logo
Support for renewables shrinks as fossil fuel interest grows

Support for renewables shrinks as fossil fuel interest grows

Miami Herald20-06-2025
Support for renewables shrinks as fossil fuel interest grows
Republicans and Democrats alike are less likely to support renewable energy than they were five years ago, according to a survey released June 5 by the Pew Research Center. Floodlight examines the survey results, which mirror growing pockets of opposition to solar farms, reignited political support for coal plants and moves by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans to kill federally funded clean energy projects.
This shift in opinion dates back to when Democratic President Joe Biden took office, said Brian Kennedy, Pew senior researcher and one of the study's authors. "This isn't a new trend," he said.
Still, Kenneth Gillingham, professor of environmental and energy economics at the Yale School of the Environment, was surprised.
"I see this shift … as a successful effort to link climate change and renewable energy to broader culture war issues," Gillingham said. He added that in the past, "prominent" Republicans supported renewables and sought solutions to climate change, but those stances could now be seen as "disloyal" to Trump.
The survey of 5,085 U.S. adults taken April 28 to May 4 revealed that while 79% of Americans favored expanding wind and solar production in 2020, that number has dropped to 60%. And 39% of Americans today support expansion of oil, coal and natural gas - almost double the 20% that supported it in 2020.
Combustion of fossil fuels - in transportation, energy generation and industrial production - is the No. 1 cause of climate change.
Much of the change in opinion is driven by Republicans, whose support of oil and gas grew from 35% in 2020 to 67% today. But Democrats also indicated less support for renewable energy and more for fossil fuels than five years ago.
While many results reflect Trump's policies opposing most renewables and boosting fossil fuels, Pew found a few notable exceptions: 69% of all respondents favor offshore wind - a technology Trump has specifically targeted.
Both Democrats and Republicans indicated stronger support for nuclear power, with Republicans' favorable opinions increasing from 53% in 2020 to 69% in 2025. Democrats' support rose from 37% to 52%. The Trump administration has signaled support for a nuclear renaissance, despite its high cost.
There were wide partisan splits on several topics. In March, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced it would scale back environmental regulations. Pew asked whether it was possible to do that and still protect air and water quality: 77% of Republicans said yes and 67% of Democrats said no.
Pew didn't ask the respondents why their attitudes have shifted. But Kennedy said in Pew's past surveys, Republicans have expressed concern about the economic impacts of climate change policies and transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources.
Mike Murphy, a Republican consultant and electric vehicle backer, said when the environmental benefits of clean technologies are touted, it polarizes Republicans. Instead, Murphy said messages should be about pocketbook issues - like lower fuel costs - and jobs.
"It's hard for pro-climate people to understand," said Murphy, who has advised dozens of state and national GOP campaigns including John McCain's 2008 presidential bid. "(They think) we just need to shout louder and hit people over the head about climate, climate, climate. The key is you want to talk about jobs and national security and other events that naturally resonate a lot more with right-of-center people."
That's what Murphy's groups, the EV Politics Project and the American EV Jobs Alliance, are trying to do to depoliticize electric vehicles. "Whenever electric cars are seen through a climate lens," Murphy said, "their appeal narrows."
It's a strategy also being used by the Electrification Coalition, a left-of-center pro-EV group. Ben Prochazka, the coalition's executive director, echoed Murphy's strategy, adding that EVs have "become overly politicized and caught in the culture wars, impacting markets and ultimately hurting our ability to realize their many benefits for all Americans."
Prochazka noted that once introduced to EVs, consumers support them: "EV drivers love their vehicles, with more than eight out of ten reporting that their next car will also be electric."
Perhaps those practical messages are getting through. In the Pew survey, electric vehicles were the one item that saw an uptick in support - 4 percentage points in the past year.
But popular support might not be enough to stop Congress from killing a $7,500 electric vehicle credit, which Murphy said would be "policy disaster."
Republicans, he said, are in a "real squeeze," because "they don't have enough money for the tax cuts the president has promised."
Murphy said: "It's easier for Republicans to cut Biden electric cars … than it is for them to cut more Medicaid."
Gillingham is still optimistic that solar, wind and other greenhouse gas-reducing technologies will move forward - because they are the cheapest.
"The continued decline in the price of renewable energy and battery technologies, as well as other new technologies, is a reason to continue to have hope that the worst impacts of climate change can be addressed," he said.
Published by Canary Media, Renewable Energy World
Floodlight is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powers stalling climate action.
This story was produced by Floodlight and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.
© Stacker Media, LLC.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Oh no! Hypocritical celebrities abandon US, blaming Trump. What will we do now?
Oh no! Hypocritical celebrities abandon US, blaming Trump. What will we do now?

