Perception of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z About

Consumption And Conservation Of Non Renewable

Energy: A Comparative Study

An research project report submitted

to

MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION

For Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the

Award of the Degree

of

Bachelor of Technology

in

Information Technology

by

Ritwik Amod

Reg. No. 170911156

Under the guidance of

Mr. Nithesh Naik

Assistant Professor

Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal

Mrs. Veena K M

Assistant Professor

Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal

September 2020
I dedicate my thesis to my friends and family.

i
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project work entitled Perception of Gen X,

Gen Y, and Gen Z AboutConsumption And Conservation Of Non

RenewableEnergy: A Comparative Study is original and has been car-

ried out by me in the Department of Information and Communication Tech-

nology of Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal, under the guidance of

Mrs. Veena K M, Assistant Professor, Department of Information and

Communication Technology,M. I. T., Manipal. No part of this work has been

submitted for the award of a degree or diploma either to this University or to

any other Universities.

Place: Manipal

Date :22-11-21

Ritwik

Amod

ii
CERTIFICATE

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My sincere thanks to Mr. Nithesh Naik , Dr. Dasharathraj K

Shetty and Mrs. Veena K M. Under the guidance of these

individuals, I performed my research work.

iv
 ABSTRACT

Non-renewable energy as it is classified, is a form of energy which comes from

sources that cannot be renewed or replenished in a feasible amount of time.

The rate of depletion of these resources is so high that replenishment is unable

to keep up with demands of current energy needs. Organic material, such as

plant and animal remains that existed millions of years ago, decay, degenerate

to form almost all of the non-renewable resources that exist in this globe. As

the materials were formed over millions of years ago, millions of years are

needed for the replenishment of them. This concludes to provide a very harsh

truth that all non-renewable forms of energy which are currently in use, will

get depleted with time.

v
Contents

Acknowledgements iv

Abstract v

List of Tables viii

List of Figures 1

1 Introduction 2

1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.2 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.1 Social . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.2 Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.2.3 Industrial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.2.4 Automobile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 Literature Review 8

2.1 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2.1.1 Demographic Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.1.2 Perceptions of the “Most Effective Thing” . . . . . . . 9

2.1.3 Perceptions of Fear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.2 Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.3 Research Gap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.4 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

vi
3 Methodology 14

3.1 Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Development . . . . . 14

3.2 Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3.2.1 Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.2.2 Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.2.3 Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.2.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

4 Results and Discussions 20

4.1 Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4.2 Reliability and Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.3 Discriminant Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.3.1 Fornell-Larcker Criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.3.2 Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.4 Path Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

5 Conclusion 25

Appendices 27

References 27

vii
List of Tables

4.1 Construct Reliability and Validity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.2 Fornell-Larcker Criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.3 Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4.4 Total effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

viii
List of Figures

1.1 Sector wise electricity consumption pattern of India (Source:

Central Electricity Authority, www.cea.nic.in [1]) . . . . . . . 6

1.2 Production and consumption of different fuel in India between

the years 1981 to 2014 (CEA,2010) [2]) . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.1 This plot shows the history of global energy production from

different sources. Data from Smil (2010). . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.1 Theory of Planned Behaviour model (TPB) [3] . . . . . . . . . 15

3.2 Technology Acceptance model (TAM) [4] . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

3.3 Proposed Conceptual Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.4 Conceptual Model Obtained . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

4.1 Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4.2 Path coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

1
Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Background

All nature’s phenomenon involves energy or conversion of energy from one form

to other. Just as ecosystems depend on energy for ecological balance, human

societies are also dependent on energy for infrastructure, transportation, food,

and most other types of human activities. Such resources are ”consumed” to

fuel different societal functions. Of course, energy is never absorbed in and of

itself; rather, the resource in its usable form is lost, and the thermodynamic

work potential is exhausted when the energy is converted to waste heat. The

availability of abundant, affordable energy is a key feature of modern, pros-

perous societies. Affordability here is used with a wider sense. Affordability

in this context refers to energy that is scientifically, ecologically, and commer-

cially feasible. With the growth of humankind and development of several

use cases the demand of energy is growing at a rapid rate, which in turn has

led to energy sources depleting at an ever-growing rate. Over the last decade,

there has been a surge of interest in Social Sciences and Humanities viewpoints

and academic approaches to energy issues across the globe. With the growing

concerns of depletion of fossil fuels and other non-renewable forms of energy,

this paper attempts to enlighten the society with perceptions of individuals of

2
different classes to give an overall idea on global energy crisis. There are many

obstacles that come in the way of development. Most of the obstacles mainly

include adoption, improper execution and ethnic, religious conflicts. Although

some of them have helped us understand extremely critical issues that go hand

in hand with development. It took us a lot of time along with many critical

crises to understand that development just for the sake of it is deteriorating

the ecological and social balance of our ecosystem. From the second half of

the 19th century, western societies began to discover that their economic and

industrial activities had a significant impact on the environment and the so-

cial balance. Several ecological and social crises took place in the world and

rose awareness that a more sustainable model was needed. As a direct result

of this now, the newer generations have a greater sense and responsibility for

sustainable development which emphasizes development without compromis-

ing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This has led

to the growing popularity of so-called renewable forms of energy. A research

should not be accompanied even to a small extent by assumptions. This raises

a question about sustainable development. Does economic development and

human capital reduce non-renewable energy consumption? Some may argue

that such developments may in turn increase the dependance of human race

on non-renewable forms of energy. Others tend to the belief that technological

advancements are needed to overcome the energy crisis and climate change.

The most efficient way would be to balance technological developments with

sustainability. If more and more research went into sustainable technologi-

cal developments that help counter the climate change and other ecological

problems like increase in pollution levels and energy consumption rather than

development just for the sake of development, alternative more effective so-

lutions would come to light. Like the production of commercial electric cars

that aims to nullify the air pollution caused by transportation alongside of-

fering better performance and range, many engineering solutions are yet to

3
emerge that offer technologies that are cleaner, better and less detrimental to

the atmosphere.

1.2 Scope

The scope of this research can be classified into four broad categories:

1.2.1 Social

The abrupt end of a time of abundant and cheap energy, especially from oil

and natural gas, has the potential to cause significant systemic changes in

the global social system [5]. More importantly the perceptions of people of

different generation need molding to make them aware of the problems we all

have set our foot in before it gets too late [6]. Important insights related to

energy conservation will help increase awareness and spread information and

can even encourage modifications of fuel regulation and laws. The information

gathered would be particularly useful in interpreting people’s beliefs and how

they vary from one generation to other. This will also aid in the formulation

of a strategy for future [7].

1.2.2 Health

As the world’s development progresses, health is an important factor. It is an

inalienable right of every human being and a vital component of well-being.

The utilisation of energy resources, which affects the state of a given region’s

environment, is determined by the unity and fight of opposites in the frame-

work of public health [8].The behavioral use of energy sources has a strong

impact on the parameters which are a direct cause of health problems in the

general community. Less fortunate families often fire inefficient combustion

equipment with inadequate ventilation, leading to substantial loss of fuel oil

and pollution from incomplete combustion of toxic materials. A variety of

4
factors, including fuel form and moisture, stove technology and operator be-

havior, influence the volume and relative proportions of the various pollutants

produced by fuel combustion. In small, poorly ventilated spaces, high emis-

sions result in high levels of domestic pollution and lead to severe exposures,

particularly for the women and children who spend most time in the kitchen

or near it [6]. Insights on harmful effects of burning non-renewable fuels can

motivate the development of cleaner, more efficient fuels and improved fuel

regulations for better air quality. The following figure indicates pathways

connecting energy and health, differentiates primary energy sources from fuel

cycles used to collect and produce energy from intermediate secondary types

of energy, such as electricity.

1.2.3 Industrial

The overall idea of non-renewable energy conservation and consumption will

help markets of all sectors to improve the quality of fuels used, ranging from

CNG/Petroleum in automobile sector to use of LPGs in cooking. Industrial

sector was hit hardest by the increase in energy costs in the wake of energy

shortages, with energy being widely seen as the major incentive for large scale

use [9]. Increasing the efficiency and sustainability of the energy intensive

industrial ventures is of great importance considering their competitiveness,

growing demands and rising costs [10]. Industrial activities’ energy prerequi-

sites are considerably diverse. Even in the manufacturing sector the energy

efficiency parameters are vague and dire need of standardization for inter-

compatibility and comparison accessibility. Indeed, there have since been sig-

nificant savings in resources in the manufacturing sector. The condensed per-

ception of different generations will help manufacturers gain an idea on the

ever changing markets and shifts in energy demands. The following figure

shows the percentages in which energy is used in the industrial sector.

5
Figure 1.1: Sector wise electricity consumption pattern of India (Source: Cen-

tral Electricity Authority, www.cea.nic.in [1])

Figure 1.2: Production and consumption of different fuel in India between the

years 1981 to 2014 (CEA,2010) [2])

6
1.2.4 Automobile

Up till recently, the automobile industry was mainly concerned with perfor-

mance. With most of automobile enthusiasts focusing on traditional technol-

ogy paired with the per say purists’ perception of how a car should sound loud,

be extremely fast and the silencer throwing flames being the added bonus, it

took us so long to realize the damage done as a result of air pollution. Lit-

tle to no effort was made in improving the efficiency dynamics of the system.

Looking back there were no major revolutions in the automobile industry un-

til recently. The arrival of electric car was a welcome change in a rather slow

changing market of automobiles. Extensive R and D had to be done for the

electric technology to catch up and even beat gasoline powered cars. As a

result, now electric cars, being effectively an electric circuit with motors offer

instant 100% torque at any instant which gasoline cars require specific RPMs

to reach [11].Motor unit, ECU, and inverter units along with a rotational fre-

quency controller and motor control circuitry of the inverter unit with the

added benefit of no air pollution, the technology is revolutionary to say the

least [11]. Insights of different generations on the automobile industry and its

revolution would be really useful in determining how specific populations treat

new technologies and how long does it take for its adoption.

7
Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.1 Literature Review

The preexisting literature relating to energy particularly non-renewable aim to

show how energy demographics are changing over the period. The abrupt end

of a time of abundant and cheap energy, especially from oil and natural gas, has

the potential to cause significant systemic changes in the global social system

[5]. For Gen X non-renewable sources of energy were cheap and in abundance.

Humans in their nature tend to harness as much use of a cheap resource and

most of the times end up overusing it until we are left with the negative

effects of the act. As a result, the perceptions of Gen X individuals differ

greatly from their daughter generations. Relationships between perceptions

of climate change, environmental concerns, and evaluations of energy sources

of individuals are to be established for efficient action [12]. Although many

experts across the world agree that human activity is influencing the global

climate, it appears that public ignorance of the problem remains a barrier to

successful action [13].

8
2.1.1 Demographic Changes

Although the required energy system overhaul is significant, it is not unprece-

dented. Despite massive potential coal reserves, oil overtook coal as the major

energy source between the 1920s and the 1970s. This occurred because oil,

as a liquid, outperformed coal in many ways, particularly transportation [14].

Demographics of energy adoption changed rapidly from one form to another

with new technologies emerging out of extensive research work [15]. Almost all

of the emerging forms of energy had some benefits over the pre-existing along

with their flaws. There are several combinations of energy resources, end-use,

and supply technologies that can solve various sustainability issues at the same

time [14]. The endless search for the most efficient way to harness nature’s

energy have brought us this far. Most probably this search would run till eter-

nity. A never-ending supply of responsibly produced energy, freeing us from

concern about how we charge our lives now would effect future generations

greatly [16]. Energy consumption research has shown that socio-demographic

factors might be significantly connected to home energy use. While there

is considerable disagreement in the research concerning the impact of socio-

demographic factors on energy use, there is no major disagreement about the

fact that they do [17].

2.1.2 Perceptions of the “Most Effective Thing”

Although there were some bright spots, participants in many of such studies

had little understanding of how different behaviours affect energy use and sav-

ings [15]. Curtailment was more popular than efficiency among participants

compared to experts’ recommendations, possibly because efficiency improve-

ments almost always require research, time and money (e.g., buying a new

energy-efficient appliance), while curtailment may be easier to imagine and

incorporate into one’s daily behaviours without any up-front expenses, in the

9
long run, such methods are simply ineffective [15]. Participants were likewise

unconcerned with huge energy variations between gadgets and activities, as

well as differences in some large-scale economic activities. Individuals would

have been able to make more educated decisions about energy-saving actions if

they were aware of their respective magnitudes. Although favourable, the ob-

served correlations between judged and actual energy values may be too weak

to facilitate sound decision making. In accordance with prior research [18], re-

spondents rated renewable energy sources the highest, followed by fossil fuels,

and nuclear power the lowest [19].

2.1.3 Perceptions of Fear

Nuclear energy with the promise of its advanced method of generating en-

ergy that used binary fission of radioactive elements found on the surface of

the earth like Uranium and Thorium seemed to be a great solution for the

overgrowing demands. Since Nuclear Energy was a clean form of energy with

almost zero waste and high energy conversion coefficient the only thing stop-

ping governments from using it was the lack of infrastructure technology and

the lack of radioactive elements found in the region [20]. But it too saw its

downfall when Chernobyl reactor in Russia met with critical accident. The

nuclear reactor core had burst open resulting in all the radioactive matter in-

cluding radioactive fumes which are insanely toxic for all life forms into the

atmosphere [21]. Large number of people lost their lives and fatalities were also

huge with long term chronic diseases like cancer. The accident was so danger-

ous that if proper measures had not been taken, human extinction would have

been inevitable. This incident stirred the souls of many and gave rise to fear

of nuclear energy with the direct result being shutting of various nuclear reac-

tors across the globe [22]. As a result, many governments including Germany

planned to make a shift from non-renewable forms of energy to much cleaner,

10
safer form of energy. Now Germany is the largest user of renewable energy in

2020 with 46% of all the electricity being produced using wind farms, solar

arrays, hydroelectric as well as bio gas plants nearly equaling that of coal, gas,

oil, and nuclear power combined.

2.2 Problem Definition

Since the development of several technologies, it is the first time that 5 gen-

erations have been functioning side by side in modern society, namely, Gen Z

right on the heels of Gen Y, Gen X, Baby Boomers and Traditionals [23]. The

views of these groups vary significantly depending on individual experiences

and their beliefs on different affairs. It would be very fascinating to see how

Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z view energy use and conservation, especially non-

renewable, as compared to renewable. Multiple generations of people reside

in this world at a given point in time. Modern society has defined different

generations according to age and year of birth. Three main key classes (most

recent born) include:

• Gen X - born between 1965 and 1979/80.

• Gen Y - born between 1981 and 1994/6 (Millennials).

• Gen Z - born between 1997 and 2012/15.

There have been a lot of substantial changes in demographics since the times of

Gen X and the times that we live in now [24]. The most generic of them include

population, labor force, literacy rate, sex ratio, birth rate, death rate, life

expectancy, healthcare and culture. The less generic ones that influenced the

world we live in now include industrial revolution, green revolution and energy

revolution [25]. Attempting to understand the perceptions of individuals can

be challenging at best let alone condensing the views of generations into one,

which is back-breaking. This paper attempts to understand the difference

11
Figure 2.1: This plot shows the history of global energy production from

different sources. Data from Smil (2010).

in perceptions of different generations on non-renewable energy sources and

contrast these views from views of same on renewable energy sources. It mainly

focuses on consumption and conservation of non-renewable energy and the

changes in patterns of usage and concerns regarding sustainability. Most of

the scholarly articles reviewed lack the condensed perceptions and attitudes of

different generations on energy consumption.

2.3 Research Gap

Most of the studies remotely associated with the perceptions of people on en-

ergy related matters revolve around choosy, specific matters. There is a lack of

significant quantitative studies to understand public opinion and how it affects

them. Studies merely give an informal understanding of the current trends and

do not focus formally on the effect of such trends on people. There is a wide

gap in terms of focus on Indian domestic population in the energy equation.

There is a need of a condensed study focusing on the overall perceptions of in-

dividuals. Insights of different generations on energy and its revolution would

12
be really useful in determining how specific populations treat new technologies

and how long does it take for its adoption for devising a plan for the future.

The condensed perception of different generations can help manufacturers gain

an idea on ever changing markets and shifts in energy demands. Studies as-

sociated with the perception of Indian population on electric automobiles are

virtually non-existent.

2.4 Objectives

The main objectives of the project are:

• To assess the knowledge and perception of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z on

energy saving in transportation, household electrical appliances and gas

consumption.

• To find the attitude of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z towards energy and

environment.

• To examine the level of motivation and obstacles of Gen X, Gen Y, and

Gen Z to follow the energy saving ways.

• To assess the awareness of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z on PCRA, BEE,

Energy Star label.

• To measure the level of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z attitudes towards

energy saving on transportation, household electrical appliances and gas

consumption.

• To find out the behavior of Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z towards energy-

saving ways on transportation, household electrical appliances and LPG

gas consumption.

13
Chapter 3

Methodology

3.1 Theoretical Background and Hypothesis

Development

At the heart of this study are three frameworks which help in fulfilling the

objectives of the study:

• TPB (Theory of Planned Behaviour)

• TAM (Technology Acceptance Model)

• PAM (Practice Acceptance Model)

The These framework conditions serve as the basis for our conceptual frame-

work for this study.

Social and personality psychologists have traditionally focused on an in-

termediate level, the fully functional individual, whose processing of available

information mediates the impacts of biological and environmental variables on

behaviour and perceptions. In these attempts to anticipate and explain human

behaviour, concepts related to perceptual dispositions, such as social attitude

and personality characteristic, have played a significant role [3]. The theory

of planned behavior (TPB) was an improvement over the basic psychological

14
Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) [26], which analysed the prediction of in-

dividual behaviour in wilful situations [27]. TPB focuses on the perceptions

and intentions of individuals which relate to a planned behaviour. To predict

a person’s behaviour, we need to understand their intention and perception

to perform that behaviour; the totality of their attitudes, their subjective

norms [3].

Figure 3.1: Theory of Planned Behaviour model (TPB) [3]

The Technology Acceptance Model focuses on the perception of individuals

on new technological infrastructure. TAM attempts to predict and measure

the success of new technology adoption relying on positive attitudes relating

to previous system capabilities, new system capabilities and motivation to use

these capabilities so as to improve accessibility, reliability and feature sets. At

a basic level Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU)

are considered for an acceptable new technological infrastructure.

Practice Acceptance Model (PAM) focuses on the current commonly ac-

cepted practices of a community , in our case the current energy efficiency pa-

rameters developed by regulating bodies like PCRA, BEE, Energy Star label

in ensuring the community does not lag behind so as to ensure the reliability of

current infrastructure like electricity grids and transformers for a considerable

15
 Figure 3.2: Technology Acceptance model (TAM) [4]

amount of time. It also relates to current acceptance of recent infrastructure,

in our case electric vehicles charging infrastructure.

Both TAM and TPB are useful when a study is focused on the possible

adoption in a case of emerging technology, in our case the adoption of energy

efficient infrastructure and efficiency parameters. The Technology Acceptance

Model (TAM) was developed to measure the acceptance of new technologies

built on the basis of customer attitudes. Its primary objective is to fore-

cast user adoption and highlight potential design problems before technology

consumers interface with the system. In addition TPB sheds light on the per-

ception of individuals on current energy policies and energy regulating bodies

relating to the awareness, knowledge and obstacles of the individuals.

3.2 Conceptual Framework

For collection of reliable data, a questionnaire was created based on the re-

search overview of this paper and adapted for the Indian population. The

questionnaire was made up of 12 socio-demographical questions and 40 non-

anthropometrical questions. The basic proposed model was obtained as a re-

sult of aligning the objectives of the study with their governing latent variables

and creating a cause effect relation between the latent variables. The flow will

help us in determining the effect of a latent variable because of another latent

variable.

16
Figure 3.3: Proposed Conceptual Model

Figure 3.4: Conceptual Model Obtained

17
 The conceptual model obtained is identical to the proposed model. To

meet the objectives the model is divided into four main latent variables. All of

the latent variables include specific indicators relating to that latent variable.

• Knowledge

• Concerns

• Efficiency

• Conclusion

3.2.1 Knowledge

This latent variable judges the overall knowledge of participants ranging from

general knowledge to awareness to obstacles faced. The general knowledge

chunk of indicators include four major mutually exclusive indicators which

helps in forming a baseline of basic knowledge of the participant on non-

renewable energy and energy as a whole. The awareness chunk of indicators

include three indicators which help in perceiving the general awareness of the

participant on energy related matters. Three indicators which are grouped into

obstacles help in perceiving the participant’s personal issues faced in achieving

ample satisfaction on energy related matters.

3.2.2 Concerns

This latent variable attempts to examine the participant’s perceptions related

to concerns of their community as a whole as compared to individual concerns.

This includes concerns related to energy policies, energy regulating bodies,

lacking infrastructure for the underprivileged, etc. Six indicators associated

with this latent variable not only helps in gathering the concerns of community

as a whole but also helps in devising a strategy for future as perceived by the

participants.

18
3.2.3 Efficiency

This latent variable revolves around efficiency characteristics and the motiva-

tion of the participants to adopt more efficient infrastructure. Indicators of

perceptions and motivations regarding adoption of electric vehicles, personal

solar panels, LED bulbs also constitute this latent variable. Perceptions of

non-renewable energy are a major chunk of this part.

3.2.4 Conclusion

This latent variable examines the overall perception of individuals on non-

renewable energy in comparison to renewable energy and its cause effect rela-

tion with other latent variables including concerns and generic knowledge.

19
Chapter 4

Results and Discussions

4.1 Demographics

• The sample consisted of 104 males (50.2%) and 98 females (47.3%) and

5 preferred not to say (2.4%).

• Sample population consisted of high school graduates (32.4%), bachelor

degree holders (30%), master degree holders (21.3%), doctorate degree

holders (9.2%) and others (7.2%).

• Income of sample population ranged from below 5 lakhs (26.6%) to above

25 lakhs (11.6%) rest in between, with a considerable portion earning 5-

10 lakhs (29%).

• (27.1%) of the sample belonged to generation X with generation Y con-

tributing to (31.7%) and generation Z contributing to (41.2%).

• Unsurprisingly (57.5%) of the sample population gathered a major chunk

of information from the internet. While newspapers, word of mouth and

mass media was used by (9.7%), (12.6%) and (20.3%) respectively.

• Interestingly (23%) favoured non-renewable energy, (25.8%) preferred

renewable energy, a majority of sample population (31.1%) was fine with

any and (20.1%) was comfortable with either.

20
4.2 Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity of scales is tested using Composite Reliability and Av-

erage Variance Extracted or AVE for each factor. Composite reliability (CR),

also referred to as McDonald’s coefficient is generally considered acceptable

0.7 and above and AVE of at least 0.5 or higher is demanded. In this case,

returned results for coefficient CR and AVE both fulfil requirement. Result is

shown in the table underneath.

Table 4.1: Construct Reliability and Validity

• Cronbach’s Alpha - Internal consistency indicates the amount to which

all of the items in a test assess the same idea or construct, and is thus

related to the test’s inter-relatedness.

• rho A - When two variables have a comparable rank, the Spearman’s

correlation between them is strong.

• Composite Reliability - Similar to Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliabil-

ity (also known as construct reliability) is a measure of internal consis-

tency in scale components [28]. It is equivalent to the entire amount of

actual score variance compared to the total scale score variance.

• Average Variance Extracted - a measure of the amount of variation

captured by a construct in comparison to the amount of variance at-

tributable to measurement error.

21
4.3 Discriminant Validity

4.3.1 Fornell-Larcker Criterion

The square root of AVE in every latent variable should be more than other cor-

relation values among the latent variables. This measure is known as Fornell-

Larcker Criterion. Our results fulfill the requirement for an accurate analysis.

Table 4.2: Fornell-Larcker Criterion

4.3.2 Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT)

Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio ensures that there is considerable difference in

the characteristics of the latent variables. HTMT values smaller than 1 show

that the true correlation between the two constructs should differ. If the value

of the HTMT is higher than this threshold, there is a lack of discriminant

validity. Some authors suggest a threshold of 0.85, whereas others propose

a value of 0.90 [29]. All of our results show a HTMT ratio of less than 0.85

which is well below the threshold.

