More people are discussing energy issues, but most don’t know enough to make informed decisions and are still advocating “wishful” solutions, according to a recent study by Public Agenda, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington, DC.
Based on a national survey, Public Agenda concluded the US public doesn’t know critical facts about energy problems and isn’t prepared for the necessary tradeoffs. “Half of all Americans (51%) could not correctly identify a renewable energy source such as solar or wind power, 39% could not name a fossil fuel, 65% overestimated US dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and 52% thought that by reducing smog, the US has come ‘a long way’ in addressing global warming,” it said.
People needn’t become energy experts, but they do need to understand the basic facts and implications of different choices. Simply increasing information isn’t enough, however, said social scientist Daniel Yankelovich, who founded Public Agenda with Cyrus Vance, former secretary of state under President Jimmy Carter. “People can absorb factual information much faster than they can overcome wishful thinking and denial or accept far–reaching changes in habits and lifestyles,” Yankelovich said.
Americans are “well advanced” in the initial public awareness stage of the energy learning curve. But the longest and most arduous stage requires they “confront their own wishful thinking and denial as they wrestle with the need to make painful tradeoffs and sacrifices,” researchers said. The final stage will be resolution and support for remedial action.
Fast problem, slow public
“This is a unique challenge to policy makers: the combination of a fast–moving, complex problem and a comparatively slow–moving public trying to come to grips with it,” Yankelovich said. “While the challenges are significant, and the hurdles extensive, there’s nothing in our research to suggest that they’re insurmountable,” he said.
Most Americans focus on one or two energy issues such as prices or climate change, not recognizing the connections to other issues. The survey showed US residents care more about the price and secured supplies of energy supplies than about climate change. Among respondents, 89% said they worried about fuel prices, with 57% worried “a lot.” Almost as many, 83%, were concerned about dependence on foreign oil, with 47% worrying “a lot.” Climate change was less an issue with 71% of the respondents concerned and only 32% worried “a lot.”
Public Agenda officials said, “Global warming simply doesn’t have the same urgency yet for the public, possibly because it’s further off, but the high price of gasoline remains fresh in their minds.”
Most respondents said they’re willing to change driving habits, but reject any increase in the cost of driving. They oppose increasing gas taxes to fund renewable energy (53%) or to achieve energy independence (57%), floor prices for gasoline (72%), and congestion pricing (61%) to force people to change their driving habits. Yet they support the use of federal decrees to force utilities to invest in cleaner, renewable energy supplies and ban coal–fired power plants.
Based on their responses to 90 survey questions, the participants were divided into four groups with distinct starting points, values, and frameworks for examining issues. The largest (40%) was labeled “Anxious” because they worry about energy costs, scarcity, and global warming. They tended to be younger with lower income and less knowledge of energy issues, researchers said. The second largest group (24%) was the “Greens,” who were politically moderate, had higher incomes, and were more knowledgeable about energy issues. They were the most willing (72%) to pay higher taxes to fund development of alternative energy sources.
The next division (19%) was the “Disengaged,” who neither knew nor worried much about energy. They were politically moderate, lower income, and disproportionately older and female.
The smallest division (17%) was the “Climate Change Doubters,” indicating their attitude on global warming. They were politically conservative and supported nuclear power and oil drilling. They divided on whether to invest in fossil fuels (48%) or solar (39%). “But even that sets them apart—all the other groups favor the alternatives by three quarters or more,” researchers said.
But while members of the four groups assessed issues from different perspectives, they sometimes expressed similar views of the problem and solutions, indicating important common grounds for addressing the energy challenge, researchers said.
The survey is the start of a continued evaluation of the public’s learning curve on energy. Results of the report are available at: http://www.publicagenda.org/reports/energy and at www.planetforward.org/energy–index.
