% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
D5. No matter how you feel today, are your registered to vote as...
a Republican,
a Democrat,
or something else?
34% TOTAL REPUBLICAN
40% TOTAL DEMOCRAT
19% STRONG REPUBLICAN
15% NOT-SO-STRONG REPUBLICAN
20% SOMETHING ELSE/INDEPENDENT
14% NOT-SO-STRONG DEMOCRAT
26% STRONG DEMOCRAT
1% DON'T KNOW
5% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
D6. Other than being an American, what is your main ethnic or racial
heritage?
2% AFRICAN AMERICAN OR BLACK
86% WHITE
4% HISPANIC AMERICAN OR LATINO
1% ASIAN AMERICAN
3% OTHER
5% REFUSED
OR Survey Page 22 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
D7. And for statistical purposes only...is your total annual household
income greater or less than
$60,000 dollars?
44% UNDER $60,000
47%^ OVER $60,000
(IF LESS THAN $60,000, ASK:) Is it...
9% UNDER $20,000
17% BETWEEN $20,000 - $40,000
18% OVER $40,000
(IF GREATER THAN $60,000, ASK:) Is it...
17% UNDER $80,000
13% BETWEEN $80,000 - $100,000
16% OVER $100,000
10% REFUSED
D8. Gender
48% MALE
52% FEMALE
I'm sure you can find it online.... but I thought I'd post it anyway.
-J
OR Survey Page 1 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
OREGON GLOBAL WARMING SURVEY
Interview Schedule
Public Opinion Strategies
May 13-15, 2008 N = 500 Registered Voters
Project #: 08308 Margin of Error: + 4.38%
* Denotes result less than 0.5%.
^ Denotes rounding. Due to rounding, some figures may be higher or
lower by less than one-half of one percent.
A. Are you registered to vote at this address?
100% YES
B. Thinking ahead....How likely is it that you will vote in the
November election for President,
Senate and Congress? Is it...
96% VERY LIKELY
4% SOMEWHAT LIKELY
C. Are you, or is anyone in your household, employed by a newspaper,
television or radio station, a
political party, or by an elected official or candidate for political
office?
100% NO
1. And, on a scale of one to ten, with one meaning NOT AT ALL
interested and ten meaning VERY
INTERESTED, please tell me how interested you are in the elections
this November?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
1% * 1% 1% 5% 3% 5% 12% 11% 59% 8.8
OR Survey Page 2 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
2. What would you say are the top two or three most important
environmental problems or issues
today?
39% Global warming
20% Air / air pollution / clean air
13% Water / water pollution / clean water
12% Oil/gas drilling
9% Energy issues/general
8% Pollution (general)
5% Automobile pollution/emissions
5% Natural resources/loss of
4% Climate change
4% Water supplies/drought
3% Forests/loss of
3% Emissions from industrial sites / power plants
3% Overpopulation
3% Renewable energy/alternative fuels
3% Wildlife
2% Deforestation
2% Drought/lack of water
2% Environmentalists/anti-environmental comment
2% Forests/threatened by development/drilling/mining
2% Rivers
2% Recycling
1% Forest fires
1% Development/too much
1% Bush Administration/federal government
1% Growth/too much
1% Light pollution
1% Logging
1% Loss of open spaces/natural areas/etc.
1% Nuclear waste
1% Ozone layer
1% Rainforests/loss of
1% Toxic substances/chemicals
1% Wilderness
1% Wildfire threat
1% Trash/solid waste/landfills
* Beetle kill/insects/trees
* Brown cloud
* Mass transit/not enough
* Noise/noise pollution
* Parks
* Public lands/drilling/development on them
* Smog
* Wet lands
* Traffic/transportation issues
– Mining
– Roadless areas
– Sprawl
5% NOTHING
8% UNSURE
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 3 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Asked of Sample A, N=251
Thinking more specifically, I’d like to focus for a moment on global
warming –
3. How serious do you think the problem of GLOBAL WARMING is – very
serious, fairly serious,
just somewhat serious, or not serious at all?
