In the online survey of representative national samples, 58 per cent of Canadians believe that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. The proportion of respondents who feel the same way is considerably lower in the United States (47%) and Britain (45%).

While three-in-five Canadians (60%) support protecting the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, only 49 per cent of respondents in the United States—and 44 per cent in Britain—concur.

There is one area of Canada where significantly less than half of respondents believe in man-made climate change: Alberta (42%). In the United States, most residents of the Northeast (53%) and Midwest (52%) think global warming is caused by emissions, but their counterparts in the West (47%) and the South (42%) appear more skeptical.

In Britain, fewer than half of respondents across the five main regions agree with man-made climate change. London (48%) has the highest numbers, followed by Midlands and Wales (47%), the South of England (46%), Scotland (also 46%) and the North (42%).

Since 2009, most Canadians have sided with the notion of man-made climate change. This year’s numbers show little fluctuation from the survey conducted in Canada in June 2012. In the United States, the proportion of respondents who believe global warming is caused by emissions increased by five points. However, it still below the historic highs recorded in November 2009 and August 2011.

In Britain, no survey conducted in the past five years has yielded a majority of respondents expressing belief in man-made climate change, although the proportion of respondents who claim global warming is an unproven theory has dropped from a high of 27 per cent in April 2010 (during the University of East Anglia’s Independent Climate Change Email Review) to 19 per cent this year.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Full Methodology Details

The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/-2.2% for Canada and Great Britain and +/-3.1% for the United States. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of each country.

In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,015 British adults, 45 per cent of respondents support building more nuclear power stations in the UK, while one third (33%) are opposed.

Since November 2009, the proportion of Britons who are in favour of expanding nuclear energy in the country has dropped by ten points.

Across Britain, 45 per cent of respondents want the UK to further pursue its nuclear energy capabilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Conversely, 34 per cent would prefer to avoid nuclear energy and focus on other carbon-free sources of energy.

At least two thirds of Britons remain “very concerned” or “moderately concerned” about nuclear waste management (74%), an accident at a nuclear power plant (69%) and health risks for communities that are close to a nuclear power station (66%). Three-in-five (62%) are worried about nuclear technology falling into the hands of extremists.

Download Full Tables

Download Full Methodology Statement

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From November 9 to November 12, 2011, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,015 randomly selected British adults who are Springboard UK panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

In the online survey of a representative provincial sample of 800 British Columbian adults, two thirds of respondents (68%) claim to have followed news stories related to proposals to build and expand pipelines in the province “very closely” or “moderately closely.”

In the survey, respondents were shown a map with the proposed location of the Enbridge Northern Gateway, a new pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia’s north coast that would export oil on tankers to China. Only nine per cent of British Columbians completely support the proposal (+2 since August), while 27 per cent support it (=), but could change their minds based on economic or environmental considerations.

Across the province, one third of respondents (34%, -1) say they completely oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway, while one-in-four (23%, -1) oppose the proposal, but could change their minds based on economic or environmental considerations.

Respondents who voiced complete or partial opposition to the Northern Gateway were also asked if they would be more likely to endorse the project if any of the five bottom-line requirements outlined by the BC Government are met. A third of opponents to the Northern Gateway say they would be more likely to back the project if world-leading marine oil-spill prevention and response systems are established (32%).

Fewer opponents say they would change their mind if on-land spill response is enhanced to world-leading standards (30%), if clear fiscal and economic benefits to British Columbia are outlined (29%) and if an environmental review process is completed (27%). In these four categories, there is a marked reduction in the proportion of possible switchers since the summer.

British Columbians were also asked about the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling in the north and central coast of British Columbia, which has been in place since the 1970s and is interpreted by some people as a ban on oil tankers in the north and central coast. A third of respondents (33%, -2) believe that oil tankers should “definitely” or “probably” be allowed in BC’s north and central coast, while a majority (53%, +2) would “definitely” or “probably” ban these vessels from the area.

Despite the attention that the Northern Gateway has generated in recent months, only three-in-ten British Columbians (31%) are content with the way Premier and BC Liberals leader Christy Clark has handled the issue, down six points in two months. One third of respondents (34%) are satisfied with the stance taken by Official Opposition and BC New Democratic Party (NDP) leader Adrian Dix. Green Party leader Jane Sterk (18%) and BC Conservative leader John Cummins (10%) post lower numbers.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From October 9 to October 10, 2012, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 800 randomly selected British Columbia adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.5%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of British Columbia. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

In the online survey of a representative provincial sample of 804 British Columbian adults, seven-in-ten respondents (71%) say they have followed news stories related to two proposals to build and expand pipelines in British Columbia “very closely” or “moderately closely.”

