Skip to content

Majority Of Brits Unwilling To Give Up Planes, Cars And New Clothes For Climate

October 27, 2021

By Paul Homewood


YahooFinance show just how you can turn black into white!




The overwhelming majority (91%) of Brits feel a personal level of responsibility in the fight against climate change, a new Ford-commissioned study has found.

A third (34%) are willing to use their car less, while 30% are willing to give up travelling abroad on planes. Over two fifths (44%) are willing to limit their buying of new clothes.

Almost half (45%) are planning to give up using non-recyclable plastics and 44% want to reduce their energy consumption.

Some 85% would be willing to adjust their shopping habits as they said it was important to buy products from businesses that have a positive or carbon-neutral contribution to the environment.

In the survey of 2,000 Brits, having a global plan to tackle climate change was the most important issue facing the UK today for 34% — the third most important issue after getting out of the pandemic (42%) and ensuring economic recovery post-COVID (38%).

The survey of 2,000 Brits showed that 34% of people thought having a global plan to tackle climate change was the most important issue facing the UK today, behind getting out of the pandemic (42%) and ensuring economic recovery post-COVID (38%).

However, more than a quarter (27%) also said putting in stricter measures to curb climate change was needed immediately.

A quarter of Brits thought the 2030 ban on petrol and diesel vehicles should be brought forward to an earlier date but nearly a third thought it should be pushed back or scrapped altogether.

Some 13% said that the next car they buy will be an electric vehicle (EV).

However, one-in-five (21%) said they have no intention of buying an EV and a further 19% will not consider purchasing an EV until they have no other option.

Charging worries was the main off-putting factor when it came to switching to an EV, with nearly half (47%) saying they’d have concerns about where they would charge their vehicle.

Two fifths said having an EV would put them off long journeys.

“This survey shows how much Britons care about climate change and that they’re ready to take a number of individual actions to help fight it.

"When it comes to personal transportation, it is clear they see EVs as the future, yet what the survey also shows is that people continue to have concerns around charging infrastructure and perceived range anxiety,” said Stuart Rowley, president Ford (F) of Europe.

Ford is calling for government, at national and local levels, energy providers and auto companies "to make an emphatic case about the opportunities of electrification to consumers and to create the infrastructure necessary to support the vision, as it is only with a unified approach that we can deliver on this promise".

Far from being a ringing endorsement of “fighting climate change”, it seems a rather lukewarm response at best.

I have highlighted the main numbers:

  • 34% will use cars less
  • 30% giving up planes
  • 44% buying fewer new clothes
  • 44% to reduce energy consumption
  • 13% will buy an EV next

What these numbers tell us is that the majority of the country are against all of these things, even pretty anodyne stuff, like buying fewer clothes.

The only area where a large majority exists is for adjusting shopping habits, which is a meaningless statement.

Apparently 91% feel a personal responsibility, but this is just what you would expect from such a poll. But actually doing something is another matter. Particularly when that something costs a lot of money!

A more honest headline from Yahoo would have been:

“Most Brits not willing to give up on planes, cars and new clothes for climate, Ford survey finds”

  1. Ray Sanders permalink
    October 27, 2021 10:49 am

    I can do a survey of 2000 people. Now what result do you want me to prove?
    p.s. I don’t charge a lot on account of I make it all up anyway.

    • October 27, 2021 11:15 am

      That sounds like the perfect description of any and all so called opinion surveys!

  2. October 27, 2021 10:55 am

    YahooFinance title is just missing the word “some” at the beginning of the sentence.

  3. Harry Passfield permalink
    October 27, 2021 10:58 am

    A survey like that demands that a breakdown of the political/eco leanings of the people answering the questions. If half of the respondents were greenies/libs then the survey would be invalid.

    • Matt Dalby permalink
      October 30, 2021 6:50 pm

      Surveys like this are invalid anyway, as a lot of people simply give what they think is the politically correct answer regardless of what they actually believe.

  4. Peter F Gill permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:00 am

    Subjected to incessant propaganda on AGW for well over 20 years, it is hardly surprising that many people have been fooled. However, when the Net Zero disaster really starts to bite I suspect that the reaction will be somewhat different to what the propagandists hope for.

    • In The Real World permalink
      October 27, 2021 11:41 am

      Yes , the propaganda has being going on & on for well over 20 years .
      But it is very noticeable that the media never mention the actual amount of CO2 that the UK produces .
      CO2 is just 0.04% of atmosphere , of which about 97% is produced naturally . And of all the human produced part , UK does about 1% .
      So the actual amount of UK produced CO2 is just 0.000012% of atmospheric totals ..
      It was very noticeable that the pandemic lockdown , with the huge reduction in travel , flying & traffic around the whole world , , has absolutely no effect of atmospheric totals .

      But you can be sure that the greens & the media will not want people to know the truth .

      • October 27, 2021 11:50 am

        Joseph Goebbels was just so prescient, for both AGW & Covid! “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

      • Peter F Gill permalink
        October 27, 2021 1:34 pm

        Yes, but in relation to the way things work the reality goes further. I and Murry Salby predicted that the worldwide lockdowns would have no discernible effect on the gradient of the Keeling curve (atmospheric CO2 as measured at Mauna Loa) unless of course there was later fiddling as is done with past temperature records. So far we are right. If someone was able to explain to the public that in a natural (I am tempted to say cyclitic) global warm period the largest reservoir of CO2, the oceans are net emitters of CO2 and that the latter is not the main driver of the the warm period, if it is a driver at all.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      October 27, 2021 1:30 pm

      But most have not. 70% not willing to give up flying, 87% not buying an EV next, 66% not reducing car usage. These are substantial majorities not willing to even SAY they would do these things. Remarkably few going along with this nonsense.

      • Peter F Gill permalink
        October 27, 2021 1:42 pm

        Sadly British Politicians are going along with this nonsense whether people like it or not. The majority that you have talked about have had little or no effect on the Climate Change Act and its increasingly disastrous consequences which some years ago I described as an act of economic national Hari Kari.

    • David V permalink
      October 27, 2021 1:50 pm

      It’s a lot more than 20 years – my son is 45 and he was frightened by global warming scare stories at school; the issue then was CFCs but the stories are still the same.

      • October 27, 2021 2:12 pm

        Kids need some basic input here:
        1. A climate trend data point is (normally) 30 years – well beyond the length of their lives so far.
        2. You cannot discern or infer trends from 1 data point, or even 2 or 3, etc. – Basic maths!
        3. The massive reduction in travel during lockdown had no effect on global CO2 levels.
        4. An historical perspective is all important.

      • October 27, 2021 4:41 pm

        Maybe your valid point about lockdown travel could be a result of atmospheric CO2 making up only 0.01% of total carbon on the planet?
        But the green loons never let an inconvenient fact get in the way of their extremist propaganda.

      • October 27, 2021 4:59 pm

        Yes, that man only generates ~3% of total/global CO2, which means 0.0012% of the atmosphere, and so the UK’s 1% share means 0.000012% of the atmosphere, and that CO2 is an IR reactive gas, so absorbing AND emitting, not just an absorber, should also be taught. The ecomentalists/green blob have got a lot to answer for with regard to brainwashing children.

      • Peter F Gill permalink
        October 27, 2021 3:07 pm

        I used the phrase “well over 20 years” in relation to propagandists. The BBC and other media had really not got going before Kyoto. Since the infamous internal meeting at the BBC it and others have more than made up for the relatively late start. Since you mention blaming the ozone hole for CFCs I may as well throw the in acid rain story too. All three stories have been found to have really serious flaws in their explanations of mechanisms. Of course the most serious errors concern the set of hypotheses making up the overall AGW religion.

  5. October 27, 2021 11:10 am

    After people are done paying twice as much for electricity, home heating and fuel, they won’t have the money to buy cars, new clothes, exotic things like meat or travel out of the country.

  6. William Birch permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:12 am

    a survey of 2,000 people out of a population of 67 million is utterly laughable. That the results still show that the majority of the 2,000 are still against these ludicrous policies in spite of the huge propaganda crusade by the mass media and “Whitehall luvvies” is remarkable.

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      October 27, 2021 3:31 pm

      The sample size is not really the problem here. It gives a margin of error of a little over 2%. Provided that the sample is genuinely random (room for some bias here), and provided that the questions are not biased (almost certainly a major problem).

      • StephenP permalink
        October 28, 2021 7:30 am

        I think that you would get widely differing results if you did the survey in Brighton compared to a survey ‘up North’.

      • It doesn't add up... permalink
        October 30, 2021 1:31 pm

        I am sure you would, particularly as Brighton boasts the only Green MP.. But neither would be a random sample of the UK population.

  7. GeoffB permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:13 am

    It all depends on how the questions are phrased, Do you agree that we should strive for a clean unpolluted planet. Just about everyone would say YES. OR
    Are you prepared to always use public transport, never fly again, invest £50,000 on insulating your house and purchasing a heat pump and pay 4 times more for intermittent electricity. we would get a resounding NO.

    • Ray Sanders permalink
      October 27, 2021 8:11 pm

      Actually what is even more important is how the “poll” is actually conducted. Recently here in Canterbury a “poll” was advertised for a term time Saturday morning that was PAYING (genuinely) £10 for a 20 minute poll with a further £10 payable dependent on answers to the first section. Payments were made in CASH. Rather unsurprisingly nearly every respondent was a student (there are over 30,000 students in a city with only 50,000 residents) and the local bars enjoyed the pay day. What result would you like for potentially £20?

  8. Penda100 permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:18 am

    “Leading questions are questions that are purposely phrased and presented in such a way that they prompt the respondent to think and answer them in a particular way. Leading questions have the potential to subtly change respondents’ opinions about a topic and to shape their responses to the questions that follow.” The Trickery of Leading Questions
    By Nagesh Belludi. So without seeing the script used by the interviewers and the basis used to select the respondents, there is no way of knowing how objective the results of this or any other survey really are.

    • October 27, 2021 11:25 am

      And that is why witnesses in a court hearing are never asked anything bur leading questions as the ‘truth’ is irrelevant. The defence or prosecution only want answers to bolster their case. Just like opinion surveys!

      • dave permalink
        October 27, 2021 12:48 pm

        Technically, a leading question is one which involves a presupposition.
        ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ presupposes that you are a wife-beater and the question would not be allowed in Court. “Did you ever beat your wife?” presupposes nothing and would be allowed. However even this would be disallowed as ‘prejudicial’ if there were no foundation laid down in earlier questioning.

        A leading question in the sense that you are invited to speak freely – and perhaps make damaging admissions – is another matter. “Cast your mind back to September 5th. Were you in a bad mood that day?” “Yes!”
        “Was that because your wife was nagging you?” “Yes!” “Did you hit her?”
        “I may have jostled her a bit!”

      • October 27, 2021 4:47 pm

        dave, with all due respect to your greater knowledge of the legal system, I was using the selling skills defintion of a leading question – “Likely to give a long, influenced answer”. As you say they are driven by assumptions in the questioner’s mind.

    • mjr permalink
      October 27, 2021 4:46 pm

      from the days when BBC was watchable the Yes Minister survey explanation.
      Imagine BBC coming up with something like Yes Minister today. It was only the fact that Hacker went to the LSE that suggested he might have left leaning tendancies but otherwise it was never clear whether he was conservative or labour MP .

  9. October 27, 2021 11:25 am

    As noted, these surveys always reflect the phrasing of the questions being asked. Ask “Would you accept severe curtailment on your lifestyle and decision making, movement, travel and leisure activities, have shopping restrictions, pay much higher taxes and energy bills, for a small hypothesised benefit decades in the future?”, in other words, not have any life or freedom.

  10. 2hmp permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:32 am

    Just 2000? that;s not a survey. It’s just a pub whip round.

  11. ThinkingScientist permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:33 am

    To the list I think you could take from the following:

    “However, one-in-five (21%) said they have no intention of buying an EV and a further 19% will not consider purchasing an EV until they have no other option.”

