Poll: Gas prices not changing public views

Press release from local pollster Bob Moore:

Despite gas prices reaching record levels, voters have not significantly changed their views about how to reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil. Furthermore, increasing gas prices do not appear to have a major impact on views about oil and gas exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Yet the idea that nuclear energy does not contribute to global warming increases support for this as an energy option, according to the findings from our April national survey of voters.

Following are the details.

Reducing Reliance on Foreign Oil

When it comes to ideas for reducing U.S. reliance on foreign oil sources, voters are most likely to favor allowing more drilling in and around the U.S. (30%) and some form of government investment in alternative energy sources (29%). We asked a similar question in February 2007, and the results are not significantly different.

“As you may know, the United States depends on foreign countries for oil. In your opinion, which one of the following is the best way to reduce our reliance on foreign oil?”

Allow more drilling for oil and gas in the U.S., Alaska and off the coasts
Feb 2007 — 26%
Apr 2008 — 30%

Government investment in alternative energy sources
Feb 2007 –29%
Apr 2008 –29%

Tax incentives for energy companies who invest in alternative energy sources
(2007 wording: credits)
Feb 2007 –14%
Apr 2008 –10%

Tax incentives for consumers who practice conservation and recycling
(2007 wording: increase requirements on)
Feb 2007 –10%
Apr 2008 –9%

Permit more nuclear power plants
Feb 2007 –4%
Apr 2008 –8%

Impose stricter mileage standards to increase fuel efficiency
Feb 2007 –9%
Apr 2008 –6%

For more on the poll click here

  • Steve Plunk

    This is junk. Forcing the respondents to pick one “best way” doesn’t mean they don’t support all of the alternatives. Voters may still see different ways to a cure but I’ll guarandamtee ya they want it done even more with high gas prices.

    Moore should know this is a worthless poll.

  • Richard Brown

    The problem is our energy policy is nothing more than a political football. Ether we are pouring tax dollars in to ineffective energy pet project or creating worthless political catch lines like energy independence.

    We need an energy policy based on sound economic and scientific principals.

  • Chris McMullen

    We need more nuclear power plants in order to reduce dependence on coal and ‘dirtier’ forms on energy generation.

    We need to lift restrictions on protected lands.

    We need to let the market decides which alternative energy source is the most viable.

    We need to start demanding more accountability with our federal and local gas tax spending.

    And lastly, we need a LNG facility in Oregon.

    • dean

      Chris…if you really want “the market” to figure out our best alternative enrgy source, do you also support eliminating the Federal insurance underwriting of nuclear plants, the federal role in finding a safe place for waste disposal, and the federal role in safety inspections? And do you support repeal of tax breaks for oil companies for exploration and development of oil? And do you support repeal of the ability of private companies to use eminent domain to condemn private land for their LNG pipelines?

      The lost could go on much longer…but you get the picture. Alternative enrgy systems have to compete against subsidized conventional systems. Its not a free market.

  • Steve Plunk

    It’s not a free market but it sure needs to be.

    When governments around the world control more than 80% of the oil it’s not a free market. When OPEC manipulates the price of oil it’s not a free market. When energy resource land is put off limits it is not a free market. When nuclear plants pay extra for insurance because of emotionally driven fear it’s not a free market. When the Feds won’t allow spent fuel reprocessing it’s not a free market.

    If the government wants to control energy then it should bear the burden of explaining why we can’t get it at the most reasonable price instead of blaming oil companies.

    • dean

      Steve…maybe we are getting it (oil) at the most reasonable price, given increased world demand bumping up against supply limits, and given political instability and war in oil producing parts of the world.