Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) has been recognized as an important means of mitigating global climate change, but apart from several pilots, it has not yet been successfully implemented on the large scale needed to live up to the expectations as a mitigation method. In Netherlands, the option of CCS has been the subject of debate for a long time, as three unsuccessful projects – two onshore in Barendrecht and the Northern regions, and one offshore near the Port of Rotterdam – demonstrate. Nevertheless, CCS has been accorded an important place in the current Dutch climate policies, being expected to contribute up to 7 Megaton of CO2 reduction. This is reflected in a fresh crop of CCS project plans. For the most, these plans have a long way to go from the drawing board to actual operations due to the technical, economic, legal and societal challenges ahead. In this article we review the status and possibilities of CCS in Netherlands based on an analysis of existing literature in the relevant disciplines. First, a brief overview of the technology options for carbon capture and storage or utilization is given. This is followed by a detailed analysis of the governmental support for CCS, given the vital role that fit-for-purpose legal frameworks and policy instruments will play in CCS deployment. Technical, legal and policy uncertainties translates into factors inhibiting CCS investment and so the paper then presents a CCS investment project to illustrate how such risks affect the business case for CCS. Finally, bearing in mind that societal acceptance has proved to be a major barrier for CCS, both in Netherlands and elsewhere, the conditions that enhance public acceptance of CCS are examined. Our work shows that while CCS is technically a straightforward proposition, its deployment has historically been hindered by the lack of a sound business case and a compelling and stable socio-technical narrative. The main argument in favor of CCS today is that it offers a transition pathway for rapidly and massively reducing CO2 emissions beyond what could be accomplished by alternative methods like electrification and renewable fuels in near future. The introduction of new financial instruments, increased government support and an improvement in social engagement appear to have enhanced the prospects of CCS in Netherlands, but we feel it is premature to assume that this time everything is different.

No abstract

No abstract

Despite some skepticism regarding its effectiveness, public participation has become a central facet of environmental decision making, including governments' various decisions to address climate change. However, the existing literature tends to address the general benefits of environmental public participation rather than examine details of how such participation actually occurs and how it differs among nations—even among nations all purportedly pursuing similar public participation goals. This article begins to fill that knowledge gap by examining law's key role in structuring how the public in different countries may actually participate in environmental decision making, including in unfolding national agendas to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change impacts. Both the United States and European Union member states have decades of experience in writing—and rewriting—public participation into their environmental laws. This article actively explores and compares how the laws of the United States, the European Union, and the Netherlands (as an exemplar of an EU member state) structure public participation in environmental decision making in order to assess how far along the scale of public participation categories each government has progressed. It concludes that, for the moment, United States environmental law more often allows for public collaboration and empowers the public to make certain kinds of environmental decisions—although a new law in the Netherlands may soon encourage more creative and collaborative forms of public participation there, as well.

No abstract