You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Seventy percent of Americans call it a serious problem.
Americans remain immensely concerned about climate change, with 70% calling it a serious problem and over one in three saying they are extremely concerned about the issue, Heatmap’s second Climate Poll has found, echoing results from its first survey last winter.
Conducted in mid-November by Benenson Strategy Group, the second poll explored both how Americans’ perceptions of climate change have shifted since Heatmap’s inaugural survey in February and also expanded to touch on questions about individuals’ personal experiences with climate change, their concerns about the future, their knowledge about climate issues and their attitudes on solutions, and how the issue is factoring into their 2024 presidential election decisions.
Encouragingly, the vast majority of Americans (68%) agree with the scientific consensus that climate change is a result of human activity, including almost half (48%) of Republicans and many (44%) former Trump voters.
However, most people do not think that things are moving in the right direction: 46% of respondents said they are “increasingly pessimistic” about climate change, while only a quarter said they think things are looking up.
While extreme heat, historic smoke, flooding, rapidly intensifying hurricanes, and the deadliest wildfire in modern history made headlines throughout 2023, Americans reported a slight decline from last winter in their feelings of being personally affected by climate change: 44% said they were “very” or “somewhat” affected, down 6 points since the Heatmap Climate Poll was last conducted 10 months ago. The highest numbers came from respondents in the West, about half (49%) of whom said they’d experienced climate change personally, and the lowest numbers were in the Midwest, with 37% who said they’d been affected.
However, that has not affected Americans’ sense of urgency or concern about future weather impacts on their communities. Of the extreme weather scenarios that Heatmap asked about — tornadoes, extreme thunderstorms, hurricanes, wildfires, drought, flooding, extreme heat, and blizzards — a majority of Americans said they had concerns about the climate impacting the place they live. The lowest level of reported anxiety was over hurricanes (57%), which makes sense given that the impacts are heavily (albeit, sometimes surprisingly) regional.
These concerns played into Americans’ thoughts about the future more generally as well. Nearly three-quarters of parents (72%) reported having high levels of concern about the climate, with
dads slightly more worried (77%) than moms (68%).
More than one in 10 Americans (12%) are worried that insurance companies are leaving their area. Almost one in five Americans (19%) say they’ve already seen their insurance rates increase due to weather extremes, and eight in 10 Americans say they want the government to require insurance companies to continue offering insurance in areas that are affected by climate change.
Most respondents said they are taking personal action on some level, whether it’s recycling (70%), carrying a reusable water bottle (62%), or driving or hoping to drive an EV in the future (46%). Even among people who voted in 2020 for Trump — no fan of electric vehicles — 30% said they drive or would like to drive an electric car in the future.
When it comes to solutions, though, Americans are more divided on the best approach. There’s uncertainty around the green energy transition, with 38% of respondents worried it will cost them money, 35% believing it will save them money, and 27% unsure. Proposals like providing tax incentives to make homes more energy efficient; making it easier to build new solar plants; investing in public transportation; and funding scientific studies to explore ways of reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere are widely popular, though, with all receiving over 80% support by respondents.
However, Americans who currently drive, or are interested in buying, an EV largely said that fuel savings (73%) were a bigger incentive to them than the benefits for the climate (63%). Starkly, Americans are also not sold on the phase-out of fossil fuels: 62% said they support making it easier to drill and build new pipelines, including 51% of Democrats and 59% of Independents.
What does the picture painted by the Heatmap poll mean for the 2024 election? There is a clear bipartisan interest in climate change, with 68% of Americans saying a candidate’s position on climate change is important in determining their presidential vote, including 86% of Democrats, 53% of Republicans, and 62% of Independents. Additionally, nearly one in seven (69%) Americans said they would be more likely to vote for a candidate that led an initiative to plant millions of trees to remove carbon from the atmosphere — a popular, albeit dubious, Republican climate proposal that 80% of Democrats said they could get behind.
Heatmap will continue to offer further analysis of the survey’s results in the coming days, including closer looks at Americans’ understandings of climate lingo, how they are influenced by common land development arguments, and more.
The Heatmap Climate Poll of 1,000 American adults was conducted by Benenson Strategy Group via online panels from Nov. 6 to 13, 2023. The survey included interviews with Americans in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Plus 3 more outstanding questions about this ongoing emergency.
As Los Angeles continued to battle multiple big blazes ripping through some of the most beloved (and expensive) areas of the city on Thursday, a question lingered in the background: What caused the fires in the first place?
Though fires are less common in California during this time of the year, they aren’t unheard of. In early December 2017, power lines sparked the Thomas Fire near Ventura, California, which burned through to mid-January. At the time it was the largest fire in the state since at least the 1930s. Now it’s the ninth-largest. Although that fire was in a more rural area, it ignited for many of the same reasons we’re seeing fires this week.
Read on for everything we know so far about how the fires started.
Five major fires started during the Santa Ana wind event this week:
Officials have not made any statements about the cause of any of the fires yet.
On Thursday morning, Edward Nordskog, a retired fire investigator from the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, told me it was unlikely they had even begun looking into the root of the biggest and most destructive of the fires in the Pacific Palisades. “They don't start an investigation until it's safe to go into the area where the fire started, and it just hasn't been safe until probably today,” he said.
It can take years to determine the cause of a fire. Investigators did not pinpoint the cause of the Thomas Fire until March 2019, more than two years after it started.
But Nordskog doesn’t think it will take very long this time. It’s easier to narrow down the possibilities for an urban fire because there are typically both witnesses and surveillance footage, he told me. He said the most common causes of wildfires in Los Angeles are power lines and those started by unhoused people. They can also be caused by sparks from vehicles or equipment.
At about 27,000 acres burned, these fires are unlikely to make the charts for the largest in California history. But because they are burning in urban, densely populated, and expensive areas, they could be some of the most devastating. With an estimated 2,000 structures damaged so far, the Eaton and Palisades fires are likely to make the list for most destructive wildfire events in the state.
And they will certainly be at the top for costliest. The Palisades Fire has already been declared a likely contender for the most expensive wildfire in U.S. history. It has destroyed more than 1,000 structures in some of the most expensive zip codes in the country. Between that and the Eaton Fire, Accuweather estimates the damages could reach $57 billion.
While we don’t know the root causes of the ignitions, several factors came together to create perfect fire conditions in Southern California this week.
First, there’s the Santa Ana winds, an annual phenomenon in Southern California, when very dry, high-pressure air gets trapped in the Great Basin and begins escaping westward through mountain passes to lower-pressure areas along the coast. Most of the time, the wind in Los Angeles blows eastward from the ocean, but during a Santa Ana event, it changes direction, picking up speed as it rushes toward the sea.
Jon Keeley, a research scientist with the US Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of California, Los Angeles told me that Santa Ana winds typically blow at maybe 30 to 40 miles per hour, while the winds this week hit upwards of 60 to 70 miles per hour. “More severe than is normal, but not unique,” he said. “We had similar severe winds in 2017 with the Thomas Fire.”
Second, Southern California is currently in the midst of extreme drought. Winter is typically a rainier season, but Los Angeles has seen less than half an inch of rain since July. That means that all the shrubland vegetation in the area is bone-dry. Again, Keeley said, this was not usual, but not unique. Some years are drier than others.
These fires were also not a question of fuel management, Keeley told me. “The fuels are not really the issue in these big fires. It's the extreme winds,” he said. “You can do prescription burning in chaparral and have essentially no impact on Santa Ana wind-driven fires.” As far as he can tell, based on information from CalFire, the Eaton Fire started on an urban street.
While it’s likely that climate change played a role in amplifying the drought, it’s hard to say how big a factor it was. Patrick Brown, a climate scientist at the Breakthrough Institute and adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University, published a long post on X outlining the factors contributing to the fires, including a chart of historic rainfall during the winter in Los Angeles that shows oscillations between very wet and very dry years over the past eight decades. But climate change is expected to make dry years drier in Los Angeles. “The LA area is about 3°C warmer than it would be in preindustrial conditions, which (all else being equal) works to dry fuels and makes fires more intense,” Brown wrote.
And more of this week’s top renewable energy fights across the country.
1. Otsego County, Michigan – The Mitten State is proving just how hard it can be to build a solar project in wooded areas. Especially once Fox News gets involved.
2. Atlantic County, New Jersey – Opponents of offshore wind in Atlantic City are trying to undo an ordinance allowing construction of transmission cables that would connect the Atlantic Shores offshore wind project to the grid.
3. Benton County, Washington – Sorry Scout Clean Energy, but the Yakima Nation is coming for Horse Heaven.
Here’s what else we’re watching right now…
In Connecticut, officials have withdrawn from Vineyard Wind 2 — leading to the project being indefinitely shelved.
In Indiana, Invenergy just got a rejection from Marshall County for special use of agricultural lands.
In Kansas, residents in Dickinson County are filing legal action against county commissioners who approved Enel’s Hope Ridge wind project.
In Kentucky, a solar project was actually approved for once – this time for the East Kentucky Power Cooperative.
In North Carolina, Davidson County is getting a solar moratorium.
In Pennsylvania, the town of Unity rejected a solar project. Elsewhere in the state, the developer of the Newton 1 solar project is appealing their denial.
In South Carolina, a state appeals court has upheld the rejection of a 2,300 acre solar project proposed by Coastal Pine Solar.
In Washington State, Yakima County looks like it’ll keep its solar moratorium in place.
And more of this week’s top policy news around renewables.
1. Trump’s Big Promise – Our nation’s incoming president is now saying he’ll ban all wind projects on Day 1, an expansion of his previous promise to stop only offshore wind.
2. The Big Nuclear Lawsuit – Texas and Utah are suing to kill the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s authority to license small modular reactors.
3. Biden’s parting words – The Biden administration has finished its long-awaited guidance for the IRA’s tech-neutral electricity credit (which barely changed) and hydrogen production credit.