Promoting the energy transition: The role of decision context and climate risk in the investment in solar versus nuclear energy.

Abstract

The energy transition requires modernizing the energy sector and investing in alternatives to fossil fuels. Both nuclear and renewable energies are potential solutions to lower carbon emissions, although nuclear power is generally less favored by public opinion. We investigated whether support and feelings for solar farms and nuclear power plants construction vary depending on whether these energy sources are evaluated separately (SE) or jointly (JE). We also examined how climate change risk perception influences willingness to invest (WTI) in these power plants and their perceived risks. Results confirmed that solar farms elicited more positive attitudes and feelings than nuclear power plants. Crucially, when evaluated in JE (vs. SE), solar farms were viewed even more positively and received greater support, whereas nuclear plants were perceived more negatively. Climate change risk perception correlated with the perception of nuclear plants as riskier and solar farms as less risky. There was marginally significant evidence that the former relationship emerged only in SE, whereas the latter was more pronounced in SE (vs. JE). Furthermore, climate change risk perception positively predicted the WTI in solar farms, but only in JE. In contrast, the WTI in nuclear power remained unaffected in both contexts. Finally, the perceived risk of each energy source was negatively associated with the WTI in them. These results offer insights into the psychological factors influencing people's perception and support for alternative energy infrastructures and can help develop effective communication strategies to facilitate a smooth and successful energy transition.