Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes

Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: Exploring British public attitudes
复制标题

DOI:
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.037
复制
发表时间:
2011-09-01
期刊:
影响因子:
9
通讯作者:
Pidgeon, Nick
Pidgeon, Nick
中科院分区:
经济学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Corner, Adam;Venables, Dan;Pidgeon, Nick

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

英国公众对核电的态度历来存在严重分歧,但随着对气候变化和能源安全的担忧对英国能源政策的影响越来越大,核电已被重新定义为一种低碳技术。先前的研究表明,很大一部分人可能“不情愿地”接受核能作为应对气候变化更大威胁的一种手段。根据一项英国全国调查(n=1822)的结果,目前的研究发现,对核能的态度仍然存在分歧,只有少数人表示无条件接受。总体而言,对气候变化和能源安全表示更大关注、具有更高环境价值的人不太可能支持核电。然而,当核电被赋予明确的“不情愿接受”框架时——允许人们在有条件的支持的同时表达对核电的不喜欢——对气候变化和能源安全的担忧成为支持核电的积极预测因素。这些发现表明,对气候变化和能源安全的关注只会在有限的情况下增加对核能的接受度——特别是在其他(首选)选择已经用尽的情况下。(C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd.版权所有。
Public attitudes towards nuclear power in the UK have historically been deeply divided, but as concern about climate change and energy security has exerted an increasing influence on British energy policy, nuclear power has been reframed as a low-carbon technology. Previous research has suggested that a significant proportion of people may 'reluctantly accept' nuclear power as a means of addressing the greater threat of climate change. Drawing on the results of a national British survey (n=1822), the current study found that attitudes towards nuclear remain divided, with only a minority expressing unconditional acceptance. In general, people who expressed greater concern about climate change and energy security and possessed higher environmental values were less likely to favour nuclear power. However, when nuclear power was given an explicit 'reluctant acceptance' framing - allowing people to express their dislike for nuclear power alongside their conditional support - concerns about climate change and energy security became positive predictors of support for nuclear power. These findings suggest that concern about climate change and energy security will only increase acceptance of nuclear power under limited circumstances-specifically once other (preferred) options have been exhausted. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.