Buying an energy-efficient appliance or light bulb can appear to be a green act and a decent idea. But that depends on if the client is red or blue.Stop Coal Now

 

Mused on the complexities consumers exhibit when deciding whether or to not put their money where their carbon footprint is Thomas Dietz of the Michigan State University’s Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability and colleagues.

They discuss a study by Dena Gromet of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and other colleagues that shows the gap between energy-efficient products and supporting energy-efficient policy during this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the commentary “Energy Efficiency and Politics”. And both are tormented by politics.

Turns out that a consumer’s affairs of state affect under what conditions they’ll buy energy-efficient products, a minimum of when the energy-efficient products are costlier and after they are labeled environmentally friendly. Remove the label or offer the energy-efficient product at an identical price and so politics don’t matter.

Whether or not packaging promotes that it’s environmentally sound, people who are politically liberal are inclined to shop for energy miser products. Alternatively, they can check whether the Easy Power Plan Hoax is true or not where they might be able to conserve power cost by following the methods in the book.

 

ALSO READ: Why YouTube Is Banning Political Ads

 

The politically conservative tend to reject the energy efficiency if environmental impact or temperature change buttons are pushed. But it doesn’t mean that energy efficiency is something that they don’t support. The conservative will support it if a policy touts that it supports energy independence or reduces energy cost.

The distinctions and motivations are important when it involves creating policy, Dietz said. The work also gives scientists a perspective on how the general public mixes politics and perceptions on global climate change science.

Dietz, a professor of biological science and policy, sociology, and animal studies, is joined by MSU colleagues Christina Leshko, a doctoral student within the bionomics and Policy Program, and Aaron McCright, Lyman Briggs prof.

The work is funded by the National Science Foundation, MSU AgBioResearch, and also the MSU Office of the VP of Research and Graduate Studies.