Mum’s the word

John Roach has an interesting article on the CNBC website about what it takes to address climate change. Does it work everywhere like this?  If anyone has other research or information on this, it would be great to know.

To Fight Climate Change, Don’t Mention It, Study Suggests

Shhh! Widespread adoption of energy-efficient technologies such as compact fluorescent light bulbs and electric cars promises to curb the pace of global climate change. But if widespread adoption is the goal, don’t mention the environmental benefits, a new paper suggests.

“There is likely to be a significantly sized group that may not like these environmental messages,” Dena Gromet, a researcher at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and the paper’s lead author, told NBC News.

While not specifically addressed in the new paper, she added that “other messages might have more universal appeal that can be emphasized” when promoting energy efficiency such as greater energy independence and long-term financial savings.

Those who show a distaste for the environmental messages tend to side with conservative political ideologies, according to the paper, which teases apart how political views affect attitudes and choices when it comes to energy-efficient products.

“As expected, the more conservative participants were, the less they favored investing in energy-efficient technology,” Gromet and colleagues write in the paper published online Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The ideological divide was strongest when energy efficiency was tied to the environmental message of reducing carbon emissions. Energy efficiency is more broadly appealing for the financial savings it offers and for increasing energy independence.

The negative impact of environmental messaging became apparent when 210 study participants were given $2 to go light bulb shopping. When energy efficient, but more costly, compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) were sold with a sticker that read “Protect the Environment,” conservatives shied away from them.

When the more expensive CFLs were sold without environmental messaging — but touted the fact that CFLs last 9,000 hours longer than the less expensive incandescent bulbs and reduce energy costs by 75 percent — more conservatives bought them.