Due to the renewed increase in CO2 emissions seen in recent years, the deployment of climate engineering technologies is likely to be necessary if the global temperature increase is to be kept within 1.5°C. If climate engineering is to be deployed, however, public support is required. The present study hence compared public support for a broad range of climate engineering technologies. Further, the factors that drive public support were investigated and compared across the technologies. In an online survey conducted in Switzerland, respondents (n=1575) were randomly allocated to the description of one of ten climate engineering technologies, of which seven were specific carbon dioxide removal measures and three were solar radiation management measures. The results show that the level of public support for afforestation was the highest. The levels of public support for the other climate engineering technologies were relatively similar, although a tendency for solar radiation management to have a lower level of support was identified. Across all the investigated climate engineering technologies, the perceived benefits were the main driver of public support. Additionally, for all the technologies but afforestation, a higher level of trust in industry/science/government increased the level of public support, whereas the factor perceived risks & tampering with nature was found to be a negative predictor of support. The present findings suggest that there are opportunities available for the deployment of several climate engineering technologies in combination with other mitigation measures. Focusing on the benefits of such technologies appears beneficial in terms of fostering increased support.

No abstract

This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use. ETH Library We choose what we like-Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice

The energy transition in Switzerland, as in many other countries, aims to increase the proportion of electricity produced using renewable energy technologies. In this context, governmental agencies and other institutions have attempted to communicate the implications of (domestic) electricity systems through the use of web-based and interactive decision support systems (DSSs). Studies show that, when no additional information is provided, preferences concerning the future electricity mix are mainly driven by the affective reactions that energy technologies evoke. A question remains, however, regarding how people engage with the information provided in a DSS, as well as whether such information is influential in terms of shaping people's choices. We asked our participants to build an electricity portfolio using a DSS, which modeled the Swiss electricity system. The participants' political orientation and their affective reactions to different energy technologies guided their information search, as well as the choice of energy technologies within their portfolio. The attention paid to the information provided was not directly related to the participants' portfolio choices. The selective processing of information, which was based on the participants' prior attitudes, suggests that they target information they are already familiar with in the DSS. However, this also illustrates a caveat previously identified in motivated political reasoning, since selective information processing, together with the tendency to disconfirm information that is incongruent with prior beliefs, can lead to the polarization of previously held views. As the information provided through the DSS we tested was unable to change the participants' affective-cognitive evaluation of energy technologies, its use should be carefully considered in light of the possible effects of consolidating existing beliefs.

No abstract