USA Today

time18 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Oh no! Hypocritical celebrities abandon US, blaming Trump. What will we do now?

If celebrities, or anyone else, want to flee the US because a Republican is president, by all means, good riddance. I've never been so mad at a political party or a politician that I felt like leaving my country. I love America too much to even consider it. But a slew of celebrities have done that. Late night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel just announced during an appearance on the "The Sarah Silverman Podcast" on Aug. 7 that he obtained Italian citizenship. Kimmel alluded that President Donald Trump and the political climate he's created were contributing factors. It's not clear if Kimmel plans to move to Italy full time. "What's going on is as bad as you thought it was going to be," Kimmel said to Silverman during the podcast. "Way worse," Silverman said. "It's so much worse. It's just unbelievable," Kimmel said about America's political climate. "Like I feel like it's probably even worse than he would like it to be." Kimmel joins other celebrities who fled America and blame Trump Kimmel joins several high-profile celebrities who have sought refuge elsewhere because of Trump. It's a fascinating example of how self-aggrandizement, celebrity and perception do not always equate to reality, common sense and gratitude. If anything, it fuels hypocrisy. People magazine reported in 2024 that the comedian and former daytime talk show host Ellen DeGeneres and her wife, Portia de Rossi, had moved to England. DeGeneres confirmed in July that Trump's return to the White House prompted her move across the Atlantic. In March, comedian Rosie O'Donnell announced in a TikTok video that she moved to Ireland with her child. She's working on obtaining Irish citizenship. In the video, she said she moved because she didn't think she'd have equal rights under Trump. If these celebrities' ties to our nation were so weak that they could be severed because Americans elected a Republican president, how much did they care about the United States to begin with? Were they ever really freedom-loving Americans? Subscribe to my newsletterhere and get exclusive access to columns like this one – before anyone else Celebrities who abandon the US are hypocrites Celebrities are often hypocritical when it comes to their real lives, political beliefs and their careers. They'll claim they're anti-gun but make films with jarring violence and hire armed security for themselves. They'll tell other Americans how to vote − and it's mostly for Democrats − but live a lifestyle free of the economic and financial pressures that regular Americans face. Celebrities such as Miley Cyrus, Amy Schumer, Cher and Whoopi Goldberg threatened to leave America if Trump got elected in 2016, but they are still here. Perhaps they at least realize how silly it is to abandon their country because millions of their fellow citizens democratically elected a Republican into office. Perhaps they realized how hypocritical it was to live a life of luxury, thanks to America's free market principles, and then spit in its face because an election didn't go the way they wanted. When O'Donnell says she fled to Ireland out of fear that Americans like her would lose their rights, what does that really mean? Trump has signed no executive orders and Congress has passed no laws that strip any Americans of their fundamental rights. Federal anti-discrimination laws remain in place to protect all Americans, including the LGBTQ+ community. It's strange for someone like Kimmel, with a reported net worth of about $50 million, to flee the United States because of a supposedly difficult political environment. He still has a platform on network TV to ridicule Trump and other conservatives who don't support Kimmel's ultraprogressive opinions. Trump, meanwhile, is doing what 77 million voters said they wanted in November. He's secured the southern border, brought illegal immigration under control, bolstered the economy and is working to secure peace in the Middle East and Ukraine. If celebrities, or anyone else, want to flee the United States because a Republican is president, by all means, good riddance. If they can't appreciate the country that paved the way for their wealth and fame, and they want to believe they are victims of a difficult political climate, they deserve to wallow in their hypocrisy in a country that is a distant second to America's greatness. Nicole Russell is a columnist at USA TODAY and a mother of four who lives in Texas. Contact her at nrussell@ and follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @russell_nm. Sign up for her weekly newsletter, The Right Track, here.

