With discussion continuing to rage about the balance of investment in different energy sources, it’s time to examine human nature…
By Keith Wheaton-Green.

Considering there is a lot of evidence that renewables are the best solution for all future energy investment, it’s surprising there are so many different opinions out there; particularly support for continued investment in new oil and gas extraction and nuclear power. This might be why.
Prejudice is part of the human condition. It simply means acting on your prejudgement based on what you already know, even though you are probably aware there are things you don’t yet know. It has surely been an evolutionary advantage – particularly in fight or flight situations – and isn’t a trait that should be maligned. It can be useful.
However, in the modern world, when you need to make a financial decision, or come to an opinion on current issues, most people would agree that prejudgement is inadequate and some detailed research is needed. Yet we have all – in social situations – come across that irritating person that “reckons something”. They have an entirely unjustified but strongly held opinion based on no evidence (as far you can see) because they have had no recent need to spend the time researching the current truth. The media might have been full of relevant information, but if it is not within a person’s sphere of interest they won’t have absorbed it.

Another interesting but rarer human trait is contrarianism. Whatever the prevailing majority opinion on an issue, a contrarian will take the opposite view, seemingly just to be awkward. They need to be particularly stubborn to maintain their opinion against the tide. An example of this would be Peter Hitchens, who writes for the Daily Mail. For society as a whole, contrarianism has its uses. Most of us have occasionally found ourselves – at work or in a social situation – where there is a “group think” that none of the group feel they can dare challenge. Some would argue that this is evident at the BBC, GB news, Stonewall and Local Government planning departments to name just a few. Without a contrarian stirring things up, a group think can continually narrow, become more extreme and less effective in its purpose.

Another opinionated “type” is the ideologue; with a fixed view of the world. They select any data that backs up their views but ignore anything disproving them. Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng have been described by some journalists recently as ideologues (zealots, even, by some). Perhaps most politicians are ideologues. Intelligence is no barrier to misguided views. In fact, skill in communication seems to reinforce a misguided ideology in the mind of both the audience and the speaker. However, with ideology comes passion. And it could be argued that without passion, what is the point of anything.
It is likely that anyone expressing an opinion that fossil fuels and/or nuclear power require continued investment is either rather lazily sticking with a prejudice, or an ideology, or is a contrarian just for the sake of it, or is in the pay of a lobby group. Whichever it is, the only way their opinion can be changed is to present them with the most up to date information as frequently as possible. If they are intelligent, they will hopefully, eventually, work it out and come to a more accurate understanding. The more money that is spent on new renewables, and the less is spent on new nuclear, oil and gas, the quicker we can get to sustainable, locally produced cheap energy. And the only honest, useful opinions, are those backed up by recent research from a wide variety of sources.