HART

RESEARCH
AS SOC I AT ES

Energy And Climate

Change Policy
A Survey among American Voters
Conducted September 2009 for
 Methodology

u Telephone survey among 1,002 registered voters

u Survey dates August 24 – 31, 2009

u Margin of error = ±3.0 percentage points overall

2 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters See Need For Significant
Changes To U.S. Energy Policy
Assessment of America’s Energy Policy

Need complete Majorities Across Party

Not overhaul and Region Agree
No need sure
for change 4% 19% Complete
overhaul/
4% major reform
Democrats 76%
Need minor 66% Independent 62%
reform SIGNIFICANT Republicans 55%
REFORM
26%
Northeast 74%
South 66%
Midwest 54%
West 71%
47%
Need major
reform

3 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters’ Priorities for Energy Reform
What should be Congress’ priorities for an energy proposal to reduce
carbon emissions and increase use of alternative & renewable sources?
Highest priority Second highest priority

Development/use of 50% Dem

renewables/alternatives 24% 41% 30% GOP
Minimize new govern- 20% 32%
13% Dem
ment bureaucracy 55% GOP

Minimize negative impact 14% 30%

on jobs/job creation
Minimize any new taxes 12% 28%
Promote new green
energy jobs 12% 26%
Reduce carbon emissions
linked with climate change 10% 21%
Minimize costs to
consumers/electric rates 7% 19%

4 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Strong Support For Reducing Carbon
Emissions/Expanding Renewables
Would you favor or oppose an energy proposal to significantly
reduce carbon emissions that contribute to climate change and
increase the use of alternative and renewable energy sources?
Not Majorities Across Party
sure and Region Agree
Strongly
Strongly 6% favor Strongly/
oppose somewhat
49% favor
12%
Democrats 91%
Independent 67%
Somewhat Republicans 59%
oppose 74%
8% FAVOR Northeast 82%
South 71%
Midwest 72%
West 74%
25%
Somewhat
favor
5 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters’ Current (Unaided) View of
“Cap and Trade”
Knowledge of “Cap and Trade” Attitude toward “Cap and Trade”

61%
58%

29%
24% Have not
heard of
14% DK name/
35% 13% not sure
Very
negative 27%
A lot
19%
9% Very 2%
A lot/fair Just Very little/ Positive Negative Neutral/
amount some not heard of not sure
6 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters Informed Reaction To
“Cap And Trade”
“The plan sets an overall limit or "cap"
on the amount of carbon dioxide Not
emissions that U.S. companies could Strongly
produce with higher limits phased in
sure favor
over time. For example, one specific 8% 14%
cap and trade proposal would reduce
carbon emissions 17% by the year Strongly
2020 and 80% by the year 2050. oppose 46%
30% FAVOR
The federal government would auction
or issue permits that allow companies
to emit carbon dioxide up to the 46%
amount set by the cap. Companies OPPOSE
that produce or emit less than their 32%
allowance could sell or trade their
unused emissions permits to com- Somewhat
panies that go over their allowance. favor
The idea would be to create a market-
16%
based system that allows companies Somewhat
to decide how best to deal with the cap oppose
set on their carbon emissions.”

7 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters’ Current (Unaided) View Of Fee
On Carbon Usage Or “Carbon Tax”
Knowledge of “Carbon Tax” Attitude toward “Carbon Tax”

57%

46%
36%

26%
Have not 18%
16% heard of DK name/
31% Very not sure
negative
A lot 23%
21%
8% Very 4%
A lot/fair Just Very little/ Positive Negative Neutral/
amount some not heard of not sure
8 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters Informed Reaction To
“Carbon Tax”
“This plan would put a tax on carbon Not
emissions so that the cost of carbon sure Strongly
pollution is reflected in the price of 6% favor
energy. While there would not be a Strongly
specific cap or limit on carbon oppose 26%
emissions, the tax would be set at a 23%
level so that it acts as an incentive for
companies to reduce their carbon 57%
emissions, improve the efficiency of 37% FAVOR
fossil fuel use, and also develop new OPPOSE
technologies and alternative energies.

A carbon tax approach also would

create incentives for consumers to use 14%
energy more efficiently. Individuals
and households would receive tax Somewhat
oppose 31%
refunds to offset the impact of the Somewhat
carbon tax.”
favor

9 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Voters’ Support Carbon Tax Over
Cap & Trade By Strong Margin
Preferred Approach for Reducing Carbon Emissions

Neither/ Carbon tax

not sure (2%) favor strongly
15% 22%
Cap & trade
favor strongly
7%
27% 58%
Carbon Tax supporters
CAP & CARBON are also more committed
TRADE TAX in their view: 38% of
carbon tax supporters
20% describe their support as
Cap & trade strong; 26% of cap &
trade supporters say the
not strongly 36% same.
Carbon tax
not strongly

10 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Preference For Carbon Tax Approach
Overwhelming Among All Key Groups
Differential: Favor Carbon Tax minus Favor Cap & Trade

All voters +31

Democrats +36 Under $40K income +38
Independents +35 $40K to $60K income +29
Republicans +20 Over $60K income +28
Obama voters +37 Strong environmentalists +45
McCain voters +21 Moderate environmentalists +34
Non-environmentalists +15
Northeast +25
South +41 Most aware +33
Midwest +20 Moderately aware +32
West +28 Least aware +28

11 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Perceived Benefits Of Cap & Trade
Over Carbon Tax
% saying each is very/fairly convincing argument for cap & trade approach
55% Recession/high unemployment make this the wrong time to pass new,
across-the-board tax on businesses and consumers (40% very convincing)
44% Carbon tax requires all U.S. companies pay same tax, no flexibility for
impact on local/regional companies; cap & trade has permit flexibility (21%)
42% Cap & trade model used successfully in U.S. in 1990s to limit sulfur
dioxide emissions and dramatically reduce acid rain levels (22%)
40% Cap & trade sets clear limit on carbon emissions, specific benchmarks &
timetables; carbon tax doesn’t guarantee companies will reduce emis-
sions rather than pay tax, so environmental impact much less certain (18%)
36% Carbon tax triggers immediate cost increase to businesses/households;
have to be paid before any rebates or refunds provided (21%)
36% Bipartisan support for cap & trade, so more likely to pass; President, Sen-
ator McCain, key Dem & GOP Congressional leaders support (18%)

12 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Perceived Benefits Of Carbon Tax
Over Cap & Trade
% saying each is very/fairly convincing argument for carbon tax approach
56% Simple market-based incentive for business; cap & trade has no direct
incentive to change behavior, big polluters can buy out (35% very convincing)
53% Simple, transparent, implement quickly, little bureaucracy/admin costs; cap
& trade is complex, vast bureaucracy, vulnerable to special interests (34%)
52% Cap & trade sets new standards over long time for business/individuals to
react, not effective with urgency of problem; EU cap & trade since 2005, so
far not lower carbon emissions (31%)
49% Cap & trade creates commodities market for emissions, Wall Street banks
control trading/pricing, mismanagement/price instability; carbon tax steady,
preset, transparent tax, promotes stable/predictable prices (30%)
46% Carbon tax has steady revenue stream, built-in funding for important
rebates/tax credits to business/households, alternatives/renewables (24%)
43% Carbon tax has no impact on US GDP over 20 years, minimal impact on
jobs/inflation; cap & trade cuts GDP $350B over 20 yrs, 2.5M jobs (25%)
42% Both raise energy costs, but carbon tax is rebated to consumer without
minimizing enviro benefits/promotion of renewables; cap & trade sacri-
fices enviro benefits to reduce economic impact (22%)
13 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Best Approach For U.S. Economy
With which argument do you agree more?
Carbon Tax supporters: Unlike Neither/ Carbon tax
cap & trade that will create rapid not sure (3%) strongly agree
changes and uncertainty in energy
prices, a carbon tax establishes a 16% 22%
steady, preset, transparent tax on Cap & trade
carbon emissions, which promotes strongly agree
stable and predictable prices that
are better for American businesses 10% 53%
and consumers. 31% CARBON
Cap & Trade supporters: It is CAP & TAX
flexible, allows companies to de- TRADE
cide for themselves how to deal
with limits on their carbon emis-
sions, and can be adapted to take
into account the impact of the 21% 31%
emissions cap on certain industries
and regions. Especially in the Cap & trade Carbon tax
middle of a prolonged recession, a somewhat agree somewhat agree
carbon tax approach of imposing a
new, preset tax on business is a
bad idea.

14 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Best Approach For Reducing Carbon
Emissions/Protecting Environment
With which argument do you agree more?
Carbon Tax supporters: This is Neither/ Carbon tax
simple, straightforward, and easy not sure (3%) strongly agree
to administer without the loopholes 14%
that will make a cap and trade 23%
Cap & trade
approach ineffective.
strongly agree
Cap & Trade supporters: This 13%
sets a specific limit on overall 52%
34% CARBON
carbon emissions while establish-
CAP & TAX
ing specific benchmarks and
timetables that can be adapted to TRADE
scientific evidence, while a carbon
tax does not actually force or
guarantee that companies will
21% 29%
reduce their carbon emissions.
Cap & trade Carbon tax
somewhat agree somewhat agree

15 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for
 Credible Messengers
How much consideration would you give to the views of this person/
group in deciding between carbon tax and cap & trade approach?
Great deal of consideration Fair amount of consideration

Scientists 43% 71%

Wind power industry 28% 51%
Environmental leaders 26% 50%
Leading economists 15% 47%
Barack Obama 26% 46%
Al Gore 22% 39%
Coal industry 15% 34%
Oil industry 11% 24%
Members of Congress 6% 24%
Major corporations 9% 22%

16 Voters on Energy & Climate Change Policy – September 2009 – Hart Research for