Americans more interested in energy than environment
posted at 8:48 am on April 6, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
Maybe it took an extended economic collapse for Americans to get practical about energy production. It could also have some relation to the Climategate scandals and the collapse of credibility for anthropogenic global-warming advocates. Either way, Gallup’s latest survey shows Americans prioritizing energy production over environmental concerns for the first time since Gallup began polling on the issue in 2001:
Americans are more likely to say the U.S. should prioritize development of energy supplies than to say it should prioritize protecting the environment, the first time more have favored energy production over environmental protection in this question’s 10-year history. …
The current data represent a continuing shift in opinion toward energy production. Since 2007, when Americans’ preferences for environmental protection were the greatest (58% to 34%), Americans’ opinions have shown significant movement each year in the direction of prioritizing energy production. This change has been evident among nearly every major demographic subgroup, although self-identified liberals have remained relatively steadfast in saying the environment should be a higher priority.
At the same time, Americans continue to advocate greater energy conservation by consumers (52%) over greater production of oil, gas, and coal supplies (36%) as a means of solving the nation’s energy problems. Americans have always come out in favor of greater consumer conservation, though this year marks the highest percentage favoring production (by a percentage point) in the last 10 years.
Interestingly, the change doesn’t come from crisis-mode thinking, at least not on energy supplies. Two years ago, spiking gasoline prices inspired the “Drill Here, Drill Now” movement. Today, though, only 34% of respondents think the energy-production situation in the US is “very serious,” a decline of eight points in a year.
Most likely, this comes from economic concerns. The chart Gallup has on its site shows that support for prioritizing environmental restrictions over energy production peaked in 2007, just before the start of the recession. Another poll earlier this month showed that respondents also prioritized economic expansion over environmental protection for the first time, and today’s chart shows that energy production has become more important as the economy worsened. People understand that high energy prices retards growth, and that we need cheap energy to expand.
With this in mind, Barack Obama’s decision to drill in certain areas might be seen as a pre-emptive move to get ahead of this curve. The poll also shows, though, that Republicans don’t need to support cap-and-trade in order to get better energy-production policies. The public has grown up a bit in the last few years, something that adversity usually accomplishes.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Time for Barry to scold us again, we’re not following his plan.
Now that he’s done perfecting health care, it’s on to saving the planet.
Sounds like a perfect time to push Cap and Trade, along with pretending that we’re going to open up new areas for oil drilling.
NoDonkey on April 6, 2010 at 8:51 AM
Gee, I wonder if the rising gas prices are affecting public opinion. We’re approaching 3 bucks a gallon here in H-Town, TX.
Doughboy on April 6, 2010 at 8:52 AM
How optimistic of you.
Aquateen Hungerforce on April 6, 2010 at 8:52 AM
Um, I read it as opening certain areas to exploration. Exploration is not drilling for exploitation. I’ve been on a rig that drilled its share of dry holes.
cozmo on April 6, 2010 at 8:54 AM
Johnnyreb on April 6, 2010 at 8:55 AM
Here in NW Florida we have been around the $3 mark for weeks now. I don’t understand how one community can have gas at $2.95 but just 15 miles down the road gas is $2.85. I live near the interstate and pay more but, down at the beach, in the “tourist” areas gas is cheaper. Crazy, and I have a feeling that it’s only going to get worse.
milwife88 on April 6, 2010 at 8:58 AM
Is this evidence that the 30-year enviro-propaganda campaign being run in our elementary and secondary education systems is actually backfiring? Would that it were true.
Courage.
Jaibones on April 6, 2010 at 8:59 AM
Enviro-nazi’s persist in claiming that energy production other than solar and wind is incompatible with the environment. They’re wrong, and maybe people are starting to see that.
darwin on April 6, 2010 at 9:00 AM
That reminds me, I haven’t checked the air in my tires yet today.
Barry’s interested in drilling and nukes like a chicken is about fried eggs. Pure political theater.
petefrt on April 6, 2010 at 9:00 AM
Above $3 in the Chicago suburbs, with the “special formulation” plague about to hit for summer. Should be ugly. Can’t wait for this to figure into the November elections.
Jaibones on April 6, 2010 at 9:01 AM
I guess I should consider myself lucky then. I was freaking out this morning on the way to my job(which I still have thankfully) when I saw regular unleaded at $2.75. That sounds like a bargain compared to other parts of the country. Maybe it’s because we’re near the Gulf.
Doughboy on April 6, 2010 at 9:03 AM
These numbers will be repeated over and over by the press as the Obama Regime pushes forward with Cap’n Rape.
cntrlfrk on April 6, 2010 at 9:04 AM
Market driven pricing.
