Table 1
Means, standard deviations and frequencies for all items.
| DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS | M (SD) | FREQUENCIES | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCALE AND ITEMS | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | DON’T KNOW | |
| Satisfaction with energy concept “Since you have been living in the Seestadt, how satisfied are you today with these aspects? Climate-neutral energy concept.” | 3.19 (1.27) | 11 | 3 | 21 | 18 | 9 | 2 |
| Importance of decarbonization “I consider the transformation of heat generation to renewable energy sources to be an important issue.” | 4.02 (0.83) | 1 | 0 | 12 | 26 | 16 | 1 |
| Subjective knowledge “I am well informed about the heating supply concept in the Seestadt.” | 2.83 (1.14) | 9 | 14 | 18 | 16 | 3 | 3 |
| Reasonability of energy costs “I consider the amount of my current costs for hot water and heating to be reasonable.” | 2.76 (1.32) | 11 | 6 | 10 | 12 | 3 | 17 |
| Self-efficacy to reduce energy costs “I feel capable of reducing my energy consumption and thus the amount of my future energy costs.” | 3.13 (1.14) | 4 | 11 | 11 | 17 | 4 | 12 |
| Long-term cost advantages of RE “Climate-friendly heating systems are more cost-effective in the long term than those using natural gas and heating oil.” | 3.95 (0.89) | 0 | 2 | 17 | 18 | 18 | 8 |
| Price stability “I expect climate-friendly heating systems to provide more stable energy prices than those that use natural gas and heating oil.” | 4.16 (0.88) | 1 | 0 | 11 | 20 | 23 | 8 |
| Protection against energy crises “Climate-friendly heating systems protect against energy and raw material crises.” | 4.09 (0.85) | 0 | 2 | 11 | 22 | 20 | 8 |
| Social norms “In my social environment, using climate-friendly heating systems is viewed positively, while natural gas and heating oil are rather rejected.” | 3.46 (0.96) | 1 | 5 | 27 | 12 | 10 | 8 |
| Willingness to pay premium: 10% “Generally, I am willing to pay a premium for climate-friendly heating supply (instead of using heating oil and natural gas): approximately 10% higher energy costs.” | 2.56 (1.12) | 12 | 13 | 19 | 9 | 2 | 8 |
| Willingness to pay premium: 20% “Generally, I am willing to pay a premium for climate-friendly heating supply (instead of using heating oil and natural gas): approximately 20% higher energy costs.” | 2.33 (1.09) | 14 | 19 | 14 | 6 | 2 | 8 |
Table 2
Bivariate correlations between satisfaction, importance of decarbonization, costs perceptions, self-efficacy, energy crisis protection and social norms.
| VARIABLE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction with energy concept | ||||||||
| Importance of decarbonization | 0.26 | |||||||
| Subjective knowledge about energy concept | 0.25 | 0.10 | ||||||
| Reasonability of energy costs | 0.65*** | 0.46** | 0.46** | |||||
| Self-efficacy to reduce energy costs | 0.21 | 0. 30 | 0.05 | 0.31 | ||||
| Long-term cost advantages of RE | 0.22 | 0.66*** | 0.27* | 0.45** | 0.27 | |||
| Price stability | 0.09 | 0.48*** | 0.03 | 0.22 | 0.13 | 0.39** | ||
| Protection against energy crises | 0.16 | 0.50*** | 0.22 | 0.30 | 0.15 | 0.55*** | 0.35** | |
| Social norms | –0.02 | 0.29* | –0.04 | –0.05 | 0.11 | 0.29* | 0.11 | 0.52*** |
[i] Note. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
Table 3
Multiple regression analysis explaining satisfaction with energy concept.
| MODEL | UNSTANDARDIZED COEFFICIENT | STANDARDIZED COEFFICIENT | SE | t | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 0.98 | 1.19 | 0.82 | 0.42 | |
| Reasonability of energy costs | 0.79 | 0.75 | 0.18 | 4.48 | <0.001 |
| Protection against energy crises | 0.90 | 0.49 | 0.34 | 2.67 | 0.01 |
| Long-term cost advantages of RE | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.27 | 0.03 | 0.98 |
| Self-efficacy | –0.03 | –0.03 | 0.18 | –0.18 | 0.86 |
| Importance of decarbonization | –0.21 | –0.14 | 0.29 | –0.71 | 0.48 |
| Social norms | –0.32 | –0.20 | 0.24 | –1.33 | 0.20 |
| Price stability | –0.32 | –0.22 | 0.22 | –1.44 | 0.16 |
| Subjective knowledge | –0.27 | –0.23 | 0.19 | –1.42 | 0.17 |
Table 4
Multiple regression analysis explaining perceived importance of decarbonizing heat generation.
| MODEL | UNSTANDARDIZED COEFFICIENT | STANDARDIZED COEFFICIENT | SE | t | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 0.51 | 0.78 | 0.66 | 0.52 | |
| Long-term cost advantages of RE | 0.39 | 0.41 | 0.16 | 2.48 | <0.05 |
| Reasonability of energy costs | 0.26 | 0.37 | 0.14 | 1.79 | 0.08 |
| Protection against energy crises | 0.45 | 0.37 | 0.23 | 1.95 | 0.06 |
| Price stability | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.15 | 0.49 | 0.63 |
| Social norms | –0.01 | –0.01 | 0.16 | –0.04 | 0.97 |
| Self-efficacy | –0.03 | –0.03 | 0.12 | –0.21 | 0.83 |
| Satisfaction with energy concept | –0.09 | –0.13 | 0.12 | –0.71 | 0.48 |
| Subjective knowledge | –0.21 | –0.26 | 0.12 | –1.66 | 0.11 |