Green dilemmas: Public opposition and support for Norway's energy transition

The rapid expansion of non-fossil energy is crucial for achieving climate targets and ensuring energy security. However, public opposition has emerged as a major barrier to developing new generation capacity. Using a nationally representative survey (n = 1936), we analyze public support for six power generation technologies in Norway—wind power (onshore and offshore), solar power (building- and ground-mounted), hydropower, and nuclear power. We find strong support for solar power on buildings, hydropower, and nuclear power, while wind power, particularly onshore, faces considerable opposition. Perceived nature loss, visual disturbances and risk of accidents are consistently correlated with opposition, whereas perceived job creation and greater price stability drive support. When asked to indicate their preferred portfolio of new power generation capacity, we find that respondents favor hydropower and nuclear energy while preferring smaller shares for both wind and solar power. By incorporating these preferences into an energy system model, we find that aligning energy investments with public preferences significantly increases price variability and system costs. These findings highlight challenging trade-offs for policymakers and investors between energy supply, environmental concerns, and costs: The solutions favored by the public align with limiting nature loss, but also imply substantially increased system costs. Facilitating an informed dialogue and systematically internalizing negative externalities is crucial to ensure an energy system that has security of supply, is cost efficient and accepted by the public.