Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:34 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,165 posts, read 1,514,680 times
Reputation: 445

Advertisements

Before we begin this thread, I would like to say that I have no horse in this race. I am getting tired of being accused of things that I do not hold merely for posting studies that I think the board may find interesting to discuss. Having said that, let me proceed:

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices
Pro-Environment Light Bulb Labeling Turns Off Conservative Buyers, Study Finds
Why Do Conservatives Like to Waste Energy? | Mother Jones *

This research demonstrates how promoting the environment can negatively affect adoption of energy efficiency in the United States because of the political polarization surrounding environmental issues. Study 1 demonstrated that more politically conservative individuals were less in favor of investment in energy-efficient technology than were those who were more politically liberal. This finding was driven primarily by the lessened psychological value that more conservative individuals placed on reducing carbon emissions. Study 2 showed that this difference has consequences: In a real-choice context, more conservative individuals were less likely to purchase a more expensive energy-efficient light bulb when it was labeled with an environmental message than when it was unlabeled. These results highlight the importance of taking into account psychological value-based considerations in the individual adoption of energy-efficient technology in the United States and beyond.

*I claim no affiliation with Mother Jones | Smart, Fearless Journalism
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:36 PM
 
20,458 posts, read 12,378,099 times
Reputation: 10251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cnote11 View Post
Before we begin this thread, I would like to say that I have no horse in this race. I am getting tired of being accused of things that I do not hold merely for posting studies that I think the board may find interesting to discuss. Having said that, let me proceed:

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices
Pro-Environment Light Bulb Labeling Turns Off Conservative Buyers, Study Finds
Why Do Conservatives Like to Waste Energy? | Mother Jones *

This research demonstrates how promoting the environment can negatively affect adoption of energy efficiency in the United States because of the political polarization surrounding environmental issues. Study 1 demonstrated that more politically conservative individuals were less in favor of investment in energy-efficient technology than were those who were more politically liberal. This finding was driven primarily by the lessened psychological value that more conservative individuals placed on reducing carbon emissions. Study 2 showed that this difference has consequences: In a real-choice context, more conservative individuals were less likely to purchase a more expensive energy-efficient light bulb when it was labeled with an environmental message than when it was unlabeled. These results highlight the importance of taking into account psychological value-based considerations in the individual adoption of energy-efficient technology in the United States and beyond.

*I claim no affiliation with Mother Jones | Smart, Fearless Journalism
No. Liberals do though....


Ever heard of a CFC light bulb? they are full of mercury. Liberals got law passed that made them the only bulb you can buy. now they are filling landfills and seeping mercury into the water.

Thank you liberals.


and to think the irony is, they did it in the name of the environment. ugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,165 posts, read 1,514,680 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd View Post
No. Liberals do though....


Ever heard of a CFC light bulb? they are full of mercury. Liberals got law passed that made them the only bulb you can buy. now they are filling landfills and seeping mercury into the water.

Thank you liberals.


and to think the irony is, they did it in the name of the environment. ugh.
Indeed, I agree that some strands of liberal environmentalism are actually negatively impacting society and possibly the environment. How much of this is a liberal condition, rather than a human one. Someone produces a new "environmentally safe" product--only in name for sake of marketing of course!--and people lap it up merely because it coincides with their personal philosophy. That certainly isn't restricted to liberals, as this study promptly shows. Perhaps this is one of the pit falls of a populace led movement such as it is with environmentalism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:43 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,781,638 times
Reputation: 4174
Liberals also tend to make government force people to turn over tax money to companies producing electric or hybrid cars, which produce far more pollutants than ordinary high-mileage gasoline cars when their batteries are used, replaced, and recycled.

The dangerous materials and chemicals in the batteries, when produced at production-line volumes, cause far more harm to the environment than either the materials that go into an ordinary gas engine or the exahust from the fuel the gasoline car burns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:43 PM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,583,124 times
Reputation: 2823


Occupy......

The answer is that some people on the right take care of the planet and some don't. The same is true for the left. These "Do conservatives........" and "Do Liberals.........." threads are inane.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:47 PM
 
Location: None of your business
5,466 posts, read 4,421,842 times
Reputation: 1179
Occupy Wall Street white trash

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:48 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,781,638 times
Reputation: 4174
Instances of pollution committed or forced by leftists abound. They mandate the use of ethanol in fuels on the theory that it will reduce gasoline consumption - ignoring the fact that it takes more gasoline to grow, distill, condition, transport, and regulate the ethanol, than the gasoline replaced by that ethanol.

Plus the fact that gasoline mixed with ethanol produces less energy per gallon then pure gasoline, making people step harder on the accelerator to get the same performance out of their cars and LOWERING their fuel mileage as a result.

Overall, liberals pollute the planet far worse than conservatives... since you asked that silly question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia
1,165 posts, read 1,514,680 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
Liberals also tend to make government force people to turn over tax money to companies producing electric or hybrid cars, which produce far more pollutants than ordinary high-mileage gasoline cars when their batteries are used, replaced, and recycled.

The dangerous materials and chemicals in the batteries, when produced at production-line volumes, cause far more harm to the environment than either the materials that go into an ordinary gas engine or the exahust from the fuel the gasoline car burns.
Would you say it is more of an economic ploy than a true concern for the environment?

P.S. I didn't ask the question; the study asked the question!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:52 PM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,218,061 times
Reputation: 12102
Everybody pollutes. From the reehugger using a computer to the ordinary non-political person.

I own several gas thirsty vehicles, I burn my trash because I don't want to pay to have it hauled away. Including plastics.

Do I worry about it?

Nope.

I let other people worry about it but all I hear is rhetoric and massive hypocrisy from those who try to "save the earth".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2013, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,531,346 times
Reputation: 24780
Default Do conservatives willfully pollute and destroy the planet?

No.

They support the corporate entities that pollute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top