Executive Summary: Public trust is no longer a soft variable in the energy transition; it is a structural constraint. Over the last decade, strong national majorities in favor of renewable energy created the impression that deployment would be limited primarily by technology, cost curves, and policy design. The 2024–2025 opinion cycle tells a more complicated story. As projects scale up, move closer to communities, and intersect with polarized politics, local trust is the deciding factor determining whether assets are permitted, financed, and built.  

This report distills the most authoritative public-opinion data available and KAOH Media’s seasoned knowledge to reveal three structural dynamics that any serious participant in U.S. energy markets must understand: 

Political Polarity in Renewables- Support for renewables remains high, but the easy gains are over. Solar and wind continue to be the most trusted electricity sources, with roughly three-quarters of Americans favoring additional deployment. However, support has slipped 10–12 percentage points from its peak in 2020 and is likely to continue to fall almost entirely due to conservative voters becoming less enthusiastic.  

Emerging Technologies of SMR’s & BESS- Nuclear power and energy storage are emerging as reliable assets in the public mind. After years of opposition, nuclear now enjoys stable majority support, with around six-in-ten Americans favoring more plants. Battery energy storage systems have similar favorability, with about 71% of Americans saying they would accept a BESS facility in their community, provided safety is credibly addressed.  

A Division in Urban vs. Rural Sentiment may Paint a False Picture - The urban–rural trust gap has become the central friction point in U.S. siting and permitting. Urban and suburban residents typically view renewable projects as modern, clean infrastructure. Rural residents, who host most utility-scale assets, regard them as highly visible intrusions to local identity.  Polling showing high national support for renewable energy development tells an incomplete story; hyper-local trust has become decisive. 

Looking ahead to 2026, these attitudinal dynamics will intersect with three external forces: federal policy uncertainty, intensifying anti-renewable rhetoric, and disruptions in tax equity and capital markets. The expected result is a landscape in which conceptual support for clean energy remains strong, but local trust becomes more fragile and outcome-determinative.  

KAOH Media and Fieldwise Civil Engagement are purpose-built for today’s development environment, bringing years of experience in the elements this report shows to be most critical to project victory: anticipating risk early, earning trust at every level, and aligning strategies with local values. As conditions grow more complex, developers, utilities, and long-term asset owners that treat trust-building as a core discipline on par with interconnection, engineering, and tax structuring will be best positioned for an enduring competitive advantage. 

1. Methodology and Data Sources 

The analysis in this report is built on a synthesis of large-scale, nationally representative opinion research conducted in 2024–2025, augmented by geographic modeling and issue-specific surveys.  

Most of these surveys rely on probability samples of 1,000–5,000 U.S. adults with margins of error typically around ±2–4 percentage points. Because question wording differs by source, this report emphasizes directional trends and high-level indicators such as “favor expansion,” “support R&D,” or “support local siting.” Where figures are combined across surveys, they should be read as informed benchmarks rather than as a single integrated dataset. 

2. The National Public Opinion Landscape (2024–2025) 

Despite a volatile political environment, several fundamentals about public trust in energy remain stable:  

• Solar and wind are still the preferred sources of new electricity, but sentiment is on the decline. Pew’s 2024 data indicate that roughly 78% of Americans favor more solar farms and 72% favor more wind farms.   

• Nuclear energy appears to be gaining majority support. Gallup and Pew find support for additional nuclear plants at around 60%, up from the low-to-mid 40s in the late 2010s.   

• Battery storage is broadly accepted. Firetrace International’s 2025 work shows that 71% of Americans support siting BESS projects in their communities.   

• Natural gas remains the most socially acceptable fossil fuel, but its popularity trails renewables. ecoAmerica’s ACPS 2024 finds that 52% of Americans support additional R&D for natural gas, compared with roughly 72% for wind and solar R&D and 56% for next-generation nuclear.  
• Energy and climate policy are high-salience issues. AP-NORC / EPIC polling suggests that about half of Americans rate energy policy and climate policy as “extremely” or “very” important in shaping their political views, placing them alongside top-tier economic and social issues. 

Uncovering the Story Beneath National Polling: Urban/Suburban vs. Rural Population Attitudes 

These topline numbers describe the national mood, but they do not capture the local friction that ultimately determines whether an individual project advances. For better understanding, we must look deeper into sectors, geography, and political identity. 

Table 1. National Support for Energy Expansion or R&D (2024–2025 Polls) 

Note: Figures are rounded and originate from different surveys; they should be interpreted as comparative indicators, not as a unified data set. 

3. Sector Deep Dives 

3.1 Solar Energy 

Solar retains the strongest reservoir of public trust among electricity sources. Roughly 78% of Americans favor more solar, and support among Democrats exceeds 90%. Solar also remains popular among most Republicans, although it has experienced a pronounced decline since 2020. 

From 2020 to 2025, national support for solar fell by roughly 10–12 percentage points. Pew’s breakdowns attribute almost all of this decline to Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents, whose attitudes toward climate policy and large-scale renewable infrastructure have hardened as these issues have become tightly linked to political identity. 

For developers, the lesson is clear: the “public trust dividend” is no longer inexhaustible. In counties where solar has been deployed aggressively without visible community benefits or local partnership, opposition is increasingly framed not simply as a land-use conflict but as a question of fairness, transparency, and power dynamics between rural communities and distant utilities, investors, or urban ratepayers. 

3.2 Wind Energy 

Wind sits just behind solar in national favorability, with about 72% of Americans favoring more wind developments. However, wind projects are often more visually and politically salient than solar, which has a lower profile design. Turbines dominate skylines, are the subject of wildlife and noise debates, and have become emblematic of disruptive renewable development writ large in several high-profile political fights. 

As with solar, Pew’s trend data shows declining Republican support for wind since 2020, along with some erosion among Independents. AP-NORC / EPIC polling points to slipping support for offshore wind specifically, even among voters who remain broadly pro-renewable. In many communities, the question is no longer whether wind power is desirable in principle, but whether a specific project has been sited fairly, designed responsibly, and integrated respectfully into local landscapes. 

From a trust perspective, wind is the sector where the gap between national endorsement and local acceptance is most pronounced. Community concerns cluster around viewshed impacts, wildlife impacts, noise, property values, and doubts about who truly economically benefits. These concerns are especially strong in rural counties with deep roots and a history of feeling overlooked by state and federal policymakers. 

3.3 Nuclear Energy 

Nuclear energy has experienced a significant, sustained shift in public standing. After more than a decade in which opposition or ambivalence was the norm, Gallup’s 2025 polling shows approximately 61% of Americans favor using nuclear power as a source of U.S. electricity. Pew finds similar levels of support for building new plants  under the moniker of Small Modular Reactors or “SMR’s” for short. 

Several drivers underpin this turnaround: growing recognition of the need for firm, low-carbon capacity; heightened concern about grid reliability under conditions of extreme weather and rising demand; and increased awareness of advanced reactor concepts and small modular reactors (SMRs). ecoAmerica’s ACPS 2024 indicates that 56% of Americans support greater R&D spending on advanced nuclear technologies, with smaller partisan gaps than seen on many other energy questions. 

Nuclear is emerging as a potential bipartisan bridge: Republicans remain somewhat more open, but Democratic support has steadily risen as nuclear is reframed as a climate solution. For policymakers and developers, the opportunity is to anchor nuclear conversations in reliability, decarbonization, and rigorous safety oversight, while being candid about its cost, waste management, and project-delivery risks. 

3.4 Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) 

Battery energy storage has moved quickly from an obscure grid component to a central focus of public trust. Firetrace International’s 2025 national survey finds that 71% of Americans support BESS facilities in their community. 

However, experience shows that storage projects are highly vulnerable to safety hazard narratives. Highly publicized fires, rumors about toxicity, or confusion about emergency response protocols can move opinion sharply, particularly in small communities. Fire chiefs, EMS leaders, and local officials often seek much more detailed assurance about containment and monitoring than project proponents expect to provide. 

Handled well, BESS projects can strengthen local trust: co-developing emergency response plans with local departments, offering site tours and training, and explaining fail-safe design in plain language all help communities see storage as resilience infrastructure. Handled poorly, BESS can become a flashpoint that constrains not only storage but also the renewable projects that depend on it. 

3.5 Natural Gas 

Natural gas occupies a transitional position in public opinion. Many Americans still view it as cleaner than coal and essential for reliability; others increasingly see it as a source of methane emissions and long-term climate risk. ecoAmerica’s ACPS 2024 suggests that 52% of Americans support additional natural gas R&D — commanding lower support than renewables and nuclear but still a national majority. 

Attitudes toward gas are highly sensitive to framing. When survey questions emphasize local jobs, affordability, and grid stability, support — especially among Republicans — rises sharply. When questions highlight methane leakage, climate impacts, or the risk of “locking in” fossil infrastructure, support falls, particularly among Democrats and younger voters. Several states have gone so far as to label natural gas a form of “green energy” in statute, a move that both signals political backing and invites criticism from environmental groups. 

