North Omaha plant will continue to use coal at least in the upcoming period following OPPD board voting
Two-thirds of Americans, according to the Pew Research Center, believe the federal government is not doing enough to combat the effects of climate change. While the majority of U.S. citizens recognize climate change as a significant issue, there is less agreement regarding how to handle the escalating global disaster. Solutions such as planting more trees to absorb carbon emissions attracted bipartisan support on a large scale.
In contrast, 86-89% of Democratic-leaning respondents supported taxing corporations based on their emissions production and implementing tighter emissions limits for vehicles, compared to 52-55% of Republican-leaning respondents.
However, attitudes regarding climate change initiatives are divided by more than just political membership. Other significant demographic characteristics include age variations, gender, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and proximity to a coast where the incidence of natural catastrophes has increased.
Economic reliance on fossil fuels also plays a significant effect in whether individuals support or reject municipal and federal climate change policies. Stacker compiled statistics based on data from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication in order to determine how Omaha residents felt about policies pertaining to climate change. The information comes from a study completed in 2020.
– Support in Omaha for funding research into renewable energy sources: 86.2%
— #104 highest among all metros
— 0.4% higher than national average
Metros where the most people support funding research into renewable energy sources
#1. Ithaca, NY: 90.4% support funding research into renewable energy sources
#2. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA: 90.3%
#3. Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH: 90.1%
Metros where the fewest people support funding research into renewable energy sources
#1. Amarillo, TX: 79.0% support funding research into renewable energy sources
#2. Houma-Thibodaux, LA: 79.7%
#3. Longview, TX: 79.7%
– Support in Omaha for regulating CO2 as a pollutant: 72.6%
— #186 highest among all metros
— 1.9% lower than national average
Metros where the most people support regulating CO2 as a pollutant
#1. Ithaca, NY: 82.9% support regulating CO2 as a pollutant
#2. Ann Arbor, MI: 80.4%
#3. Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH: 80.3%
Metros where the fewest people support regulating CO2 as a pollutant
#1. Provo-Orem, UT: 65.0% support regulating CO2 as a pollutant
#2. Amarillo, TX: 65.2%
#3. Midland, TX: 65.3%
– Support in Omaha for setting strict limits on existing coal-fire power plants: 63.8%
— #200 highest among all metros
— 4.0% lower than national average
Metros where the most people support setting strict limits on existing coal-fire power plants
#1. Urban Honolulu, HI: 81.1% support setting strict limits on existing coal-fire power plants
#2. Ann Arbor, MI: 78.5%
#3. Ithaca, NY: 78.2%
Metros where the fewest people support setting strict limits on existing coal-fire power plants
#1. Farmington, NM: 46.3% support setting strict limits on existing coal-fire power plants
#2. Weirton-Steubenville, WV-OH: 49.2%
#3. Longview, TX: 51.4%
– Support in Omaha for requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount: 64.0%
— #208 highest among all metros
— 3.8% lower than national average
Metros where the most people support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount
#1. Ithaca, NY: 77.1% support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount
#2. New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA: 76.9%
#3. Urban Honolulu, HI: 76.7%
Metros where the fewest people support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount
#1. Provo-Orem, UT: 53.1% support requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use the money to reduce other taxes (such as income tax) by an equal amount
#2. Casper, WY: 53.9%
#3. St. George, UT: 54.2%
– Support in Omaha for requiring utilities to produce 20% electricity from renewable sources: 65.1%
— #95 highest among all metros
— 0.2% higher than national average
Metros where the most people support requiring utilities to produce 20% electricity from renewable sources
#1. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA: 72.8% support requiring utilities to produce 20% electricity from renewable sources
#2. Ann Arbor, MI: 72.2%
#3. Urban Honolulu, HI: 72.2%
Metros where the fewest people support requiring utilities to produce 20% electricity from renewable sources
#1. Provo-Orem, UT: 52.2% support requiring utilities to produce 20% electricity from renewable sources
#2. Decatur, AL: 54.7%
#3. Johnson City, TN: 55.5%
– Support in Omaha for providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels: 80.8%
— #191 highest among all metros
— 1.3% lower than national average
Metros where the most people support providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels
#1. Ithaca, NY: 86.6% support providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels
#2. Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH: 86.1%
#3. Ann Arbor, MI: 86.0%
Metros where the fewest people support providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels
#1. Amarillo, TX: 75.2% support providing tax rebates for people who purchase energy-efficient vehicles or solar panels
#2. Houma-Thibodaux, LA: 75.3%
#3. Texarkana, TX-AR: 76.0%
– Support in Omaha for drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: 34.2%
— #159 highest among all metros
— 2.6% higher than national average
Metros where the most people support drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
#1. Dalton, GA: 43.7% support drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
#2. Lima, OH: 41.6%
#3. Enid, OK: 41.4%
Metros where the fewest people support drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
#1. Ann Arbor, MI: 21.9% support drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
#2. Ithaca, NY: 22.5%
#3. Corvallis, OR: 23.1%
– Support in Omaha support for expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas off the U.S. coast: 55.1%
— #182 highest among all metros
— 2.9% higher than national average
Metros where the most people support expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas off the U.S. coast
#1. Lake Charles, LA: 69.4% support expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas off the U.S. coast
#2. Alexandria, LA: 68.9%
#3. Decatur, AL: 67.7%
Metros where the fewest people support expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas off the U.S. coast
#1. Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA: 34.6% support expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas off the U.S. coast
#2. San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA: 36.6%
#3. Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA: 37.0%
