Action needed on climate: poll

August 1, 2013

Fracking_Graphic_t670Budget concerns do not deter Californians when it comes to environmental issues like global warming and its causes.

A recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that residents of the Golden State think it is time now for meaningful solutions and action, and a shaky economy is not an acceptable reason for delay.

A record-high majority of 65 percent of registered voters agree that reduction of greenhouse gases must occur in a timely manner, and a thin majority of those polled favor construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

But fracking — the practice of injecting water into the ground to “mine” natural gas and oil — is disliked by a wide margin of those polled. Offshore oil drilling also gets a thumbs-down.

Not surprisingly, Californians also enthusiastically endorse hybrid automobiles, alternative commute methods, and new energy sources.



  1. Robert1 says:

    Global warming or just too many people?
    Cause and effect–

  2. topper01 says:

    I, for one am very thankful for global warming. That last ice age was a real fly in the ointment.

    Just when you convince me to buy an electric car, you shut of the electricity! Liberal don’t want Diablo (or any nuclear power plant), they refuse to allow a river to be dammed I guess the only thing left is coal fired generators. No, wait, I see that is also on their list of no – nos! You forget, electricity is not a clean energy source. It only looks that way from ‘your’ back yard.

    • tomsquawk says:

      you make a good point here; nobody wants anything. also, no one wants wind farms or solar projects ruining fragile environments & burial grounds. i’m fairly sure that if we tapped thermal energy there would be accusations of global cooling. we don’t sell widgets anymore so sell guilt and make a good living.

      just too many rats in the box

    • r0y says:

      Energy produced by burning WOOD actually produces more electricity than wind and solar COMBINED.

  3. Citizen says:

    The very people in our state government who are pushing the fight against global warming are also the ones who are ignoring and even silently endorsing the problems that increase global warming in this state. Open borders and illegal immigration is increasing our population beyond our physical resources (water). A blind eye to the increase of land devoted to wine grape production has led to the clear cutting of redwood forests, depletion of water in our rivers and near extinction of wild salmon, illegal pot grows in our forests and national parks with contamination of creeks and streams by trash and insecticides.

    These state officials are increasing conservation efforts, to be sure, then insist that lower levels of use mean that towns and cities have to build more affordable housing and increase their population and carbon usage. So, the net gain is nothing.

    To avert an increase in carbon levels, we need to limit the population. We don’t need to be fighting off housing developments, illegal populations, more cars on the highways, and government requirements for affordable housing so that we (not the vineyards) can support more farm workers.

    When California seals the border, regulates the spread of vineyards (wine is not a necessary food), and starts dealing with population control (no poor family needs 5 children), then I’ll support the anti-carbon, global warming movement.

  4. GalaxyTraveler says:

    So, 65 percent of Californians feel the need to reduce greenhouse gases. The other 35% must be the conservative minority who still believe in Santa Claus.

    • Rambunctious says:

      Seven years ago before the global temperatures leveled off… 90% of Californians believed in the need to
      reduce Greenhouse gases…now down to 65%. And If I remember correctly it was the liberals that voted forSanta Claus in the last election.

      • GalaxyTraveler says:

        You are either clueless are just plain lying for the heck of it.

        • Rambunctious says:

          Well…your own graph shows the temperature leveling…and even dipping a bit. Why do you want Man Made Global Warming to be true?

          • zaphod says:

            why do hate the United Nations ?

            • Rambunctious says:

              Why don’t you!!!…lol

              • zaphod says:

                because I am a conservative on this issue.
                “This is a solemn but a glorious hour. I only wish that Franklin D. Roosevelt had lived to
                witness this day. General Eisenhower informs me that the forces of Germany have surrendered
                to the United Nations. The flags of freedom fly over all Europe.

                For this victory, we join in offering our thanks to the Providence which has guided and sustained
                us through the dark days of adversity.

                Our rejoicing is sobered and subdued by a supreme consciousness of the terrible price we have
                paid to rid the world of Hitler and his evil band.
                Let us not forget, my fellow Americans, the
                sorrow and the heartache which today abide in the homes of so many of our
                neighbors-neighbors whose most priceless possession has been rendered as a sacrifice to
                redeem our liberty…”
                Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex only his intellectual and political enemies would twist his words to attack climate science and the United Nations

                • Rambunctious says:

                  We now face the Climate Industrial Complex, where all powers involved want to impose their own version of a costly action as a solution to the misrepresentation of global warming.

