Carbon capture technologies are methods designed to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions from sources like power plants to prevent them from entering the atmosphere. Proponents argue that subsidies would accelerate the development of essential technologies to combat climate change. Opponents argue that it is too costly and that the market should drive innovation without government intervention.
66% Yes |
34% No |
66% Yes |
34% No |
See how support for each position on “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 1.2k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 1.2k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@GavinKuebler2wks2W
No, they are a largely inefficient means of reducing carbon since they focus only on reversing environmental harm rather than reducing it and can be used to justify further carbon emissions.
@9MY56NM6 days6D
No, the government should fund their own research and penalize companies that don't follow best practice
@9MS62CQ1wk1W
I want to say no but with limited choices, consumer opinion is almost moot. Without intervention, companies have no reason to change because customers have virtually no voice.
@3JZDMSD 2wks2W
Yes, for those companies that are pursuing entry to markets.
@9MQ3BJM1wk1W
No, most carbon capture tech is mainly a means of giving companies an out on their emissions levels and distract from actual solutions such as degrowth and ending capitalism.
@SenBR2003 2wks2W
Yes, but only in tandem with supporting renewable energy production.
Explore other topics that are important to America voters.