The unusual GOP alliance pushing earmarks in this fall's funding fight
The unusual GOP alliance pushing earmarks in this fall's funding fight

Politico

time20 minutes ago

  • Politico

The unusual GOP alliance pushing earmarks in this fall's funding fight

Conversations around government funding are ongoing. But so far, signs point to earmarks being one of the most viable pathways for breaking the impasse. It's a sweetener leaders can use to satisfy holdouts who want to be able to deliver wins for their districts — and represents a compromise for hard-liners like Harris who think this arrangement might present the best possible outcome for members who want to spend as little money as possible. Harris, who is also chair of the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Department of Agriculture and FDA, has floated the year-long, flat-funded spending bill that contains earmarks — but paired with the guarantee that Congress will also pass several more rescissions packages to claw back funds already appropriated by Congress. He also wants the White House to send over a major package of pocket rescissions that would unilaterally cancel tens of billions of dollars. Unlike with a typical rescissions bill, where Congress has 45 days to pass it before the administration is forced to spend the money as lawmakers originally intended, a pocket rescissions measure is transmitted to Capitol Hill with 45 or fewer days left until the end of the current fiscal year — and if Congress doesn't take any action by that deadline, the money is considered revoked. There's no certainty Congress can even pass a second rescissions request, while legal experts and the federal government's top watchdog have questioned the legality of the pocket rescissions process. But the pitch could be appealing to even the likes of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who is chair of a House Oversight subcommittee tasked with identifying government waste. She said in a social media post earlier this month she was uninterested in 'another CR that will leave out much needed appropriation requests that benefit our districts.' 'Funding to support critical infrastructure projects like water, roads, and community projects will AGAIN be left not funded,' she said of a government spending bill without earmarks. Greene's position signals a critical opening for proponents of earmarks — and something of a change of tune for Republicans.

Donald Trump's Approval Rating Surges After Putin Summit
Donald Trump's Approval Rating Surges After Putin Summit

Newsweek

time20 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Donald Trump's Approval Rating Surges After Putin Summit

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. U.S. President Donald Trump's approval rating surged after his summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. According to polling by InsiderAdvantage, 54 percent of voters said they now approved of the president while 44 percent disapproved. Trump's net +10 percent approval rating is an increase from the publication's last poll in July, which gave him a net +2 percent approval rating—with 50 percent of respondents approving and 48 percent disapproving. Why It Matters Approval ratings are useful in providing a snapshot of the electorate's response to key policies and developments in Trump's presidency. During his presidency, Trump's popularity has fluctuated. Maintaining broad support will be important for the president and the Republican Party more widely, particularly when voters head to the polls for the November 2026 midterms. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump talk at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on August 15. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump talk at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on August 15. AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson What To Know Trump hosted Putin in Alaska for a summit on Friday during which they spoke for two and a half hours to try to broker a ceasefire deal to end Russia's war with Ukraine. Critics have said Trump conceded too much to Putin and took umbrage with the talks ending without an agreement. Despite this, the new polling indicates the talks have boosted Trump's approval rating. InsiderAdvantage's survey was conducted between August 15 and 17. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.09 percentage points. The poll also suggests Trump is faring better than in other recent polls, which showed declining support for the president. According to a YouGov poll for British newspaper The Times, the proportion of people who disapproved of Trump's job performance increased from 52 percent in April to 57 percent in July. Newsweek analysis also found that Trump's approval rating was positive in 18 of the states he won in the 2024 election and negative in 13. What People Are Saying InsiderAdvantage pollster Matt Towery said in his analysis: "Donald Trump now has an advantage among every age group other than the most senior of voters. He has improved his numbers among African-Americans and Hispanic-Latinos. White voters are at a near record 64 percent. Voters under 65 years of age now approve of his job performance by wide margins. Only the nation's oldest voters disapprove of his job performance, which is consistent with our prior surveys. Overall, his approval numbers are surging upwards post-summit." U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social after the summit: "The Fake News has been saying for three days that I suffered a 'major defeat' by allowing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to have a major Summit in the United States. Actually, he would have loved doing the meeting anywhere else but the U.S., and the Fake News knows this. It was a major point of contention! If we had the Summit elsewhere, the Democrat run and controlled media would have said what a terrible thing THAT was. These people are sick!" What Happens Next Trump's popularity is likely to continue oscillating throughout the remainder of his presidency. Meanwhile, he has discussed plans to secure a trilateral meeting with Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. He is also meeting with European leaders, including Zelensky, at the White House on Monday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store