Energy Poll: Oregonians want balance

FreedomWorks Oregon Releases Poll Taken for Launch of the Campaign for Affordable and Reliable Energy

PORTLAND, Ore. — FreedomWorks Oregon launched a major media and grassroots campaign today in Portland promoting the development of clean, affordable, and reliable sources of energy. The Campaign for Affordable and Reliable Energy (CARE) will promote sensible energy policy solutions to meet current and future demand and will also expose how anti-energy radicals are opposed not just to energy development, but to our modern way of life.

FreedomWorks commissioned Moore Information to conduct a new poll to learn how energy issues are shaping voters opinions on important energy policy issues. The poll was taken from July 26-29 and questioned 500 voters from across the state with 46 percent of respondents describing themselves as Democrats and 35 percent self-described as Republicans.

Highlights of the poll include:

– 90% believe it is important for America to be energy independent.
– 59% favor changing laws to allow America’s oil and gas reserves to be accessed for American consumers.
– 66% favor construction of large wave energy farms in marine reserves off the Oregon coast.
– 62% favor building large wind energy farms in scenic or wildlife sensitive areas in Oregon.
– 60% favor building a natural gas pipeline across Oregon, to supply Oregon and the Western United States with natural gas.
– 73% believe environmental groups can be unfair and unreasonable in their efforts to stop energy development.
– 70% are unwilling to permanently pay $6 or more per gallon for gasoline to protect the environment.
To learn more about the poll taken of Oregon voters focusing on energy issues please visit the campaign website www.lightsonoregon.com.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 11:32 | Posted in Measure 37 | 31 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • JessseO

    Love that they’re not willing to name the groups who oppose wind power. Because it’s bullshit. It’s like they label some radical an environmentalist and smear all enviros.

    Similarly, LNG — an explosive gas on ships near our cities — is NOT the same thing as domestic natural gas, but they want to conflate the two.

    Where’s the million dollars from? NO one is saying.

    Probably Texas energy companies, wanting to impose their will on Oregon and take the profits and gas away.

  • Steve Plunk

    Quick, somebody forward this to Wyden, Smith, and all Democratic Oregon congressmen along with a note explaining how representative democracy works. It seems only Walden understands the basics of energy and what Oregonians want when it comes to energy policy.

    These politicians should put the politics aside and start representing us.

  • Bob Clark

    LNG terminals exist not far from downtown, Portland, just off highway 30. They’ve been there for decades with no serious blow ups. The proposed LNG terminal at Warrenton is an old abandon saw mill site where relatively few people live or visit. The state isn’t putting any money into this proposed LNG terminal, and risks very little if anything. In return, Oregon and the local community receive tax dollars from the project. If LNG prices are too high relative to domestic supplies, there will be very few if any LNG ships coming into Warrenton. If LNG prices become relatively inexpensive, it will help the U.S conserve domestic natural gas reserves and back up wind power when the latter isn’t producing.

    This is probably too much logic for the nimbys and the nimby reacting state government and politicians.

  • Phoebe

    Polls to tell us what we already believe. Politicians need to listen to the voters and not the hype.

  • eagle eye

    Oh, sure, they want wind power. Is this a Boone Pickens trying to line his pockets here?

    Sure, Oregonians want to line the Oregon Coast with monster wind turbines.

    • Alan

      ….and kill the birds!

      • dean

        No need to line the coast and bird kills are way overstated.

        • eagle eye

          If not the coast, where? The poll did talk about environmentally valuable areas, after all. How about Mt. Hood?

          After all, if it’s good enough for Teddy Kennedy and his rich friends off the Mass. coast, what is so special about Oregon?

          • Alan

            Oregon is special because we are not Massachusetts.

          • David from Eugene

            At least we are not any more. The original 1620 land grant for Plymouth Council for New England, (predecessor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony) issued by James the First included all lands between the 40 and 48 parallels from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Which included Oregon.

          • dean

            Eagle….we have over 400 miles of coastline. The wind energy there extends in at least a 20 mile wide swath all the way down. That amounts to over 5 million acres if I calculate right. A wind farm large enoough to power all the homes and industry on the coast might take up 100,000 acres at most. It is quite doable without “lining” the coast.

            Plus we have lotsof other windy areas, not just the coast and gorge.

            Ted Kennedy and his rich friends are right in that there are some areas where wind farms don’t belong. We have enough land in Oregon to find places where they do belong. We should get busy with these and stop arguing about the need. Its real and it is going to be met. Lets do it right.

          • eagle eye

            Oh, great, you want to sacrifice 100,000 acres along the Oregon coast to power the coast. All for nothing, because there is no need for wind power, unless you insist on subsidizing the industry (and a lot of land owners who have their hands out).

            And I suppose you think it would all be in the clear cuts in the wasteland that you think is the Coast Range? Think again, look at any coastal wind development in the world, the prime place is right along the coastline or nearby at sea. (But I’ll bet you wouldn’t hear of drilling for oil out there, even though it would be a thousand times less conspicuous.)

            But what makes you think it would stop at powering the “homes and industry along the coast”? What about the rest of the state? What about powering California? Do you really think it will remain local?

            So you think Teddy Kennedy is right about his beloved Massachusetts coast, but it is OK to trash Oregon. Fine, but even he hasn’t succeeded. What do you think is going to happen to poor old poor Oregon? We won’t have a chance.

            And you call yourself a landscape architect! And I’ll bet you consider yourself an environmentalist to boot. I pity the poor students who have to suck this stuff up from you.

          • dean

            Now now Eagle Eye….I don’t merely CALL myself a landscape architect. I actually ARE a landscape architect, or so it says on my state license. I care enough about the land to want to help keep it from cooking itself to death. And I’m saying that out of 5 million or so acres we ought to be capable analytically of finding a fraction that is less conspicuous yet plenty windy enough. And the land under wind turbines is not “sacrificed.” It can be farmed, grazed, Christmas treed, even golfed I imagine. If the turbines are a few miles off shore, the water under them can be fished. And yes, if we can clearcut the BeJesus out of the coastal mountains and not bat an eye, if we can accept the ugliness of Highway 101 through Lincoln City and Reedsport, then we can erect wind turbines along parts of them and live with the aeshetic impacts.

            And my students love me. Or so they say at the end of the term when grades are due.

            California has plenty of wind on its own coast. They don’t need ours. as for the rest of Oregon, we have enough wind well distributed that we don’t need the coast to do all the heavy lifting.

            Chris (below,) as usual what you don’t know is a lot, yet you express it with such great panache. Very impressive.

          • chris McMullen

            Typical dumba**; compounding the fact wind turbines decimate animals, they’re totally impractical and can’t survive without subsidy.

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/06/29/eawind129.xml

            http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20080603/ai_n25485233

            http://www.ncpa.org/prs/tst/20040501hsburnett.htm

          • eagle eye

            dean, I know you actually AM a credentialed landscape architect, and I will believe that your students at UO love you, especially your keen attention to syntax.

            That is the point: I feel sorry for them.

            Actually believing that trashing the landscape is needed to keep the planet from burning. (Hint: if it’s actually happening, and if we’re actually causing it, there’s plenty of time to react, and we don’t need to put a pox on the land, nuclear power is the way to reduce CO2 emissions).

            And believing that it will actually stop at providing electricity for the few hundred thousand people on the Coast.

            There are plenty of people — some them local college professors, hell, college presidents — who would gladly turn the Midwest into a giant windfarm for the rest of the country.

            I have news for them — most of the country would be glad to turn Oregon, especially the Coast, into a windfarm for them.

            It’s pathetic that you’re teaching this stuff.

          • dean

            eagle, I don’t teach any courses on the pros and cons of wind farms. But if I did I would suggest objective analysis, avoidence where necessary, mitigation otherwise. Until something better comes along we will need more wind energy, in my humble opinion.

            As for the great plains…..lots of space, lots of wind, centrally located, lousy economy, few people, and other resources tapped out. I can’t see a problem developing more wind energy there, and apparently local communities feel the same way. Oregon’s location is way too far from east coast population centers to do the job. we need to focus on regional issues.

          • eagle eye

            “lots of space, lots of wind, centrally located, lousy economy, few people, and other resources tapped out. I can’t see a problem developing more wind energy there, and apparently local communities feel the same way.”

            Sounds exactly like Oregon except for the centrally located part — but no problem, California and Seattle will be happy to have their wind colony in Oregon, and AC power transmission has been around for a long time.

          • Anonymous

            Dean hasn’t taught at U of O in years.

        • Chris McMullen

          Bird kills are way over stated?

          1,000 birds killed every year at just Altimont alone?

          http://www.wind-works.org/articles/NRELBirdReport04.html

          http://www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=1875

          Nice how you idiots piss your pants about suburban sprawl, but turn a blind eye to green power alternatives that decimate wildlife.

          The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal, but you morons would rather chop up birds and bats than emit naturally occurring carbon dioxide.

          Whackos.

          • Jason W.

            Chris,
            I appreciate your comments, but please refrain from calling your fellow commentors “idoits”. Ideas may be idoitic or monornic, but we have a policy on Catalyst of not getting into name calling or getting personal. There are 10,000,000 other blogs for that.

          • Anonymous

            “Chris,
            I appreciate your comments, but please refrain from calling your fellow commentors “idoits”. Ideas may be idoitic or monornic…”

            Jason, no one called anyone an “idoit” or a “monorn”, tee-hee.

            Just this once, I think dean’s right, I also think Chris is BS’ing…

            …and I think you need spell-check 😉

            ps,

            dean does too, but that’s way down the list of what dean needs.

          • Jason W.

            “monorn” — is a person inflicted with “mono” that dreaded kissing disease from grade school. Aw hell, I screwed that up…the letter R on the keyboard is nowhere near the letter N.

        • Jerry

          Dean – One bird death is one too many. You keep saying they are over reported, but you don’t know what you are talking about. The bird kills continue unabated in CA. Once these turbines are up, they don’t come down, so think before you write.
          PLUS, Dean, how come you NEVER answer the question about how to store the power when the wind stops blowing (and it does, by the way). We need 100% traditional power back up. 100%. There is no storage option available to us today. NONE whatsoever. You don’t seem to want to deal with that. I don’t blame you – it makes the whole wind thing kinda silly, sort of like someone I know…

          • Rupert in Springfield

            The fact of the matter is, with energy perception is reality. This was the case with nuclear 30 years ago. The China Syndrome, Melt downs and the like were all hyped up to make nuclear seem like it would kill us all. Thus it is with birds and windmills. It doesn’t matter if its true, the question is who will have the better propaganda.

            That is where we are at with windmills, or as one faction of the environmentalists like to call them “bird blenders”. I do not make this stuff up, my wife is a professional commie bird rehabilitator and all I have to do is mention windmills and off we go. Yep, sure, cats kill birds, doesn’t matter just like it didn’t matter with nuclear’s proven safety record. The fact is, no matter what you do, someone will have a problem with it. We now have so many factions of the left who make their living being “activists” that the hurdles to do anything are huge.

            The professionally indignant (the above mentioned activists) have grown geometrically in the last few decades. They make their living saying “no”. They are the progressives who hate progress. The beauty of it is they have grown so numerous they now are fighting their own. Windmill’ers vs. Environmentalists, its a riot! The best approach is to sit back and watch the granola fly.

            What do I predict for the future? God knows. These days I just tend to satisfy myself that no matter what happens, after January 20th we are assured that we will have the first president since Regan who can actually pronounce the word “nuclear” correctly.

  • Anonymous

    Every time a LNG comment shows up by some lib it’s a distortion.

    “an explosive gas on ships near our cities ”

    What a cannard.

    The safety of LGN and this terminal is well established.

    As is every other concern the no no’s cook up.

    But just like with sustainable logging these democrats will oppose it just for the sake of opposing it.

  • Jerry

    There is only one way to balance Oregon’s energy. One and only one. Get a bunch of windmills and use that power exclusively for pumping and selling water to California.

    Then, take that money and buy nuclear power plants for our primary power source.

    Then, sell more water and use that money to pay poor nations to take the waste. They will take it, you know, gladly, for a fee.

    Problem solved. Thanks.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Well, that would be one way, the other being to get the pro windmill’ers in a ring with the pro bird people, sell tickets to everyone who would love to watch a bunch of scragglyvestwearingAlGoreworshipping greenies beat each other up over who cares more about the planet. My guess would be that ticket sales would be such that we could establish a fund that could buy oil up to $1,000 a barrel and provide everyone with free gas. The added benefit would be greenies would be tied up in the ring, smoother traffic due to less bumper sticker laden VW buses doing 45 on the highway, less angry bicyclists and much less moral proselytizing from the organically fed perpetually indignant justice crowd.

  • djo

    What a breath of stale air to listen to you spout off about the envro and to forget we are here as people. We have needs and we are here to serve one another. The truth is the survey reveals the real needs of people. How we get energy and the use of science and technology is important. Trees grow and eat co2 grass etc.
    Oregon has the technology but sits on it’s hands and bows to the non-experts to cripple our livlihood while we argue dumb concerns like the stupid owl that destroyed timber jobs while the forests burned. We did nothing to recover the timber while we built expensive LEED programs. Wake up old Oregon those out of staters are eating your lunch!!

  • Pingback: peter - dining chairs()

  • Pingback: read this post here()

  • Pingback: 15000 SoundCloud Plays()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)