More than two thirds of environmentally aware people have cut the number of trips they make by car, a poll for The Times has found.

Nearly 70 per cent of concerned consumers have reduced car use in the past year and the main reason for the switch to other forms of travel has changed from cost to factors such as better public transport, according to the annual Populus survey.

Only 35 per cent cited cost as the primary reason for cutting car journeys, compared with 47 per cent last year, when the high price of petrol was driving consumers off the road.

The proportion of respondents who said that they had reduced the number of trips was the same.

In an indication that the Government’s high-profile ride-to-work scheme is having an effect, 34 per cent said lifestyle changes were responsible for the reduction in trips — up four percentage points from last year. Improved public transport was given as the main reason by 7 per cent of respondents, compared with only 3 per cent last time.

The environment remains a prominent issue, with 14 per cent of concerned consumers saying it was the most important reason for cutting down on trips.

David Lourie, an analyst for Good Business, the ethical consultancy, said the findings demonstrated that the unprecedented price of oil last year may have fostered a long-term change in how people want to travel. “It is an opportunity for the Government to tap into this by presenting viable alternatives,” he added.

But despite additional evidence that motorists are deserting their cars, the troubled automotive industry can take heart that even consumers who care about the environment are in favour of the state aid that carmakers have been granted. Some 42 per cent were in favour of government assistance, compared with only 39 per cent against. “This is quite strong support; look at the anger over bailouts to the banking industry. It’s a clear indication they want the industry to succeed,” Mr Lourie said.

“Cars are integrated into people’s lives and they want the industry to find solutions.”

This trust in the motor sector to come up with answers is borne out by the relatively small proportion of concerned consumers who said they did not envisage themselves driving a car in ten years’ time. Only a quarter of respondents, down four percentage points, said they would not have a car — the same as the proportion who believed they would be driving a hybrid. Hydrogen and electric cars only accounted for 23 per cent between them, by contrast.

However, only one respondent in seven said they thought they would be driving a petrol car in ten years’ time.

Mr Lourie said: “The Toyota Prius and fuel-efficient cars have shifted people’s perception. Because electric cars have low range, when you ask people what they’ll be driving in ten years’ time, they say: “They only go five miles.’ ”

For the motor industry, the environmental imperative — or, put in selfish terms, the fuel-efficiency imperative — is highlighted by how high price and environmental considerations come on consumers’ agendas, compared with practical issues or the brand of the car.

Some 41 per cent cited price as the most important factor, up from 36 per cent last year. The environmental credentials of the model were the most important factor for 28 per cent of respondents, up three percentage points from 2008.

Only 4 per cent said brand was the most important factor, while practical considerations, such as the size and the number of seats, were identified by only 16 per cent as the most important consideration when buying a vehicle.

Mr Lourie explained: “In other sectors, things like quality and brand name will be higher on the agenda. If you look at a brand like Fiat, who in the past would have had negative opinions, they have actually got a very fuel-efficient fleet. So there’s an opportunity there for companies like Fiat.”

The findings also suggest that the Government’s high-profile scrappage scheme, under which drivers can receive £2,000 for trading in their old cars, has changed consumers’ perception over who is responsible for disposing of old vehicles.

Some 42 per cent of concerned consumers believe that the safe disposal of vehicles after the end of their lives is the responsibility of manufacturers, up 2 per cent on last year. About 90 per cent of respondents had heard of the scheme, although only 1 per cent had taken part.

Last month the Government said that some 60,000 new cars had been ordered under the scheme, which was intended to support carmakers. It had been criticised for not targeting British manufacturers specifically, but mirrors schemes in France and Germany.

Despite Lord Mandelson’s intention to prop up the beleaguered motor industry, the scheme has had positive environmental knock-on effects, because new cars are more fuel-efficient and environmentally friendly than older models.