This, if true, is exciting news indeed:
“Data from a new IBM survey reveals we as consumers would be willing to pay more for environmentally friendly energy options if more information could be made available to educate themselves.”
But can we count on–or wait on–consumers to drive the widespread adoption of alternative energy against their immediate, pocketbook interests?
I often wonder about change strategies that are predicated on consumer sacrifice on a broad scale. Nothing would make me happier than a world of consumers hungry to do the right thing at marginal sacrifice…I’m just not as optimistic about that model of change. In my mind, we can incentive good behavior (corporate and consumer) through government regulation (taxes, for instance) or technological innovation (it’ll save you money, stupid)…but rarely, on a grand enough scale to matter, will consumers elect to sacrifice low prices for doing the right thing.* This survey would seem to suggest otherwise, and I hope it’s true. But I worry that this may be a case of survey participants saying what they think their interviewer wants to hear.
*Sometimes, obviously, incentives are bigger than monetary considerations. Like when the fish from China could kill you; or when the coal-fired power plant constructed miles from your home could do the same. (“Health costs related to air pollution total $68 billion a year [in China], nearly 4 percent of the country’s economic output).
(Hat Tip: Eco Geek)
Image used under a Creative Commons license from Flickr user blmurch.

Subscribe by email


- "Cleaner Energy Ideas", posted by Taylor on February 21, 2008
- "New York Times to Steve Jobs: “You Are Wrong”", posted by Jarred on February 21, 2008
- "More on Algae", posted by Taylor on January 10, 2008
- "All I Need To Know [To Run My Company] I Learned In Kindergarden (?)", posted by Taylor on January 27, 2008
- "“…and nothing but the truth, so help me Google” [Guest Post]", posted by a Guest on March 18, 2008