Well, so sometimes you hear that people don't really believe in global warming, or that it's not their first priority, or whatever.
But what is absolutely plain as day is that they support controlling greenhouse gas emissions. It's a downright consensus.
There is strong public sentiment for limiting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions in energy legislation, according to the latest Society for Human Resource Management/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, conducted by the Pew Research Center.
Two-thirds of Americans favor including limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions in a comprehensive energy bill, a number that seems to belie the difficulties the Senate is having in arriving at a consensus on legislation. [emphasis ed.]
Gosh golly, Congress is having trouble arriving at a consensus, even when the public already has? You might think our elected officials were listening to someone else! LOL totes.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A growing number of Americans want the United States to regulate greenhouse gas emissions as the largest oil spill in U.S. history helps boost interest in petroleum alternatives, a poll by two universities found on Tuesday.
About 77 percent of 1,204 Americans polled support regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant, up 6 percentage points from January, according to the poll by researchers at Yale and George Mason universities.
This goes to show that things change depending on what question you ask. People may not know, or doubt, whether global warming is real. I think that's too bad, but maybe it's not really that important. What matters is whether they support sensible precautions against the dangers that global warming poses. They do support such measures, overwhelmingly.
You know who may not know this? Our Senator, Scott Brown: (617) 565-3170, or (202) 224-4543.
… it becomes increasingly amazing that the punditocracy still hasn’t admitted that the left is the center. Carbon tax, public option, PB fines, bank regulation, DADT… center-right country my ass!
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120…
<
p>Being asked if you want to limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions in a poll is bound to garner plenty of support. Ask the same question and include the price people will actually pay to accomplish these goals and I suspect the results would be quite different.
“Surreal. Almost post-modern.”
Try raising gas to $4/gal to cut the carbon — these people would run you out of town on a rail.
Says who?
<
p>Why stop at $4 a gallon? Why not say $10? Wow, $10! Do I hear $15?
<
p>Anyway, the idea is to use less of it.
People nowadays have no problem supporting something in the abstract, then flipping when the tangible application of that cause adversely affects them.
<
p>At public meetings, for example, I’ve seen affordable housing activists opposing such units in their own neighborhoods, generally for the following reasons:
<
p> The adverse affect on the activists’ property values.
<
p> Lack of off-street parking parking spaces in the proposed units.
<
p>The minimum number of off-street parking spaces acceptable to the activists was two per proposed unit – I include studio and one-bedroom units – and this criterion was consistent over the years.
<
p>In contemporary society, inconvenience usually trumps principle.
driving a stake through the black heart of global Bernie Madoff carbon trading derivatives trading. Would this be a benevolent based thing I should think these globalist power tripping queers could “sell” the sheeple better by announcing a “Manhattan Project” for alternative energy, but no, they can’t even be bothered to create logical talking points.
<
p>It is also clean the “green” movement isn’t really green at all as most of the polluting industries are in countries who don’t care at all about enviornmental issues.
“Smart Grid” as it’s marketed is all about building the infrastructure of power rationing.
<
p>The real question here is could you tomorrow live as the Amish people do, sans energy.
Since the first Energy Crisis back in the early 1970s, every poll I’ve ever seen shows that the US public prefers efficiency and renewables over coal, oil, and nuclear power by 70% or more. This is a consistent finding. It has never gone away in all these years.
<
p>And it doesn’t make a bit of difference to the politics or the policy. Why should it make a difference now? BP’s disaster? Another IPCC report? Mebbe, mebbe not.
<
p>I’m not holding my breath for anything to change in the political world. I’ll be here with my one room off-grid in a rented apartment, my homebrew solar backpack, and doing monthly weatherization barnraisings.
<
p>Good to see those commercials form ENERNOC though, telling our politicians that renewables and efficiency are not a partisan issue but an American issue. That’s a hopeful sign.
or hold your breath, or feel hopey-changey. Just asking for a phone call.
<
p>(617) 565-3170,(202) 224-4543.