69%
Yes
31%
No
69%
Yes
31%
No

Historical Results

See how support for each position on “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 3.5k America voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

See how importance of “Carbon Capture Subsidies” has changed over time for 3.5k 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…2mos2MO

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

 @GavinKuebler from Pennsylvania answered…2mos2MO

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.

 @SenBR2003 from New York answered…2mos2MO

 @9RDDSGC  from Florida answered…4 days4D

No, carbon capture is not scientifically feasible currently, due to the fact that we have not transitioned to fully-green energy, as the inherent energy involved results in more carbon emissions than it captures; carbon capture should only be utilized once we have an over-production of sustainable energy, such as nuclear and solar; instead, we should focus on more feasible temporary methods to prevent further damage, such as high-atmosphere stratospheric aerosol injection.

 @9RCSTCNfrom Maine answered…4 days4D

All companies should be forced to operate with such technology if they are involved in such business. They need not develop their own tech, and may buy from other players in market

 @9R6WQQS from Utah answered…6 days6D

No, carbon capture tech is not viable. The Government should invest in sustainable energy solutions instead.