    In other words 40% will only buy an EV either “over their dead body” or when they are forced to do so. That’s a pretty strong core of resistance to EV’s.

    Meanwhile only 13% said their next vehicle will be an EV. That’s not going to translate into much take off, and its likely only the well off with a greenie bent. (BBC staff?).

    Watch the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles ramp up spectacularly in 2028/2029 and then the sales of new cars fall off a cliff when the ban comes in 2030. What will the government do? Delay the ban? Give even more subsidies to everyone? Nationalise car showrooms?

    The stupidity is off the scale. Welcome to 2030. Welcome to Cuba. Welcome to the command economy.

    • Coeur De Lion permalink
      October 27, 2021 1:25 pm

      By the way, has anyone heard anything about vehicle import policy? Prevented? What does the WTO say about that? I’m importing a couple of Citroen Picasso diesels on a few years time for my grandchildren,

  12. Mad Mike permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:38 am

    I was looking for the wording of the questions being asked in the survey but couldn’t find them. The nearest I got was this from Ford.

    Click to access Ford-Go-Electric-Climate-Countdown-UK-report-FINAL.pdf

    Like all these surveys, sentiment plays a part but, when you actually have to do what you say, reality often changes your mind. The French have an expression “I speak with my heart but vote with my wallet.”

  13. sid permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:45 am

    Its just like shopping surveys. “would you like chickens to have a better life.” reply “yes”
    90% or so buy the cheapest

  14. richard permalink
    October 27, 2021 11:50 am

    “A third (34%) are willing to use their car less, while 30% are willing to give up travelling abroad on planes. Over two fifths (44%) are willing to limit their buying of new clothes”

    But they won’t !!

    • M E permalink
      October 28, 2021 4:41 am

      We were recently told that wearing secondhand clothes was an indicator of white privilege. I read it on the internet so it must be true ! So now we can’t wear new clothes either we must take up Make Do and Mend again

  15. October 27, 2021 11:50 am

    For lovers of climate change fear porn
    Sky news obviously feels there daily climate show is just not enough.
    So they have started popping up there climate dashboard
    This has the true? record of how the world temperature has increased by 1.5c since 1880
    Plus how we only have 11 years till it reaches 2.c
    But better than that it has the amount of C02 that is being put out and you can watch the count increase in real time.
    Rather like the US debt clock showing the debt total and increasing in real time.
    I guess we will have to wait a long time for a dashboard showing the amount of money wasted on self defeating green policy’s increasing in real time.

  16. October 27, 2021 1:03 pm

    “Almost half (45%) are planning to give up using non-recyclable plastics”. I wonder if they would be willing to have the medical profession also give up on non-recyclable plastics.

    • October 27, 2021 1:39 pm

      I guess also: “Considering the dramatic reduction in travel during the worldwide yearlong+ covid lockdowns had no effect on global CO2 levels, do you think you need to reduce your travel?”

    • Broadlands permalink
      October 27, 2021 1:41 pm

      They confuse “biodegradable” with recyclable. The former is essentially “compost” and turns carbon back into CO2 more quickly than what the latter will do eventually…unless it is deeply buried. Over the long term it doesn’t matter except for appearance alongside the highways where plastic is discarded from passing vehicles.

  17. Phoenix44 permalink
    October 27, 2021 1:26 pm

    Moreover, the numbers saying they would do things are unlikely to reflect the real numbers -there’s every incentive to say you will be virtuous in a poll. They are almost certainly exaggerated therefore.

    Thus there’s clearly a substantial majority who will not do any of these things.

    Quite how that gets spun as support is beyond me.

    • October 27, 2021 1:42 pm

      The fact that so many people cannot detect that they’re being asked leading questions, so refuse to answer, is telling.

  18. Coeur de Lion permalink
    October 27, 2021 1:31 pm

    O/T I’m afraid but The Times front page yesterday had a piece about CO2 level not being affected by the COVID industrial disaster: indeed it increased they say. Today a multi page pull-out called The Heat Is On which had me on my knees in the kitchen sobbing with fear.

