29
What does the Australian public think about all things energy? Peta Ashworth, Adjunct Assoc. Prof School of Social Science CRICOS Provider No 00025B
What does the Australian public think about all things energy?
Peta Ashworth, Adjunct Assoc. Prof School of Social Science
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Acknowledgement
The team at CSIRO:
• Grace Muriuki
• Talia Jeanneret
• Paul Graham
• Thomas Brinsmead
• Jenny Hayward
Funding from the CSIRO’s
Energy Flagship
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Outline
•Rationale
•Experimental design
•The tool
•Results
Rationale
• Conducted energy technology surveys for some time (since 2005)
• Continual finding Australians prefer renewable energy
• Generally have been reluctant to pay more
• Previous experience with interactive tools for climate data in tourism
has been well received
• What would be the impact of an interactive tool on price and GHG data
Experimental Design
TREATMENT DESCRIPTION
Control No energy source and related technologies information provided
Repeat of funding priority ranking included only the top five energy sources and related technologies
Condition One (‘MyPower’)
Description of energy sources and related technologies provided
Directed to engage with ‘MyPower’ online tool
Attitudes sought after interaction with online tool
Repeat of funding priority ranking included all twelve energy sources and related technologies
Condition Two (Information table)
Description of energy sources and related technologies provided
Information on cost and emissions of energy sources and related technologies presented in a table
Attitudes sought with consideration given to cost and emissions information
Repeat of funding priority ranking included all twelve energy sources and related technologies
Energy information Energy Sources and related technology
Levelised cost of energy (cents per kilowatt hour)
Typical lifecycle
CO2 emissions
(grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour)
Wind* ranges from 9 to 17 ranges from 8 to 20
Nuclear ranges from 10 to 12 ranges from 8 to 45
Coal ranges from 14 to 22 ranges from 877 to 1130
Gas ranges from 12 to 27 ranges from 422 to 548
Gas or coal (CCS) ranges from 11 to 25 ranges from 65 to 396
Geothermal* ranges from 15 to 23 ranges from 20 to 57
Solar* (concentrating solar/solar-
thermal)
ranges from 18 to 25 ranges from 14 to 32
Solar* (photovoltaic) ranges from 12 to 23 ranges from 29 to 80
Biomass* ranges from 12 to 14 ranges from 18 to 75
Wave/tidal* ranges from 21 to 23 ranges from 6 to 9
Total Sample
• In total 2986
– Control n=483
– C1 n= 1250
– C2 n=1253
• Age and gender reasonably consistent across groups
• Males 48.1% Females 51.9%
• Slight over representation in 65
- 69 years
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
¯
560 0 560280 Kilometers
Legend
!. Capital cities
Respondent postcodes
Adelaide
SOUTH AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIAQUEENSLAND
NORTHERN TERRITORY
NEW SOUTH WALES
TASMANIA
VICTORIA
Hobart
Brisbane
Perth
Sydney
Canberra
Darwin
Melbourne
Belief in climate change
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
71.52%
7.10%
9.65%
11.73% Yes, it is already happening
It will start happening within thenext 30 years
No it is not happening and won’t
I do not know / I am not sure
Belief in causes of climate change
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
4.04%
10.99%
27.31%
57.66%
3.68%
13.90%
25.76%
56.66%
0% 20% 40% 60%
I do not know / I am not sure
Caused mostly by natural changes in theenvironment
Caused mostly by human activities
Caused by both human activities andnatural changes in the environment
2011 2013
How Australia will respond to CC
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
2007 2010 2011 2013
%
New technologies will be developed We will change our lifestyleWe will live with climate change and adapt Do nothingIs a problem but Australia won't do anything I am not sure
Energy availability & affordability
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
...electricity and gas will becomeunaffordable for you?
...petrol will become unaffordable foryou?
...there will be more frequent poweroutages?
...there will be a national petrolshortage?
