Hey everyone! Welcome once again, this week I will finish sharing the data I collected from my survey. These questions are focused more on lifestyle and behaviours which are more personal. I would classify the questions into two types, one from which we can deduce their lifestyle while the other would be about how the respondents viewed their own lifestyle. Let us begin our journey together.
Isn’t the results fascinating, there is some polarisation with regards to air-conditioning usage. More than half of the respondence either used it for all 7 days of the week or they did not use it at all. I personally cannot imagine the energy consumption of using the air-con 7 days a week, that is every single day, 365 days a year. Yet I guess this may be the norm if we look from a office building or a mall perspective. Another fact is that, 5 out of 22 of my BES respondents used the air-con 5 or more days a week (take from this what you will). According to what this paper found, only 1/5 of their participants used the aircon for more than half a year. Well, for my survey it is about 40% of respondents that use it for more than 6 months/year. Assuming their weekly rate of usage is consistent.
About 90% of my respondents use public transport as their main form of transportation. (In fact, 3 out of the 7 individuals that used private vehicles are BES undergraduates.) This is higher than the national average of 67% and well above the target of 75% made by the Ministry of Transport. I think a possible reason is that working adults are the ones contributing to private vehicle usage. This is in line with them having higher disposable income to purchase cars.
In an optional question that I posed, I asked respondents to share their monthly domestic electricity bill if they were comfortable doing so. I received 55 responses. 50 of them were responses that stated they did not know their electrical usage, the other 5 were ($100, $110, $200, $200, $500). I think this illustrates that many really do not take notice of the amount of energy that they consume. The above graph honestly upturns my preconceived notion that aircon usage would automatically result in higher electrical bills.
For my carbon footprint question, I received 38 responses a responses rate of about 45%. The average carbon footprint of all 38 respondents is 6,244kg CO2/year. According to the SP My Footprint Calculator the Singaporean average is 8,280kg CO2/year. There is a chance that the average has been distorted by non-response bias in which those with a higher carbon footprints chose not to input their result is a possible reason I thought of.
Response from a sample size of 83.Do you think that people who consciously make eco-friendly decisions have a smaller carbon footprint? Well from the data I collected this is not the case! 12 respondents that inputted their carbon footprint that proclaimed that they did not consciously make eco-friendly decisions had an average of 5024kg CO2/year. The 26 that responded yes had an average of 6660kg CO2/year as their carbon footprint. I think that their are several activities that are very significant in the calculation process such as air travel (which I should have included in my survey).
That is all I have to share from my survey! Thank you so much for your kind support.
P.S. Sorry if I’m too detailed about the responses from BES students.
· Permalink
Hi Li Zhe,
It is interesting that from your survey, people who claim to consciously make eco-friendly decisions have a higher average carbon footprint than those who don’t. Why do you think this is so? Could it be that some chose “yes” because it is the socially desirable option? Or they are not clear what can be considered as “eco-friendly decisions”?
– Si Ying
· Permalink
Hi Si Ying,
Well I personally think that a possibility is one that you have mentioned it is socially desirable to choose “yes”. Yet this is an anonymous survey and thus perhaps they themselves also feel that they should in fact be answering yes. I think another reason would be that they are indeed living an eco-friendly lifestyle at least in their eyes yet perhaps they discount the fact that they take an annual holiday to perhaps Europe. I think the carbon footprint calculator factored in emissions from air travel very heavily thus this could be another reason. As for defining eco-friendly decisions, I hope you will join me in my next post where I shall be discussing this.
Thank you for visiting.
· Permalink
Hi Li Zhe!
It was very interesting to read about your findings! The “polarisation” was especially interesting, as it highlighted the extreme differences in people’s lifestyles. This MAY reflect the differences in lifestyles between higher and lower income Singaporeans – the people who used their air conditioners 7 times a week are likely to be more affluent, since air conditioning does cost more. To me, this clearly reflects how affluence affects consumption levels (the more affluent are more likely to consume more, in the case of both individuals and countries as a whole), as mentioned by Dr Coleman in her previous lectures.
The most shocking, however, was the fact that the respondents who claimed that they make eco-friendly decisions consciously had higher average carbon footprints. Perhaps this reflects a certain complacency amongst those who think they are making “enough” environmentally conscious decisions? Although I can’t remember my responses to your survey, I think I will definitely reflect on the decisions I make and make more conscious improvements, so thank you for sharing these results!
– Hope 🙂
· Permalink
Hi Hope,
I think this also portrays another of the questions, I should have asked yet didn’t. I think certainly affluence may have a role to play in one’s aircon usage. Yet we cannot discount the fact that actions made by even the affluent are also their own decisions.
Yes, I agree with you it may be possible that those who think they live a eco-friendly lifestyle may feel relieved of their guilt and perhaps feel justified to consume more. I think I read a paper regarding this however I couldn’t find it again. If I do so I’ll update you.
Thank you for visiting!
· Permalink
Here is a related paper not the exact one I read but still relevant. (https://spssi-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/doi/full/10.1111/josi.12365)
It talks about how people generally perceive themselves to be doing more than others on average for the environment and thus they feel less guilt and also feel less need to do more for the environment.
· Permalink
Hi Li Zhe!
Of all the results from the survey, I think was most shocked by the air-conditioner one. Funnily enough, it seems we were surprised by literally opposite things. I didn’t expect so many to fall under the ‘0 days’ group! I’ve always thought that Singaporeans used air-conditioning amount an obscene amount, and apparently air-conditioning makes up 40% of an average Singaporean household’s electricity bill (https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/high-time-singapore-does-something-about-its-inefficient-reliance-air-conditioning).
Do you think this difference in data comes simply from lifestyle differences due to demographic differences (eg. NUS students are likely to stay in hall which do not provide air-conditioners)? Or do you think that it is due to actual conscious decisions by your surveyees to be more environmentally friendly?
· Permalink
Hi Rachel, it seems you had a similar idea as Dr Coleman! In all honestly, I do think that the polarization and difference is a culmination of conscious decisions, habit and frugality? Personally, my decisions regarding air-con usage is affected by all the above. How about you?
· Permalink
Hi Li Zhe,
This post is GREAT !!!
I really dig your interpretation of results and the creative ways you thought of looking for links. So proud of you !
I have one comment / Q. You mention the polarising results on aircon use. But it occurs to me that your respondents, who I understand are all students, include ppl who live in hall / RC. As far as I know, many of the residences don’t have aircon. So, could that explain the observation ?
I was also surprised anyone has an electricity bill of 500 sgd / month. The highest mine has ever been was maybe 250. And while WFH, I have the aircon going constantly (as does my husband in the next room). Admittedly, we set the temp at 27º. When we sleep, we have the aircon on all night at 25º in our bedroom (we can’t open windows because we face the intersection of Clementi Rd & AYE, so it’s too dusty & noisy). I wonder if asking ppl about the temp setting might yield different results than asking about frequency of use.
jc
· Permalink
Thank you, Dr Coleman. I never did see the question from this perspective until you raised it. As I thought that people would respond based on their usual habits if they were not staying on campus. I guess this speaks of the need to have greater clarity in my survey question. It definitely is a possibility that campus residence has caused this polarisation. Yes I expect if one asks about temperature would certainly be those who only set their air-conditioning to 25 degrees and those who set it to the lowest possible setting.
Overall, I am looking forward to green cooling technology to become more common place. (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/singapore-air-con-green-cooling-tech-climate-change-energy-solar-13239626) Yet as mentioned in class, with the difficulty faced in phasing out CFC from CFC banks. Would be seen again even with green cooling technology is something we have to consider.
-Li Zhe