http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/20/the-politics-of-saving-theconservatives-hate-conservation-studies-prove-theyll-reject-products-labeled-as-energy-efficient-planet-new-studies-find-conservatives-will-reject-products-labeled-gre/
Have you ever noticed the phenomenon where, once someone notices you’re waiting for their parking spot, they actually get slower about pulling out?It has an official name, that phenomenon: “territorial defense.” A study done by R. Barry Ruback and Daniel Juieng back in 1997 found that people will get territorial even when that parking space has no continued value to them, sometimes out of a primal desire to assert control against perceived intrusions or feeling ‘rushed’ out of their spot.
I bring this up because a new, non-related study by Dena M. Gromet, Howard Kunreuther, and Richard P. Larrick has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, on how political ideology affects attitudes and choices about energy efficiency, and there appears to be an element of “territorial defense” in their findings.One of the most obvious is that the promoting of energy-efficient products and services on the basis of their environmental benefits actually turned conservatives off from picking those products.
this one is chock full of republican dandys, "for it before against it, for it before Obama was", shoot myself in the foot, voting against my own personal interest.
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. [Emphasis added]In other words, in “territorial defense” of their climate change denying political agenda, conservatives are less likely to use a product if it’s labeled as energy-saving, making the perverse point that, either “we don’t need no stinking energy-saving stuff because we’ve got our denial party-line to rely on,” OR “our stance is right, yours is wrong; we’re definitely NOT buying into yours, so we will not be buying these damn efficiency light bulbs, thank you.”
i think also right wing's got major bucks invested i oil and old scchool energy, so to embrace green energy would slowly choke that source of income off and because the republicans as with all else told them that's how the feel. but mostly i think it's a progressive ideal and they can't have that submitting would be seen as an even harsher word "COMPROMISE".