The fuel prices gets the customer into the store to buy other merchandise. Many times when the wholesale price of gasoline fluctuates wildly, a station will loose
money in fuel sales but make it up with sales of other products.
cozmo on April 6, 2010 at 9:04 AM
?
A gallon of milk can be $1.79 at one store, & $3.25 at a store on the next block.
itsnotaboutme on April 6, 2010 at 9:05 AM
Not to imply that Barry Two-Face is the Lyingest Liar who ever told a lie or anything, but I’ll believe this drilling thing when I see it.
CantCureStupid on April 6, 2010 at 9:05 AM
It’s a simple thing -we don’t fret over what we’ve always had until someone threatens to take it away.
We’ll follow the trendy enviro-worship propaganda stuff just so far, but when it starts to really hurt us, well -we look a little closer and see CO2 as not quite poison and climate as not quite pollution, and then see fraud and see science as not not quite apolitical and then we say -what fools we’ve been.
Don L on April 6, 2010 at 9:06 AM
Say, Who’s the politico that keeps pushing the importants of a sound energy policy? You know, what’s her name with the “Drill Baby Drill” mantra? I wonder what she might would say about this news?
Amadeus on April 6, 2010 at 9:08 AM
Anyone want to bet that because Obama couldn’t conrtrol the rising gas prices he then decided to announce that meaningless, MSM touted, silly oil exploration (but don’t drill) commerical just in time to soften the angry reaction from Joe six-pack at the polls next November?
Don L on April 6, 2010 at 9:10 AM
http://www.k-y.com/
davidk on April 6, 2010 at 9:11 AM
It’s because the evil oil companies are taking advantage of the average American.
Everyone has a constitutional right to affordable fuel.
It’s in the constitution under the ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness’ Clause.
Gas Station Reform NOW!
cntrlfrk on April 6, 2010 at 9:11 AM
One of the mysteries of the capitalistic system. Independant producers setting the price that comes closest to THEIR product demand. Maybe we should fix the price so we can create a shortage. Would you like that?
docdave on April 6, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Gas Price Map
Dasher on April 6, 2010 at 9:11 AM
Nothing will stop it because it gives the fed more control over us and the country. It has always been about control and never ever has it been about the environment.
RagTag on April 6, 2010 at 9:12 AM
Milk at the local Wal-Mart is $3.89. If you can find it for $1.79 I’m moving to your area. I see what you are saying. My point is, most gas stations do not make a major profit on gas, they are more interested in getting you into the store to spend money on more profitable items such as soda, candy, chips ect. Our local “Tom Thumb” stores who are owned by Kroger is offering a “savings card” so everytime you spend money you accumulate points on that card and for every 100 points you get .10 off a gallon of gas. Why not just lower the price of that gas .10 and let everyone benefit from it?
milwife88 on April 6, 2010 at 9:14 AM
Milk at our local Walmart is $1.99
Dasher on April 6, 2010 at 9:15 AM
Regardless, I can only assume that the nuclear plants and oil drilling are merely limp-wristed threats aimed at Iran.
uknowmorethanme on April 6, 2010 at 9:16 AM
In other news: Americans more interested in American Idol and Dancing with the Stars than either energy or the environment.
ernesto on April 6, 2010 at 9:17 AM
Seriously? I never said anything about fixing prices, just asking an honest question. The price of a gallon of gas at the local BP is $2.98 and the price at the Tom Thumb is $2.94. So, you can go to the BP and pay more for the same gas, or you can go to the Tom Thumb and save a little. Who suffers…BP. I know I won’t go there. I find the cheapest price and pull in to fill up. See, that’s what happens in a “free market” society. You get to make that choice.
milwife88 on April 6, 2010 at 9:20 AM
Because only a small percentage of the customers actually take advantage of the discount. Our local gas station has little coupons for 5¢ off a gallon of gas. I never use them because I use my debt card to buy the gas, it is not worth it to me to go into the store to save the 50¢ on the ten gallons my Civic uses on a typical fill. If I went in I might waste even more money buying stuff I don’t need, which is the idea of the coupons in the first place.
Dasher on April 6, 2010 at 9:21 AM
It ain’t rocket science stupid—Drill Here & Drill now!
