This research assesses the degree to which the British Petroleum oil spill has had an impact on how Americans view nuclear energy. The study will follow-up with 500 survey respondents who took part in a late March 2010 survey about nuclear energy. While the original survey was not intended to include a second wave, the oil spill has created the opportunity for a natural experiment. One possibility is that the oil spill has increased support for non-petroleum based sources of energy by making nuclear energy seem relatively less risky and by making decision makers involved in nuclear energy seem relatively more responsible. A second possibility is that the oil spill will has decreased support for nuclear energy by increasing the risk that Americans associate with complex technical systems such as those involved in nuclear energy and by making decision makers involved in the overall energy industry seem less responsible. The research explores both possibilities as well as questions about the role of media use and survey question order. The work builds on this unique opportunity by grounding itself in contemporary research and theory related to the impact of framing and fairness perceptions.
The broader impact of this research will be realized through its efforts to integrate research and advance discovery in the area of the public opinion dynamics underlying views about energy alternatives. The findings will inform collaboration with other organizations involved in current debates about energy alternatives.
This research resulted in the collection and analysis of survey data (n = 425) in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The survey focused on citizens' views about nuclear energy based on the hypothesis that an accident related to fossil fuels might make nuclear energy more attractive to Americans. An alternative hypothesis was that the scope of the disaster might make Americans more wary of the potential risks involved in large-scale energy production. The survey focused on views about nuclear energy risks and benefits, views about key decision-makers involved in nuclear energy, overall support for nuclear energy development, attention to oil spill news, environmental attitudes, and demographics. The data collection was unique because it was possible to resurvey a group of respondents who had already answered questions about nuclear energy in the months before the spill. This type of panel data allows for stronger statements about what may have caused any changes in attitudes or beliefs.The data was collected online by Knowledge Networks using a unique probability based sampling methodology that includes respondents traditionally missed by online surveys. The results of the survey -- the analysis of which was undergoing peer review at the time of this report -- suggest that there was no overall (average) change in views about nuclear energy as a result of the spill but that there was some change within sub-groups. In particular, it appears that those who paid more attention to oil spill news and who had stronger environmental views became more negative about nuclear energy while those who paid more attention but had weaker environmental views become more supportive of nuclear energy. In other words, the impact of the oil spill on views about nuclear energy was conditional on having paid attention to the spill and that the direction of the change was based on pre-existing environmental views. The results speak to difficulty of making arguments about one form of energy (e.g., nuclear) through a critique of another (e.g. oil). The findings are, however, consistent with past research on motivated reasoning and biased processing. The data also speak to the relative stability of views about nuclear energy and the danger of expecting simple effects from attention to the news media. The current study is part of a broader research program on citizens' views about energy. The results of this specific research project have been presented at academic conferences focused on risk analysis in December 2010 and another focused on journalism and mass communication education in August 2011. It also formed the basis of a presentation to a local chapter of the American Nuclear Society in February 2011, an April 2011 article for The Natural Hazards Observer and a presentation to a chapter of the Young Generation in Nuclear Energy in November 2011. Additional analysis is expected and a third wave of data was collected following the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear accident. A graduate student assisted in the analysis of the results as part of her Ph.D. training.