60%^ TOTAL SERIOUS
37% TOTAL NOT SERIOUS
48% Very serious
13% Fairly serious
23% Somewhat serious
14% Not serious at all
2% DON’T KNOW
– REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
Asked of Sample B, N=249
Thinking more specifically, I’d like to focus for a moment on climate
change –
4. How serious do you think the problem of CLIMATE CHANGE is – very
serious, fairly serious,
just somewhat serious, or not serious at all?
64%^ TOTAL SERIOUS
35% TOTAL NOT SERIOUS
52% Very serious
11% Fairly serious
20% Somewhat serious
15% Not serious at all
1% DON’T KNOW
– REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 4 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Some people use several terms to describe the issue of the earth
becoming warmer due to a build-up of
carbon and other gasses in our atmosphere from such things as burning
fossil fuels like coal and oil or the
loss of forests. For purposes of this survey we are going to use the
phrase GLOBAL WARMING to
describe this –
5. So, from what you know about global warming, which of the following
four statements is closest
to your opinion?
63% TOTAL TAKE ACTION NOW
37% TOTAL LITTLE/NO ACTION
42% Global warming has been established as a very serious problem, and
strong, immediate
measures are necessary.
21% There is enough evidence that global warming is taking place and
some action should be
taken.
21% We don1t know enough about global warming, and more research is
necessary before we
take strong actions.
16% Concern about global warming has been greatly exaggerated.
* DON’T KNOW
* REFUSED
OR Survey Page 5 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
6. There is a proposal in Congress that would reduce the global
warming pollution produced by the
largest sources in the United States, specifically power plants,
factories and other major
industries. This proposal would achieve a gradual reduction in global
warming pollution of
seventy percent from the pollution levels measured in 2005. This
proposal provides flexibility for
companies to meet their individual target, and would stimulate
strategies for increasing energy
efficiency, use of renewable energy, and other efforts to achieve the
overall reduction in
pollution.
Having heard this, would you tell your Representatives in Congress
they should or should not
support this proposal?
72% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
I’d like to read you two viewpoints about this proposal to reduce
global warming pollution.
7. Supporters say that this proposal to reduce global warming
pollution is modeled after the program
during the FIRST President Bush’s administration that solved the acid
rain problem. It will not
only reduce the pollution that causes global warming, but also allow
us to protect human health,
reduce our dependence on foreign energy, and become a global leader in
the new energy
technology economy. The United States is the single largest
contributor of carbon in the
atmosphere and we should take this first step to make common sense
changes rather than fighting
about whether global warming exists or not.
How convincing is that as a reason why your Representatives in
Congress should support this
legislation? Would you say...
74% TOTAL CONVINCING
22%^ TOTAL NOT CONVINCING
40% VERY CONVINCING
34% SOMEWHAT CONVINCING
13% NOT VERY CONVINCING
10% NOT AT ALL CONVINCING
3% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 6 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
ASK ED OF THOSE WHO SAY “VERY CONVINCING” IN Q7: N=207
8. And if you had to choose, which part of that statement is the
single BEST reason why your
Representatives in Congress should SUPPORT this legislation?
26% United States is the single largest contributor of carbon in the
atmosphere
13% Reduce our dependence on foreign energy
9% Reduce global warming pollution
8% Protect human health
8% Is a first step to make common sense changes
5% Jobs/global leader in new energy technology economy
4% Modeled after acid rain program
4% Better than fighting about whether global warming exists or not
8% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which ONE
thing you
heard would say is the BEST reason they should support this
proposal?)
16% UNSURE
– REFUSED
___________________________________________________________________________________
9. Opponents say that this proposal to reduce global warming pollution
is a hidden tax on consumers
at a time when we are already paying record amounts to heat and cool
our homes and drive our
cars. We should not risk hurting our economy while doing nothing to
ensure some of the world’s
biggest polluters like China and India address this problem. Besides,
we can’t trust big business
to stop polluting, when this legislation allows the richest companies
to buy their way out of
reducing emissions.
How convincing is that as a reason why your Representatives in
Congress should OPPOSE this
legislation? Would you say...