The survey allowed respondents to see a map that shows the proposed location of the Enbridge Northern Gateway, a new pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia’s north coast that would export oil on tankers to China. Only seven per cent of respondents completely support the proposal, while 27 per cent support it, but could change their minds based on economic or environmental considerations.

Across British Columbia, more than a third of respondents (35%) completely oppose the Enbridge Northern Gateway, while one-in-four (24%) oppose the proposal, but could change their minds based on economic or environmental considerations.

The proportion of complete opponents to the Enbridge Northern Gateway outranks that of complete supporters by a 5-to-1 margin. However, half of British Columbians (51%) are currently taking a moderate position of support or opposition that could change depending on specific considerations.

Respondents who voiced complete or partial opposition to the Northern Gateway were asked if they would be more likely to support the project if any of the five bottom-line requirements outlined by the British Columbia government are met. About a third of opponents to the Northern Gateway say they would be more likely to back the project if world-leading marine oil-spill prevention and response systems are established (37%), if on-land spill response is enhanced to world-leading standards (35%), if an environmental review process is completed (34%), and if clear fiscal and economic benefits to British Columbia are outlined (32%).

Respondents were also asked about the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling in the north and central coast of British Columbia, which has been in place since the 1970s and is interpreted by some people as a ban on oil tankers in the north and central coast. More than a third of respondents (35%) think oil tankers should “definitely” or “probably” be allowed in BC’s north and central coast, while half (51%) would “definitely” or “probably” ban these vessels from the area.

A separate proposal to expand an existing Kinder Morgan pipeline that carries oil from Alberta to Vancouver Harbour is supported by 37 per cent of British Columbians (9% completely, 28% with reservations), and opposed by half of respondents (25% completely, 25% with reservations).

Across British Columbia, 37 per cent of respondents are satisfied with the stance taken by Premier and BC Liberals leader Christy Clark on the issue of pipelines, while 43 per cent are dissatisfied. A similar proportion of British Columbians (35%) is content with the position of Official Opposition and BC New Democratic Party (NDP) leader Adrian Dix, while 27 per cent are not happy with his stance. The rating is significantly lower for Green Party leader Jane Sterk (20%) and BC Conservative leader John Cummins (14%).

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From July 30 to August 1, 2012, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 804 randomly selected British Columbia adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.5%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of British Columbia. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

In the online survey of a representative sample of 1,505 Australian adults, seven-in-ten respondents (70%) think the carbon tax will have a negative financial impact on their families, while only ten per cent foresee a positive impact.

In addition, only nine per cent of Australians believe they will see significant long-term benefits for the environment as a result of the carbon tax, with almost half (47%) think some benefits will materialise, and 44 per cent say no benefits will emerge.

Under the carbon tax, about 300 of Australia’s largest polluters will pay $23 for every tonne of carbon dioxide they emit. In 2015, an emissions trading scheme with regular auctioning of pollution permits will come into force.

Only 17 per cent of Australians say they have a high level of understanding of how the carbon tax works, while 52 per cent claim to have a medium level of understanding.

Across Australia, around half of respondents (48%) think global warming is entirely or mostly caused by man-made sources, while 31 per cent believe it is mostly or entirely caused by natural changes. Only 15 per cent of Australians say global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven.

A majority of Australians (50%) would prefer to protect the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, while just over one-in-four (27%) would prefer to foster economic growth, even at the risk of damaging the environment.

Compared to the views outlined by respondents to a three-country Angus Reid Public Opinion poll conducted earlier this year, Australians are slightly less likely to believe in man-made global warming than Canadians. Australians are more likely to call for the protection of the environment even at the risk of hampering economic growth than people in Britain and the United States.

While Australians over the age of 55 are more likely to be sceptical about man-made global warming than their younger counterparts, they are also more likely to say that they understand how the carbon tax works, to believe it will have a positive impact on their families, and to expect significant long-term benefits for the environment.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Peter Harris, Managing Director, Vision Critical AUS/NZ
+02 9256 2001
peter.harris@visioncritical.com

Methodology: From July 6 to July 8, 2012, Vision Critical Australia conducted an online survey among 1,505 randomly selected Australian adults who are Nine Rewards panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 2.5%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Australia. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

The online survey of representative national samples also shows that belief in man-made climate change has reached the highest level in the United States since 2009, and has fallen considerably in Britain.

