3.1. Climate change

Follow-up questions regarding the greenhouse effect and global warming have repeatedly indicated that people experience these phenomena as an actual threat with a connection to environmental pollution. As early as in the late 1980s, Finns tended to see a connection between air pollution and current weather conditions that were deemed exceptional. Now that there has been discussion about this issue under the concept of climate change, the phenomenon has been unambiguously clear.

Two out of three (67%) now agree that the rains, storms, floods and other exceptional weather conditions in the past few years are an indication of climate change¹ - in other words, show that pollution has upset the balance of nature. Only one in eight (13%) dare to disagree. Even though like-mindedness prevails, it is significantly lower than in the previous year (77%). When examining trends, it can be seen that attitudes have returned to the same levels as at the beginning of the millennium (2000-2004). During the time period from 2005 to 2007, when the debate on climate change more widely came to public knowledge, the public opinion visibly reacted to the situation. The dramatic news on destruction caused by natural catastrophes and also people's personal experiences of the unusual natural phenomena further convinced the population. Now, we have not seen people mowing their lawn in December and everything has seemed much more 'normal' also otherwise. One simple reason might be that the concern about the climate has become more commonplace. The current economic crisis might also be one reason that has pushed this matter aside [Figure 16.]

This way of thinking also emerges in direct connection with energy generation. Nearly three out of four (73%) think that the use of coal and other fossil fuels should be considerably restricted in order to stop the greenhouse effect. Also, this share is considerably smaller than the year before (76%). The demand has had extensive support for a long time (no figure).

The opinions on climate change were also studied by using another thesis which was formulated as clearly as possible. The purpose of this indicator, included in the survey for the first time two years ago, was to test how extreme an argument relating to the climate can be and still be accepted. The reactions to the statement 'Climate change is an actual and extremely serious threat which the entire world should begin to immediately eliminate by any means possible' show that there is directly no such limit. The fact that the statement is like a cry for help does not diminish its acceptance. A great majority (81%) agrees; only a marginal minority (6%) disagree. Although the figures are somewhat more reserved also in this connection compared to the previous peak figures (85% agreed in 2007), the result can still be considered an expression of an unusually wide unanimity [Figure 17.]. Differences among demographic groups - i.e., the fact that there are practically no differences - show how concern about the climate is a unifying factor for the entire society.

Earlier research information should also be mentioned in this connection. Four years ago (2004), an extensive series of questions was used to measure conceptions of climate change and the Kyoto protocol. The questions tested belief in the genuineness of the phenomenon. At that time, three in four agreed with the statement that climate change is an actual threat requiring efficient measures. The opposite claim, stating that the climate change is not true or at least the threat has been exaggerated, received more rejection than acceptance. One viewpoint on the attitudes towards the threat of climate change can be discovered when studying the opinions on allocating the resources of society (Chapter 6.).

According to previous reports, the public opinion seems to approve of many ways of preventing the climate change, even if they have received public criticism. This is also shown by another new statement measuring attitudes toward emissions trading. However, the thesis 'Even though emissions trading raises the price of electricity more than its production costs, emissions trade must be accepted due to its environmental advantages' strongly divides opinion (37% in favour, 32% against). The fact that the share of unsure respondents increased to nearly a third (30%) also shows an increase in uncertainty. When taking into account the criticism towards the price of electricity - and also the inclusion of windfall that can be seen in the argument - the result can be considered somewhat positive. It has already previously been noted that the opinions regarding the trade of emissions are highly dependent on how the statement used in the survey is formulated. If the statement refers to the potential national problems arising from the system, clearly fewer respondents accept it than when global responsibility or the role of the EU as a forerunner are mentioned. However, even the unilateral emission reduction measures of the EU are generally accepted rather than rejected. Other research data on attitudes relating to climate change also indicate the same phenomenon².

Also, a new statement was indirectly connected to the climate theme: 'Because most of the world's energy is produced using fossil fuels still at least for decades, the most urgent task is to develop systems for collecting and storing carbon dioxide'. Two out of three (67%) agree with the view, only about one in twenty is against (5%, no figure).

______________________________