Public Attitudes to Whole Energy System Change

1. Public Attitudes to Whole Energy System Change Nick Pidgeon, Catherine Butler, Christina Demski, Karen Parkhill, Understanding Risk Group, School of Psychology, Cardiff University, and Alexa Spence, Nottingham University ERP Engagement Workshop, London, May 2013

2. CU Consortium • Psychology, Cardiff University • PI: Prof Nick Pidgeon • Researcher Co-I: Dr Catherine Butler • Researcher Co-I: Dr Karen Parkhill • Researcher: Dr. Christina Demski • Co-I: Dr. Lorraine Whitmarsh • Engineering, Cardiff University • Co-PI: Prof Nick Jenkins • Researcher: Dr Tracy Sweet • Researcher: Dr Modassur Chaudry • Researcher: Brian Drysdale • Architecture, Cardiff University • Co-PI: Prof Peter Pearson • Psychology, Nottingham University (attached to Psych, Cardiff) • Researcher Co-I: Dr Alexa Spence

3. Energy System Transformation

4. WP1Many Scenarios

5. Trading off

6. Objectives To identify key trade-offs in system change & stakeholder & public responses to these To build knowledge and understanding of public attitudes, values and acceptability of energy system change To create qualitative and quantitative data sets for examination of the perspectives of varied publics across the UK on whole energy system and system change To develop and utilise innovative methodological approaches for examining public values, attitudes and acceptability To develop a range of generic materials that can be utilised as a basis for working with varied publics

7. Reasons for Engagement and Dialogue • Incorporating Public Values in Decisions (e.g. equity) • Improving Decision Quality • Resolving Conflict • Establishing Trust and Legitimacy • Education and Information (but need genuine two-way engagement) See: Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties Royal Society / Royal Acad. Eng, 2004, London, Ch 7.

8. Methods for Engagement • Participatory and/or Constructive Technology Assessment • Scenario Analysis • Direct Public Engagement (e.g. citizen jury) • Decision Analysis • Multi-stage Approaches • Public Attitudes Research See: Nanoscience and Nanotechnologies: Opportunities and Uncertainties Royal Society / Royal Acad. Eng, 2004, London

9. Work Packages

10. Work Package 2: Public Deliberations • Diverse sample: • Gender • Age • Ethnicity • Educational qualifications • SEG • Household tenure • Power station affiliation

11. WP 2: Day format

13. MY 2050 in the Workshops

14. WP3 – Survey Sampling • Nationally representative for GB (n=2,441) • Core samples for England, Scotland and Wales • Conducted 2-12th August 2012 through IpsosMORI • Weighted by age, gender, geographical region and employment status

15. WP3: Survey & my2050 • Climate change, energy security and affordability • Key energy supply options: fossil fuels, nuclear power & wind energy • Electrification of heating, cooking and driving • Demand reduction • Demand side management • Overall system change my2050 • About my2050 • Repeated questions • Environmental values & technol. optimism • Sample characteristics

16. Key survey analyses Topline findings = launch early next year  findings and interpretation of public perceptions of key area in energy system change Further/advanced analysis – academic papers National comparisons – England, Scotland, Wales • My2050 responses • Which options within the my2050 received most/least effort • What futures did people create? Drawing out key ‘public • pathways/futures’ • How do they compare to the original data and the DECC pathways Before and after the my2050 tool = do key perceptions around energy supply and demand change as a result of engaging with the tool? Framing the my2050 tool = do public futures change if the target is not compulsory? What if they are presented with an already existing future possibility? (scenarios)

17. Reports • Butler, C., Parkhill, K.A. & Pidgeon N.F. (2013) Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability: Deliberating Energy System Transitions in the UK Report on Findings from Deliberative Workshops. Working Paper, Cardiff University and UK Energy Research Centre. • Demski, C., Spence, A. & Pidgeon N.F. (2013) Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability: Summary findings of a survey conducted in August 2012. Working Paper, Cardiff University and UK Energy Research Centre. • Demski, C., Parkhill, K., Butler, C., Spence, A. & Pidgeon N.F. (2012) Public Engagement and the My2050 tool . Policy Briefing, Cardiff University and UK Energy Research Centre. • available from ‘Reports’ section at www.understanding-risk.org