49% TOTAL CONVINCING
46% TOTAL NOT CONVINCING
16% VERY CONVINCING
33% SOMEWHAT CONVINCING
24% NOT VERY CONVINCING
22% NOT AT ALL CONVINCING
5% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 7 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
ASK ED OF THOSE WHO SAY “VERY CONVINCING” IN Q9: N=81
10. And if you had to choose, which part of that statement is the
single BEST reason why your
Representatives in Congress should NOT support this proposal?
22% Legislation allows the richest companies to buy their way out of
reducing emissions
21% Does nothing to ensure China and India address this problem
11% hidden tax on consumers
10% we’re already paying record amounts to heat and cool our homes and
drive our cars.
6% We should not risk hurting our economy
6% Can’t trust big business to stop polluting
– DO NOT BELIEVE IN GLOBAL WARMING
6% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which ONE
thing you
heard would say is the BEST reason they should not support this
proposal?)
16% UNSURE
1% REFUSED
___________________________________________________________________________________
11. Having heard these two viewpoints about this proposal to achieve a
gradual reduction in global
warming pollution, by providing flexibility for companies to meet
their individual target, and
stimulate strategies for increasing energy efficiency, would you tell
your Representatives in
Congress that they should or should not support this proposal?
INIT INFORMED
72% 72% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ 17% TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% 55% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% 17% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% 6% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% 11% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% 10% DON’T KNOW
1% * REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 8 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
12. QUESTION DELETED
____________________________________________________________________________________
13 Do you think this proposal to reduce
global warming pollution would – help OR hurt the U. S.
economy, or would it not have much impact one
way or the other?
27% HELP
31% HURT
27% NOT MUCH IMPACT
14% DON’T KNOW
* REFUSED
OR Survey Page 9 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
14. As you just heard some critics of this legislation to reduce
global warming pollution say that it
may increase the price we pay to heat and cool our homes at first, as
power plants have to become
more efficient and use more renewable energy. What is the most you
would be willing to pay in
higher energy prices per month to reduce global warming pollution
produced by power plants?
33%^ TOTAL $35 AND OVER
48%^ TOTAL $25 AND UNDER
21% 45 dollars
10% 35 dollars
16% 25 dollars
14% 15 dollars
...OR...
16% 5 dollars
1% MORE THAN $45
3% LESS THAN 5 DOLLARS
13% NONE/OPPOSE INCREASE
6% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 10 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Now I would like to read you a few statements about this issue. For
each one, please tell me if you agree
or disagree with that statement...
TOT TOT STRG SMWT SMWT STRG
AGREE DISAGREEAGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DK REF
The (first/next) one is...
Q15-18, Asked of Sample A, N=251
15. Solving global warming problems now will cost less money than if
we wait until later.
77% 20%^ 58% 19% 7% 12% 4% *
16. It is our moral obligation to reduce global warming.
73%^ 24%^ 56% 18% 9% 16% 2% *
17. Global warming is so urgent a problem that even in these difficult
economic times, we should
take action now.
76%^ 23% 55% 20% 8% 15% 1% –
18. This is a global problem that should be addressed by international
treaties, rather than the United
States acting alone.
79% 20%^ 61% 18% 8% 11% 1% 1%
Q19-22, Asked of Sample B, N=249
19. It is our duty as Americans to reduce global warming.
73% 24%^ 57% 16% 8% 17% 2% 1%
20. It is too late to really do something about global warming.
11% 85%^ 3% 8% 17% 67% 3% 2%
21. Usually I would support this kind of a proposal, but in our
current economic times, I cannot get
behind these changes.
23%^ 72% 14% 10% 18% 54% 4% 1%
22. I understand that reducing global warming will take sacrifices
from all of us, and I am ready to
make some changes.
83% 16%^ 61% 22% 4% 11% * 1%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 11 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Summary of Global Warming Statements By % Strongly Agree
Global Warming Statements % Strongly
Agree % TotalAgree
I understand that reducing global warming will take sacrifices from
all
of us, and I am ready to make some changes. 61% 83%
This is a global problem that should be addressed by international
treaties, rather than the United States acting alone. 61% 79%
Solving global warming problems now will cost less money than if we
wait until later. 58% 77%
It is our duty as Americans to reduce global warming. 57% 73%
It is our moral obligation to reduce global warming. 56% 73%
Global warming is so urgent a problem that even in these difficult
economic times, we should take action now. 55% 76%
Usually I would support this kind of a proposal, but in our current
economic times, I cannot get behind these changes. 14% 23%
It is too late to really do something about global warming. 3% 11%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 12 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Please tell me, for each of the following, whether you think global
warming pollution is currently
contributing to that problem, will contribute to it over the next five
to ten years, will contribute to it
eventually, or will never contribute to that problem in Oregon.
