65%
Yes
35%
No
65%
Yes
35%
No

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 1.3k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 1.3k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.

 @9NF9B4M from Iowa answered…6 days6D

No, but companies should be taxed for their carbon emissions and this will incentivize them to invest in carbon capture technologies and other ways of reducing pollution

 @SenBR2003 from New York answered…3wks3W

 @GavinKuebler from Pennsylvania answered…3wks3W

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.

 @9L4Z23B  from Pennsylvania answered…5 days5D

No, but they should be eligible for R&D grants contingent on the US Government getting equity on any patents granted

 @9NCW7BK from Georgia answered…1wk1W

We have many ways we create power in this country - so each method would capture and store CO2 in different ways. This question needs to be more specific.
That's a big problem I have with many college students who harp about climate change - they haven't done their homework so they talk in generalties. A lot of these folks - don't even know what is too much or the right amount of CO2.

  @ChaseOliverLibertarian  from South Carolina answered…2wks2W

The best way for government to combat climate change would be to lower taxes and end artificial barriers to entry that protect favored firms and stifle innovation. Doing so would allow the market to find solutions.

Other Popular Questions

Explore other topics that are important to America voters.