18. Deliberative Workshops - Themes Policies & Governance Paying for 2050 Imagining Change Social Contracts Responsibility & Trust Risk (Making & Taking) Meta Issues Intangibles Politics of Place Technological Pessimism Non-Transitions Accessing Futures Sensory Experience

19. Deliberative Workshops - Emerging Findings • Whole System Framing - essential • Climate Change, Energy Security & Affordability • Public interpretive frames differ to policy (e.g. not p/kWh) • No straightforward relationship between views on meta issues and views on energy system change • General Positivity/Enthusiasm Toward Change (clean, sustainable, quality of life, not finite) • Where negative conceptions of things appear it about not being seen as involving change i.e. non-transitions (e.g. biofuels, CCS, consumption) • Some Interventions Leave People Feeling Vulnerable • Prosumer/investment risks for early adopters • Stigma – being seen to be ‘not normal’ (need neighbourhood/community interventions)

20. Transitions Need to be Sensitive to Place • Siting – appropriate siting & importance of process • Socio-cultural histories of place taken into account • Passive demand management is draconian/intrusive – homes as sites of contestation • Cost & Affordability • Concern about cost is multi-dimensional not just about higher bills (e.g. profits, investment, who pays) • Some acceptability of bills increases to pay for certain types of transitions (i.e. sustainable) this is in the context that people expect costs to go up anyway. • Existing Social Contracts • Flying – beyond travel (multi-culturalism, aspirations, work v leisure, enjoyment) • Meat – beyond sustenance (social interaction, pleasure and meal times)

21. Imagining Change – Future Sustainability Future energy supply… Jeff: -Wind turbines Lewis:- Waves Eric:- Solar Ann:- Wind Rachel:- I think with the wind and anything to do with the weather, we get enough of it here [giggles from group] Moderator: -And onshore wind/off shore wind, do you mind? Lewis:- Both [nodding and murmurs of agreement from group] Moderator:- So what do you see the benefits of wind and wave, wood the things you have mentioned? Jeff:- It’s free Ann:- Natural Jeff: Natural, aye (Glasgow) Engendering change Rose:-… I don’t want somebody coming in and saying, “you can’t run that, you’re going to jail for putting that heater on all night”, but I do think something will need to be done because we need to stop, we know this, we know what we’re damaging… (Glasgow) Cultural transition I don’t want to sound like an old hippy but if you go producing more and more and more, you just have more and more rubbish, and more and more environmental problems but our system, our economy is based on producing so that is a real problem (Rachel, London)

22. Survey : To what extent do you agree or disagree that the UK should reduce its use of fossil fuels? (Wales Data - * indicates significant difference from UK samples)

23. Imagining Change – Non-Transition Non-transition - Biomass… Fiona - It’s another oil and you would exploit countries who will allow you to have land and everyone else wants that land so I think you would end up with more wars and water issues. Cheryl:- Yeah it feels like a step backwards… it feels like come on guys, we can do something better than that. I don’t know what it is about it, maybe it is because it’s just burning stuff, it doesn’t seem very sophisticated or sustainable and it seems like they have just panicked and said we’ll just burn stuff. (Cumbria) • Negative conceptions of things not seen as involving real change (or non-transitions) such as Biofuels,

24. Technological Realism – and Politics of Place On Carbon Capture and Storage Jeff:- “See, I worry about that whenever humans try and transport something dangerous, they always make an arse of it somewhere along the line, like oil. The damage we have done with big oil tankers spilling out, we would have to transport this and store it and obviously I don’t know how that gets out, is it like a vapour or liquid or ice I don’t know, but if you leave humans to transport something from a to b at some point of them doing that they will make a balls up and it could end up back in the environment. That is just my opinions on humans, but we always make an arse of it somewhere”. (Edinburgh) Politics and history… Olivia:- It is not as bad, but I really don’t think we want to be the dustbin of the world for that kind of thing (carbon emissions) (Glasgow)

