Post on 09-Jun-2020
PUBLIC OPINION ON GREAT LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL & ENERGY
POLICY: A CANADA-U.S. COMPARISON
POET Institutional Partners
Do we need the 57th study of public opinion in the Great Lakes Basin?• Yes—and unique features of the GLPRN work…• Broad scope of questions, including emerging energy
sources• Builds on much earlier work and allows some comparison
with earlier findings• Opportunity to set foundation for longitudinal work• Opportunity to pioneer comparison of public and elite
opinion• Close adherence to boundaries of the Great Lakes Basin—
versus broader Region (or American-centric)
• Source: Great Lakes Information Network. (2014). The Great Lakes.
A Word About Methods• Telephone survey conducted by Muhlenberg Institute of
Public Opinion: November-December 2013• Included 1,247 residents within the Basin
• Random digit dialing, with both landlines and cell phones• Overall margin of error of 3 percent, calculated at a 95% confidence
level• Weighted sample by percentage of total Basin population within
portion of state/provinces within the Basin• Ontario: 408• Michigan: 267• Illinois: 138….
Preview of Future Attractions• Comparison with elite opinion: Is there a difference between the views of the citizenry and their elected/appointed leaders?Michigan via the Michigan Public Policy Survey (MPPS): Special version of twice-yearly survey to lead elected/appointed officials in 1,739 local jurisdictionsOntario to follow with an upcoming survey of 444 local leaders
General Perceptions about Great Lakes
• Convergence or Divergence in Basin• How different are we?
• Perceptions of quality and risk
• Policy preferences and actions
• Role of governments, industry and citizens
Importance and Connection
• How important are the Great Lakes?• 66% ‘strongly agree’ that
the Great Lakes are a valuable state/provincial economic resource
• 71% ‘strongly agree’ or ‘somewhat agree’ that the GL have significant impact on daily life
• Connection to the GL?• 98 % have visited at least 1
lake in their lifetime
Engaged in Activity
Did Not Engage in Activity
Not Sure
Went hunting in Great Lakes Region
11% 89% <1%
Went Fishing on one or more of the Great Lakes
29% 71% <1%
Ate fish from one or more of the Great Lakes.
54% 42% 4%
Swam in one or more of the Great Lakes.
40% 60% <1%
Went to a beach on one or more of the Great Lakes.
54% 46% <1%
Went boating on one or more of the Great Lakes.
40% 60% 0%
Perceptions of Quality?
• 86% in both countries: quality fair or better than fair• Only 9% say ‘poor’ or ‘very
poor’
• How compared to past studies (2005 & 2007)?• Americans and Canadians
think lakes better, but assessment of quality increased more amongst Canadians
• Does this mean that residents think quality is better than 20 years ago?• Only 39% ‘somewhat or
strongly agree’ that GL better health today
http://www.npca.ca
What are citizens concerned with?
• Three most important environmental concerns today?
ISSUE (Grouped by category)
Rank 1 Total mentions (as rank 1, 2 or 3)
Pollution/Contamination 55% 73%
Asian Carp 8% 21%
Water Levels 5% 16%
Invasive Species 4% 11%
Sewage/Waste 3% 7%
Water Quality/Maintaining Quality
3% 6%
Industrial/Business Waste
2% 6%
Garbage Dumping 2% 6%
Zebra Mussels 2% 5%
GL policy positions?
32%
34%
28%
42%
42%
34%
41%
39%
40%
31%
17%
18%
25%
27%
31%
32%
36%
37%
44%
52%
-26%
-28%
-23%
-14%
-13%
-19%
-14%
-15%
-10%
-9%
-14%
-14%
-12%
-10%
-7%
-8%
-5%
-7%
-3%
-5%
-60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
“Enforce laws to reduce water diversion from the Great Lakes, even if it means citizens outside the Great Lakes face water shortages”
“Increase the cost of water for households and businesses to encourage consumers to use less water”
“Close the shipping channel near Chicago that may allow Asian carp to enter Lake Michigan, even if this harms the local economy”
“Reduce the rate at which farmland or other natural areas are being paved over, even if it limits local economic development”
“Prevent new construction on wetlands, even if limits economic development”
“Phase out coal-fired power plants to reduce mercury emissions in the Great Lakes Region, even if the cost of electricity increases”
“Reduce runoff from farm and the agricultural sectors even if it increases the cost of food”
“Increase efforts to improve Great Lakes water quality, even if it requires higher taxes”
“Rebuild sewers to improve Great Lakes water quality, even if it requires an increase in your property taxes”
“Strengthen regulations to reduce the release of pharmaceuticals and other contaminants entering the Great Lakes even if the cost of drugs increase”
Somewhat Support Strongly Support Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose
Positions on energy in GL?
23%
21%
19%
44%
36%
38%
44%
10%
8%
13%
27%
44%
46%
42%
-19%
-25%
-21%
-12%
-9%
-6%
-5%
-34%
-36%
-37%
-8%
-7%
-6%
-4%
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
“Increase drilling for natural gas and oil through hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking,” in the Great Lakes Region”
“Allow more offshore oil and gas drilling in the Great Lakes”
“Increase the use of nuclear power in the Great Lakes Region”
“Increase the use of hydroelectric power through dams in the Great Lakes Region”
“Increase the use of wind power off the shores of the Great Lakes”
“Increase the use of wind power on land in the Great Lakes Region”
“Increase the use of renewable electricity in the Great Lakes Region”
Somewhat Favor Strongly Favor Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose
US vs. Canada on energy in GL?
15%
27%
16%
23%
18%
20%
39%
46%
38%
47%
39%
37%
37%
36%
7%
11%
4%
9%
16%
12%
42%
41%
25%
27%
35%
52%
36%
48%
-17%
-20%
-23%
-26%
-16%
-24%
-5%
-6%
-15%
-10%
-8%
-5%
-7%
-9%
-38%
-32%
-41%
-33%
-37%
-36%
-6%
-3%
-11%
-7%
-10%
-4%
-12%
-4%
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Ontario
US
Frac
king
off-s
hore
drill
ing
Nuc
lear
rene
wab
leen
ergy
Hyd
roel
ectri
con
shor
e w
ind
offs
hore
win
d
Somewhat favor Strongly favor Somewhat Oppose Strongly oppose
Assessment of government performance
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Very Effective
Somewhat Effective
Not Too Effective
Not Effective at All
“Can
ada
and
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es w
ork
toge
ther
to c
are
for t
he G
reat
Lak
es.
How
effe
ctiv
e do
you
thin
k th
ey a
re in
this
effo
rt?”
Total
United States
Canada
Responsibility to protect
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ontario US Ontario US Ontario US
A Great Deal of Responsibility Some Responsibility No Responsibility
Business and Industry
Federal Government
State/Provincial Government
Local Governments
Individual Citizens
Coordination for action?
Increase coordination between states and provinces in the Great Lakes even if it requires
giving up some of your (state/province’s) decision-making power?
Strongly Support
Somewhat Support
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose
• Overall• US and Canadians don’t differ
markedly; where difference, not too surprising
• Connected to Lakes and concern for quality
• Contaminants and pollution• Support for renewables
interesting; also daunting for implications for energy needs
• Look to federal government and industry to lead
Great Lakes Region Wind Energy Growth
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Cum
ulat
ive
Inst
alle
d W
ind
Cap
acity
(MW
)
Sources: United States Department of Energy. (2013). Installed wind capacity; Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2013). List of wind farms.
State / Province Overviews
• Renewable energy policy – RPS / FIT
• Treatment of wind
• Wind siting authority
High support for additional wind power in Region
36%
38%
44%
46%
9%
6%
7%
6%
Offshore
Onshore
Margin of Error: ±3%
Support for additional onshore wind power
37%
39%
52%
35%
5%
8%
4%
10%
US
Ontario
Margin of Error: ±5% for Ontario and ±3.5% for US
Wind turbines provide economic benefits
35%
35%
50%
33%
5%
11%
4%
13%
US
Ontario
Margin of Error: ±7% for Ontario and ±5% for US
Wind turbines create noise and human health problems
Margin of Error: ±7% for Ontario and ±5% for US
17%
25%
5%
11%
39%
32%
27%
16%
US
Ontario
Wind turbines cause visual and property value impacts
Margin of Error: ±7% for Ontario and ±5% for US
24%
30%
12%
20%
36%
23%
20%
18%
US
Ontario
State/Province Comparison
3568
1543
988
2986
1638
428
2366
1340
648
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Illinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota New York Ohio Ontario Pennsylvania Wisconsin
Inst
alle
d C
apac
ity (M
W)
Installed wind energy, end of 2013
Sources: United States Department of Energy. (2013). Installed wind capacity; Canadian Wind Energy Association. (2013). List of wind farms.
Wind turbines cause visual and property value impacts
Margin of Error: ±10% for rural and ±4.5% for non-rural
26%
27%
12%
27%
34%
21%
19%
22%
Non-rural
Rural
Other Findings• Regulation of wind
• All levels of government should regulate wind• Smaller role for federal government
• Mixed public opinion where science is uncertain• Property values• Bird Migration and weather patterns• Rural landscapes
HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN THE BASINPublic Views on the Emerging Presence of Fracking in the Great Lakes Region
Hydraulic Fracturing in the Basin• Hydraulic Fracturing or “Fracking” has seen considerable
expansion within many regions of the Great Lakes Basin.• Marcellus shale play is prominent in Lake Erie and
Ontario basins including major portions of New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
• Michigan contains large portions of the Antrim shale play. • The Utica shale play lies beneath significant portions of
New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and southern Ontario.
Strongly Favor
Somewhat Favor
Somewhat Oppose
Strongly Oppose
Not Sure
Canada 7% 15% 17% 38% 22%
United States 11% 27% 20% 32% 10%
Views on Increasing Hydraulic FracturingU.S-Canada Comparison
Strongly ot Somewhat
Agree
Strongly or Somewhat Disagree
Not Sure
Fracking offers economic benefits to communities, such as job creation and lower energy prices 57% 27% 17%Fracking poses serious environmental risks due to spills and leaks 62% 24% 15%Fracking for natural gas reduces carbon emissions by reducing the use of coal 46% 26% 29%Fracking promotes energy independence by increasing the supply of fossil fuels extracted in the US/Canada 52% 24% 24%Fracking poses serious risks to health of residents living near drilling operations 53% 25% 23%Fracking in (state/province) poses major risks to the state/provinces water resources 59% 22% 19%
Views on the Effects of Fracking among Basin Residents
19%
22%
16%
28%
36%
28%
48%
33%
-20%
-21%
-15%
-22%
-5%
-12%
-8%
-7%
Very or Somewhat Liberal
Very or Somewhat Conservative
Very or Somewhat Liberal
Very or Somewhat Conservative
"Fra
ckin
g po
ses
serio
us ri
sks
tohe
alth
of r
esid
ents
livi
ng n
ear
drill
ing
oper
atio
ns"
"Fra
ckin
g po
ses
serio
usen
viro
nmen
tal r
isks
due
to s
pills
and
leak
s"
Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree
"Fracking poses serious envrionmental risks due to spills and leaks."
"Fracking poses serious risks to health of residents living near drilling operations."
Ideology and Views on Fracking in the Basin
This entity should have…
Great Deal of Authority
Some Authority
No Authority
Not Sure
The Federal Government
36% 37% 18% 9%
Provincial/State Governments
47% 40% 6% 7%
Local Governments
35% 47% 11% 8%
Land Owners 49% 38% 6% 7%
Public Preferences Regarding Authority over Fracking in the Basin
43%
32%
33%
39%
11%
21%
13%
8%
Canada
United States
Great Deal of Authority Some Authority No Authority Not Sure
US/Canada Comparison Regarding Federal Control over Fracking in the Basin