Exploring public acceptability of direct air carbon capture with storage: climate urgency, moral hazards and perceptions of the ‘whole versus the parts’

Abstract

Negative emission technologies (NETs) or the drawdown of atmospheric carbon is increasingly essential to meeting climate targets. Many options (e.g., afforestation) may not however meet the scale of removal and permanence of storage needed. Scientists and engineers are thus turning to new alternatives involving technology bundles using direct air capture of C0 2 and storage. However, the social acceptability of these is presumed unlikely given the sheer complexity of their components, governance arrangements, perceived advantages and disadvantages, and the different moral and value positions at play. This paper explores public perceptions of a proposed system including above sea and potentially more positively viewed components (wind energy to power direct air capture of carbon) alongside deepocean and potentially more negatively perceived components (injection and storage as carbonate rock).Using a representative survey of n = 2120 US and Canadian residents nearest a proposed system pilot, analysis reveals two very different pro les of perceivers, pro and con. Rejection of the system as a whole is driven by concern for storage or below sea components, physical risks (e.g., leakage), and belief that such a system constitutes a moral hazard, enabling continued fossil fuel dependence. Conversely, those who support such a system perceive it as economically, climatically, and ethically bene cial now and for future generations, express a strong sense of climate severity and urgency, and see themselves as responsible for natural systems. We close with cautions as to the social licence for negative emission technologies, and the fragility of hope as these possibilities unfold.

Utilizing CO2 as a strategy to scale up direct air capture may face fewer short-term barriers than directly storing CO2

“…These practices are similar to current widespread offsetting practices, which are widely considered to be problematic [117]. DACCS has also historically been associated with various concerns about its risks, such as its large energy requirements [118,119], its safety [8,85,120], and its entanglement with the fossil fuel industry and perverse incentives to continue polluting [121][122][123], which reduce public acceptance of DACCS [6,120,124]. The benefits of DACCS, on the other hand, lie in its potential to not only enable net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in hard-to-abate sectors, but also to contribute to net-negative CO 2 emissions, although such impacts become climate-relevant only if absolute emissions fall below the rate of carbon removal [2,3,[5][6][7].…”

Upscaling DAC Hubs with Wind Energy and CO2 Mineral Storage: Considerations for Large-Scale Carbon Removal from the Atmosphere

“…Extensive research has demonstrated that public groups tend to be skeptical of technologies that propose intervening in natural environments . This cautionary stance is particularly keen regarding coastal regions and the ocean, and negative opinion about ocean fertilization, among other proposed climate solutions, is common. , Public concerns regarding the proximity and security of a storage reservoir and worries about the health and environmental impacts of a potential leak are common but may be reduced when the permanence of CO 2 mineralization and ocean basalt storage is considered . Other concerns arise around environmental safety in the ocean, such as the infrastructure construction and related industrial responsibility …”

“…52,56 Public concerns regarding the proximity and security of a storage reservoir and worries about the health and environmental impacts of a potential leak are common but may be reduced when the permanence of CO 2 mineralization and ocean basalt storage is considered. 57 Other concerns arise around environmental safety in the ocean, such as the infrastructure construction and related industrial responsibility. 58 Kerguelen's location in the sub-Antarctic may deepen such considerations.…”

Social Considerations and Best Practices for Engaging Publics on Ocean Alkalinity Enhancement

“…Ultimately, conversations across publics need to remain open and heterogenous, not polarized, to enable consideration of options. In addition, those who do attend to and/or recognize a broad set of perceived benefits for some ocean CDR options appear to hold that position and remain more steadfast as concerns acceptability in general and (largely) independent of political position (Satterfield et al, 2023).…”