Great expectations: Public opinion about energy transition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Energy transition is a fundamental part of the policy response to climate change, but unlike climate change, we know little about the factors that shape public attitudes about it. We address three questions: 1) how supportive are people of energy transition, 2) how do pre-existing ideas – about politics, economics, climate change, and energy – affect public views on energy transition, and 3) how malleable is public opinion about transition? Using the Canadian province of Alberta – a context where oil and gas are politically and economically predominant – we assess these questions with a population-based survey experiment (n = 1591). Results indicate that energy transition is widely popular. Pre-existing values and beliefs about the economy; political identification with the left-right spectrum; worry about climate change; and hope in the future of oil and gas as a predominant industry strongly structure attitudes about transition. We argue that championing the economic benefits of clean energy will not be persuasive with people who continue to have high hopes in the future economic benefits of fossil fuels. Instead, we suggest policy makers focus instead on the economic risks that come from continued reliance on fossil fuels.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it