          • GalaxyTraveler says:

            Frankly, I wish it wasn’t happening, but it obviously is. I have no interest in the “climate change industry”, as you call it. I’m for reducing CO2 wherever we can. That’s the culprit. It’s real and it’s largely man made. CA has made great strides in reducing CO2 in vehicles and factories, we need to continue that effort.

            You should have seen LA back in the late 60s and 70s. There has been MUCH improvement in air quality. That’s undeniable. So forget the conspiracy theories. Let’s work on common sense solutions.

            • tomsquawk says:

              take a look at CO2 recovery with tertiary oil wells. takes CO2 into the ground and leaves it there; better than fracking?

      • aft50s says:

        I voted for global warming and will continue to do so at every opportunity

    • shelworth says:

      or, 65% are good little sheep and believe what they’re told to believe.

  5. r0y says:

    You know, we’re called the NANNY STATE for a reason. What do Nannies manage? Children. Who are usually incapable of reasoning and budgeting… exactly. Suffice it to say that a majority of Californians are truly mental midgets when it comes to issues more complicated than American Idol or the Kardassians.

    • tomsquawk says:

      oooooh; how is Kimmy doing how is the royal baby what is she wearing…i meant Kimmy

    • Maxfusion says:

      Oh no, mental midgets is an upgrade. They’re true believers that make a person baptized in a river with snakes wrapped around their necks look like the benchmark of reason. They’re zealots, and most couldn’t tell you how much anthropogenic CO2 is in the atmosphere, the effects of the Eurasian ice sheet, or any other pertinent factor in this “issue”. They’re the same bed wetters that decided it was a good idea to put a disbarred megalomaniac, dope smoking, coke head, socialist in the white house.

      • Rambunctious says:

        well said… they turn a blind eye to solar and volcanic activity as well. In order to believe in man made climate change they need to lie to themselves. It’s really astonishing.

            • Rambunctious says:

              Well lets see what the USGS has to say about this issue.

              • zaphod says:

                from your link: Do the Earth’s volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities? Research findings indicate that the answer to this frequently asked question is a clear and unequivocal, “No.” Human activities, responsible for a projected 35 billion metric tons (gigatons) of CO2 emissions in 2010 (Friedlingstein et al., 2010), release an amount of CO2 that dwarfs the annual CO2 emissions of all the world’s degassing subaerial and submarine volcanoes (Gerlach, 2011).
                science is very clear , too much CO2 in the atmosphere is bad news for temperate dwellers

                • r0y says:

                  CO2 has little to no effect on temperature like we were all told. We’ve had a very, very small cooling since the late 90’s and an increase in CO2 levels… Ooops.

                • zaphod says:

                  how skeptics read the data VS climate scientists
                  it is 1998 again cherry picked for a reason.

                • Maxfusion says:

                  UK Professor Emeritus of Biogeography Philip Stott of the University of London explains the crux of the entire global warming debate and rebuts the notion that CO2 is the main climate driver.

                  “As I have said, over and over again, the fundamental point has always been this: climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor (CO2), is as misguided as it gets,” Stott wrote in 2008. It is not simply, the sun or CO2 when looking at global temperatures, it is the Sun, volcanoes, tilt of the Earth’s axis, water vapor, methane, clouds, ocean cycles, plate tectonics, albedo, atmospheric dust, Atmospheric Circulation, cosmic rays, particulates like Carbon Soot, forests and land use, etc. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, not just CO2.

                  Blah, blah, I’ll see your mathematician and raise you a Bio-geographer.

  6. MaryMalone says:

    Well, I guess gutless politicians can no longer use the excuse of “my constituents won’t support this” anymore.

  7. Rambunctious says:

    So I guess polls are the new way of determining the future of California…

    • tomsquawk says:


    • r0y says:

      Yeah, they should poll the people who are against fracking and ask if they know how panicked the Saudis are by it… wonder where all that anti-fracking money comes from… bah, forget that. I don’t want answers to tough questions, I’d rather just feel good about something I don’t put a lot of thought into.

  8. tomsquawk says:

    “Budget concerns do not deter Californians when it comes to environmental issues like global warming and its causes”. When did Californians have budget concerns? Easy to say you want it, harder to pay for it.

    Maybe we could pass a proposition for more taxes to fund this and once the money is in we could later ammend it in a flurry of SB’s and AB’s and squirt it over to the general fund? I’m thinking of the last gas tax swap.

    Sorry for the cynicism.

    Regarding fracking. No one likes it. How about CO2 recovery on tertiary wells? That never seems to be discussed as an alternative.

    • MaryMalone says:

      We could start funding by stopping Brown’s train-to-nowhere boondoggle.

  9. slomike says:

    I believe you are preaching to the 35% on this site.

Comments are closed.