  19. Gerry, England permalink
    October 27, 2021 1:41 pm

    The amusing thing with battery cars is that the more of them that are on the road then the harder it will be to charge them while travelling given that they are only likely to be bought by those with off street parking. At my local station the charging parking bays used to be empty all the time but yesterday the 4 bays were occupied with cars that are not bottom of the range and may even be hybrids taking advantage of a free charge given that you have to pay the normal parking charge.

  20. It doesn't add up... permalink
    October 27, 2021 3:37 pm

    The latest attempt to stick lipstick on a pig.

    A green doodle that comes full of problems. How are they going to maintain the floating solar array? Why is the lagoon going to be any less of a money pit under a new sponsor? Would you want your server farm perched over the water?

    I did laugh at one thing though. They announce that the server farm would be powered by an uninterruptible renewable source of power in a first for the world. They are right about that…

  21. Pitchfork Uprising permalink
    October 27, 2021 4:23 pm

    I think that broader social behavior surveys nearly always rank climate change and the environment about 5th or 6th in the public’s priorities. I guess it’s all about how you ask the question – and of whom.

    • October 27, 2021 8:48 pm

      But when you pitch climate change against other major pressing issues across the globe, climate change comes bottom of the rankings.

  22. Athelstan. permalink
    October 27, 2021 4:52 pm

    According to opinion polls hmg are doing a great job with the chimeric disease, just wait until the economy goes down the toilet, oh that’s the way to the great reset, silly me! I’ll bet that, opinion polls tell it that the moon is made of green cheese, 99% of people believe it.

  23. Nordisch geo-climber permalink
    October 27, 2021 5:33 pm

    This constituency of 69,000 voters recorded only 2000 votes for the green candidate in the election two years ago. She lost her deposit.
    That is the real world.

  24. grammarschoolman permalink
    October 27, 2021 6:15 pm

    99.6% of statistics are made up.

    • Gas Geezer permalink
      October 27, 2021 8:27 pm

      97% of statisticians agree .

    • Ray Sanders permalink
      October 27, 2021 8:31 pm

      Sorry, but you just made that up didn’t you! Old fashioned reality says that only 13 out of 17 stats are simply made up on the spot. And they are both prime numbers so it must be true.

  25. tom0mason permalink
    October 28, 2021 1:35 am

    “Majority Of Brits Unwilling To Give Up Planes, Cars And New Clothes For Climate”

    Actors and entertainers more so. And yet these same types would wish to lecture us on cutting down on everything, fossil fuels, plastic straws, flying off on holidays, eating meat, etc.
    The public knows what it likes, what it wants, and pontificating politicians, pseudo-scientists, and all those in the entertainment business are not required.

  26. Eoin Mc permalink
    October 28, 2021 8:38 am

    Or Only A Minority of Brits willing to give up…..

    • October 28, 2021 9:48 am

      And that’s the point. They always present the numbers as if they would also apply to the rest of the population, i.e. there’s nothing ‘against’, and they never admit the numbers are the minority, not the majority. By their score, if only 1 person in a thousand agreed with their proposition, that’s enough ‘proof’ for them that they are right.

  27. Gerry, England permalink
    October 28, 2021 1:02 pm

    Dr North has put a petition on the government site calling for a referendum on NetZero. Sign up so we can force a debate.

    • Peter F Gill permalink
      October 28, 2021 1:08 pm

      As of 13:06 hrs GMT only 1374 signatures. !0,000 needed for a debate. By the way as far as I am aware to sign you have to be a UK citizen.

    • Peter F Gill permalink
      October 28, 2021 2:27 pm

      Corrections (1) time was BST (2) Signatures required for response 10,000 and for a debate 100,000. Present number at 14:26 BST 1504 i.e a long way to go.

  28. dennisambler permalink
    October 28, 2021 4:06 pm

    Cliscep has a good analysis of a Guardian WWF poll on much the same lines, but involving 20,000 or 22,00 depending on which reporting was involved.

  29. Adamsson permalink
    October 28, 2021 8:23 pm

    Of course they are unwilling. Nobody would willingly make themselves much worse off.
    That’s why we aren’t going to get a choice.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: