An overwhelming, bipartisan majority of voters (77%) believe that building more transmission is important for the U.S. When asked about overhead transmission lines being built in their community, more than a third of respondents (34%) have not heard enough to say, with the remainder of respondents split between a favorable opinion (30%) and an unfavorable opinion (36%). Unsurprisingly, underground lines are more favorable (52%) despite being cost prohibitive for developers to date, though 34% of voters still haven’t heard enough to say their opinions. 55% of voters say they would support a transmission line being built in their community. Support is slightly lower among Black (49%) voters, compared with white (57%) and Latino (66%) voters. A majority of respondents (60%) agree that new transmission would improve reliability, leading to fewer blackouts and outages. Most voters (58%) prefer a publicly owned and operated transmission system, compared with just 24% who support private ownership.

Pennsylvanians have mixed attitudes about fracking. Voters in the state overwhelmingly want stronger regulations on the industry, and around four in ten support phasing out fracking completely. Voters in the state are about three times as likely to have positive attitudes than negative attitudes about the clean energy industry (62% favorable / 21% unfavorable). Specific types of clean energy, including solar energy (80% favorable / 11% unfavorable) and wind energy (73% favorable / 16% unfavorable), are even more popular. Meanwhile, voters are closely divided in their attitudes about the oil and gas industry (45% favorable / 44% unfavorable). And while Pennsylvanians have overwhelmingly positive opinions about natural gas (75% favorable / 14% unfavorable), they are more split in their opinions about fracking (44% favorable / 37% unfavorable). More than four in ten voters (83%), including 71% of Republicans, support federal subsidies for clean energy development. Pennsylvanians are also far more supportive of the government spending taxpayer dollars on wind and solar development (84% support / 16% oppose) than on fracking and pipeline development (62% support / 38% oppose).

The campaign that ushered in ‘the end of coal in New England’ has its sights set on fossil fuel power plants and reclaiming energy democracy. Earlier this year, the No Coal No Gas (NCNG) campaign won its major campaign demand: to close the last big coal plant in New England. NCNG has reissued our three campaign goals — with an update to the third — as follows: 1) build unity and community; 2) show what is possible; and 3) shut down all fossil fuel plants in New England. Activists know that change doesn’t happen through electoral politics, letters to the editor and rallies alone. They also know that when a group of people march across a bridge or occupy the halls of power, there are even more people behind the scenes involved in endless planning, calling, writing, investigating, driving, feeding, painting, sewing, conflict-mediating and thinking together. This is why “building unity and community” has been the campaign’s number-one campaign goal all along.

This guide provides a landscape scan and needs assessment of the work being done at the intersection of climate and housing justice. While tremendous work is underway at the intersection of housing and climate justice, many challenges remain. This brief concludes with recommended investments in 1) technical assistance and research, 2) movement support, and 3) toolkits and popular education materials to unlock the potential of the work and ensure more healthy, stable, and resilient homes for EJ communities. This guide presents interviews with thirteen environmental justice (EJ) leaders, including three from “grasstops” organizations and ten from grassroots advocacy and coalition organizations, including two from the East Coast, one from the Midwest, five from the West Coast, one from the Mountain Region, and two from the South. EJ organizations are working on a wide range of programs and policies at the intersection of housing and climate justice, from working in coalitions to advocate for specific policies and programs to monitoring, outreach, and engagement around implementation. This brief highlights many examples of this work across the following categories: building decarbonization and healthy homes; accelerating energy transition and relieving energy burden; and neighborhood-level decarbonization and resilience.

This post includes climate and environment headlines, data points, and key takeaways from recent public polls - including new polling on polluter accountability and new polls of Black voters and young Americans.

Voters across party lines support the recently introduced Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act. Voters support the Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act by a 66%-24% margin after reading a brief description of it. The bill is supported by more than four in five Democrats (84%), three in five independents (62%), and half of Republicans (50%).

Most young Americans care about addressing climate change in their own lives and careers. While few have heard about the American Climate Corps, a large majority are interested in it after learning about it. Four in five Americans aged 18-26 (81%) agree that climate change poses a serious threat to our future – including large majorities of young liberals (92%), young moderates (81%), and young conservatives (67%). Around two-thirds of young Americans (67%) agree that they “want to take more personal actions to address climate change,” and most are attracted to the idea of having a job that allows them to contribute to the cause. Only around one-quarter of young Americans (27%) say that they’ve heard of the American Climate Corps, including just 4% who say that they’ve heard “a lot” about it. After reading about it, around seven in ten (69%) say that they’re interested in serving in the American Climate Corps – including 22% who are “very interested” in the program.

Water pollution is a common concern for Gen Z Americans, and around one-third worry that they will lack clean water and will need to move because of climate change. Majorities of Gen Zers say that they worry “some” or “a great deal” about each of the following: pollution of lakes, rivers and oceans – 72%, including 60% of voting-age Republicans; the health of fish and oceans – 66%, including 59% of voting-age Republicans; the availability of clean drinking water – 57%, including 39% of voting-age Republicans. Additionally, nearly three-quarters of Gen Z Americans (74%) – including 88% of voting-age Democrats and 65% of voting-age Republicans – agree that it’s “very important” to protect oceans, lakes, and rivers from pollution. Around one-third (31%) believe that their generation will “definitely” or “probably” not have enough clean water in the future to live, and 36% are at least “somewhat” concerned that they will have to move from their current town or city because of climate change.

Join Youth Climate Finance Alliance and the Climate Advocacy Lab where we’ll share more about our new “State of the US Youth Climate Movement” Report and Zine." We will review our research methodology, key findings, and how learnings are shaping our shifts in our programming and organizing strategy. With hopes to resource climate advocates to better contextualize the state of the domestic US youth climate movement and its challenges - to intergenerational allies, movement partners, as well as funder networks - we will highlight key case studies and have plenty of time to discuss and reflect You can view the full report (bit.ly/YCFAReport), as well as the zine at bit.ly/YCFAZine.

Reframe corporate climate messaging around materiality, not morality. There is strong support for companies reducing carbon pollution, investing in clean energy, and communicating about their efforts to do so. The key to appealing to the broadest set of stakeholders is to frame climate action around materiality– not morality. In other words, businesses invest in climate-related efforts not just because they’re good, but because they’re good for business. Investors and consumers alike believe clean energy technology will shape the future of the economy. The best way for businesses to broaden support without antagonizing skeptics is to frame corporate action through the financial materiality of climate-related risks and opportunities.