Public acceptance and risk-benefit perception of CO2 geological storage for global warming mitigation in Japan

Tokushige, Kohko; Akimoto, Keigo; Tomoda, Toshimasa

doi:10.1007/s11027-006-9037-6

Cited by 38 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In additional regressions, the study also tests more directly for a mediating influence of awareness, risk, and benefit perception using the mediation procedure of Baron and Kenny . The results show first that the variable number of CCS sites is significantly correlated with acceptance (coefficient of −0.093; p ‐value <0.001).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS

Braun

2017

Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS

Braun

2017

Risk Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tokushige et al, 2007;Terwel et al, 2009a). Those who think the societal benefits outweigh the risks (rather than vice versa) are more likely to be positive about CO 2 storage and less likely to engage in protest against it.…”

Section: Predictors Of Initial Reactions To Co 2 Storagementioning

confidence: 99%

Initial public reactions to carbon capture and storage (CCS): differentiating general and local views

Terwel

Daamen

2012

Climate Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered a potential climate change mitigation option, but public opposition may hamper its implementation. A quasi-experimental approach is used to examine whether 'not in my back yard' (NIMBY) sentiments can be anticipated at the initial stage when CO 2 storage locations have been selected and communicated to the public. Furthermore, the psychological structure of initial reactions to CO 2 storage plans is studied to ascertain the differences between people living in the direct vicinity of a proposed CO 2 storage location (i.e. onsite residents) and people who do not (i.e. offsite residents). The results indicate that initial reactions to local CCS plans are not necessarily dominated by NIMBY sentiments. For onsite residents as well as offsite residents, trust in government affects their judgements of the risks and benefits associated with CCS, which in turn affects their inclination to protest against CCS plans. Onsite residents' inclination to protest is affected by their perceptions of local safety risks, but this is less of a concern for offsite residents. The inclination to protest against CCS is unrelated to concern about climate change.Le captage et stockage de carbone (CSC) est considéré comme une option possible d'atténuation du changement climatique, mais l'opposition publique pourrait entraver sa mise en application. Une approche quasi-expérimentale est employée pour examiner si des sentiments de « pas dans ma cour » (« Not in my backyard -NIMBY ») pourraient être anticipés dans les stades initiaux, à l'étape de sélection des lieux de stockages de CO 2 et leur communication au public. Par ailleurs, la structure psychologique des premières réactions aux plans de stockage de CO 2 est étudiée de manière à déterminer la différence entre les personnes vivant à proximité des lieux de stockages proposés (c'est-à-dire résidents sur site) et les autres personnes ne vivant pas sur le site (c'est-à-dire résidents hors-site). Les résultats indiquent que les premières réactions aux projets CSC locaux ne sont pas nécessairement dominées par des sentiments « NIMBY ». L'opinion des résidents sur site comme pour les résidents hors-site sur les risques et bénéfices associés au CSC est influencée par leur confiance dans le gouvernement, qui à son tour influence ou non leur tendance à protester contre les projets de CSC. Les tendances protestataires des résidents sur site sont influencées par leur perception des risques de sécurité locale, mais ceux-ci constituent une moindre préoccupation pour les résidents hors-site. Les tendances protestataires au sujet du CSC ne sont pas liées aux préoccupations sur le changement climatique.Mots clés : Captage et stockage de carbone (CSC); mitigation du changement climatique; attitudes du public; confiance; « pas dans ma cour » (NIMBY); protestations; perceptions du risque

show abstract

“…At the same time, they recognize that in the eyes of the public CO 2 storage is a new technology with risks unknown to science, and that field tests and a good safety record are needed to improve the public's perception of risk from CCS technologies. A survey conducted by Tokushige et al (2007a) indeed showed that Japanese university students perceived CO 2 storage as less risky than geological disposal of high-level radioactive waste, and that CO 2 storage scored more favorably on both the 'unknown' and 'dread' dimension of risk. 4 Finally, an extensive survey by Sharp et al (2009) revealed that members of the Canadian public rated geological disposal of CO 2 as less risky than common energy technologies such as normal oil and gas industry operations, nuclear power, and coal burning power plants (with mean scores for a national and a regional sample of just over 4 on a scale ranging from 1 = not at all risky to 7 = extremely risky).…”

Section: Host Community Compensation and Ccsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the analysis by Singleton et al (2009) and the findings of Tokushige et al (2007a) and Sharp et al (2009), we might expect 4 Respondents in this survey -who overall had little knowledge about geological storage of CO2 prior to participation in the study -answered ten questions concerning their risk perceptions of geological storage of CO2. Results showed scores close to the midpoint of the scale for questions concerning 'dread', 'severity of consequences' and 'observability' (with mean scores of 4.12-4.39 on a scale that ranged from 1 to 7, with higher scores indicating a higher risk perception).…”

Section: Host Community Compensation and Ccsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should further be noted thatSlovic's (1987) psychometric framework is based on risk perceptions of the general public (not residents near concrete potential facility sites), and that this is also the case for findings reported byShackley et al (2009) andTokushige et al (2007a). Further,Singleton et al (2009) -who compared CO2 storage to Slovic's 14 potential hazards -estimated the perceived riskiness of CO2 storage and did not collect risk perception data on this potential hazard.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation