New Scientist is usually sharp, but not with the poll that led them to conclude, “the US public has a clear preference for action in the electricity sector rather than vehicle fuel.” The methodology was flawed:
We split the sample into three groups. One was told that the vehicle fuel policies would result in the price of a gallon rising to $4. The second group was told that a gallon would rise to $7 and the third $15. We did the same for electricity, telling the groups that a typical monthly bill would rise from $85 to either $87, $95 or $155. Then we presented all the respondents with the six policies and for each asked: “If an election were being held today, would you vote in favour of this policy or would you vote against it?”
Gosh, people would rather their electricity bill rise a little than their gasoline bill rise a lot. Duh.
And this polling completely misses the point that you can cut emissions in both sectors without raising energy bills — if you focus on energy efficiency.
Jeers to New Scientist for trying to pass off this silliness as serious analysis.
Share
Print
This entry was posted by Joe
on Thursday, June 21st, 2007 at 5:08 pm and is filed under Media.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
RSS
Subscribe by Email
Follow Climate Progress on Twitter
