mead berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Poll: Support for Climate Agreement Down

With the COP21 global climate summit kicking off next Monday in Paris, a new shock poll found declining support across the globe for a tough climate agreement. The BBC:

Only four now have majorities in favour of their governments setting ambitious targets at a global conference in Paris.

In a similar poll before the Copenhagen meeting in 2009, eight countries had majorities favouring tough action.

The poll has been provided to the BBC by research group GlobeScan.

Just under half of all those surveyed viewed climate change as a “very serious” problem this year, compared with 63% in 2009. […]

All told an average of 42% of those polled want their government to play a leadership role in setting ambitious targets, while another 41% want their government to take a more moderate approach and support only gradual action.

“The public are less concerned about climate change, and when you put that in the context of the climate conference in Paris, the findings show less support for an ambitious and binding agreement at a global level than there was ahead of COP15 in 2009 in Copenhagen,” said Lionel Bellier, from GlobeScan.

“It’s not an abrupt change of views, the trend seems to be now towards a softer approach.”

A “softer approach” seems eminently sensible to us. The fact remains that any unwieldy agreement hashed out among world leaders with wildly differing agendas will be practically unenforceable, at thus will be only marginally effective if it succeeds in moving the needle at all. The whole circus is at best a distraction, and at worst a growth-killing boondoggle which will provide the world economy with yet another layer of restrictive, expensive bureaucracy to be gamed by the nimble and to be paid for by the slow-witted.

Alas, public opinion alone has never deterred globalist bureaucrats from forging boldly ahead with their schemes. We’re nearly certain this time around will be no different. 

Features Icon
show comments
  • bottomfish

    I think this change in public opinion reflects the growing realization, despite environmentalist propaganda, that a meaningful greenhouse gas reduction scheme will cripple the world’s biggest economies.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    Now we know where the majority of foolish people live, Spain, Canada, UK, and France. I think we could sell these rubes a bridge.

    • Robert

      Foolishness would seem to be topic specific. Who bought the Obama Bridge twice?

  • Boyd

    I assume they will be discussing how to advance nuclear technology at a faster pace at this meeting? Won’t they?

    • bannedforselfcensorship

      Electric cars, plus nuclear power, plus some grab bag of solar, etc. where appropriate (sunny, hot climes.)

      The Democrats could have rolled out a plan to build 100 nuclear power plants as part of the stimulus. They preferred to build bike paths and pay off state employees.

      They could have at least funded Yucca Mountain, the storage facility. This would have helped a state hardest hit, Nevada. Yucca mountain of course was not funded.

  • Terenc Blakely

    When the world needs leadership to head off WWIII, we get another Climate Change conference. Worst political class…. ever.

    • catorenasci

      Well, the Russian aristocracy in 1914, and the French aristocracy in 1789, were probably as bad, but it’s a close run thing….

  • Olinser

    Like they care what the stupid unwashed masses of their countries think.

    The only thing they care about is whether they can use this to seize power. It has not, and never WILL BE, about the climate.

  • Rick Johnson

    Only the weak minded who have swallowed the Greens BS about climate change would find this poll a shock. Anyone who has been following the science welcomes this poll as confirmation that more and more people are seeing through this great Green scam. It’s about time TAI got with the program. Your credibility as serious commentators who can be trusted takes a big hit everytime who push the Left’s line.

  • bittman

    I am very concerned that Obama and Kerry have been saying they can enter a treaty (or Executive Agreement) at this upcoming Climate Change Conference WITHOUT TAKING THE MATTER TO THE USA SENATE FOR RATIFICATION as every American should know is required by our Constitution. When will Americans wake up and see that a President who can use his “PEN and PHONE” and the REGULATORY AGENCIES to legislate is really a DICTATOR?

    • bannedforselfcensorship

      If they pull another UN vote on an agreement, no need for the Senate…well, nothing will happen, but that’s how you have your Republic fall.

  • Blackbeard

    It would be comforting to think that as the negative effects of foolish environmental policies, and other misguided efforts by our “elites” become apparent, they would reconsider and back off. But actually those negative effects (tepid economic growth, demographic collapse, stagnant wages, increased inequality, increased terrorism, etc., etc., etc.) are already here and our leaders resolutely refuse to see that it is their very policies that are making things worse. In addition, with the enthusiastic help of our complaisant mass media, they are able, at least so far, to confuse enough voters to cling to power.

    It’s enough to make one wonder if perhaps the Chinese don’t have a better idea.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service