Public Interest in Climate Change Wanes says Friends of Science Society
Recent polls indicate that climate change action is no longer a priority for most North Americans, says Friends of Science Society. This runs counter to the 89% climate action advocacy media project of Covering Climate Now and counter to claims of Canada’s Abacus Data of a spike in climate interest by the public.
CALGARY, AB, July 17, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — Results of a new poll by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) think tank published on July 09, 2025, show that Americans are more interested in reliable, affordable power, driving conventional Internal Combustion Engine vehicles over Electric Vehicles, and are generally unconcerned about the alleged “climate crisis,” says Friends of Science. The report on the poll results is titled, “The Science vs. the Narrative vs. the Voters: Clarifying the Public Debate Around Energy and Climate.” It includes a helpful chronology of how climate change escalated to a ‘climate emergency.’
Friends of Science Society has produced a new video explainer titled, “Abacus Data is at it Again on Climate Change.” The video critiques climate advocacy claims made by Abacus Data in a recent poll, who frame their findings as “Public concerns about climate up 15-points since October 2024.” For Canadians, according to the Abacus poll, the top three priorities are: 1) the rising cost of living (59%); 2) Donald Trump and his administration (46%); 3) the economy (38%). Climate change and the environment comes in at just 14%, in eighth place on a list of 13 priorities.
The AEI survey finds that Americans’ top three priorities are: 1) strengthening the nation’s economy (70%); 2) fighting inflation (68%); 3) defending the country from future terrorist attacks (63%). “Dealing with climate change” is in 15th place out of 18 priorities, at 40%.
The AEI survey of Americans asked what people would be willing to pay for climate change action. “When asked if they would support just a $1 monthly fee on their electricity bill to fight climate change, only 47 percent say they would, while almost as many (43 percent) were opposed…and at $100, the ratio is 1:7, with just 11 percent in favor of paying such a fee to combat climate change and 77 percent opposed.”
By contrast, the Abacus Data survey included no such question and that is the focus of much of Friends of Science Society’s critique. In Friends of Science Society’s report “What are climate policies costing Canada?” author Robert Lyman states, “The total federal and provincial expenditures on climate measures over the period 2020 to 2030 as listed by the Carbon Policy Tracker are $476 billion or $11,900 per resident of Canada. This equates to roughly $28,000 per household (i.e. an average of $2,800 per household per year). This is just what has been announced to date; there remain five more fiscal years before 2030 during which governments may add more initiatives.”
Friends of Science Society is critical of Abacus Data’s questions which conflate extreme weather events, floods and wildfires with evidence of climate change. As stated in the AEI findings, such claims are not consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The AEI authors state, “The catastrophism around climate change, as noted in the first section, is not consistent with the IPCC’s scientific findings, despite the claims of the (climate alarmist) narrative…”
Covering Climate Now, a media umbrella project has been pushing their 89% climate action project, claiming there is a pro-climate action “silent majority.” A Western Standard article of April 22, 2025 deconstructs the 89% surveys, noting that their reference to people being willing to spend 1% of their income on climate action. That means Canadians would be spending about $431 per capita. In fact, Canadians are paying tens of thousands of dollars for climate action. If Canada’s emissions reduction targets were attained, the efforts might reduce global temperatures by 0.007 °Celsius (seven thousandths of a degree Celsius) by 2100. For this immeasurable amount, the country would be ruined by degrowth as outlined in Friends of Science Society’s videos “Canada’s Net Zero Climate Policies,” and “Net Zero – All Pain, No Gain.”
The AEI report features insights from polymath and energy expert Vaclav Smil’s report, “Halfway Between Kyoto and 2050: Zero Carbon Is a Highly Unlikely Outcome.” Smil sees the Net Zero 2050 target as unattainable – indeed, delusional.
About
Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens that is celebrating its 23rd year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).
more news
Crisis or hoax?, a new book by former Dutch parliamentarian
Crisis or hoax?, a new book by former Dutch parliamentarian In Crisis or Hoax?, earth scientist and former Dutch parliamentarian Jules de Waart critically examines the IPCC's CO2-driven climate change narrative, arguing the science is unsettled and lacks robust evidence. Drawing on his expertise in climatology and political science, he challenges the [...]
The Tide is Turning Decisively Against Net Zero
The Tide is Turning Decisively Against Net Zero The cracks in the climate industrial complex are no longer hairline fractures; they are gaping holes, writes Tilak Doshi. Even some former apostles of the green faith, such as former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, now admit that phasing out fossil fuels is “doomed to [...]
Unrealistic Canadian Climate Policy Bogs Down Economy
Unrealistic Canadian Climate Policy Bogs Down Economy "Canadian Climate Policy – What Comes Next?" is a new report by Robert Lyman, published by Friends of Science Society. US Endangerment Finding on carbon dioxide is consequential to central bank and Canadian climate policies. Friends of [...]
