Public support for carbon dioxide removal strategies: the role of tampering with nature perceptions

Wolske, Kimberly S.; Raimi, Kaitlin T.; Campbell‐Arvai, Victoria; Hart, P. Sol

doi:10.1007/s10584-019-02375-z

Cited by 83 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to prior studies on the connection between knowledge and public opinion about new technologies [27,31,40], we found that greater familiarity with renewable energy policy is associated with lower concerns over the country's energy scarcity. It is possible that respondents who are more familiar with renewable energy policy have a better understanding of energy policy in general and, therefore, are confident in the ability of the market and the government to ensure a reliable energy supply in the future, regardless of the type of energy technologies employed to accomplish that.…”

Section: Knowledgesupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Interestingly, neither familiarity with renewable energy policy nor energy knowledge variables are associated with perception of the level of government funding of new technologies or the power of new technologies to ensure a sustainable supply of energy in the future. This discovery suggests a diversion from previous research findings on the connection between knowledge and public opinion about new technologies [27,31,40]. We establish that familiarity with general energy issues and renewable energy policy is not necessarily associated with public perceptions on government investments into new energy technologies or on the technical capabilities of those technologies.…”

Section: Knowledgementioning

confidence: 51%

“…Hobman and Ashworth [31] discovered that a provision of additional information about a range of alternative energy technologies leads to greater public support for the use of said technologies. At the same time, Wolske et al [27] contend that more information about carbon removal technologies may actually discourage public support, due to learning about new risks and potential impacts.…”

Section: Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the same time, these respondents do not seem to support the idea that new technologies can ensure energy supply for all in the future. It is possible that respondents with higher biocentric scores on the NEP scale are concerned about the potential negative impacts of new technologies on the environment [24][25][26][27], and thus, the extent to which technologies should serve as a solution to energy problems in the future. Building on the research by Simon and Moltz [33], who contend that political ideology is a strong predictor of public opinion about government spending in areas of environment and technologies, we demonstrate that conservatives are less concerned about the insufficiency of government funding towards research and development of new energy technologies, and are also less likely to believe that alternative energy technologies are capable of being an adequate energy resource in the future.…”

Section: Environmental Value Orientations and Ideologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On a more abstract level, other studies explore the general public's familiarity with new energy technologies, including wind energy [19], offshore renewable energy [20], smart meters [21,22], and electric vehicles [23]. These studies find that public opinion concerning energy technologies is often rooted in the degree to which those technologies are perceived as risky, with uncontrollable and catastrophic impacts [24], or tampering with natural processes [25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Public Perceptions of Energy Scarcity and Support for New Energy Technologies: A Western U.S. Case Study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines public concern for energy security and support for public investment in new energy technologies. Using household survey data from the western U.S. states of California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, socio-demographic characteristics, environmental values, and policy relevant knowledge are analyzed as drivers of energy security and technology investment orientations. Findings suggest that a majority of respondents in each state believe that not enough money is being spent on energy research, that the country has insufficient energy resources, and that new technologies can support future energy security. Multivariate analyses indicate that some socio-demographic variables (e.g., gender and education), ideology, and environmental value orientations also have an impact on energy security orientations and support for technology investment.

show abstract

Section: Knowledgesupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Knowledgementioning

confidence: 51%

Section: Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Environmental Value Orientations and Ideologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Public Perceptions of Energy Scarcity and Support for New Energy Technologies: A Western U.S. Case Study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Natural carbon removal as technology

Markusson

2022

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lay people tend to prefer natural solutions for carbon removal over technological ones. Researchers have argued that all carbon removal methods can be seen as "natural." Here I argue that it is also in practice necessary to see all carbon removal methods as "technological," that is, standardized, engineered, machine-like, enclosed systems. Natural carbon removal methods are complex socio-natural-technical messy systems that interact in complex ways with their environments. But to work well in practice as an option in climate policyincluding in any emissions trading or offsetting schemes-they simultaneously need to be framed in much narrower terms, to be accountable (modellable, tradeable). And there will be efforts to not just frame, but physically make natural carbon removal as standardized, engineered, machine-like and enclosed as possible-although doomed to never be fully successful. It is in these senses that all carbon removal is technological. The ambiguity between an often vague framing as natural, a narrowly technological framing, and a wider socionatural-technical framing, matters for public understanding and acceptance.Would lay publics still prefer natural solutions to carbon removal, if they are informed about the inevitable technological framing and shaping of them?Research is needed about this. It also matters for the risk of mitigation deterrence. Previous research shows that the narrow framing, of carbon removal methods as technology is implicated in societal processes that deter efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

show abstract