The key takeaway is that gas maintains significant social license in many regions, especially where it underpins local employment and industrial activity, but that license is no longer unconditional. The public trajectory is toward a more conditional acceptance of gas: tolerable as a near- to medium-term reliability resource but not widely embraced as the backbone of a 2050 system. 

4. Geography and the Urban–Rural Trust Divide 

The most consequential structural pattern emerging from the 2024–2025 research is not simply partisan polarization; it’s the widening urban–rural trust divide. Yale Climate Opinion Maps show strong support for renewable energy research and renewable generation on public lands in every state. Yet Pew’s deep dives into local energy developments reveal that rural residents, who host a disproportionate share of projects, hold systematically different views than urban and suburban residents. 

Rural adults are more likely to say that large solar or wind farms make the landscape less attractive and are less likely to say that such projects would help the local economy. Urban and suburban respondents, by contrast, tend to highlight modernization, climate benefits, and economic opportunity. In practical terms, a project that is coded as “visual intrusion” and “outside imposition” in some rural contexts is viewed as “progress” in many urban contexts. 

Table 2. Urban vs. Rural Attitudes Toward Local Renewable Energy Projects 

Note: Values are approximate aggregates from multiple 2024–2025 polls and are provided for directional insight, not as precise point estimates. 

From a development perspective, this divide means that the binding constraint on deployment is shifting from statute to social license, moving from formal policy support to local permission. County boards, township councils, Tribal governments, and community coalitions increasingly function as the real gatekeepers to large-scale energy infrastructure. 

5. Political and Demographic Segmentation 

Energy attitudes in the U.S. are strongly structured by political identity, age, education, and, to a lesser extent, race and gender. Several robust patterns recur across surveys: 

• Democrats and Democratic-leaning Independents overwhelmingly favor expanding wind and solar and show growing support for nuclear, while expressing low support for expanding coal and offshore oil and gas drilling.   

• Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents remain more supportive of expanding fossil fuel production and have become markedly less supportive of large-scale wind and solar than they were in 2020. Nuclear, by contrast, is relatively popular across the spectrum.   

• Younger Republicans are significantly more pro-renewable than older Republicans. Pew’s work highlights gaps of 20–30 percentage points between younger and older GOP respondents on support for expanding wind and solar. 

• Women and college-educated respondents are somewhat more likely to express concern about climate change and to back renewable energy policies, though this varies by region and political context. 

Table 3. Illustrative Partisan Differences in Energy Preferences 

Note: These values are simplified to highlight directional gaps. Exact percentages differ by question wording, survey mode, and field period. 

6. Trends Over Time and 2026 Outlook 

In the last decade, public trust in renewable energy has moved through three phases: 

1. Enthusiastic Expansion (mid-2010s to 2020)

Falling renewable costs, rising climate concern, and relatively limited local experience with large-scale projects produced broad, bipartisan enthusiasm for wind and solar expansion.

2. Polarization and Friction (2020–2023) 

Climate policy became more partisan; issues like EV mandates, gas stoves, and fossil fuel pipelines entered the culture-war arena, and more communities confronted the realities of having big projects nearby.

3. Trust as a Finite Resource (2024–2025) 

With anti-renewable rhetoric increasing on the Right, tax equity markets tightening, and high-profile project delays or cancellations, many rural communities have shifted from cautious optimism to guarded skepticism about clean energy promises.

Going into the new year, three external forces are likely to interact with these attitude baselines: 

1. Federal policy uncertainty 

Changes in congressional control, evolving administrative rules, and potential litigation around major climate and energy provisions introduce uncertainty and risk to long-term project economics.

2. Anti-renewable rhetoric and media narratives 

Even when formal policy remains supportive, sustained rhetorical attacks from elected officials and media outlets can turn renewable infrastructure into symbolic a battleground.

3. Disruptions in tax equity and capital markets

When projects are publicly delayed, downsized, or canceled because financing becomes uncertain, the reputational impact is local. Residents often interpret these events as broken promises, regardless of the underlying cause.

Table 4. 2026 Public Trust Outlook by Sector (Qualitative Forecast) 

In short, 2026 is likely to be a year in which national support remains broadly favorable to clean energy, but local trust becomes more volatile and more central to project outcomes. 

