U.S. Government
International
Academic, Non-Governmental
The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) has been running an online advertisement at the Washington Post, The Hill and other web sites which makes the following claim: 72% of opinion leaders support coal electricity.
A closer look at this claim provides yet another example of how the coal and electricity industries that created ACCCE are manipulating Americans in their fight to keep polluting for free.
If you click on the "America's Power" advertisement, you're taken to this page, where the ACCCE claims "it’s easy to see why 72 percent of American opinion leaders support the use of coal." On this page are four links that all go to the same press release describing the ACCCE study that produced this 72% number.
The Election Day 2008 press release makes a number of questionable claims. I requested a copy of the survey's methodology last week from ACCCE and received no response. One of the hired pollsters involved was more forthcoming with information, though not a copy of the methodology.
The claims all rest on the survey's definition, provided at the bottom of the press release, of "opinion leaders," aka "opinion elites."
These are defined as follows:
The poll interviewed 600 opinion elites nationwide. Elites are defined as adults with $80,000 or more in household income and a four-year college degree or more and a professional or managerial job title or a business owner and a high degree of involvement in politics and policy matters.
So how many people is that really?
According to the Census Bureau economic data, there were 116.8 million households in the U.S. in 2007 (the latest year for which there's complete data), of which only 34.1 million meet the income requirement described for an "opinion elite" above. That's just 29% of all households.
According to the Census Bureau educational attainment data, there are approximately 60.5 million people in the U.S. with at least a four-year college degree. That's just under 28% of the estimated population of the U.S. in 2007 that was at least 18 years old.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, if we take all occupations in management, legal, computers and mathematics, architecture and engineering, healthcare providers and technicians, and business and finance as individuals who might qualify as "opinion elites" by profession, that's a total of approximately 26.1 million people out of a total of approximately 253 million people employed in 2007. That's only about 10% of the workforce.
Finally, we'll have to make an educated guess about how someone was defined as having "a high degree of involvement in politics and policy matters."It's probably fair to say that the nation's 65,000 legislators and 15,000 lobbyists in 2007 qualified, but they are certainly not alone (and they're already counted in the workforce numbers just described). Pollster Thomas Riehle of RT Strategies, one of the two groups that produced this study for the ACCCE, says the 600 participants were selected from a group regularly used by his company. He says they represent about 7% of the population.
As you can see, there's a significant problem with this definition – it applies to such a small number of individuals in the U.S. that it's impossible to generalize the results.
So much for the available survey methodology notes – on to the survey's results.
CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2
CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is one of the the key components to Life on earth.
Awesome!!!
Awesome!!!
Polls are phoney
Whenever I see a poll concerning something the government wants pushed through, knowing how corrupt they are, I ignore their reading and take a poll of my own and I prove them wrong 9 times outta 10.
In Canada after the polls registered a whopping 59% favouring same sex marriages, I went canvassing on my own and found that the polls are totally wrong, at least in the greater Edmonton area. I also found if a choice was made between on record and off, the ratings were different again. In conclussion, the majority of the people off record were dead set against gay marriage, but on record they explained they didn't want to rock the boat and disagree with the polls so they replied yes.
There is a certain amount of fear in this country for stating ones mind.
well.... if you don't use
well.... if you don't use coal... you have to use either gas or nuclear... and there are lots of people opposed to nuclear.. and gas... well, it's not good to choose only one fuel source in case prices swing.. and they have swung hard in the past 3 years.. from 4 to 14 to 4 again....
And don't give me the bs answer on renewables.. they are by far the most expensive.. and anything over 5% and you have to have something there to back it up.. like gas... because the wind doesn't blow on the hottest day of the year.. and solar is expensive!!!! so live with coal.. CO2 is not destroying the earth.. the bs politicians message is.
Which is really "more expensive"...
"And don't give me the bs answer on renewables.. they are by far the most expensive."
Renewables only *appear* more expensive because fossil fuels A) receive massive government subsidies, and B) do not have to pay the full costs of bringing their product to market. That is, mining companies are allowed to pollute the areas around them (taxpayers clean it up later) and coal plants are allowed to spew mercury and CO2 willy-nilly into the air. It's as if your neighbor were allowed to dump his trash in your bins and his excrement onto your lawn.
In fact, the market is even more restricted---when government leases for oil, gas, coal, and uranium exploration and extraction are put up for bid, ONLY those folks in those industries are allowed to bid on them, deflating the "market value". If any group or corporation (e.g. Sierra Club) were allowed to bid, leases would find a true market value as some of them would be purchased by non-industry agents.
Public opinion about coal
Brian,
I am sure that ACEEE is putting a PR spin on the research results & you may like to have further information to check the inferences from the survey - yet I also suspect the overall findings are probably about right.
We made a press release early this year about the coal industry, and our headline finding was that:
When it comes to the battle of ideas about coal, the coal industry has a considerable public opinion advantage over environmental groups, such as the Alliance for Climate Protection
http://www.haddock-research.com/coal_industry_has_considerable_public_op...
Drop me a line if you'd like some special analysis of the data to check the points ACEEE were making (contact details on the Haddock site).
Rgds, Peter
Post new comment