Younger Americans More Supportive of Exporting Natural Gas Than Older Americans

The new UT Energy Poll data is out today! Here I’ll highlight changing American attitudes related to the export of natural gas. The infographic above shows a snapshot of current survey responses collected March 3-­17 among 2,133 U.S.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The new UT Energy Poll data is out today! Here I'll highlight changing American attitudes related to the export of natural gas.

The infographic above shows a snapshot of current survey responses collected March 3-­17 among 2,133 U.S. residents aged 18 and older*.

The first thing I notice is that younger Americans are much more likely to support natural gas export than older Americans. It makes me wonder if this may reflect older respondents' memories of living through the 1970s energy crisis.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Republicans and Libertarians are also more likely than Democrats and Independents to support natural gas export, but age seems to be the most influential factor we observe in the data.

Looking at the data over time [not pictured], support for export has increased during the past year from 28 to 37 percent. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who disagree has decreased from 39 to 28 percent. Still, nearly one third of Americans remain neutral, which is not surprising giving energy literacy among the public remains low.

Why are we seeing increased support for natural gas export? It's possible that these trends may reflect the current media attention to Russian energy and the crisis in Ukraine. We can't be sure, but it will be interesting to see the Fall data in six months...

 

* Data from the poll were weighted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income based on U.S. Census Bureau figures, as well as propensity scores, to ensure the sample’s composition reflects the actual U.S. population. MOE for this wave is 3.0

This post originally appeared at Scientific American’s ‘Plugged In

Sheril Kirshenbaum is executive director of Science Debate, a nonpartisan org working to get presidential candidates on record on science policy. She co-directs Michigan State University's Food Literacy and Engagement Poll and hosts the NPR podcast Serving Up Science.

More by Sheril Kirshenbaum

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe