The carbon-saving behaviour of residential households

The housing sector in 2004 was accountable for about 30% of total UK carbon emissions. The magnitude of this figure represents a significant imperative for policymakers to act on the sector through behavioural change strategies. Energy efficiency in households might easily be considered as driven mainly by economic motives, but this would not explain why even cost-free behavioural changes, like switching the lights off more often, are not adopted more widely. Literature has mainly concentrated either on the economic motives of pro-environmental behaviours or on the relevance of attitudes to shape them. Little has been said so far on the interaction between attitudes and the so called contextual factors. Diekmann and Presindörfer (2003) outlined the “low-cost hypothesis” which argues that pro-environmental behaviours are driven by pro-environmental attitudes only in the presence of low costs. However, little is known about households’ perceptions of costs and benefits in relation to energy saving behaviour. We propose to develop the low-cost hypothesis with a theoretical approach integrating attitudinal research and rational choice literature and explaining the interaction between tangible and intangible costs and benefits.Furthermore, the importance of resources such as education, information and income is highlighted in order to explain the magnitude of the perception of the costs and benefits considered by households. Finally, the scope for policy intervention aimed at shaping perceived costs and benefits to help the drive towards pro-environmental behaviour is discussed

Windfarm acceptability and the co-operative model of local ownership

UK and European renewable energy targets require a wider deployment of wind energy if they are to be met. Despite a growing installed capacity of wind energy, social acceptability of wind farms is still a social factor hindering the pace of deployment. In recent years, community involvement in renewable energy projects has been increasingly advocated by many as a positive factor leading to several benefits including a wider acceptability. Interest has been risen by community schemes of whole or partial ownership of wind farms. This thesis draws on a range of social and psychological theories to propose an original integrated theoretical framework to explain social acceptability of wind and to research the suitability of the co-operative scheme of community ownership in overcoming local opposition to wind projects. Two studies were carried out: a qualitative study surveyed the community co-operative case of Westmill in England and a quantitative postal survey investigated the opinions of residents living up to a distance of ten kilometres from four proposed wind farms in Scotland. It was found that perceived local costs and benefits and social and individual resources influence acceptability of proposed wind farms. Further, the co-operative scheme appears not to be regarded as capable of affecting substantially acceptability, nevertheless participants acknowledge its suitability to benefit the community of the chance of participating in the revenue of the wind farm and in building social capital.Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) funding

Compensation for Energy Infrastructures: Can a Capability Approach be More Equitable?

In this article, we deal with the evaluation of the losses suffered by persons living in urban areas as a result of energy services. In the first part, we analyse how by adopting different informational foci we obtain contrasting interpersonal evaluations regarding the same loss. In the second part, we distinguish between a diachronic and a hypothetical/moralised threshold for harm in order to assess whether individuals are benefiting from or being harmed by a given energy service. Our argument is that the most accurate evaluation of an individual damage caused by an energy service can be obtained by using capabilities as informational focus, instead of realised wellbeing or means to wellbeing, and by interpreting the loss in relation to a hypothetical/moralised threshold that corresponds to a list of central capabilities. In the last part, we address monetary and non-monetary compensations for a loss that is evaluated in terms of capabilities. Accordingly, we expound how compensation policies can either restore the capabilities lost due to energy services or monetarily compensate the individual for the fact that a given capability (or set of capabilities) has been irremediably lost

Early primary tumor response in metastatic RCC patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors-based combinations

Background: 25-30% of renal cell carcinoma presents with metastases (mRCC) at diagnosis. The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-combinations on the primary tumor (PT) is debated. Patients andMethods: mRCC patients (pts) with PT who received first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N/I) or pembrolizumab plus axitinib (P/A) were included. We investigated the early primary tumor response (EPTR) at the first radiological assessment. Results: 73 pts were included. The median early reduction of the PT longest diameter was 12.4% with P/A versus 6.2% with N/I (p = 0.42). We evaluated if the type of EPTR could affect the metastases response. Among pts with PT stable disease (SD), 8.3% had metastatic disease progression (PD) with P/A and 34.8% with N/I. Early PT partial response (PR) was associated with no metastatic PD with both N/I and P/A. The 2 pts with PT PD had also metastatic PD to P/A. Of the 3 PT with PD to N/I, 1 had metastatic SD and 2 PD. In the overall population, of the 94.1% without PT progression (PR+SD), 47.5% had metastatic PR, 35.6% SD, 16.9% PD. Conclusions: ICIs-combinations achieved an early PT PR in about 10-20%, without any complete responses. Only a small percentage of PT had an early PD, mainly associated with metastatic PD. However, among those PT without an early progression, metastatic PR can be achieved in approximately 50% of cases

Impaired immunogenicity to COVID-19 vaccines in autoimmune systemic diseases. High prevalence of non-response in different patients’ subgroups

Autoimmune systemic diseases (ASD) may show impaired immunogenicity to COVID-19 vaccines. Our prospective observational multicenter study aimed to evaluate the seroconversion after the vaccination cycle and at 6-12-month follow-up, as well the safety and efficacy of vaccines in preventing COVID-19. The study included 478 unselected ASD patients (mean age 59 ± 15 years), namely 101 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 38 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), 265 systemic sclerosis (SSc), 61 cryoglobulinemic vasculitis (CV), and a miscellanea of 13 systemic vasculitis. The control group included 502 individuals from the general population (mean age 59 ± 14SD years). The immunogenicity of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) was evaluated by measuring serum IgG-neutralizing antibody (NAb) (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant antibody test kit; Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL) on samples obtained within 3 weeks after vaccination cycle. The short-term results of our prospective study revealed significantly lower NAb levels in ASD series compared to controls [286 (53–1203) vs 825 (451–1542) BAU/mL, p < 0.0001], as well as between single ASD subgroups and controls. More interestingly, higher percentage of non-responders to vaccine was recorded in ASD patients compared to controls [13.2% (63/478), vs 2.8% (14/502); p < 0.0001]. Increased prevalence of non-response to vaccine was also observed in different ASD subgroups, in patients with ASD-related interstitial lung disease (p = 0.009), and in those treated with glucocorticoids (p = 0.002), mycophenolate-mofetil (p < 0.0001), or rituximab (p < 0.0001). Comparable percentages of vaccine-related adverse effects were recorded among responder and non-responder ASD patients. Patients with weak/absent seroconversion, believed to be immune to SARS-CoV-2 infection, are at high risk to develop COVID-19. Early determination of serum NAb after vaccination cycle may allow to identify three main groups of ASD patients: responders, subjects with suboptimal response, non-responders. Patients with suboptimal response should be prioritized for a booster-dose of vaccine, while a different type of vaccine could be administered to non-responder individuals