Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o This paper examines consumers' willingness to pay for nuclear and renewable electricity as two alternatives to fossil fuels for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. We conduct a choice experiment of consumer-stated preferences on the basis of an online survey in four US states and Japan after the Fukushima nuclear plant accident. First, the results suggest that US consumers' willingness to pay for a 1% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions is $0.31 per month, which is similar to the results for the US a decade ago. Japanese consumers show a slightly lower willingness to pay of $0.26 per month. Second, the average consumer in both countries expresses a negative preference for increases in nuclear power in the fuel mix (to a greater extent in Japan). Third, renewable energy sources were endorsed by both US and Japanese consumers, who show a willingness to pay $0.71 and $0.31 per month for a 1% increase in the use of renewable source energy. This study also examines the differences in respondents' characteristics. Approximately 60% of the US respondents who did not change their perception concerning the use of nuclear energy subsequent to the Fukushima nuclear crisis have almost no preference for variation in nuclear power, which is in stark contrast to the Japanese respondents' opposition to nuclear energy. Increasing awareness of global environmental problems and the requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction is the motivation for this study. The Great East Japan Earthquake of March 2011 and the subsequent accident at the Fukushima nuclear plant raised concerns about the trade-offs involved in replacing fossil fuels with renewable sources and nuclear power to meet climate change goals. Changing power sources present advantages and disadvantages that add to a complex process. For example, nuclear power has the potential to meet emissions reduction targets; however, it also brings nuclear power generation risks such as the environmental impact of radioactive waste and damage to the health of populations in the event of a catastrophe. Renewable energy also has the potential to drastically reduce GHG emissions and, as is the case with nuclear energy, it may have additional benefits such as decreasing the need for imported energy sources. The pursuit of renewable energy entails substantial investment, intermittent supply, and associated negative local externalities, such as altered landscapes, noise, and potential harm to birds. Therefore, consumer opinion should …