# FILE NAME: 00000537.soc
# TITLE: Should the government subsidise the use of solar energy? [db753207aea068816c4cf20253e5a3f5]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - In general, the group was in favour of government subsidies of the use of solar energy. Most people felt that this is a very important way of ensuring that solar energy becomes a more affordable and efficient energy source. There was also the general consensus that this is a way in which governments can make a real impact on the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, there was also some disagreement, particularly from the more economically minded people who felt that there is an argument for governments not to subsidise solar energy as this could lead to the market being over supplied and therefore the solar panels themselves becoming less valuable. There was also some discussion about how much governments should be allowed to spend on such projects and whether it would be better to spend the money in other areas, for example, health and education.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - Solar energy is the future. The Government should subsidise it so that more people can afford it.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - The government should subsidise the use of solar energy because it is a renewable source of energy and will help to reduce greenhouse gases. This was a difficult task as you can see, but with some perseverance the group was able to come up with a consensus statement that all members could agree on.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - “The Government should subsidise the use of solar energy, as it is a renewable source of energy and will help to reduce greenhouse gases. It is a cheaper alternative to more traditional sources of energy and will make countries less dependent on other countries.” The group of participants then ranked their opinions of the other participants’ opinions on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being most extreme, 5 being neutral, and 10 being least extreme. Participant 1 rated the views of Participant 2 as being at the level of 10. Participant 1 rated the views of Participant 3 as being at the level of 1. Participant 1 rated the views of Participant 4 as being at the level of 1. Participant 1 rated the views of Participant 5 as being at the level of 8. Participant 2 rated the views of Participant 1 as being at the level of 2. Participant 2 rated the views of Participant 3 as being at the level of 10. Participant 2 rated the views of Participant 4 as being at the level of 2. Participant 2 rated the views of Participant 5 as being at the level of 3. Participant 3 rated the views of Participant 1 as being at the level of 1.
2: 1,3,2,4
1: 1,3,4,2
1: 3,2,1,4
1: 4,3,2,1