25. Everyday Sensory Experience • Coal, Oil and Gas viewed as archaic, dirty, limited (running out), and conflict generating BUT… in everyday experience… • Electrification- cars, cooking and heating • Existing experiences • Controllability James:- if they could get an electric car to that stage where you could get electric cars at the same performance as diesel and petrol then I would do definitely, but not at the moment. (Edinburgh) Lilly:- I love my coal fire, especially when it is pouring down rain outside and you come in and you’ve got a coal fire there is nothing better. (Cardiff) Amy: I wasn’t keen on an electric hob. I like to see the flame, I think it’s safer. (London).

26. Survey -Demand Reduction (Wales Data)

27. RiskRisk Taking and Risk Making Michael: To be honest with you I think part of it is that if anyone sticks their head above the parapet to try and do anything… I’m frightened that I am going to get you know into trouble by doing something that’s slightly different. And I think that’s part of the problem. Jason: Exactly, it comes down to familiarity doesn’t it?... that’s how you implement change. Once it becomes familiar. Matt: …And then that [government cavity wall scheme] started and I’d say now that about 2/3rd of the estate… one saw someone else getting it done and said “what is happening here?” and then they got it done. (Cumbria) Fiona: I would watch and wait like I am doing with the hybrid [car] thing. We thought about it but we thought we would just watch and wait and see what happens to everyone else – see if their car falls apart (Cumbria)

28. Demand Management

29. Demand Management – Survey (Wales Data)

30. Cost & Incentives A fair energy market? Lindsey:- Is that part of the problem - that they have opened up the market place and the market place now dictates what we pay whereas before it was centralised and government-led and a fair price for all, and now we swap and the next week they put their prices up and you wish you stayed with that one. We are having to juggle this constant reassessing of who we should be with - change our mortgage every five minutes, change our telephone provided, change our gas and electric. We get our gas from the electric and the electric from the Gas Board - it has just got ridiculous. We don’t want all this aggravation of having to compare prices – a penny more on that or less on that - and different usage. We just want a fair price for what we use then we will use it fairly. Judy:- Yes, I think you’re right. I think it does need to be uniform because at the minute we are playing in a monopoly and we are losing out because they are getting mega big bucks from the profits they are getting and what are they giving us - absolutely nothing… (Cumbria)

31. Social Contracts Values and Intangibles …in my eyes it may be a silly thing to say, why have a world when you can’t visit it? Why have other counties when you can’t go there. It seems silly that we can’t visit other countries and cultures and actually learn. What is there to learn in life? (Nigel, London) Jeremy:- And no way in the world will I give up eating meat, I don’t care, may the world come to an end tomorrow (Glasgow) On flying… Amy:- …Tenerife, I go a lot and my family used to live in the states and I went a lot out there, so here there and everywhere, I am a retired lady now and I worked all my life, every day of my life, and now I think, “well I should just enjoy myself” so I do. (Glasgow) Irene:- Something I wouldn’t change is not eating meat [laughter and agreement from group] (Merthyr)

32. The My2050 tool

33. Public pathways to energy futures? (Clusters of responses) Mean slider level/effort (0-3)

34. Before and After the tool

35. System transformation (Wales Data) 89% agree that Britain needs to radically change how it produces and uses energy by 2050. National Government(s) are seen to play a large role in bringing about these change.

36. Concluding Comments • Successful Engagement – Elicited a Rich Set of Public Discourses • Value of Multiple-Methods • Public(s), Values, AND Commonality • Use of Interactive Tools (e.g. MY2050) • Future Priorities

37. www.understanding-risk.org