20 April 2007Patrick O'Driscoll and Elizabeth Weise,
A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds that more Americans than ever — 60%, up from 48% a decade ago — believe that global warming has begun to affect the climate. A slightly larger percentage think it will cause major or extreme changes in climate and weather during the next 50 years.
And in a reflection of the impact the environmental movement has had on Americans' attitudes in the nearly four decades since the first Earth Day celebration, most people now believe that they should take more steps as individuals — such as riding mass transit and making their homes more energy efficient — to help reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that trap heat in the atmosphere.
Even so, most people are wary of any government effort to protect the environment by imposing restrictions on how they live, work or get around. A majority of those surveyed in the poll, conducted March 23-25, said they wouldn't want a surcharge added to their utility bill if their homes exceeded certain energy-use levels. And most Americans would oppose any laws requiring cars sold in the USA to dramatically improve their gas mileage or restrictions on development to try to limit suburban sprawl.
Taken together, the poll responses indicate that Americans are going green on their own terms, depending on their interests and their wallets.
The survey comes as a barrage of warnings about global warming — most recently in March, from a United Nations science panel — has transformed the climate-change debate. Going green has moved past politics to become a fashion statement, and big business.
It's a shift reflected not just in the Academy Award for An Inconvenient Truth, the film on former vice president Al Gore's global-warming lecture. It's also evident in magazines from Vanity Fair to Fortune, whose recent "green" issues included hints about how to get green — or invest in companies that are.
America's move toward going green also can be seen in the ad campaigns and store aisles of the nation's largest retailers. Wal-Mart, the world's largest buyer of organic cotton, aims this year to sell 100 million compact fluorescent bulbs, which last longer and use far less energy than regular bulbs. The fluorescent bulbs typically cost five to seven times more.
In the USA TODAY poll, Americans showed a willingness to spend more money to help the environment.
More than two-thirds of those responding said they should use only fluorescent bulbs in their homes. And 62% said they should buy a gas-saving hybrid car such as the popular Toyota Prius. Gas-electric hybrids typically cost thousands of dollars more than cars with gas-only engines, and buyers usually have to keep the cars for several years to break even financially.
Meanwhile, more than eight in 10 said a company's environmental record should be an important factor in deciding whether to buy its products. And 78% thought spending several thousand dollars to make their homes more energy-efficient is a good idea.
But like Ari Adler of East Lansing, Mich., most Americans get more uncomfortable with the idea of going green if it were to mean limiting choices in daily life.
Adler says his 2003 Jeep Wrangler "has the aerodynamics of a brick, but I enjoy the vehicle I have." As his old light bulbs burn out, "I'll replace them with fluorescents. But I'll resist the idea that we should be required to do that."
Adler, 39, who works in public relations, says he is "one of those people (who) tries to do the right thing for the environment and knows there is more I should be doing, but don't necessarily do."
Going green can be expensive
Indeed, only about half of those polled thought they do a good job personally of protecting the environment. Less than 10% rate their efforts as "excellent."
Andy McDonald of South Bend, Ind., says he used to recycle his household trash — until the city made it mandatory and doubled his garbage bill to pay for it. "I was doing it anyway," McDonald says. "They were trying to force me to do it. I don't like that."
McDonald, 29, who services motor-home diesel engines, says he often sees contradictions in his customers' commitment to going green. "In the shop, people drive in with $500,000, $600,000, $700,000 motor homes with 500-horsepower engines that get, at best, 6 mpg on the highway," he says. "And yet they tow a hybrid around to drive when they get there. It's better than driving a regular vehicle, but maybe not driving the motor home could be a greater impact."
Products that help people use less energy — or leave a smaller "environmental footprint," as green advocates say — often are more costly than their alternatives, causing some to argue that going green is only for those who can afford it.
Those in older homes have to pay several thousands of dollars to replace windows with energy-saving, double-paned glass. Organic food, grown without chemicals potentially harmful to land, water, wildlife and people, costs more. So do hybrid vehicles and electricity generated by wind turbines or solar panels.
In a CBS News/New York Times poll last year, fewer than half of the respondents said they had bought a costlier, "eco-friendly" product during the past year.
"The fact is, most of these products sold as 'green' cost more than the alternative," says Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank that dismisses climate-change warnings as scare tactics not based on sound science. "You're already pricing people at the lower end out."
He cites a study by an automotive research group, CNW Marketing Research in Bandon, Ore., that calculated total energy use for several car models. Ebell says the overall energy outlay for the Prius — from design to the junkyard — is costlier "than for an SUV like my Chevy TrailBlazer. It takes a huge amount of energy just to fabricate those batteries."
Matt Golden heads a San Francisco firm that does home-energy audits to examine power use and heat loss and recommends ways residents can save.
"We don't have to live like cave people," Golden says. "You don't have to give things up. You just have to get smarter" about what it takes to run high-tech gadgets and appliances.
When Golden examined the home of Cliff and Monica Knudson in San Jose, Calif., he found that their plasma TV, with a digital video recorder and DVD player, drew 100 watts of power when turned off — the equivalent of burning a 100-watt light bulb 24 hours a day. Golden's solution: Plug everything into a power strip that can be turned off when the TV is not in use.
Several websites such as alittlegreener.com have popped up to offer advice to consumers about how to save energy, recycle and green up their lives — without being fanatic about it.
"It needs to be easy. It needs to be OK to start small," says Meredith Thomas of San Francisco, who launched alittlegreener.com last year as a guide for the not-so-eco-savvy consumer.
Astrid Usong of Redwood City, Calif., went to Thomas' site to find places to recycle building materials from a house she is remodeling with her husband, Patrick Weston. What she found there "touches every facet of your life: food, baby, family, work, vacation," says Usong, 29, a designer for a financial website.
Big gaps in awareness
Some analysts say the green movement is overhyped.
"Despite how ubiquitous this whole green message is, a lot of people still don't know what the hell this is about," says energy marketing consultant Suzanne Shelton of Knoxville, Tenn. A survey by her firm last year found 58% of Americans could not identify a source of "green, renewable or sustainable energy," such as solar or wind.
Shelton adds that 10% to 20% of those questioned say they participate in "green power" programs to pay a little extra for electricity generated by wind turbines or solar arrays. She says data from power companies show that no more than 4% actually participate.
"Their answers aren't consistent with reality," Shelton says. She says she isn't certain if the responses stem from social pressure to say the right thing or if "they're misunderstanding the terminology."
The USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows wide differences over what the government should do about global warming. About two-thirds favor spending many billions more on research into new sources of energy. But just one-third are comfortable with land-use restrictions to curb suburban sprawl, which necessitates more car trips. Only about a third favor imposing tough restrictions on U.S. industries and utilities.
For some, going green isn't about the environment as much as saving on home energy bills. Austin stockbroker Andrew Ma replaced more than 130 light bulbs with compact fluorescents in his 5,800-square-foot house after "doing the math."
"It makes a lot of sense," says Ma, 34.
But he says he won't give up his "gas hogs" — a Yukon Denali SUV and a Mercedes-Benz SL600 convertible — "that carry us in style and comfort."
"I'm not going to get a Prius. The fun factor is not there yet," he adds. "I do treasure the environment. But I'm not one of the tree huggers."
Contributing: Paul Davidson
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2007-04-18-going-green_N.htm?csp=34
