Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Economy

Poll: Americans Broadly Skeptical of Climate Pledges

But they do want corporations to step up.

A BP sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

From BP to Shein, businesses are promising that they’re greener than ever. But Americans are skeptical these pledges are anything but greenwashing, a term for deceptive advertising practices around sustainability that was formally added to the dictionary last year. Perhaps with good reason, too: Of 702 companies that have made net-zero targets and were scrutinized by Net Zero Tracker, two-thirds hadn’t actually offered details on how they plan to reach those goals.

A majority of Americans (64%) think corporations’ pledges around climate change are just for appearances and that they won’t stick to their promises, the inaugural Heatmap Climate Poll, published Thursday, found. But Americans do want corporations to step up: Sixty-seven percent of Americans feel that large corporations have an important role to play in mitigating the effects of global warming.

Heatmap's findings were consistent across political parties. Sixty-three percent of Democrats distrusted climate pledges, compared to 61% of Republicans and 69% of independents. The findings were also fairly consistent across incomes, geographies, and education levels.

They are also optimistic about future action. When Americans consider which entity will have the greatest positive impact on the climate in the next five years, big businesses and corporations were ranked second, just behind individuals and ahead of the federal government. A plurality of Republicans ranked corporations first.

This comes as something of a surprise considering the hard line the Republican Party has taken recently against corporate environmental, social, and governance practices — otherwise known as ESG. Conservatives argue businesses are being unfairly pressured to make overtures to climate activists. Still, a plurality of Republicans are optimistic about corporations’ ability to make a difference on climate change.

Americans also expressed a high level of concern around pollutants, the majority of which are generated by industry, agriculture, and big business. Over 40% of respondents individually ranked air pollution, water pollution, and plastic pollution as “an extremely serious problem”; 39% said the same for toxic waste (the Heatmap Climate Poll was conducted shortly after the toxic chemical spill caused by a train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio).

The impression that businesses are powerful climate actors also carried over into concerns about their potential to serve as obstacles to renewable and sustainable solutions to address climate change. Forty-one percent of Americans (including 37% of Republicans and 43% of Democrats) characterized lobbyists and special interests having too much power in Washington as being an “extremely serious problem.” Just under a third of Americans (30%, including 19% of Republicans and 40% of Democrats) felt that big corporations standing in the way of the government taking action we need on climate change is another “extremely serious” barrier.

The Heatmap Climate Poll of 1,000 Americans adults was conducted via online panels from Feb. 15 to 20, 2023. The survey included interviews with Americans in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.02 percentage points. Read more about the topline results here.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
A destroyed house and a blueprint.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Recovering from the Los Angeles wildfires will be expensive. Really expensive. Insurance analysts and banks have already produced a wide range of estimates of both what insurance companies will pay out and overall economic loss. AccuWeatherhas put out an eye-catching preliminary figure of $52 billion to $57 billion for economic losses, with the service’s chief meteorologist saying that the fires have the potential to “become the worst wildfire in modern California history based on the number of structures burned and economic loss.” On Thursday, J.P. Morgan doubled its previous estimate for insured losses to $20 billion, with an economic loss figure of $50 billion — about the gross domestic product of the country of Jordan.

The startlingly high loss figures from a fire that has only lasted a few days and is (relatively) limited in scope show just how distinctly devastating an urban fire can be. Enormous wildfires thatcover millions of acres like the 2023 Canadian wildfires can spew ash and particulate matter all over the globe and burn for months, darkening skies and clogging airways in other countries. And smaller — and far deadlier fires — than those still do not produce the same financial roll.

Keep reading...Show less
Green
Climate

Why the L.A. Fires Are Exceptionally Hard to Fight

Suburban streets, exploding pipes, and those Santa Ana winds, for starters.

Firefighters on Sunset Boulevard.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A fire needs three things to burn: heat, fuel, and oxygen. The first is important: At some point this week, for a reason we have yet to discover and may never will, a piece of flammable material in Los Angeles County got hot enough to ignite. The last is essential: The resulting fires, which have now burned nearly 29,000 acres, are fanned by exceptionally powerful and dry Santa Ana winds.

But in the critical days ahead, it is that central ingredient that will preoccupy fire managers, emergency responders, and the public, who are watching their homes — wood-framed containers full of memories, primary documents, material wealth, sentimental heirlooms — transformed into raw fuel. “Grass is one fuel model; timber is another fuel model; brushes are another — there are dozens of fuel models,” Bobbie Scopa, a veteran firefighter and author of the memoir Both Sides of the Fire Line, told me. “But when a fire goes from the wildland into the urban interface, you’re now burning houses.”

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Climate

What Started the Fires in Los Angeles?

Plus 3 more outstanding questions about this ongoing emergency.

Los Angeles.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

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.

Keep reading...Show less
Green