IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eerjnl/v11y2022i1p12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Americans Support for Renewable Energy is Disconnected from their Understanding of Powerline Infrastructure as a Mechanism to Mitigate Climate Change

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca J. Romsdahl
  • Christopher Felege
  • Joshua E. Hunter
  • Cheryl Hunter
  • Susan Ellis-Felege

Abstract

As nations are transitioning to renewable energy sources, they will need to expand and upgrade their energy infrastructure, including high-voltage power lines (HVPL). We have conducted the first nation-wide survey in the last thirty years to assess public attitudes toward HVPL in the USA. The study evaluates perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes toward building new transmission lines, as these relate to renewable energy, place attachment, and environmental impacts. Our results show that Americans do not recognize how new HVPL could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions; instead, respondents favor moving from centralized energy (large power stations and HVPL) to decentralized energy (local power supply and small scale solar panels and wind turbines. Our findings are consistent with studies from Europe in that citizens recognize negative human impacts on the natural world and support renewable energy, however, they have a limited understanding of the role of HVPL infrastructure in mitigating climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca J. Romsdahl & Christopher Felege & Joshua E. Hunter & Cheryl Hunter & Susan Ellis-Felege, 2022. "Americans Support for Renewable Energy is Disconnected from their Understanding of Powerline Infrastructure as a Mechanism to Mitigate Climate Change," Energy and Environment Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eerjnl:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/eer/article/download/0/0/45109/47796
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/eer/article/view/0/45109
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Rejecting renewables: The socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4500-4513, November.
    2. Matthew Cotton & Patrick Devine-Wright, 2013. "Putting pylons into place: a UK case study of public perspectives on the impacts of high voltage overhead transmission lines," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1225-1245, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Drupady, Ira Martina, 2011. "Examining the Small Renewable Energy Power (SREP) Program in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7244-7256.
    2. Ng, Thiam Hee & Tao, Jacqueline Yujia, 2016. "Bond financing for renewable energy in Asia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 509-517.
    3. Zeynep Clulow & Michele Ferguson & Peta Ashworth & David Reiner, 2021. "Political ideology and public views of the energy transition in Australia and the UK," Working Papers EPRG2106, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    4. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    5. Sugimoto, Kota, 2019. "Does transmission unbundling increase wind power generation in the United States?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 307-316.
    6. Zheng, Shuhong & Yang, Juan & Yu, Shiwei, 2021. "How renewable energy technological innovation promotes renewable power generation: Evidence from China's provincial panel data," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1394-1407.
    7. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    8. Goda Perlaviciute & Linda Steg & Nadja Contzen & Sabine Roeser & Nicole Huijts, 2018. "Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
    9. Nuru, Jude T. & Rhoades, Jason L. & Gruber, James S., 2021. "The socio-technical barriers and strategies for overcoming the barriers to deploying solar mini-grids in rural islands: Evidence from Ghana," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. Zhang Jingchao & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2021. "Are societies becoming proself? A topographical difference under fast urbanization in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(9), pages 12976-12993, September.
    11. Charlie Wilson & Arnulf Grubler, 2011. "Lessons from the history of technological change for clean energy scenarios and policies," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(3), pages 165-184, August.
    12. Farah Roslan & Ștefan Cristian Gherghina & Jumadil Saputra & Mário Nuno Mata & Farah Diana Mohmad Zali & José Moleiro Martins, 2022. "A Panel Data Approach towards the Effectiveness of Energy Policies in Fostering the Implementation of Solar Photovoltaic Technology: Empirical Evidence for Asia-Pacific," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    13. Egbue, Ona & Long, Suzanna, 2012. "Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 717-729.
    14. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & van der Vleuten, Johannes Marinus & Hills, Peter & Tao, Julia, 2012. "Consumer perceptions of smart grid development: Results of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 204-216.
    15. Jingchao, Zhang & Kotani, Koji & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi, 2019. "Low-quality or high-quality coal? Household energy choice in rural Beijing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 81-90.
    16. Poruschi, Lavinia & Ambrey, Christopher L., 2018. "Densification, what does it mean for fuel poverty and energy justice? An empirical analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 208-217.
    17. Olivier JOALLAND & Tina RAMBONILAZA, 2017. "Assessing the impact of renewable energy infrastructure on the “tourist value” in rural landscapes: a spatial hedonic approach," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2017-10, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    18. Lin, Boqiang & Omoju, Oluwasola E. & Okonkwo, Jennifer U., 2016. "Factors influencing renewable electricity consumption in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 687-696.
    19. Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2016. "The history and politics of energy transitions: Comparing contested views and finding common ground," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-81, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Lloyd, Bob & Forest, Andrew S., 2010. "The transition to renewables: Can PV provide an answer to the peak oil and climate change challenges?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7378-7394, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:eerjnl:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:12. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.