Donate Newsletters
Home » Climate + Energy » Oregonians Want Solutions on Climate

Oregonians Want Solutions on Climate

SwatchJunkies

February 6, 2018

Lawmakers in Oregon are poised to decide on the Oregon Clean Energy Jobs Bill, a move to either fulfill long-held global warming commitments or press pause yet again. Policymakers might get cold feet; the usual corporate stall tactics are rolling in. But what do people in Oregon think?

Oregon is a state often divided by urban-rural, partisan, and bigger geographical lines (take opinions on sanctuary cities, DACA, and healthcare). But on climate change, Oregonians look to be unified behind solutions. Opinion modeling by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication shows that 76 percent of Oregonians want to see CO2 regulated as a pollutant, including 60 percent of Oregon Republicans. And a recent statewide survey found that Oregon voters support a cap-and-invest program, like the legislation under consideration, by a three-to-one ratio.

72% of @PortlandGeneral customers support the goal of generating 100% of #Oregon’s electricity from #renewables by 2030.
Tweet This

Portland General Electric (PGE) has voiced opposition to the legislation, so it’s worth looking at PGE customer attitudes more specifically. And it looks like PGE customers would prefer PGE live up to its promises rather than put up roadblocks. One statewide survey* last summer found that:

  • 68 percent of PGE customers said it’s important to them (either “extremely” or “very” important) that their electric utility “provides power produced from clean, renewable sources.”
  • A majority of Oregonians (57 percent) said they “would prefer to pay a little bit more to ensure that more of my electricity is coming from clean, renewable sources like solar, wind, and hydroelectricity” vs. 35 percent who said they “would prefer to keep paying the same rates for electricity, even if it means I won’t receive more electricity from clean, renewable sources.” (The remaining share was undecided.)

Another recent survey found:

  • 72 percent of Oregonians who are PGE customers support (54 percent “strongly”) the goal of Oregon generating 100 percent of its electricity using clean, renewable sources like wind, solar, and hydropower by 2030. Only 21 percent were opposed.
  • The same share—72 percent (47 percent “strongly”)—say they support requiring all new sources for generating electricity to be clean and renewable as a means to increase Oregon’s use of renewable energy and reduce its use of natural gas to generate electricity. Twenty-two percent were opposed to this idea.

On climate questions more broadly, it’s fair to say there are partisan and geographical differences. But taking a look again at Yale’s climate opinion maps (a statistical model that aggregates scores—and several years’ worth—of national and local public opinion polls and can estimate state, congressional district, and county attitudes with around 95 percent confidence), we see that in every county across Oregon, sizable majorities want CO2 regulated as a pollutant. Morrow County shows the lowest level of support, but it still stands at 64 percent. Every other county shows support closer to 70 percent, with a few above 80 percent.

In *every* county across #Oregon, sizable majorities want CO2 regulated as a pollutant. #orleg #ActOnClimate
Tweet This

And the pattern holds in each Congressional district. On the east side of the state, in District 2, 71 percent of voters favor regulating CO2 as a pollutant. Along the coast, support is high: in District 4 it’s 75 percent (Oregon’s southwest corner); in District 1 it’s 76 percent; and in District 5 it’s 74 percent. In District 3, which includes most of Portland, support bumps to fully 81 percent. Support does drop among conservative voters, but still, majorities of Oregon Republicanswith numbers hovering just above or below 60 percent—in each of Oregon’s Congressional districts support regulating CO2 pollution.

The statewide survey referenced above, conducted by PolicyInteractive, reaffirms these numbers. Overall, 77 percent of Oregonians say there’s solid evidence global warming is happening (with less than a quarter still citing “natural causes” over “human”), with only 4 percent saying it’s a “hoax.”

Oregonians are seeing climate impacts close to home, and their views are changing accordingly. Nearly 8 in 10 (78 percent) agree that Oregon’s shrinking glaciers and decreasing snowpack are caused by climate change. Slightly lower but strong majorities say climate change worsens hurricanes and forest fires.  

As PolicyInteractive’s Tom Bowerman points out, “Oregon voters support climate action now at a 5:1 ratio.” In a forced choice, 77 percent chose the statement “Climate change requires us to change our way of life such as driving less or living more simply” as opposed to just 14 percent who chose “If climate change becomes a problem we can deal with it later.” Only 9 percent were undecided.

As mentioned, 61 percent of Oregon voters support a cap-and-trade program similar to those enacted by California and Canadian provinces—and similar to the legislation on the table in Salem. Eighteen percent say they are opposed to such a measure, and 22 percent were undecided. Again, political party differences shape responses on this question: 80 percent of Democrats favor a cap-and-trade policy; Republicans were split, with 35 percent support and 38 percent opposition; 50 percent of non-affiliated or third party voters support it. There is a preference for reinvesting cap-and-trade revenue to cut pollution over refunding the money to taxpayers.

Oregonians across the political spectrum and across the map may not see eye to eye on all the issues of the day, but on climate change, Oregon voters’ values—including those of PGE’s customers specifically—are clear as day.

*These polls have not been publicized, but the organizations that commissioned them agreed to share some of their findings for this article.

 

Talk to the Author

SwatchJunkies

Talk to the Author

Anna Fahey

Anna Fahey, Principal Director of Strategy, leads Sightline Institute's communications, marketing, and messaging strategies; coordinates the organization’s cross-cutting legislative campaigns; and serves on Sightline’s executive team.

About Sightline

Sightline Institute is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit think tank providing leading original analysis of democracy, forests, energy, and housing policy in the Pacific Northwest, Alaska, British Columbia, and beyond.

5 thoughts on “Oregonians Want Solutions on Climate”

  1. Too bad this report doesn’t provide separate data for Pacific Power customers since Pacificorp has a far greater mix of coal generation than PGE. Still, it’s hopeful.

  2. What do you mean by “solutions”? Doesn’t that imply that we have a problem?

    There is nothing unusual about today’s climate:
    It has been warmer before
    It has been cooler before
    There were more storms previously
    There were less storms previously
    The rate of change of temperature has been faster in the past.
    Same for droughts & floods
    Same for all the other crap the alarm industry claims.
    Therefore there is noting to worry about & nothing to explain with CO2
    Same for all the other lies the trillion dollar climate alarm industry spreads.

    If that is not enough evidence then:
    CO2 FOLLOWS TEMPERATURE and thus cannot be the cause of temperature changes.

    You need more evidence:
    CO2 went up from 1945(?) to 1970 as temperature declined.
    CO2 went up even more from 1995 to present as temperature was stable.
    Arctic warmed MORE in the early 1900s and faster than it did in the late 1990s which had much more CO2.
    What do you mean by “solutions”? Doesn’t that imply that we have a problem?

    There is nothing unusual about today’s climate:
    It has been warmer before
    It has been cooler before
    There were more storms previously
    There were less storms previously
    The rate of change of temperature has been faster in the past.
    Same for droughts & floods
    Same for all the other crap the alarm industry claims.
    Therefore there is noting to worry about & nothing to explain with CO2
    Same for all the other lies the trillion dollar climate alarm industry spreads.

    If that is not enough evidence then:
    CO2 FOLLOWS TEMPERATURE and thus cannot be the cause of temperature changes.

    You need more evidence:
    CO2 went up from 1945(?) to 1970 as temperature declined.
    CO2 went up even more from 1995 to present as temperature was stable.
    Arctic warmed MORE in the early 1900s and faster than it did in the late 1990s which had much more CO2.
    “DebunkingClimate.com”

Comments are closed.

For press inquiries and interview requests, please contact Martina Pansze.

Sightline Institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization and does not support, endorse, or oppose any candidate or political party.

You can power us forward on sustainable solutions.

See an error? Have a question?

Find the author's contact information on our staff page to reach out to them, or send a message to editor@sightline.org.

Privacy Overview
Sightline Institute

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognizing you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

3rd Party Cookies

This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.

Additional Cookies

This website uses social media to collect anonymous information such as which platform are our users coming from.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us better reach our audiences.