TOT TOT CURRENTLY 5-10 YEAR EVENTUALLY NEVER DK REF
CURRENT/ EVENT/
5-10 YEARS NEVER
The (first/next one) is...
23. Drought and water shortages
60% 33%^ 43% 17% 17% 17% 5% 1%
24. Coastal erosion and rising sea levels
58% 33% 42% 16% 18% 15% 8% 1%
25. Shrinking glaciers
66% 27% 55% 11% 13% 14% 6% 1%
26. Wildfires
58% 34% 45% 13% 14% 20% 6% 1%
27. Heat waves
55% 34%^ 38% 17% 17% 18% 9% 1%
28. Reduced snowpack in the mountains
55% 35% 40% 15% 18% 17% 8% 1%
29. Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife
61%^ 33%^ 49% 11% 14% 18% 6% 1%
___________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 13 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Summary of Contributing By % Currently
Global Warming Contributing % Currently % Currently/
5-10 Years
Shrinking glaciers 55% 66%
Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife 49% 61%
Wildfires 45% 58%
Drought and water shortages 43% 60%
Coastal erosion and rising sea levels 42% 58%
Reduced snowpack in the mountains 40% 55%
Heat waves 38% 55%
____________________________________________________________________________________
30. And which ONE of those I just read is most concerning to you as a
problem facing Oregon?
25% Declining numbers of native fish and wildlife
22% Drought and water shortages
14% Wildfires
9% Reduced snowpack in the mountains
7% Coastal erosion and rising sea levels
5% Shrinking glaciers
3% Heat waves
4% ALL/COMBINATION (PROMPT: But if you had to choose, which one is
more
concerning to you?)
7% NONE
5% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 14 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
As we mentioned before there are two main phrases that are used to
describe the issue we’ve been
discussing –
31. Which one phrase is most CONCERNING to you –
37% Climate change
...OR...
48% Global warming?
13% NO DIFFERENCE
1% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
32. Which one phrase BEST describes the issue we’ve been discussing of
the earth becoming warmer
due to a build-up of carbon and other gasses in the atmosphere from
such things as burning fossil
fuels like coal and oil or the loss of forests such as in the
tropics? Is it...
41% Climate change
...OR...
46% Global warming?
7% NO DIFFERENCE
4% DON’T KNOW
1% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 15 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
I am going to read you some statements that people have made IN FAVOR
OF the legislation to reduce
global warming pollution. After I read each one, please tell me
whether the argument is very convincing,
somewhat convincing, not too convincing or not at all convincing as a
reason why your Representatives
in Congress should SUPPORT this legislation.
TOT TOT NOT VERY SMWT NOT TOO NOT AT DK REF
CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV ALL CONV
The (first/next one) is...
33. This legislation creates new markets for farmers and ranchers by
providing incentives to create
new energy sources from crops like switch grass or even agricultural
waste. Farmers and ranchers
will have a new way of earning money and we will have cleaner energy.
73%^ 24% 34% 40% 11% 13% 2% 1%
34. This legislation benefits Oregon foresters, by providing
incentives to grow trees longer to reduce
global warming pollution and improve the quality of the air we
breathe.
77%^ 20% 38% 40% 9% 11% 1% 1%
35. Some of the carbon emissions that we produce today will still be
in our atmosphere one hundred
years from now. We have a responsibility to future generations to do
the responsible thing and
start making common sense changes today.
81%^ 17% 50% 30% 8% 9% 1% 2%
36. Carbon pollution threatens to dramatically change our world for
the worse. We have a
responsibility to be good stewards of the earth and take care of the
creation God has given us.
76% 20% 46% 30% 10% 10% 2% 1%
37. The legislation may include incentives for companies to help
reduce the loss of the world's
rainforests, whose loss contributes about twenty percent of global
warming pollution around the
world. Companies that pay for efforts to reduce forest loss will get
credit for saving carbon.
Because these activities are very cost-effective, allowing this
approach will reduce the overall
costs of the program for American businesses and consumers.
68%^ 27% 29% 38% 14% 13% 5% 1%
38. Global warming is hurting some of Oregon’s major employers that
rely on our natural resources.
The health of our forests and timber industry has been hurt by
droughts which weaken trees and
leave them vulnerable to insects. Our fishing industries are hurt by
changes in ocean temperature
that negatively affect the health of fish. And tourism may even
suffer if there is less snow for
skiers or more extreme weather.
68% 29%^ 40% 28% 13% 15% 2% 1%
39. While global warming is an enormous challenge, it is not
insurmountable. From the clean air act,
to putting a man on the moon, we have used tested science and new
innovations to solve big
problems successfully. Tackling the global warming challenge is no
different.
70%^ 28%^ 31% 38% 14% 13% 2% 1%
TOT TOT NOT VERY SMWT NOT TOO NOT AT DK REF
OR Survey Page 16 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
CONV CONV CONV CONV CONV ALL CONV
Q40, Asked First Night Only, N=151
40. Global warming can lead to increased instability in some of the
most volatile regions of the world
and poses a threat to America’s national security. The U.S. should
commit to a stronger national
and international role to help reduce global warming and avoid
significant disruptions to global
security.
59% 40%^ 22% 37% 17% 22% 1% 1%
Asked of Sample A, N=251
41. This legislation provides a system that will spur American
entrepreneurs to seek out innovative
energy-saving technologies. By putting the power of the free market to
work, we will reduce
more pollution, do it more efficiently and do it better than if
government sets up more arbitrary
rules and regulations.
73% 24% 33% 40% 15% 9% 2% *
Q42, Asked First Night Only, N=151
42. Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to lower food
production, such as the rice
shortages that have led to food riots in many third world countries.
This trend will only continue
unless we manage to reduce global warming.
54% 45%^ 25% 29% 20% 24% – 1%
Asked of Sample A, N=251
43. We spend too much time fighting about whether global warming
exists, and not enough time
making common sense changes to protect our earth. Even as scientists
learn more about this issue,
we all know more needs to be done to reduce air pollution. This
proposal will protect human
health, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and help us become a
worldwide leader in new
energy technologies.
87% 10% 53% 34% 5% 5% 1% 1%
Q44-46, Asked of Sample B, N=249
44. This proposal offers the opportunity for American technology and
know-how to take our
country’s energy solutions in a new direction. It creates incentives
for companies to be more
energy-efficient and use low-carbon sources of energy, which in turn
can help reduce our
dependence on foreign oil.
82%^ 15% 53% 30% 6% 9% 3% –
45. Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to a greater
chance of large, severe
wildfires that threaten homes and people’s lives. This trend will
only continue unless we manage
to reduce global warming.
69% 27% 36% 33% 11% 16% 2% 1%
46. Warmer temperatures are leading to coastal erosion that affects
wildlife, changes in ocean
currents and river temperatures affect fish and marine life, while
droughts lead to a greater
chance of large, severe wildfires that threaten forests . This
legislation provides money to Oregon
to cope with these challenges.
77% 19% 45% 32% 8% 11% 2% 2%
____________________________________________________________________________________
Summary of Statements In Favor Of Legislation By % Very Convincing
OR Survey Page 17 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Statements In Favor of Legislation % Very
Convincing % TotalConvincing
We spend too much time fighting about whether global warming
exists, and not enough time making common sense changes to protect
our earth. Even as scientists learn more about this issue, we all
know
more needs to be done to reduce air pollution. This proposal will
protect human health, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and help
us become a worldwide leader in new energy technologies.
53% 87%
This proposal offers the opportunity for American technology and
know-how to take our country’s energy solutions in a new direction.
It
creates incentives for companies to be more energy-efficient and use
low-carbon sources of energy, which in turn can help reduce our
dependence on foreign oil.
53% 82%
Some of the carbon emissions that we produce today will still be in
our atmosphere one hundred years from now. We have a responsibility
to future generations to do the responsible thing and start making
common sense changes today.
50% 81%
Carbon pollution threatens to dramatically change our world for the
worse. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of the earth and
take care of the creation God has given us.
46% 76%
Warmer temperatures are leading to coastal erosion that affects
wildlife, changes in ocean currents and river temperatures affect
fish
and marine life, while droughts lead to a greater chance of large,
severe wildfires that threaten forests . This legislation provides
money
to Oregon to cope with these challenges.
45% 77%
Global warming is hurting some of Oregon’s major employers that
rely on our natural resources. The health of our forests and timber
industry has been hurt by droughts which weaken trees and leave them
vulnerable to insects. Our fishing industries are hurt by changes in
ocean temperature that negatively affect the health of fish. And
tourism may even suffer if there is less snow for skiers or more
extreme weather.
40% 68%
This legislation benefits Oregon foresters, by providing incentives
to
grow trees longer to reduce global warming pollution and improve the
quality of the air we breathe.
38% 77%
Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to a greater
chance of large, severe wildfires that threaten homes and people’s
lives. This trend will only continue unless we manage to reduce
global warming.
36% 69%
OR Survey Page 18 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
This legislation creates new markets for farmers and ranchers by
providing incentives to create new energy sources from crops like
switch grass or even agricultural waste. Farmers and ranchers will
have a new way of earning money and we will have cleaner energy.
34% 73%
This legislation provides a system that will spur American
entrepreneurs to seek out innovative energy-saving technologies. By
putting the power of the free market to work, we will reduce more
pollution, do it more efficiently and do it better than if government
sets up more arbitrary rules and regulations.
33% 73%
While global warming is an enormous challenge, it is not
insurmountable. From the clean air act, to putting a man on the moon,
we have used tested science and new innovations to solve big
problems successfully. Tackling the global warming challenge is no
different.
31% 70%
The legislation may include incentives for companies to help reduce
the loss of the world's rainforests, whose loss contributes about
twenty
percent of global warming pollution around the world. Companies
that pay for efforts to reduce forest loss will get credit for saving
carbon. Because these activities are very cost-effective, allowing
this
approach will reduce the overall costs of the program for American
businesses and consumers.
29% 68%
Global warming is causing droughts which are leading to lower food
production, such as the rice shortages that have led to food riots in
many third world countries. This trend will only continue unless we
manage to reduce global warming.
25% 54%
Global warming can lead to increased instability in some of the most
volatile regions of the world and poses a threat to America’s
national
security. The U.S. should commit to a stronger national and
international role to help reduce global warming and avoid
significant
disruptions to global security.
22% 59%
____________________________________________________________________________________
OR Survey Page 19 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
Sometimes after hearing a little more, people feel somewhat
differently, so let me ask you again about the
proposal in Congress to reduce global warming pollution produced by
power plants, factories and other
major industries.
47. Having heard more about this issue, would you tell your
Representatives in Congress they should
or should not – support this proposal?
INIT INFO POST
72% 72% 73% TOTAL SHOULD SUPPORT
15%^ 17% 18% TOTAL SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
58% 55% 58% STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
14% 17% 15% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD SUPPORT
4% 6% 5% NOT SO STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
10% 11% 13% STRONGLY SHOULD NOT SUPPORT
12% 10% 7% DON’T KNOW
1% * 3% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
On a scale from one to ten where ten represents a description that is
perfect for you and one a description
that is totally wrong for you, how well do each of the following
describe you? You can, of course, use
any number between one and ten.
To what extent do you regard yourself as...
48. An environmentalist
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
5% 2% 4% 5% 18% 10% 13% 21% 8% 11% 6.5
49. A supporter of business interests
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
7% 5% 8% 6% 23% 11% 12% 13% 2% 9% 5.7
50. A supporter of religious conservative groups
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean
33% 9% 7% 5% 12% 4% 6% 7% 3% 9% 4.1
OR Survey Page 20 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
And for statistical purposes only –
D1. First, in what year were you born?
4% 18 - 24
10% 25 - 34
23% 35 - 44
18% 45 - 54
19% 55 - 64
25% 65 AND ABOVE
2% REFUSED
D2. And what was the last level of education you COMPLETED?
22% GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL OR LESS
28% SOME COLLEGE
48% COLLEGE+
2% TECHNICAL OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL
26% SOME COLLEGE
26% GRADUATED COLLEGE
22% GRADUATE/PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL
3% REFUSED
D3. How would you describe the area where you currently live?
50% CITY/SUBURBS
47% TOWN/RURAL
23% A big city
27% A suburban area
26% A small town
21% A rural area
* DON’T KNOW/NOT SURE
3% REFUSED
OR Survey Page 21 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
D4. Have you purchased a hunting or fishing license in last three
years?
18%^ HUNTERS
31% FISHERS
66% NON-SPORTSMEN
3% YES/HUNTING ONLY
16% YES/FISHING ONLY
15% YES/BOTH
64% NO
2% UNSURE/REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
D5. No matter how you feel today, are your registered to vote as...
a Republican,
a Democrat,
or something else?
34% TOTAL REPUBLICAN
40% TOTAL DEMOCRAT
19% STRONG REPUBLICAN
15% NOT-SO-STRONG REPUBLICAN
20% SOMETHING ELSE/INDEPENDENT
14% NOT-SO-STRONG DEMOCRAT
26% STRONG DEMOCRAT
1% DON'T KNOW
5% REFUSED
____________________________________________________________________________________
D6. Other than being an American, what is your main ethnic or racial
heritage?
2% AFRICAN AMERICAN OR BLACK
86% WHITE
4% HISPANIC AMERICAN OR LATINO
1% ASIAN AMERICAN
3% OTHER
5% REFUSED
OR Survey Page 22 of 22
May 13-15, 2008
D7. And for statistical purposes only...is your total annual household
income greater or less than
$60,000 dollars?
44% UNDER $60,000
47%^ OVER $60,000
(IF LESS THAN $60,000, ASK:) Is it...
9% UNDER $20,000
17% BETWEEN $20,000 - $40,000
18% OVER $40,000
(IF GREATER THAN $60,000, ASK:) Is it...
17% UNDER $80,000
13% BETWEEN $80,000 - $100,000
16% OVER $100,000
10% REFUSED
D8. Gender
48% MALE
52% FEMALE
Brendan Castricano
Jul 7, 2008, 4:46:40 PM7/7/08
to Josh, Northwest Institute for Community Energy
Josh
That's a great question. Thanks for bringing it up. There's definitely alot of subtle nuances to the whole project, and it will take some time for people to process that information. It's definitely a thought to put on the table. Overall, I think there's alot of good back and forth dialogue to be had regarding the NICE. Could you remind me your phone #. Evidently, I'm just not as good at keeping track of the little pieces of paper as I'd like to think I am.
Cheers,
Brendan
nathan jones
Jul 14, 2008, 1:03:37 PM7/14/08
to Josh, Northwest Institute for Community Energy
hi Josh,
Im sorry for replying a bit late on this. I just wanted to clarify something that we just realized ourselves. We are not trying to get the community to commit to the SunNE this summer. What we are trying to do is to get the community to show "demand" a feasibility study. The study should answer most of the nuts and bolts questions. I think that this will be an easier thing to do for the 3 weeks we have left, it is also what SunNE needs to move forward. Once the funding for the study comes in then we (or who ever is bottomlining the SunNE project after August) should be able to answer most of the questions that arise. Hope you had a great weekend =)
~nathan
Im sorry for replying a bit late on this. I just wanted to clarify something that we just realized ourselves. We are not trying to get the community to commit to the SunNE this summer. What we are trying to do is to get the community to show "demand" a feasibility study. The study should answer most of the nuts and bolts questions. I think that this will be an easier thing to do for the 3 weeks we have left, it is also what SunNE needs to move forward. Once the funding for the study comes in then we (or who ever is bottomlining the SunNE project after August) should be able to answer most of the questions that arise. Hope you had a great weekend =)
~nathan
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages