Nuke support in UK hits record high

[SimonHobson]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/19/uk_nuclear_yesplease/

Nuke support in UK hits record high
Keeping calm and carrying on

Public support for nuclear energy has reached an all-time high in the UK, less than a year after the Fukushima incident. There is an interesting gender gap, though.

Pollsters Ipsos MORI, who buttonholed about 1,000 Brits last month for its survey, found that 40 per cent of the sample [PDF] now hold favourable views of nuclear power, compared to 19 per cent who don't. Men (55 per cent) are much more likely than women (26 per cent) to view it positively. Nuclear energy has been viewed more positively than negatively since 2004.

The recovery comes about 10 months after the most publicised civilian nuclear emergency in 25 years: the incident at the Fukushima-Daiichi power plant, caused by a tsunami wiping out Japan's shores. Support for nuclear energy dipped but rapidly recovered.

<chart>

We may infer that people looked at the Japanese crisis and thought it was not applicable to the UK, or that it was applicable, but posed much less of a risk than the hysterical media portrayed.

There must be a point at which the narrative of impending catastrophe becomes exhausting to the public. Perhaps after Fukushima, we've passed that point.

[martin]

Thanks to a highly successful "damage limitation" exercise by HMG aimed at the Daily Mail readers.......... (as reported a couple of months ago.........)

[GavinA]

the register's showing both it's rubbish journalistic skills, and it's bias here.

It's not an all time high, the survey only started in 2009, and actually the changes from 2010 show that while 2% of respondents moved from mainly favourable to strongly favourable, the only move of people from the don't knows was of 2% into the mainly unfavourable column.

So the massive campaign to persuade the public that Fukushima somehow meant Nuclear was actually very safe, only actually impacted marginally on those already looking at nuclear favourably, and the only movement from the don't knows was sensibly towards the POV of actually maybe it's not such a safe thing after all.

Still, as damage limitation excercises go it has been pretty successful.

hmm, also that poll only applied to half the number of people of the 2010 poll, so any changes aren't likely to be statistically significant anyway - ie they could well just be sampling error.

[desperate]

Or just maybe Joe Public has a more relaxed view, rather than being swayed by all the shouting.

also that poll only applied to half the number of people of the 2010 poll,

There were of course 2 polls of half the sample size-:,

so any changes aren't likely to be statistically significant anyway - ie they could well just be sampling error.



so that is only true if the same people were polled, and sampling error COULD go both ways.

But in any case whatever you, or I, or anyone else out here thinks, the GOVT seem determined to cripple the country in many ways

Desp

[GavinA]

ok, but if you were to take the average of the 2 polls done in 2011 then the results would be the polar opposite of that reported in the article, hence me commenting on lower sample size used to produce the figures the article is based on.

basic fact of the matter though is that the changes aren't statistically significant, and the length of the survey simply isn't long enough anyway to produce any sort of 'record high' type headlines, so the article is a load of rubbish, and coming from the register with it's track record on nuclear, I'd have to conclude they're deliberately spinning it that way.

[GavinA]

in case anyone's in any doubt about the register's bias btw, just run a search for the article they wrote in July about the June survey showing the big drop in public support for Nuclear post Fukishima.

Actually, I'll save you the time as it doesn't exist.