Americans do NOT want to pull the plug on clean energy. While people take President Trump’s threat to repeal clean energy policies seriously, they do not want him to follow through. More than three in four (78%) Americans believe Trump when he says he will repeal policies that deal with climate change and will eliminate clean energy in the United States, including 39% who totally believe him. However, a solid majority (57%) say Donald Trump should NOT repeal climate change policies or cut clean energy investments. Opposition spans demographic groups, including majorities of Americans who in live contested CDs (60%) and independents nationally (58%). There is wide opposition to overturning specific climate and clean energy policies. When presented with simple, clear descriptions of Trump’s potential actions and their impacts, majorities of Americans want Congress to OPPOSE each one. Opposition is strong across the board, including more than six in 10 independents and voters in contested congressional districts. People see through President Trump’s energy agenda and recognize that it serves oil and gas CEOs, not them. By nearly 2:1, the public wants Congress to reject President Trump’s energy agenda.

In this episode, David talks with Matt Traldi, co-founder of Greenlight America, about the fight for clean energy at the local level. They discuss how small groups of opponents are successfully blocking renewable projects across the country, and how Matt’s organization is working to turn the tide by mobilizing local supporters and giving them the tools to advocate effectively at critical government meetings.

The electorate has a growing awareness of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and its energy efficiency and electrification incentives: 63% of respondents say they are somewhat or very interested in pursuing home electrification and efficiency upgrades. This includes 70% of Latino Americans, 66% of Black Americans, 60% of White Americans, and 58% of rural Americans. Additionally, voters report that the components of the IRA that make them more likely to support federal investments in clean energy and energy efficiency focus on potential cost savings from energy efficiency upgrades and the creation of new clean energy jobs. In addition to voters overall, majorities of voters across partisanship favor keeping various IRA incentives, rather than ending them. After reading that components of the IRA may face repeal by a new administration, voters say that losing household energy savings or economy-wide air quality improvement benefits are among the most concerning outcomes of IRA repeal.

If defending against Congressional efforts to revoke the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), call it a "repeal" of incentives that are lowering costs for Americans, not a "rollback". Poll testing indicates "repeal" generates more opposition. Positive statements about the IRA increase support, especially messages about the jobs and tax savings that have been created. Energy unreliability and air pollution/health impacts are the top reasons to keep the IRA. Even Majorities of Republicans want to keep IRA incentives. There is an overall strong belief that efficiency upgrades would be helpful, and belief in pro-clean energy statements is higher than opposition statements. There is, however, low awareness of local energy investments related to the IRA and low awareness of repeal efforts. Understanding of terminology varies: "Energy justice" & "Energy equity" are not well understood, while "energy efficiency" and "weatherization" are well understood by Americans. Regarding personal behaviors, cost savings are a key motivator of efficiency & electrification upgrades, while upfront costs and uncertainty about qualification are key barriers. Responses are broadly similar across race, though Black voters are slightly more concerned about certain impacts of IRA repeal, while rural voters tend to show slightly less support for IRA policies.

Since the passage of the IRA and CHIPS, billions of dollars in investments have been announced. Specifically, $388 billion of investments and 135,800 jobs have been announced. This resource shows where these investments have been announced in the U.S. It also lists the companies who have made announcements. Investments are shown by type: batteries, electric vehicles, solar, wind, and other. Most investments have been made in the Midwest and south.

In this episode, David Roberts chats with Ari Matusiak, co-founder and head of Rewiring America, which recently received a $2 billion grant from the feds to take home electrification mainstream. They dig into the practical challenges — getting local contractors on board, simplifying rebate access — and the enormous opportunities.

Voters overwhelmingly support government investment in clean infrastructure projects and don’t want funding to go to bad actors with histories of pollution. Around two-thirds of voters (67% support / 23% oppose) support investments in clean infrastructure projects such as solar and carbon capture after reading that the U.S. Department of Energy is awarding funding for these projects following the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These investments earn overwhelming support from Democrats (85%) and independents (69%), and are also supported by half of Republicans (50% support / 38% oppose). Large majorities of voters, including 79%+ of Democrats and 65%+ of Republicans, say that developers should be required to be in compliance with various laws in order to receive federal funding for clean infrastructure projects.

A hard-fought presidential campaign has yet to persuade majorities of voters that the president’s landmark spending initiatives have made their lives better. New polling found that fewer than 3 in 10 voters said President Joe Biden’s big legislative policy changes had improved their lives and communities. Voters’ attitudes about massive domestic spending initiatives have either barely budged or slightly dimmed since April, despite six more months of campaigning by both parties in the run-up to next week’s election. People were more likely than they were last spring to say they don’t know what effect the laws have had. Self-described political independents are significantly more bullish on the president’s climate law than they were six months ago, the survey found. And the number of voters who called the Biden-backed laws harmful was significantly lower than those who said the legislation had either benefited them or had a mixed impact: just 24% said the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has “positively” affected them, while 19% said it has had negative effects and 24% called it a mix.

Small, diffuse changes at the household and community level can complement big policy shifts towards emissions reductions. 42% of US energy-related emissions come from homes and vehicles. This resource featured a conversation between Kevin Green, Vice President for Rare’s Center for Behavior & the Environment and Sarah Lazarovic, Vice President of Communications and Creative Strategy at Rewiring America. “Of course, we need to rework huge policy interventions to make this feasible for people. But also as humans, there are many things that we not only can do, but have to do to make this happen,” according to Lazarovic. When she swapped out her gas furnace for a heat pump, she brought her household emissions down by 75%. Part of the confusion among Americans is that there are so many solutions presented to people, that many people begin to experience cognitive fatigue and choice overload.

Short videos can increase support for solar and wind energy. This research found an 8% increase in persuasion via videos on social media that showed clean energy improves the local economy. Persuasion was particularly effective for self-identified moderates compared to somewhat conservative or conservative participants. Political “moderates” supported expanding clean energy by an additional 22% compared to the control group (compared to -9% to -1% effect range for very conservatives). Persuasion was also particularly effective for people who did not support expanding clean energy in the pre-survey. Support for expanding clean energy increased by 19% for those who did not support it in the pre-survey (opposed or neutral). One month later, persuasion towards clean energy persisted only among people who were neutral in the pre-survey. All other effects had decayed away, demonstrating that continued, long-term exposure to messages is needed for persuasion to persist.