Greenhouse Gases: Solutions Versus Reasons

How will average Americans react to the Environmental Protection Agency's conclusion that greenhouse gases are a threat to human health? Environmentalists are jubilant, businesses are wary, and the bulk of the public is probably confused. That's not surprising. The EPA decision is a technical, but significant step. Eventually it could lead to federal regulation of greenhouse gases under air pollution laws, although there's a long review process before that could happen.

The good news for the EPA is that the public supports a lot of the measures that will be required to make a dent in greenhouse gases. The less-good news is that the public may not as enthusiastic about the EPA’s reasoning, especially when the costs start hitting close to home.

In Public Agenda's Energy Learning Curve survey, released in association with Planet Forward, we found the public supports a number of proposals on energy, many of them the kinds of measures the government might mandate to cut greenhouse emissions. That includes higher mileage standards for vehicles, investing in railroads and public transit, and tax incentives to businesses and consumers who cut energy use.

So there's a substantial consensus on possible solutions. But most Americans are considerably more concerned about the price of fuel and the country’s reliance on imported oil than about global warming. Eight in ten (83 percent) worry that the U.S. economy is too dependent on oil, with 47 percent saying they worry “a lot.” What’s more, an overwhelming 9 in 10 Americans (89 percent) say they worry about the cost of gas and fuel. Even more important is the intensity of that concern, with 57 percent saying they worry “a lot."

But the public is considerably less anxious about global warming. Seven in ten (71 percent) say they worry about global warming, but only 32 percent say they worry “a lot” about it — that’s 25 points behind the number who say they worry about energy prices. The issue of global warming simply doesn’t have the same urgency yet for the public.

That's a key thing for policymakers to consider as they move forward on energy: the steps they propose may make sense to the public, but they may not be as sure about the reasons they're given. You can argue for higher mileage standards based on economic reasons, energy security, or climate change, but the arguments policymakers choose can bring people into the debate, or push them away.

Will the EPA’s judgment that global warming puts Americans’ health is at risk change that equation? Will it give the global warming rationale a more important place at the table? It might, but showing Americans how solutions they’re already open to – higher gas mileage, more alternative energy, more energy efficiency – can help out on all three fronts might be the most powerful argument of all.