7. Strategic Implications for Developers, Utilities, and Investors 

The patterns described above translate into a specific, actionable agenda for organizations seeking to build or finance energy infrastructure in the United States: 

1. Elevate rural and community engagement to a core project discipline. 

Local trust now sits alongside engineering, interconnection, and tax-credit eligibility as a gating factor. Effective developers budget for sustained field presence, invest in local representation, and empower teams who can engage directly with landowners, Tribal governments, and community leaders over years, not months. 

2. Align messages with audience-specific values without appearing inconsistent. 

For many Democrats and younger voters, climate protection, environmental justice, and decarbonization are primary motivators. For many Republicans and rural residents, reliability, affordability, landowner rights, and tangible local benefits carry more weight. Thoughtful campaigns frame the same project through multiple, honest lenses, rather than pushing a single universal narrative. 

3. Pair renewable and storage resources displaying firm power in both engineering and narrative.  

Public anxiety about reliability is rising. Projects that explicitly explain how solar, wind, nuclear, storage, and natural gas work together to maintain reliability will enjoy more trust than those that emphasize climate benefits alone. 

4. Be candid about risk, including policy and financing risk, from the outset.

Overpromising benefits or timelines, or remaining opaque about uncertainties, can cause long-term damage if projects stall. Communities are more willing to accept risk when developers are transparent about what is known, what is contingent, and how decisions will be made as conditions change. 

5. Monitor sentiment and narrative early and often.

Given the speed with which narratives can shift, an annual — or even semiannual — “state of public trust” check at the national, state, and county level should be considered a best practice. This is especially important in counties hosting multiple overlapping projects or where prior projects have faltered. 

In a world where infrastructure depends on social license, organizations that treat trust-building as a strategic asset will be the ones that can reliably move steel and capital in the decade ahead. 

8. Conclusion 

The future of renewable energy in the United States will not be determined by policy alone, nor will it be secured solely by capital, technology, or cost curves. As the recent opinion landscape makes clear, public trust has become the binding constraint in the communities that host the infrastructure of transition. 

This trust is not a “nice-to-have.” It is a structural precondition for deployment. And it is no longer evenly distributed — the easy consensus is over. Projects must now navigate localized skepticism, partisan narratives, and the aftershocks of delayed or downsized developments. 

In this new terrain, success will belong to those who treat trust-building, message calibration, and stakeholder intelligence as core competencies. 

The Role of KAOH Media and Fieldwise Civic Engagement 

Simply put, we have been built for this moment. 

Across diverse geographies and stakeholder environments, KAOH Media and Fieldwise Civic Engagement have helped clients translate their vision into a community-aligned reality. Our teams specialize in what this report identifies as decisive: 

• Diagnose Local Risk Early: Integrate trust analysis into site selection and feasibility studies, including political alignment, sentiment mapping, and historical opposition patterns. Research and continuous monitoring are key. 

• Build Ground-Level Relationships Before Formal Entry: Establish a presence before filings begin. Engage with landowners, local officials, and key influencers through credible intermediaries and sustained fieldwork. 

• Tailor Narrative by Region and Risk Profile: Design messaging strategies that match local values and risks. 

• Strengthen Institutional Trust Pathways: Partner early with fire departments, school boards, planning commissions, and local businesses to align your i projects with trusted community institutions. 

• Update Risk Models with Non-Technical Variables: Treat public trust, political rhetoric, and perception of volatility as operational inputs. 

As we enter 2026, a year facing rising energy demand, intensified scrutiny, and political re-alignment, organizations that integrate trust architecture into their core development model will be positioned not only to build more, but to build with consent, clarity, and staying power.   

References  

• Pew Research Center – Americans’ Views of Technology and Renewable Energy (2024): https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2024/06/12/americans-views-of-technology-and-renewable-energy/
• Pew Research Center – Nuclear Energy and U.S. Energy Choices (2025): https://www.pewresearch.org/
• AP-NORC / University of Chicago EPIC – Climate and Energy Policy Surveys (2024–2025): https://epic.uchicago.edu/research/
• Gallup – Support for Nuclear Energy in the U.S. (2025): https://news.gallup.com/poll/473287/support-nuclear-energy.aspx
• ecoAmerica– American Climate Perspectives Survey 2024: https://ecoamerica.org/research/american-climate-perspectives-survey/ 
• Yale Program on Climate Change Communication – Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2024: https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/
• FiretraceInternational – U.S. Battery Energy Storage System Public Sentiment (2025): https://www.firetrace.com/blog 
• AP-NORC – Energy, Policy, and Climate Issue Polling:https://apnorc.org/