According to a new survey from by MIT''s Centre for Advanced Nuclear Energy Systems Americans, increasingly looking to alternative energy sources like wind and solar, are slowly warming up to nuclear fuel.

In 2002, as part of the MIT study on The Future of Nuclear Power, the first MIT Energy survey investigated public attitudes toward nuclear power in light of other sources of electric power. The survey found cost and environmental harm to be key drivers behind public preferences regarding energy sources.

In February 2007, the survey was repeated using similar sampling methodologies and the same core questionnaire, augmented by questions about global warming, waste treatment, and transfer of nuclear technology.

In the five years between the two surveys, public preferences were remarkably stable. The two surveys showed that Americans hold extremely optimistic views on alternative energy sources - solar, wind, and hydroelectric - especially as far as price is concerned.

The surveys pointed out to the more realistic views on traditional fuels - fossil fuels plus nuclear power - in terms of the relative pricing and environmental harm of these energy sources.

Cost and harm, in turn, strongly influence public desires to expand or reduce different energy sources. Concern about global warming rose somewhat from 2002 to 2007, but remained only weakly associated with preferences about electricity generation.

The most notable change in survey responses was the decline of oil''s popularity. Americans now strongly wish to reduce the use of oil, and they view this energy source less favourably than any other source of power. Coal, seen as moderately priced but very harmful to the environment, also remains quite unpopular.

Five years ago, nuclear power was viewed similarly poorly; it now seems to have gained modestly in support and is approaching natural gas in terms of favorability.

In 2007, the national survey, Public Attitudes Toward America''s Energy Options: Insights for Nuclear Energy, of 1,200 Americans'' opinions on different types of energy indicated growing concern about global warming, but also showed a reluctance to pay to fight it.

Professor Stephen Ansolabehere, the MIT political scientist who conducted the survey in 2007 was also associated with the previous survey.

Ansolabehere, who conducted the recent survey through Knowledge Networks, a consumer information company, said he hoped that tracking Americans'' attitudes toward energy would help policy-makers decide how to chart the US'' future energy policies.
.
Though public preferences have remained relatively unchanged in the five years, the percentage of people wanting to more nuclear power has grown from 28 per cent to 35 per cent, reflecting Americans'' concern over global warming caused by carbon emissions from fossil fuels, Ansolabehere noted.

This means winning public approval for expanding nuclear power generation in the US would be difficult. Yet, while Americans are not unreservedly for nuclear energy, they are even more opposed to oil, which ranked below nuclear energy as the least popular fuel - the number of those voting for a reduction in oil consumption rose from 56 per cent in 2002 74 per cent in the 2007.

Ansolabehere believes the trend could also be due to rising prices and growing concern over the United States'' dependency on oil, reflected by the rising prices at gas pumps. Evidently cost weighed heavily on the choice of fuel, along with perceived environmental harm.

Coal, which is seen as cheap but harmful, too is unpopular.

The survey revealed that Americans have an accurate idea of the cost of oil, gas, coal and nuclear power, but tend to underestimate the costs of alternative sources like wind and solar power. The respondents strongly favour using more wind and solar power, until told that they were more expensive than traditional energy sources.

The survey also found that even though concern over global warming has been rising in the past five years, the concern does not quite translate in to a willingness to pay to combat the problem.

When people are asked how much more they would pay for their electricity to counteract global warming, the average answer is $10 more on their monthly electric bill, compared to the $25 actually required, revealing that people don''t associate electricity generation with burning of fossil fuels.

Ansolabehere plans to repeat the energy survey periodically every few years.