IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v13y2020i1p238-d304833.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Perceptions of Energy Scarcity and Support for New Energy Technologies: A Western U.S. Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandra Buylova

    (School of Public Policy, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Brent S. Steel

    (School of Public Policy, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Christopher A. Simon

    (Department of Political Science, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA)

Abstract

This study examines public concern for energy security and support for public investment in new energy technologies. Using household survey data from the western U.S. states of California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, socio-demographic characteristics, environmental values, and policy relevant knowledge are analyzed as drivers of energy security and technology investment orientations. Findings suggest that a majority of respondents in each state believe that not enough money is being spent on energy research, that the country has insufficient energy resources, and that new technologies can support future energy security. Multivariate analyses indicate that some socio-demographic variables (e.g., gender and education), ideology, and environmental value orientations also have an impact on energy security orientations and support for technology investment.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandra Buylova & Brent S. Steel & Christopher A. Simon, 2020. "Public Perceptions of Energy Scarcity and Support for New Energy Technologies: A Western U.S. Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:238-:d:304833
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/1/238/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/1/238/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudia Bassarak & Hans-Rüdiger Pfister & Gisela Böhm, 2017. "Dispute and morality in the perception of societal risks: extending the psychometric model," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 299-325, March.
    2. Manfredi Crainz & Domenico Curto & Vincenzo Franzitta & Sonia Longo & Francesco Montana & Rossano Musca & Eleonora Riva Sanseverino & Enrico Telaretti, 2019. "Flexibility Services to Minimize the Electricity Production from Fossil Fuels. A Case Study in a Mediterranean Small Island," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-38, September.
    3. Ekins, Paul, 2004. "Step changes for decarbonising the energy system: research needs for renewables, energy efficiency and nuclear power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(17), pages 1891-1904, November.
    4. James N. Druckman & Mary C. McGrath, 2019. "The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(2), pages 111-119, February.
    5. Erick Lachapelle & Christopher P. Borick & Barry Rabe, 2012. "Public Attitudes toward Climate Science and Climate Policy in Federal Systems: Canada and the United States Compared," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(3), pages 334-357, May.
    6. Aaron McCright & Riley Dunlap & Chenyang Xiao, 2013. "Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 511-518, July.
    7. Hobman, Elizabeth V. & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Public support for energy sources and related technologies: The impact of simple information provision," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 862-869.
    8. Matto Mildenberger & Jennifer R. Marlon & Peter D. Howe & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2017. "The spatial distribution of Republican and Democratic climate opinions at state and local scales," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 539-548, December.
    9. DeCicco, John & Yan, Ting & Keusch, Florian & Muñoz, Diego Horna & Neidert, Lisa, 2015. "U.S. consumer attitudes and expectations about energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 749-758.
    10. Alexa Spence & Christina Demski & Catherine Butler & Karen Parkhill & Nick Pidgeon, 2015. "Public perceptions of demand-side management and a smarter energy future," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 550-554, June.
    11. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2016. "Differing cultures of energy security: An international comparison of public perceptions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 811-822.
    12. Kimberly S. Wolske & Kaitlin T. Raimi & Victoria Campbell-Arvai & P. Sol Hart, 2019. "Public support for carbon dioxide removal strategies: the role of tampering with nature perceptions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 345-361, March.
    13. Klick, Holly & Smith, Eric R.A.N., 2010. "Public understanding of and support for wind power in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1585-1591.
    14. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 113, pages 1061-1073, Elsevier.
    15. Krause, Rachel M. & Carley, Sanya R. & Lane, Bradley W. & Graham, John D., 2013. "Perception and reality: Public knowledge of plug-in electric vehicles in 21 U.S. cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 433-440.
    16. H. Nassopoulos & Patrice Dumas & Stéphane Hallegatte, 2009. "Optimal reservoir dimensioning under climate change," Post-Print hal-00777413, HAL.
    17. Sütterlin, Bernadette & Siegrist, Michael, 2017. "Public acceptance of renewable energy technologies from an abstract versus concrete perspective and the positive imagery of solar power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 356-366.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erika Allen Wolters & Brent S. Steel & Rebecca L. Warner, 2020. "Ideology and Value Determinants of Public Support for Energy Policies in the U.S.: A Focus on Western States," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Jooseok Oh, 2020. "IoT-Based Smart Plug for Residential Energy Conservation: An Empirical Study Based on 15 Months’ Monitoring," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Aistė Balžekienė & Agnė Budžytė, 2021. "The Role of Environmental Attitudes in Explaining Public Perceptions of Climate Change and Renewable Energy Technologies in Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-15, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yu, H. & Reiner, D. & Chen, H. & Mi, Z., 2018. "A comparison of public preferences for different low-carbon energy technologies: Support for CCS, nuclear and wind energy in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1826, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Marilou Jobin & Michael Siegrist, 2020. "Support for the Deployment of Climate Engineering: A Comparison of Ten Different Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1058-1078, May.
    3. Jessica E. Hughes & James D. Sauer & Aaron Drummond & Laura E. Brumby & Matthew A. Palmer, 2023. "Endorsement of scientific inquiry promotes better evaluation of climate policy evidence," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(6), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Shannan K. Sweet & Jonathon P. Schuldt & Johannes Lehmann & Deborah A. Bossio & Dominic Woolf, 2021. "Perceptions of naturalness predict US public support for Soil Carbon Storage as a climate solution," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-15, May.
    5. Olson-Hazboun, Shawn K. & Howe, Peter D. & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2018. "The influence of extractive activities on public support for renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 117-126.
    6. Clulow, Z. & Ferguson, M. & Ashworth, P & Reiner, D., 2021. "Political ideology and public views of the energy transition in Australia and the UK," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2126, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Sælen, Håkon Grøn & Aasen, Marianne, 2023. "Exploring public opposition and support across different climate policies: Poles apart?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    8. Strazzera, Elisabetta & Mura, Marina & Contu, Davide, 2012. "Combining choice experiments with psychometric scales to assess the social acceptability of wind energy projects: A latent class approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 334-347.
    9. Pelau, Corina & Pop, Nicolae Al., 2018. "Implications for the energy policy derived from the relation between the cultural dimensions of Hofstede's model and the consumption of renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 160-168.
    10. Shawn Olson Hazboun & Hilary Schaffer Boudet, 2020. "Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    11. Kaitlin T. Raimi & Kimberly S. Wolske & P. Sol Hart & Victoria Campbell‐Arvai, 2020. "The Aversion to Tampering with Nature (ATN) Scale: Individual Differences in (Dis)comfort with Altering the Natural World," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 638-656, March.
    12. Michael Siegrist & Joseph Árvai, 2020. "Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2191-2206, November.
    13. Lee, Juyong & Reiner, David M., 2023. "Determinants of public preferences on low-carbon energy sources: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 284(C).
    14. Matias Spektor & Guilherme N. Fasolin & Juliana Camargo, 2023. "Climate change beliefs and their correlates in Latin America," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    15. Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee & Donggeun Kim, 2019. "Searching for the Next New Energy in Energy Transition: Comparing the Impacts of Economic Incentives on Local Acceptance of Fossil Fuels, Renewable, and Nuclear Energies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-32, April.
    16. Galliera, Arianna, 2018. "Self-selecting random or cumulative pay? A bargaining experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 106-120.
    17. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    18. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    19. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    20. Oege Dijk, 2017. "For whom does social comparison induce risk-taking?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 519-541, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:13:y:2020:i:1:p:238-:d:304833. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.