Overall, half of Canadians (52%, -8 since October) and Americans (49%, +7) say that that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. Only 43 per cent of Britons (-4) agree with this assessment.

In the United States, one-in-five respondents (20%, -5) think that global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven, along with 20 per cent of Britons (+2) and 14 per cent of Canadians (=).

More than half of Canadians (55%, -6) believe it is more important to protect the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, while 22 per cent (+4) would prefer to foster economic growth, even at the risk of damaging the environment.

In the United States, 47 per cent of respondents (+2) would emphasize protecting the environment, while 26 per cent (-4) would foster economic growth. The biggest change since last year comes in Britain, where only 40 per cent of respondents would protect the environment (-11) and 33 per cent would prefer to foster economic growth (+11).

Analysis

Since 2009, Angus Reid Public Opinion has conducted five three-country surveys on global warming. The latest poll outlines one of the lowest proportions of believers in man-made climate change ever recorded in Canada (52%). Still, Canadians are more likely than Americans or Britons to both believe in emissions as the primary source of global warming and to choose environmental protection over economic growth.

In the United States, despite the economic crisis, belief in man-made global warming has reached the high level that was observed before the so-called “climate-gate” controversy. In addition, the proportion of Americans who brand climate change as an unproven theory fell by five points, the biggest fluctuation observed in the past three years.

Britain has become the main source of skepticism, with the lowest proportion of believers in man-made global warming, and with a third of Britons acknowledging that they would foster economic growth even at the risk of damaging the environment—the largest proportion observed in all three countries.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From August 25 to September 2, 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,001 Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists, 1,000 American adults who are Springboard America panellists, and 2,005 British adults who are Springboard UK panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% for Canada and the United States, and 2.2 per cent for Great Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Canada, the U.S. and Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

In the online survey of a representative sample of 1,005 American adults, 68 per cent of respondents acknowledge that recent price increases in gasoline have caused financial hardship for themselves and others in their household.

Respondents in the South (71%) appear to be the most affected, followed by those in the Midwest (68%), the West (67%) and the Northeast (63%).

When asked if they have taken any measures to deal with recent gas price increases, seven-in-ten Americans (69%) say they are driving less than usual, while two-in-five (38%) are filling up their cars with less fuel than they would normally do.

One-in-five Americans (20%) are walking to destinations more often than they used to, while fewer respondents are choosing to carpool more (12%) or take public transit (10%).

Across the country, five per cent of Americans say they have sold their car to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle. This course of action is more prevalent among respondents aged 18-to-34 (7%) and people in the West (8%).

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Angus Reid Public Opinion
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From August 4 to August 5, 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,005 American adults who are Springboard America panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1%. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of the United States. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

The considerable level of uncertainty that Britons expressed earlier this year towards global warming has subsided, as more people in the country regard climate change as a fact, a new three-country Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found.

The online survey of representative national samples also shows that Canadians continue to lead the way in the belief that global warming is caused by emissions, while Americans remain particularly doubtful.

Overall, three-in-five Canadians (60%, +2 since April) say that that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. This month, 47 per cent of Britons agree with this assessment, up nine points in six months. Americans are the most skeptical at 42 per cent (+1).

In the United States, a quarter of respondents (25%, unchanged) believe global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven, along with 18 per cent of Britons (-9) and 14 per cent of Canadians (-4).

Three-in-five Canadians (61%) think it is more important to protect the environment, even at the risk of hampering economic growth, while 18 per cent would prefer to foster economic growth, even at the risk of damaging the environment.

Half of Britons would rather protect the environment (51%) than foster economic growth (22%). The views of Americans are more nuanced on this issue (45% to 30%).

Analysis

Canadians went through a period of global warming disbelief at the end of 2009, when the proportion of respondents who saw climate change as a fact mostly caused by emissions fell by 11 points. Now, Canadians are closer to their pre-Copenhagen summit numbers.

In stark contrast, the views of Americans have not recovered since last year’s plunge. Twice in 2010, a quarter of respondents have branded climate change as an unproven theory—six points higher than in November 2009.

