Note in the report that "suggestions on action" noted people said that more research needs to be done into Nuclear power. Also this was done around the first anniversary of Fukushima so it will have a skewing effect.
Put it another way I can do another survey with another random statistically significant number of respondents and get completely different numbers.
What surprised me the most was how poorly biomass performed on the survey. In Sweden, for instance, it has been developed into a major source of energy from wood chips associated with their paper mills mainly I believe.
One question I'd like to see asked is "which do you feel is worse, coal or nuclear?" Or for that matter compare nuclear with any fossil fuel. That is where the real education could begin. I've confronted anti-nuke folks on some commondreams threads and having to make that choice makes them very uncomfortable, leaving them open to the problem of where their priorities are ie how serious are they about global warming. And since I'm no nuke enthusiast, just recognize it is for now a better choice, I think I can bring some cred.
Thank you. As I suspected, the questions are poorly worded to extract what people think are a realistic solution to the problem. This was more of a "Which energy source gives you warm fuzzies?" survey.
For example, this question: "Please indicate how effective you think the following measures are in reducing Australiaâ€™s greenhouse gas emissions:"
If a person knows that that are no nuclear power plants in Australia, then how do they answer that? The question doesn't ask which of the following would be effective. It asks how effective you think they are present tense - no subjunctive.
I would put "building nuclear power reactors" at the bottom of that list, because it is completely ineffective in Australia, because it fails to exist at all.
That question really wasn't worded to extract a clear opinion on what would be a most effective choice of everything that could be done.
The other relevant question asks for an ordering from most preferred to least preferred. It doesn't ask the questionee to consider effectiveness. So how does a person answer this one? My most preferred would be to have the electricity arrive at my sockets out of thin air. But if you ask me which I think would provide me with my preferred mixture of reliability, affordability and safety, I would answer very differently.