Public Preferences to CCS: How does it Change Across Countries?

Ashworth, Peta; Einsiedel, Edna F.; Howell, Rhys; Brunsting, S.; Boughen, Naomi; Boyd, Amanda D.; Shackley, Simon; Bree, B. van; Jeanneret, Talia; Stenner, Karen; Medlock, Jennifer; Mabon, Leslie; Feenstra, C.F.J.; Hekkenberg, M.

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.683

Cited by 28 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A combination of how established CCS was in each country, the extent and nature of public debate about CCS, sample availability, and survey costs eventually narrowed our European selection to the UK, Norway and the Netherlands (see Table 2). Given that there is evidence of existing differences in CCS perceptions across continents (L'Orange Seigo et al, 2014;Ashworth et al, 2013), we also wanted to compare our European sub-sample with respondents from a different continent. North America (specifically Canada and the US) was selected given the extent of existing CCS activity there (see Table 2).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of studies investigating perceptions of CCS have been conducted within individual countries; there have been notably fewer cross-cultural studies of CCS perceptions (and even fewer covering more than one continent), making direct comparisons across studies difficult From the cross-cultural studies that have been conducted in Europe, it seems that awareness is particularly high in the Netherlands (potentially due to the high profile nature of the Barendrecht case; Bellona, 2010), whereas elsewhere awareness is lower, with Europeans typically holding fairly mixed and ambivalent views towards CCS (Upham and Roberts, 2011;Eurobarometer, 2011;Reiner et al, 2011). There are, however, notable differences between continents (L'Orange Seigo et al, 2014;Ashworth et al, 2013). For example, Canadians seem to be more accepting than Swiss publics, perhaps due to their different experience of (and dependence on) fossil fuel industries (L'Orange Seigo et al, 2014).…”

Section: Public Perceptions Of Ccsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consistent with the pervasive confirmation bias in information processing, whereby initial beliefs or feelings filter whether or how further information is perceived (De Bruin and Wong-Parodi, 2014), information may also exacerbate or confirm concerns or, conversely, reinforce positive attitudes. For example, Dutch and Scottish participants in one study became more negative after reading information about CCS, whereas Canadian and Australian participants became more positive (Ashworth et al, 2013). The notion of 'framing' spans several social science disciplines and theories.…”

Section: Framing Effects and Cdumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) involves trapping carbon dioxide (CO 2) from power generation and heavy industrial processes and directing it into long-term geological storage (e.g., in depleted oil fields or saline aquifers). In doing so, CCS could facilitate global carbon abatement efforts. Yet, it remains controversial with high-profile public opposition to particular CCS developments. For instrumental, normative and substantive reasons, it is increasingly recognised that public acceptance of CCS as a vital precondition for its commercial-scale rollout. While much is known about factors influencing public support for CCS, relatively few cross-national studies have so far been undertaken. Here, we present findings from a large-scale international experimental study of public perceptions of CCS, to examine how individual, geographical and informational factors influence support for CCS. In particular, we compare the lens through which CCS is seenas a 'techno-fix' climate change solution, as reusing a waste product (through Carbon Dioxide Utilisation [CDU]), or as part of a systemic approach to climate change mitigation. Pairing CCS with CDU led to higher support for CCS, although information frames interacted with national and individual-level factors. Depending on which CCS lens is chosen, different groups will be more or less likely to support CCS implementation. As with other issues, targeting CCS information to audience values is likely to be more effective than untargeted communication. Our findings also show mentioning (modest) costs of deploying CCS can lead to lower support. Discussing CCS costs should be done in the context of costs of broader energy system transformation and of not mitigating climate change so that the public can deliberate over the relative risks and benefits of CCS and alternatives in the context of broader sustainability pathways.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Public Perceptions Of Ccsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Framing Effects and Cdumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognizing this, the results show that in some regions the level of CCS public awareness is lower as compared with alternative green energy technologies. According to [18], in Australia 77% of respondents know about CCS, in the Netherlands — 84%, in Canada — 61%, in Scotland — 36%. It should be highlighted that a high public awareness in the Netherlands and Australia is explained by different reasons.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public perception of carbon capture and storage: A state-of-the-art overview

Tcvetkov

Cherepovitsyn

Fedoseev

2019

Heliyon

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a technology enabling to use fossil fuels in a sustainable way. Therefore, it attracts much attention from the industrial sector, government authorities and scientific community. However, public awareness of the technology is extremely low, and the studies of the lay people's opinion have been launched only during the last decade. Taking into account the role of public support during the implementation of CCS projects, the authors would like to present herein their review of materials on this subject published during 2002–2018 (135 articles). As part of our review, we determined 9 key aspects forming the public perception of CCS. For each of the key aspects, we summarized the available results of the studies. Apart from that, we compared the CCS current status in different countries and provided a number of reasons for involving new countries into the fight against global warming. This work shows that most attention is devoted to CO2 storage; whereas its capture and transportation are poorly studied in terms of public perception. Wider development is required for the methodology enabling a transition from global rhetoric concerning global warming issues to the implementation of particular projects, namely, CCS. The issues related to public awareness of CCS are studied rather thoroughly, but no recommendations are provided regarding the establishment of an optimal database for the lay people. Numerous assessments of general public perception have been carried out. However little attention was paid to the regions with active projects, namely, to the factors considered the most important by the local public, and how actual project results meet their expectations. Therefore, despite an extensive scientific base developed over 17 years, further studies should be aimed at filling the existing gaps. This will enable to improve CCS attractiveness for the public, including the cases when it is compared with alternative low-carbon technologies.

show abstract

“…imiting global average temperature rise to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, in order to comply with the Paris 2015 Agreement, requires that fossil carbon use is curtailed, and/or large tonnages of CO 2 must be captured and securely stored underground [1][2][3] . Despite worldwide interest and the successful implementation of several tens of CO 2 storage research, pilot and commercial projects 4,5 , some scientists, publics and stakeholders remain concerned that leakage of CO 2 poses a threat to the viability of long duration CO 2 storage as an effective climate mitigation tool [6][7][8][9][10][11][12] . Leak rates of 0.01% per year, equivalent to 99% retention of the stored CO 2 after 100 years, are referred to by many stakeholders as adequate to ensure the effectiveness of CO 2 storage 1,13,14 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating geological CO2 storage security to deliver on climate mitigation

Alcalde¹,

Flude²,

Wilkinson³

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can help nations meet their Paris CO2 reduction commitments cost-effectively. However, lack of confidence in geologic CO2 storage security remains a barrier to CCS implementation. Here we present a numerical program that calculates CO2 storage security and leakage to the atmosphere over 10,000 years. This combines quantitative estimates of geological subsurface CO2 retention, and of surface CO2 leakage. We calculate that realistically well-regulated storage in regions with moderate well densities has a 50% probability that leakage remains below 0.0008% per year, with over 98% of the injected CO2 retained in the subsurface over 10,000 years. An unrealistic scenario, where CO2 storage is inadequately regulated, estimates that more than 78% will be retained over 10,000 years. Our modelling results suggest that geological storage of CO2 can be a secure climate change mitigation option, but we note that long-term behaviour of CO2 in the subsurface remains a key uncertainty.

show abstract

Public Preferences to CCS: How does it Change Across Countries?

Cited by 28 publications

References 8 publications

Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage

Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage

Public perception of carbon capture and storage: A state-of-the-art overview

Estimating geological CO2 storage security to deliver on climate mitigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About