Health and energy preferences: Rethinking the social acceptance of energy systems in the United States

Highlights

• A 2011 survey of U.S. residents’ energy preferences is analyzed.

• Predictors of preferences include health, political party, ideology, sex, age, and education.

• Less healthy people are less likely to support coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy.

Abstract

Does a person’s health impact their opinions about energy sources? This article tests whether people with health problems prefer less physically harmful energy sources using data from a 2011 survey of 1382 U.S. residents. 19% of respondents reported their health as “only fair” or worse, and a smaller proportion of these people supported coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy than of respondents who had “good” or “excellent” health. The analysis finds significant differences in opinion by gender, age, and other demographic characteristics. These findings are consistent with previous U.S. studies on energy preferences. After controlling for political party, ideology, sex, age, education, race, religion, and geographical region, this article shows that people with health problems are not more likely to back renewable energy, but that they are significantly less likely to support coal, natural gas, and nuclear power. These results may be utilized by a variety of policy-oriented groups. They can help shape interest groups’ advocacy strategies, advise decisions about what communities to avoid when developing energy facilities, and guide policymakers’ attempts to initiate energy policy that will be supported by the public by increasing understanding about how energy preferences are formed.

Introduction

Energy policy currently occupies significant public attention, particularly around issues of sustainability and emission reduction. Public approval is useful for policies to be implemented successfully. Given the divergent attitudes toward different energy sources, policymakers must discern public opinion in order to appropriately guide energy policy. Understanding citizens’ underlying preferences is crucial for designing effective policies. Investigating the effects of social variables may help shed light on how the general public will react to energy transition as well as how localized populations might respond to nearby investment in different types of energy facilities. This paper tests the hypothesis that people facing health challenges are likely to weight the health implications of energy sources more heavily when considering their preferences among them.

Americans vary in their preferences among economically viable sources of energy. Previous research shows the important roles political party, ideology, sex, age, and education play in explaining those preferences. However, the literature concerning the impact of individuals’ health on their energy opinions is not well developed. This article attempts to fill that gap by exploring the role of physical health on opinions about four of the main sources of U.S. energy – coal, natural gas, nuclear, and renewables. Coal and natural gas impose heavy costs on the environment that can deteriorate peoples’ health [1], [2], [3], and nuclear power poses large-scale health risks to populations near nuclear facilities [4], [5].

Knowing the impact of health on public energy preferences could be helpful to a variety of actors invested in this area of public policy. Not only will it help clarify the underlying drivers of public opinion about energy, but it can guide interest groups’ strategies for approaching energy advocacy and advise policy decisions regarding the expansion of new energy facilities.