In Britain, the conclusion of the so-called “climate-gate” has left opinions about global warming at roughly the same levels as before the controversy first began. The big drop experienced in April has dissipated, and Britons are now closer to Canadians on this issue.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Communications & Media Relations
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From October 4 to October 17, 2010 Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,009 Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panellists, 1,003 American adults who are Springboard America panellists, and 1,948 British adults who are Springboard UK panellists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% for Canada and the United States, and 2.2 per cent for Great Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure samples representative of the entire adult population of Canada, the US and Great Britain. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

A three-country Angus Reid Public Opinion poll has found that a campaign designed to link Alberta’s oil sands with damaging environmental practices could have a devastating impact on the province’s brand and tourism industry.

The online survey of representative national samples of 1,012 Canadian, 1,013 American, and 1,956 British adults sought to gauge public reaction to the “Rethink Alberta” campaign, which was launched last month by environmental groups and includes an online video, a website and billboards.

At the start of the survey, 49 per cent of Americans and 54 per cent of Britons said they would “definitely” or “probably” consider visiting Alberta if they were planning a holiday today.

However, after respondents were shown the 1:40 minute ad that “Rethink Alberta” has posted on YouTube, the perceptions of Americans and Britons clearly soured.

After watching the ad, only 26 per cent of Americans and 24 per cent of Britons would still “definitely” or “probably” consider travelling to Alberta. In fact, the proportion of those who would “definitely not” plan a holiday in Alberta increased from 15 per cent to 34 per cent among American respondents, and from 12 per cent to 31 per cent among British respondents.

Assessment of the Ad

Respondents in the three countries were asked to choose up to four adjectives to describe the online video.

In Canada, only five per cent of Albertans say the ad is fair but over a fifth of respondents in all other provinces—including 36 per cent in Ontario—describe it as fair. For Albertans, the ad is mostly deceiving (79%), unfair (67%), offensive (60%), and untrue (45%).

Over seven-in-ten respondents in the U.S., including 80 per cent in the South and 79 per cent in the Northeast, say the ad is informative. More than a third of Americans—including 46 per cent in the South—call it honest.

In Britain, at least three-in-ten respondents (40% in Scotland) think the ad is truthful and, just like in the U.S., a very large majority of respondents (at least 73%) deem it informative. London holds the highest proportion of respondents who describe the video as unfair (still quite low at 17%).

Oil Sands and the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

After watching the ad, Canadians are reticent to agree with the allegation that the environmental impact of Alberta’s oil industry is actually worse than the environmental impact of the recent oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. While only 27 per cent of Canadians agree with this statement—made last month by Michael Marx of Corporate Ethics International—two-in-five Americans (43%) and Britons (42%) do agree with the notion that Alberta’s oil industry is damaging the environment in a greater way than the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

The ad that was shown to survey respondents can be seen here.

Full Report, Detailed Tables and Methodology (PDF)

CONTACT:

Mario Canseco, Vice President, Public Affairs
+877 730 3570
mario.canseco@angus-reid.com

Methodology: From July 22 to August 1, 2010, Angus Reid Public Opinion conducted an online survey among 1,012 randomly selected Canadian adults who are Angus Reid Forum panelists; 1,013 American adults who are Springboard America panelists; and 1,956 British adults who are Springboard UK panelists. The margin of error—which measures sampling variability—is +/- 3.1% in Canada and the U.S., and 2.2% in Britain. The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the entire adult population of the three countries. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding.

Mario Canseco comments on the findings for CBC News.

In the United States, 53 per cent of respondents think the federal administration is not paying enough attention to the environment. In Britain, 40 per cent of respondents feel the same way about their government.

The G8 was created after the 1998 Birmingham summit. Russia had attended previous meetings of the G7, but had been excluded from specific discussions on financial and economic matters. The group holds annual summits where the heads of government of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States discuss economic and political affairs. The European Union (EU) also attends these meetings as an observer. The G20, which incorporates finance ministers and central bank governors from 19 countries and the EU, meets twice a year.

The latest G8 summit took place on Jun. 25 and Jun. 26 in Huntsville, Ontario (Canada), and the G20 meeting was held in Toronto on Jun. 26 and Jun. 27.

Late last month, executive director of Greenpeace USA Phil Radford expressed dismay at the way the G20 countries dealt with the environment, saying, "It is like a meal where you ask your friends to come and bring a dish. Some countries came with things that were half-baked. Some countries like Canada came with food that was rotten and then others showed up with nothing at all."

Polling Data

Canada – Overall, do you think the federal government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

United States – Overall, do you think the federal government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

Britian – Overall, do you think the Government is paying too much attention, the right amount of attention, or too little attention to the environment?

Complete Poll (PDF)