Roger Pielke Jr. | Ruy Teixeira
Key PointsThe relationship between voter opinion, scientific assessment, and media narrative is poorly understood, thereby reinforcing the current extremely partisan and tribal public discussions about energy and climate.
The public’s views and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s scientific analysis differ in important respects from the narrative that has come to dominate the mainstream media and public discourse on climate and energy.
The public broadly supports an “all-of-the-above” approach to energy policy and does not generally support a rapid elimination of fossil fuels. Instead, they support increased domestic production of fossil fuels.
The public is most interested in the cost and reliability of the energy they use and the convenience and comfort of their energy-using products. They are unwilling to sacrifice much at all financially to address climate change or significantly change their consumer behavior.
With the abrupt changes in energy and climate policy promulgated by the second Trump administration, it is more vital than ever to understand what voters actually think about energy and climate; how those views align (or don’t align) with scientific evidence,
as summarized by the most recent assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); and how both match up with the dominant mainstream media narrative about these crucial issues.
Right now, the relationship between voter opinion, scientific assessment, and media narrative is poorly understood. Our report aims to clarify this underlying confusion to better inform policy initiatives and proposals, in both policy and political terms, in the context of American public opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment