Well, this is fascinating. The good people at @cplusc.bsky.social have found that voters with incomes under 100K overwhelmingly support fossil-fuel phaseout! So much for the myth that climate change is merely an "elite" preoccupation of the affluent, college-educated, dare I say "woke" voter. 🧵 - ThreadSky

doctorvive.bsky.social • 81 days ago

Well, this is fascinating.

The good people at @cplusc.bsky.social have found that voters with incomes under 100K overwhelmingly support fossil-fuel phaseout!

So much for the myth that climate change is merely an "elite" preoccupation of the affluent, college-educated, dare I say "woke" voter.

🧵

Comments

lowerthetemp.bsky.social•80 days ago

There’s only one way to phase out fossil fuels: reduce fossil fuel demand. As long as fossil fuel demand is robust, fossil fuel development will continue.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

The demand is for energy, not fossil fuels.

lowerthetemp.bsky.social•80 days ago

That’s why we need to clean up the electricity supply and then electrify everything. This will reduce fossil fuel demand.

therat2025plan.bsky.social•80 days ago

It's quite the catch 22 for the oil companies, are they doing negative things to suppress green and pink hydrogen? If the green hydrogen can be reduced in price to a dollar $1.50 with IRA to the fossil fuel hydrogen? Production, price,and agreements with other countries for green steel & cement help

lowerthetemp.bsky.social•80 days ago

The oil companies need to shift to geo thermal. They have the right technology for that.

humantravl.bsky.social•80 days ago

Generally the wealthier people are, the less empathy they have. So these findings are no surprise.

chrisbataille.bsky.social•80 days ago

Sooner or later we’re just going to state the obvious, that the only folks fundamentally objecting to a fossil fuel phase out or phase down are those who have a vested interest in continuing to extract rents from FF extraction 😉

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

They are certainly the ones actively blocking the transition.

leaferi.bsky.social•81 days ago

UBI & health for all—because climate and because need fix money.

Blame digitization. Pretty politically neutral. That one.

Regenerative capitalism.

leaferi.bsky.social•81 days ago

Those with less suffer worst outcomes and hit hardest by its impacts. Makes sense.

theresavermont.bsky.social•81 days ago

Interesting data. Very encouraging

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

@chrislhayes.bsky.social @rokhanna.bsky.social @whitehouse.senate.gov wanted to make sure you gentlemen saw this...

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

In fact it's rather the opposite.

Voters with incomes of 100K and above are the ones who oppose the phase out of fossil fuels.

And this makes sense, of course, because they're the ones holding the equity that would devalue were those "assets" to strand...

2/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

And, of course, affluent voters are those who emit the most carbon as part of the "reward for their success," or whatever you want to call high-carbon leisure pursuits.

https://www.noemamag.com/we-need-to-talk-about-the-carbon-footprints-of-the-rich/

3/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

And, of course, affluent voters are generally shielded from the toxic harms of air, water, and ground pollution making it unsafe to live in poorer communities near oil and gas refineries and extraction sites.

4/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

Wow, going through all this, I can't believe the other story ever seemed at all plausible!

5/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

Anyway, that's just one of the gems in this study by the great @holcaggiano.bsky.social, @gruberte.bsky.social & @markpaulecon.bsky.social.

Please read, share, and discuss in your networks! We got some climate myth-busting to do!

https://climateandcommunity.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Voters-Support-Phasing-Out-Fossil-Fuel-Extraction_12-11-24.pdf

6/6

jratcliffe.bsky.social•81 days ago

I don't see a link to the actual survey in that release - do you have one? Interested to see the questions actually asked.

cyclefunmontreal.bsky.social•81 days ago

I call it the 'high-carbon lifestyle'.

kathryngrace.bsky.social•81 days ago

Glad to see this. Thank you for sharing it.

kairos.social•80 days ago

Q.e.d.: Representative democracy is everything but representative. Only a representative sample of the entire populace is.

DEMOCRACY ≠ ELECTIONS

DEMOCRACY = RANDOM SELECTION

#sortition #lottocracy

scottsantens.com•80 days ago

All the more reason for carbon tax and dividend.

https://www.scottsantens.com/this-idea-can-literally-change-the-world-universal-basic-income-through-carbon-pricing/

mrbillings.bsky.social•81 days ago

Is there a correlation with the health problems associated with fossil-fuels in these income brackets?

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

I mean, yes?

josephsabol.bsky.social•80 days ago

Remember, there's a correlation between narcissism and climate change denial, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X22001099

annecasselman.bsky.social•81 days ago

📌

grundiinheaven.bsky.social•80 days ago

📌

robertferry.bsky.social•81 days ago

The wealthy and powerful are always going to complain that climate legislation is part of some socialist class war (their challenge to the green new deal), so we might as well acknowledge the populist overlap and rally the 90% together in solidarity for a more sustainable and more equitable future.

josephsabol.bsky.social•80 days ago

I know several 20-something POC who are totally opposed to anything "socialist". When I explain their local fire department is socialist, they say, "that's different."

velyvan.bsky.social•80 days ago

Don't you think there's simply an age bias here? As people making over 100k are just older?

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

Someone else asked that question; I don't know the answer!

soupcansteffans.bsky.social•81 days ago

📌

cjtanman.bsky.social•80 days ago

Ask the question another way and you get a different result. For example, if you ask do you support higher taxes to tackle climate change, 82% say no. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/over-80-of-voters-oppose-higher-fuel-tax-to-tackle-climate-change-poll-1.4694330
i.e. Very easy to say you "support" something, but the support dwindles when details are presented.

piperfuriosa.bsky.social•80 days ago

When you suffer & die of cancer early from the chemicals at your shitty job & your kid's asthma acts up from the air pollution dumped on your poor neighborhood, you end up a lot more radical than people might expect. Old people aren't innately conservative; radicals die young (often from poverty.)

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

gosh I've never thought about shifts to conservatism in those terms 😔

piperfuriosa.bsky.social•80 days ago

I can't take credit for that. I first heard about it in the queer community, talking about why so many generations of radical LGBTQ people are missing. The poorest had the least chance of surviving the AIDS crisis. But one sees this in every oppressed group.

billwallace.bsky.social•81 days ago

Also, the difference between what people say in a poll and what they do in the privacy of a polling booth would be interesting.

billwallace.bsky.social•81 days ago

It would be interesting to see how those figures would change if people were aware of what ending the use of fossil fuels entails. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t (we’ll be forced to anyway at some point) but it will necessitate a large drop in living standards which will test their attitude.

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

not for people who make less than 100K. exactly the opposite, actually! once we've decarbonized the rise in everyone's real incomes from the savings on electricity, heat, transportation, and health care will HUGELY improve lower-income people's quality of life.

josephsabol.bsky.social•80 days ago

Agree. The top few % use way too much fossil carbon. Everyone wants low prices, but the real cost of fossil fuel is about 1/3 the real cost, which should internalize all the environmental and health damage.

billwallace.bsky.social•80 days ago

Also, is there even enough stuff like copper on the planet to transition? Maybe there is but digging it out from underneath the Andes (for example) would render that prohibitively expensive. Seems to me that we’d be forced into much lower energy consumption & thus a much reduced living standard.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

don't worry! there are plenty of metals. see the research I dropped in elsewhere on this thread

billwallace.bsky.social•80 days ago

You say once we’ve decarbonised like it’s a small adjustment whereas in reality I don’t think anyone actually knows how this will be achieved without eye watering cost. Not to mention the vast oil energy required to mine the necessary resources to transition. That cost will be shared by all.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

Well, it doesn't need to be shared by all — how those costs are distributed is a policy choice. And they're not costs, anyway: they're investments. All the research shows that halting global heating at 2C or below, once the costs of climate change are weighed, is a macroeconomic BENEFIT.

1/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

And, again, the transition is imminently affordable: the UNEP recently estimated that investments of about 1-3% of global GDP would enable us to create a net zero economy.

https://www.unep.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2024

This is in line with other estimates from academia and consultancies.

2/n

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

And finally, building a clean-energy economy certainly won't require more oil in the short term than an economy that runs on oil will need indefinitely. And extraction overall will plummet once we've made the transition.

https://ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-technologies-need-far-less-mining-fossil-fuels

billwallace.bsky.social•80 days ago

Sounds like magic pudding economics but given that I haven’t read that report I will take a look.

billwallace.bsky.social•80 days ago

Good luck convincing the wealthy to subsidise the poor’s energy consumption, but it is certainly a noble aim.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

I hear your despair. Take heart! We can still save so much for our children.

aquietresistance.bsky.social•80 days ago

It's almost as though, to see through the propaganda, you simply turn what is said on its head. The opposite is nearly always closer to the truth.

johnsmillie42.bsky.social•81 days ago

Now if only it showed up in votes

gruberte.bsky.social•81 days ago

I’m not trying to “both sides” this but notably, both candidates supported fossil extraction. We wouldn’t expect “fossil phase out” to drive people to Harris.

cmf406.bsky.social•81 days ago

I mean, she came right out and said Drill Baby Drill.

(I'd hoped it was merely tactical, but was pretty disappointed.)

johnsmillie42.bsky.social•81 days ago

I would've personally appreciated a more aggressive stance as well, though I can't guess whether that would've yielded more or fewer votes.

johnmarkr.bsky.social•80 days ago

You’re not “both sidesing” anything here. You’re just reminding us that both major parties are in the same side, the side of the wealthy, callous, destructive .1 percent.

johnsmillie42.bsky.social•81 days ago

True, but if your priority is decarbonization, the choice is still clear.

Voters are free to have other priorities, but I didn't find Trump serving any of mine, personally.

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

Is it clear, though? Wasn't one of the problems with the election that many, many voters were getting almost no news about Harris and hearing few of her campaign messages?

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

In any event, this election being about economic precarity and cost of living doesn't call these results into question. They weren't testing priorities, just views towards phaseout.

johnsmillie42.bsky.social•81 days ago

Sigh, yeah, just bummed that Trump - who is also the worse candidate for cost of living- won.

nicholasroy.me•78 days ago

Fossil fuel phaseout is an anti-elite policy as much as it is a pro-climate policy. I'd be curious to see a version of this question reframed as achieving climate goals vs. damaging bottom lines of greedy major oil corporates.

mjfleck.bsky.social•78 days ago

Reframing the phaseout as a positive for energy affordability seems like the big problem.

"The energy transition will cost you (the average American) more than business as usual" is a politically damaging argument against the transition. Do any surveys show the % of Americans who agree/disagree?

mattyv.bsky.social•80 days ago

I wonder if the other side to this is that, despite those findings, a not-insignificant number of <100k earners end up voting for people not phasing out fossi fuels because they vote for other priorities. Also, near 100k is a lot. Under 60k might be more interesting *I haven't looked for that detail

strikart.bsky.social•80 days ago

Thanks for a very nice thread and your very positive angle on these data. This could indeed call for a more a positive future.
Still, a more negative one could be that people with a secure economic foundation want BAU and don’t accept changes that potentially could impact their lifestyle. 💚

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

Yes, that's what I tried to imply here, although I didn't say it as clearly as you did.
https://bsky.app/profile/doctorvive.bsky.social/post/3ld7vlnipnc2a

trionac.bsky.social•80 days ago

I don’t see it as an elite preoccupation but in a cost of living crisis it’s difficult for many people to retrofit etc. the greatest gains to be made in the development of renewable energy infrastructure and transport systems. Contributes to economic resilience if done well (selling point to govts)

greenfret.bsky.social•80 days ago

I am happy to help people retrofit. I made a plan for a home I did an energy audit on, that used only sweat equity and the money from savings of previous fixes to improve the efficiency of a house by 50% and pay for solar panels. It can be done.

trionac.bsky.social•80 days ago

There is a government incentive here where you get sustainable energy grants and Green finance at very low interest. It’s state guaranteed which helps with securing finance. It’s still expensive tho. Had a consult with architect recently, cost of building so high he advised phased extension/retrofit

greenfret.bsky.social•80 days ago

Architects get paid as a percentage of the cost of the job. Of course, they will tell you it is going to be expensive.

Air sealing can be done with minimal investment.
Interior storm windows can be made for around $20 per window.
Insulation can be done DIY, at low cost.

Every little bit helps.

trionac.bsky.social•80 days ago

It’s a bit different here in Ireland. He won’t have anything to do with that element, stated approved companies do all of that. What has happened is ppl have had to really compromise on elements of the design. He advised to get costing from all tradesmen and divide project into phases over 5 years!

greenfret.bsky.social•80 days ago

Shorter is better, but the plan I mentioned was for 8, so take whatever time you need. But the trick is doing it yourself, and re-investing all savings. That alone is enough.
Energy efficiency has to come first in the priorities of the design. Doesn't matter how nice the rest of the house is,..

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

agreed!

doumac.bsky.social•80 days ago

Sadly, many must have still voted for King DT. Mr Drill drill drill, frack frack frack. Going set back de-carbonization to dangerous catastrophic levels with lies and big oil support.

bennettelder.net•80 days ago

something that I feel like is probably related, I have not been able to find any mutual funds to get the employer 401K match at the past few places I've worked at because they're all so invested in fossil fuel interests. just doing tech jobs at non-energy companies and still this is what I see.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

yes, it's a huge problem

leahgoldfarb.bsky.social•80 days ago

Indeed, I too struggled with this for years and then I found….SPYX.

doctorvive.bsky.social•80 days ago

And here it is!

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SPYX/

helchose.bsky.social•81 days ago

I'm proud to say I'm against the trend. I make >$100K and advocate for fossil-fuel phaseout. I also own an EV, have a heat pump HVAC and water heater, and solar on the roof. :)

Governments around the world should subsidize this phaseout aggressively. I will pay more taxes if it helps.

doctorvive.bsky.social•81 days ago

helchose.bsky.social•80 days ago

Thank you Dr., we need to build a movement and make this happen. I'm all in. 🌍🌳🌦️🌈

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply