Climate engineering (CE) and carbon capture and storage are controversial options for addressing climate change. This study compares public perception in Germany of three specific measures: Solar radiation management (SRM) via stratospheric sulphate injection, large-scale afforestation, and carbon capture and storage sub-seabed (CCS-S). In a survey experiment we find that afforestation is most readily accepted as a measure for addressing climate change, followed by CCS-S and lastly SRM, which is widely rejected. Providing additional information decreases acceptance for all measures, but their ranking remains unchanged. The acceptance of all three measures is especially influenced by the perceived seriousness of climate change and by trust in institutions. Also, respondents dislike the measures more if they perceive them as a way of shirking responsibility for emissions or as an unconscionable manipulation of nature. Women react more negatively to information than men, while the level of education or the degree of intuitive vs. reflective decision-making does not influence the reaction to information.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a technology that counteracts climate change by capturing atmospheric emissions of CO from human activities, storing them in geological formations underground. However, CCS also involves major risks and side effects, and faces strong public opposition. The whereabouts of 408 potential CCS sites in Germany were released in 2011. Using detailed survey data on the public perception of CCS, this study quantifies how living close to a potential storage site affects the acceptance of CCS. It also analyzes the influence of other regional characteristics on the acceptance of CCS. The study finds that respondents who live close to a potential CCS site have significantly lower acceptance rates than those who do not. Living in a coal-mining region also markedly decreases acceptance.

No abstract