Table 4.3: Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio

22
 Figure 4.1: Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio chart

4.4 Path Coefficients

Path coefficient is the partial correlation coefficient between a dependent vari-

able and an independent variable that has been adjusted for other independent

variables in path analysis and structural equation modelling.The direct influ-

ence of a variable assumed to be a cause on another variable thought to be

an effect is shown by a path coefficient. Coefficient of determination can take

any value between 0 to 1. In the chart below we can see that our predictive

capability is established, hence the model has predictive capability.

23
Figure 4.2: Path coefficients

Table 4.4: Total effects

24
Chapter 5

Conclusion

This study examined the extent to which some key demographic and be-

havioural factors influence the actual attitudes, intentions, and behaviour of

people in relation to conservation and consumption of non-renewable energy.

Interestingly (23%) favoured non-renewable energy, (25.8%) preferred renew-

able energy, a majority of sample population (31.1%) was fine with any and

(20.1%) was comfortable with either. The ’Knowledge’ latent variable includes

four major mutually exclusive indicators which helps in forming a baseline of

basic knowledge of the participant on non-renewable energy and energy as

a whole. This latent variable comprised of everything ranging from generic

knowledge of the sample population, to awareness and obstacles faced by the

sample population. This latent variable had the highest correlation with ’Con-

cerns’ and ’Efficiency’ as expected. Our study reaffirmed that the perception of

individuals in energy related matters are influenced by Control Beliefs, Norma-

tive Beliefs, Behavioural Beliefs, Perceived Ease of Usefulness, Perceived Ease

of Use, Subjective Norms, Attitude Towards New Technologies and Intention

in which the beliefs of control, ease of perceived usefulness, and subjective

norms are of the utmost importance. This study also reaffirmed the vague

perceptions of different individuals of the most efficient thing. There was also

a strong relationship between perception of fears and nuclear energy in which

25
the major factor of perception of not using nuclear energy as a major source of

non-renewable energy was strongly related to fear. 43% of the sample popu-

lation considered efficiency as a major factor in purchasing electronic gadgets.

32.4% of the sample population supported the initiatives of large scale central-

ized organizations like BEE, PCRA and Energy Star Label in standardizing

energy efficiency parameters of commercial and consumer products. Interest-

ingly 14% of the sample population favoured curtailment of energy use, 27.1%

favoured increasing the supply through R&D while 45.4% favoured an ade-

quate balance of curtailment and R&D. There were mixed perceptions of the

sample population on the pre-existing energy policies put in place by the gov-

ernment. 77.8% of the sample population of strong views about non-renewable

energy conservation and consumption and believed that such practices would

help in devising a plan for the future.

The external validity of our results needs to be demonstrated by future

research, as the data for this study comes from a random sample of Indian

population from different parts of the country. In addition, our respondents

are predominantly urban or semi-urban, and the country’s rural location re-

quires further investigation. Our study is exploratory in nature. It manages

to explain the status quo of perceptions of different generations in the con-

sumption and conservation of non-renewable energy.

26
References

[1] S. Koduru, “Indian domestic sector and the need for promoting com-

munity based microgeneration over stand-alone systems,” International

Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, vol. 03, pp. 12–19,

11 2014.

[2] S. Mishra, “The apocalyptic anthropocene epoch and its management

in india,” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCE RESEARCH,

vol. 5(3), pp. 645–663, 03 2017.

[3] I. Ajzen, “The theory of planned behavior,” Organizational behavior and

human decision processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179–211, 1991.

[4] N. Marangunić and A. Granić, “Technology acceptance model: a liter-

ature review from 1986 to 2013,” Universal access in the information

society, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 81–95, 2015.

[5] S. Tiba, “The oil abundance and oil dependence scenarios: the bad and

the ugly?” Environmental Modeling Assessment, vol. 26, 06 2021.

[6] R. Banerjee, V. Mishra, and A. Maruta, “Energy poverty, health and

education outcomes: Evidence from the developing world,” Energy Eco-

nomics, vol. 101, p. 105447, 07 2021.