Not at all 2 3 4 Very much
Willingness to pay more for electricity to reduce
GHG emissions?
Willingness to pay N %
Yes 624 20.9
No 1,250 41.9
I’m not sure 1,112 37.2
Spread of those willing to pay more or not
Exploring the use of an interactive tool
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Total
No m
ore
Up to $25 m
ore
Up to $50 m
ore
Up to $75 m
ore
Up to $100 m
ore
Up to $150 m
ore
More than $150
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Reason for not subscribing % Example quote
Cost 45.0 At this point in time I cannot afford the additional cost.
No interest in the scheme 32.1 Not really concerned about it.
Lack of understanding of offer or availability 22.9 Do not understand how it works
Don’t believe or suspicious of scheme 11.0 I am not convinced this power is actually from a green source.
Currently a low carbon house 6.5 I feel that I have done enough by taking on solar panels and reducing my energy use
Reason for subscribing % Example quote
Benefits to the environment 47.5 A clean and more sustainable energy resource
Aligns with values 19.0 Feels good to know I’m doing my part in saving the planet
Financial savings 9% Saves money
* Two coders extracted themes from open-ended questions, an inter-rater agreement of
0.91 & 0.84 was obtained using Cohen’s’ Kappa (unweighted).
Reasons for price increases % Example quote
Government policies 35.8 The government with the so called carbon tax
Greed and profiteering of electricity companies
28.4 Companies looking for too much profit
Maintenance and development of network infrastructure
17.1 Costs of maintaining poles and wires
Mismanagement of/within the industry
6.8 Administration and lack of planning
Not sure/don’t know 6.8 Don’t know why they have increased
Increase in consumer demand for energy
6.5 More people are using more electricity
* Two coders extracted themes from open-ended questions, an inter-rater agreement of
0.91 was obtained using Cohen’s’ Kappa (unweighted).
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Freq. of energy source selection (n=813)
Energy source/technology N %
Renewables 732 90.04
Gas 679 83.52
Coal 545 67.04
CCS 375 46.13
Nuclear 169 18.33
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Distribution % preferences MyPower (n=813)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Nuclear
CCS
Coal
Gas
Renewable
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Frequency of the range of electricity price changes from energy mix choices
21.0%
37.5%
20.5%
6.6% 5.9% 8.4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
1 to 10% 11 to 20% 21 to 30% 31 to 40% 41 to 50% 51 to 60%
Frequency of range of carbon emission changes from energy mix choices
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
11.8%
6.0%
8.1%
9.6% 9.1%
11.2%
12.5%
7.1% 6.2%
4.2% 3.7%
1.2%
9.0%
0.2% 0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
The average energy mix and impacts
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Energy source/technology % SD
Renewables 23.35 26.74
Gas 28.30 25.55
Coal 8.67 12.24
CCS 32.82 26.00
Nuclear 6.86 18.00
IMPACT OF ENERGY MIX %
Change in electricity price 22 15.14
Change in emissions -44 35.23
Clustered groups of energy preferences
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
Extent of Social Approval (n=2549)
CRICOS Provider No 00025B
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Low-emission nuclear energy
Traditional fossil-fuel based energy
Low-emission fossil-fuel based energy
Renewable energy
They would disapprove 2 Neither approve nor disapprove 4 They would approve
Mean levels of support
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
Me
an le
vels
of
acce
pta
nce
table group (n=1253)
widget group (n=1250)
control group (n=483)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Disagree T1 Disagree T2 Neither T1 Neither T2 Agree T1 Agree T2
Changes in preferences T1 & T 2
Information Table
What have we seen
• On average people have been reluctant to agree to price increases when asked the general question.
• When given the options in the MyPower tool they have chosen a more stringent emission reduction-price increase combination than their first answer indicated.
• Might mean that people are reluctant to give a blank cheque for price increases when asked an open question.
• When given very specific detail about cost-emission trade-offs and how to achieve them they are more comfortable selecting something with reasonable ambition.
