Understanding public acceptance amidst controversy and ignorance: The case of industrial Carbon Capture and Storage in Germany

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2024.103838
Felix Große-Kreul , Laura Altstadt , Aileen Reichmann , Nora Weber , Katja Witte
{"title":"Understanding public acceptance amidst controversy and ignorance: The case of industrial Carbon Capture and Storage in Germany","authors":"Felix Große-Kreul ,&nbsp;Laura Altstadt ,&nbsp;Aileen Reichmann ,&nbsp;Nora Weber ,&nbsp;Katja Witte","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Carbon capture and storage technologies (CCS) are being discussed and tested in different countries to reduce industrial emissions. Public opinion about industrial CCS (iCCS) can be a key factor in whether it will be implemented. Yet, measuring public acceptance of CCS is a challenge: on the one hand, the use of CCS is the subject of intense and controversial political debate. On the other hand, a majority of people is still not aware of it. Thus, prior research has used informed choice questionnaires or experimental study designs to measure <em>ad-hoc informed</em> or <em>spontaneous</em> <em>opinions</em>. In this paper, we propose a new approach to measure public opinion, including only respondents with stated prior knowledge about iCCS. Based on a quantitative survey in Germany (<em>n</em> = 1845), three questions are examined: do the results support our new approach to measure public opinion about iCCS? To what extent is there acceptance of iCCS and what factors influence acceptance in Germany? And what are implications for both the national political level and for the local deployment of iCCS? Results from the regression analysis show that five attitudes influence the general acceptance of iCCS in Germany: <em>perceived local risks of climate change</em>, <em>advantages outweigh disadvantages</em>, arguments about <em>unavoidable emissions</em> and about <em>iCCS as a bridge technology</em>, and the <em>acceptance of local storage</em>. Furthermore, descriptive results show high levels of associated risks with the transportation of CO<sub>2</sub> and lacking trust in relevant stakeholders for iCCS deployment (industry and energy utilities).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"118 ","pages":"Article 103838"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624004298","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Carbon capture and storage technologies (CCS) are being discussed and tested in different countries to reduce industrial emissions. Public opinion about industrial CCS (iCCS) can be a key factor in whether it will be implemented. Yet, measuring public acceptance of CCS is a challenge: on the one hand, the use of CCS is the subject of intense and controversial political debate. On the other hand, a majority of people is still not aware of it. Thus, prior research has used informed choice questionnaires or experimental study designs to measure ad-hoc informed or spontaneous opinions. In this paper, we propose a new approach to measure public opinion, including only respondents with stated prior knowledge about iCCS. Based on a quantitative survey in Germany (n = 1845), three questions are examined: do the results support our new approach to measure public opinion about iCCS? To what extent is there acceptance of iCCS and what factors influence acceptance in Germany? And what are implications for both the national political level and for the local deployment of iCCS? Results from the regression analysis show that five attitudes influence the general acceptance of iCCS in Germany: perceived local risks of climate change, advantages outweigh disadvantages, arguments about unavoidable emissions and about iCCS as a bridge technology, and the acceptance of local storage. Furthermore, descriptive results show high levels of associated risks with the transportation of CO2 and lacking trust in relevant stakeholders for iCCS deployment (industry and energy utilities).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在争议和无知中了解公众的接受程度:德国工业碳捕集与封存案例
各国正在讨论和测试碳捕集与封存技术(CCS),以减少工业排放。公众对工业碳捕集与封存技术(iCCS)的看法是决定该技术是否会被实施的关键因素。然而,衡量公众对 CCS 的接受程度是一项挑战:一方面,CCS 的使用是激烈和有争议的政治辩论的主题。另一方面,大多数人仍然不了解它。因此,以往的研究都是使用知情选择问卷或实验研究设计来测量临时知情或自发的意见。在本文中,我们提出了一种测量公众意见的新方法,只包括事先声明了解 iCCS 的受访者。基于在德国进行的一项定量调查(n = 1845),我们探讨了三个问题:调查结果是否支持我们衡量公众对 iCCS 意见的新方法?德国对 iCCS 的接受程度以及影响接受程度的因素有哪些?对国家政治层面和地方部署 iCCS 有何影响?回归分析的结果表明,有五种态度影响着德国对 iCCS 的普遍接受程度:认为当地存在气候变化风险、利大于弊、关于不可避免的排放和 iCCS 作为桥梁技术的论点,以及对当地储存的接受程度。此外,描述性结果表明,二氧化碳运输的相关风险水平较高,iCCS 部署的相关利益方(工业和能源公用事业)缺乏信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
期刊最新文献
Energy communities, distributed generation, renewable sources: Close relatives or potential friends? Energy inefficiency as a ‘poverty premium’ Connected, complex, and carbonized: The country archetypes of the petrochemicals sector Understanding public acceptance amidst controversy and ignorance: The case of industrial Carbon Capture and Storage in Germany Energy subsidies versus cash transfers: the causal effect of misperceptions on public support for countermeasures during the energy crisis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1