[7] K. Blok and E. Nieuwlaar, Energy and society, 11 2020, pp. 1–17.

27
 [8] N. Letunovska, L. Saher, T. Vasylieva, and S. Lieonov, “Dependence of

public health on energy consumption: a cross-regional analysis,” E3S Web

of Conferences, vol. 250, p. 04014, 01 2021.

[9] J. Darmstadter, J. Dunkerley, and J. Alterman, How Industrial Societies

Use Energy: A Comparative Analysis, 01 1977, vol. 55.

[10] M. Benedetti and V. Introna, “Industrial energy management and sus-

tainability,” Sustainability, vol. 13, p. 8814, 08 2021.

[11] T. Ozaki, “Electric automobile,” Patent, 05, 2015.

[12] A. Spence, W. Poortinga, N. Pidgeon, and I. Lorenzoni, “Public percep-

tions of energy choices: The influence of beliefs about climate change and

the environment,” Energy & environment, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 385–407,

2010.

[13] I. Lorenzoni and M. Hulme, “Believing is seeing: laypeople’s views of

future socio-economic and climate change in england and in italy,” Public

Understanding of Science, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 383–400, 2009.

[14] R. Banerjee, S. Benson, D. Bouille, A. Brew-Hammond, A. Cherp,

S. Coelho, L. Emberson, M. Figueroa, A. Grubler, M. Jaccard, S. Ribeiro,

S. Karekezi, K. He, E. Larson, Z. Li, S. McDade, L. Mytelka, S. Pachauri,

A. Patwardhan, and T. Johansson, GEA, Global Energy Assessment –

Toward a Sustainable Future, 01 2012.

[15] S.Z., D. M.L., C. Davidson, and W. Bruine de Bruin, “Public perception

of energy consumption and savings,” pp. 16 054–16 059, 09 2010.

[16] C. Stokel-Walker, “Neverending energy is closer than you

think,” https://journeytozerostories.neste.com/innovation/

neverending-energy-closer-you-think#82ee4643, 2020.

28
[17] S. Grantham, “Household energy consumption, conservation & effi-

ciency,” 2006.

[18] S. Eurobarometer, “Energy technologies: Knowledge, perception, mea-

sures.”

[19] S. Z. Attari, M. L. DeKay, C. I. Davidson, and W. B. De Bruin, “Pub-

lic perceptions of energy consumption and savings,” Proceedings of the

National Academy of sciences, vol. 107, no. 37, pp. 16 054–16 059, 2010.

[20] J. de Groot and L. Steg, “Morality and nuclear energy: Perceptions of

risks and benefits, personal norms, and willingness to take action related

to nuclear energy,” pp. 1363–73, 04 2010.

[21] X. Hu, W. Zhu, and J. Wei, “Effects of information strategies on public

acceptance of nuclear energy,” p. 120907, 05 2021.

[22] A.-S. Hacquin, S. Altay, L. Aarøe, and H. Mercier, “Fear of contamination

and public opinion on nuclear energy,” 10 2020.

[23] K. Mhatre and J. Conger, “Bridging the gap between gen x and gen y,”

Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 5, 09 2011.

[24] M. Wong, E. Gardiner, W. Lang, and L. Coulon, “Generational differences

in personality and motivation: Do they exist and what are the implica-

tions for the workplace?” Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 23, pp.

878–890, 11 2008.

[25] V. Tetelmin, “Energy-demographic history of the modern civilization,”

pp. 142–153, 06 2021.

[26] T. J. Madden, P. S. Ellen, and I. Ajzen, “A comparison of the theory

of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action,” Personality and

social psychology Bulletin, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 3–9, 1992.

29
[27] J. L. Hale, B. J. Householder, and K. L. Greene, “The theory of reasoned

action,” The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice,

vol. 14, no. 2002, pp. 259–286, 2002.

[28] S. H. To, “Composite reliability: Definition share on.”

[29] D. Alarcón, J. A. Sánchez, and U. De Olavide, “Assessing convergent

and discriminant validity in the adhd-r iv rating scale: User-written com-

mands for average variance extracted (ave), composite reliability (cr), and

heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (htmt),” in Spanish STATA

meeting, vol. 39. Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2015.

30