Herb on April 6, 2010 at 9:23 AM
Funny guy, but K-Y is pansy stuff compared to the lubricants we used in the field. You haven’t lubed until you’ve applied pipegrease with a spatula. And bentonite will make a greased pig sticky by comparison.
cozmo on April 6, 2010 at 9:24 AM
I can see where that is a pain. Tom Thumb however allows you to link the savings card to your debit card so the savings is automatic. Gotta love modern technology.
milwife88 on April 6, 2010 at 9:25 AM
Planet Gore:
That’s a kind of new gas tax if you have to buy more watered-down gas to get the same power. Not to mention the additional $1,000 cost of a new car the goverment estimates for the new CO2 regulations.
And the first thing car-makers will cut is heavy structure, aka; the stuff that makes you safer.
Haven’t you people “helped” enough?
Noel on April 6, 2010 at 9:26 AM
Wait until gas prices start spiking this summer – and without bushcheneyhalliburton to blame it on.
Pass the popcorn please!
pain train on April 6, 2010 at 9:26 AM
I’ve been paying up to $3.12 for awhile in socal.
jbh45 on April 6, 2010 at 9:28 AM
I don’t care what the supply situation is gas is going to go up at Christmas, Spring break and summer. They usually give you some b.s. about switching the production of heating fuel to gasoline because of the increase in summer driving. I’ve been around too long not to see the pattern. Put it was really interesting that oil went over $87 a barrel yesterday. I am pretty sure the “good” unemployment news didn’t indicate that consumption was going to go up that much.
Cindy Munford on April 6, 2010 at 9:28 AM
Wow, you guys are going up to now 3 bucks a gallon. I haven’t seen below 3 in over two years. We are now at 3.40 a gallon. For almost a year it was a constant 3.24.
Diesel has gone up quite a bit too.
I am sure most of you are probably unaware as to how much your natural gas went up for heat and electricity to your house. Keep an eye out.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 9:31 AM
no actually it is harder at times.
Just because you drill, doesn’t mean that they can refine it.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 9:32 AM
That’s right, until they increase refining capacity the govt essential hold the strings to the amount off fuel that is available. No new refineries for 30 years has kept a stranglehold on the citizens and oil companies.
thomasaur on April 6, 2010 at 9:36 AM
Not Green, Just Cheap
That describes me & my family
mdenis39 on April 6, 2010 at 9:37 AM
It is really hard to increase the gas economy of a fleet of vehicles. The easiest way is to reduce weight.
Another way which is costly; new engines that use high temp ceramics and operate at much higher temperatures than current engines. Of course that creates a whole new set of problems for fuel additives, cooling, electronic component failure, engine life issues, etc. But not to worry the government is looking out for you! NOT !
Dasher on April 6, 2010 at 9:40 AM
It also depends on what type of oil it is, what the base comp is, the chemistry, the time of year (which is a factor if it is cold in certain areas of the world) and the tax table period.
Just because it may have come out of the ground, there is always something coming up concerning what to do with it. China wants it for plastic, Iran wants it to make diesel easily, We want it for gasoline.
To many factors and only the one who has the largest margin of expendable money gets it.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 9:42 AM
You are correct. Also, has anyone bothered to ascertain whether the oil companies are willing to drill in the limited areas being offered? I doubt they are. It sort of like the western area natural gas leases shell game, it seems.
Doorgunner on April 6, 2010 at 9:50 AM
I don’t know if this is true, but a friend of mine told me last week that the variations from town to town have to do with pollution levels and the amount of additives that are required. Coastal communities and rural areas have less air pollution and so the gas does not have to have as much of the expensive additives.
rockmom on April 6, 2010 at 9:52 AM
I am going to take a step out and say probably not and they will probably stick with State run Leases.
Shell’s lease looks like it is being yanked in Alaska. Oh boy! I actually feel bad for them right now, as they were just doing seismic and oceanography for a good location, then they got sued by that stupid Native Village and then halted via the BLM. Now this. I call BS.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 9:53 AM
Just stopped in the local gas station to get my morning coffee. They were changing the price of gas out front. Jokingly I said to my friend Mike who runs the place ” Let me guess, it’s going down” he just laughed LOL.
BTW, OT, but is anyone else having issues getting Hot Air
to load up?
I sometimes have to hit refresh3-4 times before the page
appears.
Fires1 on April 6, 2010 at 9:55 AM
Maybe in some States (like CA) but in others, they have the Regulatory Body that mandates what is suppose to be in the fuel during certain times of the year. But it sways like the wind. And you only notice a cent or two increase with the newer additives.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 9:56 AM
Thus the conundrum of the environmentalists. In order for people to care about the environment, they must feel economically comfortable. Cheap energy is a requirement for people to feel economically comfortable. “Green” energy technologies are not cheap.
WashJeff on April 6, 2010 at 9:58 AM
Sarah Palin said it first.
canditaylor68 on April 6, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Looks like Americans should gird their loins for the inevitable “Inconvenient Truth II: Alternative Fuel Boogaloo” in which Albert Gore will stop the destruction of a biofuel plant. I smell another Oscar and possibly a peace prize.
cyclown on April 6, 2010 at 10:03 AM
How can the price be different?
Market flexibility, perhaps? Working out that formmula to determine just what the best price is so you can still make money, get more customers and not go into the red.
The two parts of gasoline are: raw material and refined goods.
We are one of the Nations actually shipping out raw material for overseas refining, as we haven’t built a new refinery in decades. My proposal has always been: use ‘superfund sites’ that can’t be cleaned up for refining. The places are already toxic dumps, right? Everyone will need safety gear for a refinery… and no one has the money to actually clean the places up. Meet State and local pollution laws for emissions and run-off and I’m sure you can find a few places in the US for this. They aren’t ‘pristine’ sites to start with and a few are pretty isolated.
But that would be pragmatic management of US resources to the benefit of the Nation. Can’t have that!
ajacksonian on April 6, 2010 at 10:05 AM
Distribution costs seem to be the issue. I’m no expert, but I guess Chicago gets its gas from Dallas (anyone?), and that distance adds quite a bit to wholesale prices.
But go 10 miles east into Indiana, and event the tollroad stations are selling regular unleaded at $2.79 – 30 cents cheaper.
Jaibones on April 6, 2010 at 10:16 AM
It is the Regulatory Commission per that State. I am sure IL and Chicago tac the crap out of your gas and no one has a clue they are doing it.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 10:20 AM
I don’t get to work by snail darters and spotted owls.
daesleeper on April 6, 2010 at 10:25 AM
I work in SChererville, IN and live in Frankfort, IL, so I cross the border almost everyday of the week. Currently, IN gas prices are nearly the same as those in Will county. What I have found is that when the IL gas formulations change due to evnironmental laws, that probably happened int he last six weeks, is when the biggest gap between IL and IN prices exists. IN does not have to go through changes in gas formulation that the Chicago area does.
I was told by a friend, and I cannot confirm, that Chicago’s gas is brewed every six weeks or so since our formulation is different than the whole surrounding area. This jives with the trend I see where IN and IL prices separate rapidly and then gradually meet withing a few cents after a couple weeks.
WashJeff on April 6, 2010 at 10:26 AM
The city and Crook county do have higher taxes than IN, otherwise the state of IL is almost that same as IN.
WashJeff on April 6, 2010 at 10:27 AM
Wash, go to the States (both) websites and look up both Regulatory Commissions. Email or call and ask them for the Tax structure amounts on the gas and diesel and even the natural gas as well as what additives they put in for each State. Most major Cities have their own Reg Commission as well. Something to do if you are curious…. use a FOIA as it helps the process.
upinak on April 6, 2010 at 10:30 AM
The problem is that the EPA has been empowered as a sovereign authority to rule by fiat and do what it wishes to advance an ideological agenda under the guise of protecting us.
There are no limits. The firewalls have been breached by this President and Congress. The shackles of the Constitution by which our government was constrained lay in a heap on the floor. We are now a country of men and not laws. The EPA can now begin wielding its authority to control the means of production, energy use and whatever else it wishes as a regulatory authority with the explicit mission of counting, regulating and taxing Co2 emissions. Scary stuff.
Along with a VAT tax, we will likely have to start paying a carbon tax on goods and services in the near future.
R Square on April 6, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Harder question to answer than just a few years ago but there used to be several refineries in Indiana and I seem to recall a few in Illinois along the Mississippi.
Refineries are running at and beyond full capacity and must make more than just gasoline and more than one type of gasoline. The EPA and several states demand, by law, that some areas must have lower emission fuels and this too affects price.
For state and local governments, gasoline tax is a cash cow. Not to mention federal tax. It makes things really fun along the boarders.
cozmo on April 6, 2010 at 10:35 AM
Branch Rickey on April 6, 2010 at 10:41 AM
Good Grief Ed!
I cannot believe you’ve bought in to the “Obama OPENED areas for exploration” horsecrap.
Look behind the curtain from the spin, and what he actually did was RESTRICT and REDUCE the total area available for exploration, including some of the most promising areas (can you say ‘Destin Dome’?) out there.
Recall the mantra – Skippy is lying to us. Fact check even his punctuation marks.. Repeat as necessary.
Wind Rider on April 6, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Both Gallup and Ed are using a straw man to pervert the discussion. It is not a question of energy or environment: it is a question of whether carbon dioxide is changing the climate. Many people including many scientists in relevant fields have disputed this for more than the ten years that Gallup has clouded the discussion. The so called deniers have had the better of the argument but have not prevailed because of the billions of dollars and megaphones that governments have provided the AGW crowd.
burt on April 6, 2010 at 11:07 AM
Ed: Can’t believe you bought into this BS…you’re ususally better at analyzing these things.
Obama SAID that he’s opening up areas for EXPLORATION…NOT DRILLING!!! Meanwhile, as Wind Rider points out above, the actual area open is really REDUCED. Actual prospects for domestic oil production are thus GREATLY DIMINISHED!!!
This is kind of like when his “building more nuclear plants” BS was accompanied by a tightening of licensing regulations (so you could BUILD them…but not OPERATE them), and the closing of the only nuclear waste disposal site.
NEXT: Watch for Obama to try to use the West Virginai coal mine explosion as an excuse to begin shutting down coal production.
Obama and his ilk won’t be happy until all US energy production is completely shut down and we’re living in dark caves which we’re forced to rent from the government.
landlines on April 6, 2010 at 11:15 AM
Remember to always watch what Obama does, NOT what he says.
jukin on April 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM
I”m sure the GOP will capitalize on this recent data.
Mr. Arrogant on April 6, 2010 at 11:45 AM
He did not decide to drill. He decided to talk about it so people like you think he will allow it. Do you actually believe Mr. Hanky is serious about domestic oil production?
SKYFOX on April 6, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Funny that Gallup didn’t mention the margin in favor of energy production THIS year, while they mentioned the 58% to 34% margin for the environment from 3 years ago.
From the Gallup link, the margin for energy production is 50% to 43%, meaning that 15-16% of the population changed their minds over the last 3 years.
Obama: (closes eyes and inserts fingers in ears) Gee, wouldn’t it be a great idea to impose carbon dioxide taxes? The American people want us to stop the seas from rising, just like we stopped health care costs from rising!
Lalalalalalalala…
Steve Z on April 6, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Crude prices are one contributing factor to the prices of gasoline, jet fuel, diesel fuel, home heating oil, and other refined products, but refineries are another. We will need to import crude oil for years to come, no matter how much we drill, but there is NO EXCUSE for importing refined producsts.
We need MORE refineries, but let’s get the EPA out of the way and build them!
Government loves to demonize greedy big bad EEEEEEEVIL oil companies, but new refineries on American soil will provide thousands of jobs to American workers!
If refineries try to run at rated capacity all year to meet demand without scheduled down-time for maintenance, guess what happens! Corrosion and cracks in pressure vessels go undetected, something goes KABOOM one day and X number of refinery workers are killed or maimed, and government demonizes the oil companies again!
But the real problem is the NIMBY-pamby government that won’t allow much-needed new refineries to be built because of too-stringent EPA regulations. More capacity means more supply, lower gasoline and heating oil prices, AND enough downtime for scheduled maintenance to protect the refinery workers. When will government GET IT ???
Steve Z on April 6, 2010 at 12:55 PM
Conventinal wisdom was that it was the Iraq War that had angered the American public in 2008, setting up the big democratic gains. No one mentions the price of gas. My recollection was that during the Spring and Summer, it was over $4/gallon. Then after the economic collapse in Sept, gas prices began to fall. How many Americans had to pay $4 a gallon, vs how many Americans knew someone fighting in Iraq? Nearly everyone has to drive to work, thus an increase in gas prices is like a tax increase – out of our control! It will go up this summer – it’s just a question of how high!
humdinger on April 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM
I hope not, but…
This administration has been shutting down surface coal production since their first month in office via denial of permit renewals and other administrative hurdles thrown in the way of producers.
I fear the demagogue-in-chief will use this tragedy to go after the deep mines as well.
I’m still waiting for those magic green jobs to whisk us away to fairyland.
hillbillyjim on April 6, 2010 at 3:48 PM
So when does she start getting all the credit due her. First, the a majority in the US identify themselves as pro-life and now this. Can’t we have politicians stand up and give credite where credit is due? It is getting to be ridiculous as everyone dances around the issue instead of just coming out and saying “It is Palin. She is driving this. She is owed lots of credit and she is doing a great job when not a lot of others are dodging and running.”
Dan Pet on April 6, 2010 at 5:38 PM
3.20 to 3.40 in California home to the rich illegals and failing governments
Obamatrix on April 6, 2010 at 8:37 PM