"However, even when pensioners are discounted, there is only a “weak trend” to show that people who profess to care about climate change do much to cut their energy use. "

So to get a 'weak trend' you have to exclude the group from society that spends the most time at home? Pensioners have most of the same electrical appliances that the young have. They probably use the cooker or the kettle more often. Yes, they are more frugal but aren't people who care about CO2 supposed to do the same?

Spoils your story a bit perhaps.

I think this comment by Robin Guenier should be included here for those who missed it on Unthreaded.

Probably the most worrying feature of that DECC "survey" is the question:

Those surveyed were asked if they agreed or disagreed with the statement: “The effects of climate change are too far in the future to really worry me.”
Note how that neatly assumes that respondents accept that (a) the climate is changing; (b) it's worrying or potentially worrying; (c) that mankind is responsible (otherwise what's the point of doing anything about it?); and (d) that anything we do can resolve the problem. In other words, it's no more than a classic "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" trick.
Jul 14, 2014 at 3:14 PM | Robin Guenier

No the most worrying or depressing thing to me is that people, including presumably the authors and DECC, think the survey means something. 250 families of varying sizes. And surveyed in rolling order - so some measured their stuff in january and then some more in feb and more in march etc through the year. And then they had to adjust all of the data to account for the fact that energy use does vary over the year so the data are not comparable. And so on. If all climate science was done this way I'd be manning the barricades with you (now there's a hostage to fortune - I'm sure you can find some studies that are equally dodgy).