Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results from a Scottish large group process

Energy Policy

Volumn 66, Issue , 2014, Pages 496-506

  Howell, Rhys ^a   Shackley, Simon ^a   Mabon, Leslie ^a   Ashworth, Peta ^b   Jeanneret, Talia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b CSIRO   (Australia)

Author keywords

Carbon dioxide capture and storage; Low carbon energy; Public perceptions

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE; GLOBAL WARMING;

CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND STORAGE; CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS; LOW CARBON ENERGIES; LOW-CARBON ENERGY TECHNOLOGY; LOW-CARBON TECHNOLOGIES; PUBLIC PERCEPTION; RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES; WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS;

CARBON CAPTURE;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; CARBON DIOXIDE; CARBON SEQUESTRATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EMISSION CONTROL; ENERGY RESOURCE; ENERGY USE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

EDINBURGH [SCOTLAND]; SCOTLAND; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84892487140     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.041     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Ashworth P., Carr-Cornish S., Boughen N., Thambimuthu K. Engaging the public on carbon dioxide capture and storage: does a large group process workα. Energy Procedia 2009, 1:4765-4773.
2. Ashworth P., Bradbury J., Wade S., Feenstra C.F.J.Y., Greenberg S., Hund G., Mikunda T. What's in store: lessons from implementing CCS. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2012, 9:402-409.
3. Ashworth P., Einsiedel E., Howell R., Brunsting S., Boughen N., Boyd A., Shackley S., Van Bree B., Jeanneret T., Stenner K., Medlock J., Mabon L., Feenstra C.F.J., Hekkenberg M. Public preferences to CCS: how does it change across countriesα. Energy Procedia 2013, 37:7410-7418.
4. Bradbury J. Public understanding of and engagement with CCS. The Social Dynamics of Carbon Capture and Storage: Understanding Representation, Governance and Innovation 2012, Routledge, London and New York. N. Markusson, S. Shackley, B. Evar (Eds.).
5. Brunsting S., van Bree B., Feenstra C.F.J., Hekkenberg M. Public Perceptions of Low Carbon Energy Technologies-Results from a Dutch Large Group Workshop 2011, Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands, Netherlands.
6. 2 storage operations to inform public engagement in Poland and Scotland. Energy Procedia 2013, 37:7327-7336.
7. Cass N., Walker G. Emotion and rationality: characterising and understanding opposition to renewable energy projects. Emotion Space Soc. 2009, 2:62-69.
8. CCC Building a Low-carbon Economy-The UK's Contribution to Tackling Climate Change 2008, Committee on Climate Change, London, (The First Report of the Committee on Climate Change).
9. 2-capture and storage technologies in the Netherlands. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2009, 3(3):322-332.
10. de Best-Waldhober M., Paukovic A., Brunsting S., Daamen D. Awareness, knowledge, beliefs, and opinions regarding CCS of the Dutch general public before and after information. Energy Procedia 2011, 4:6292-6299.
11. Devine-Wright P., Howes Y. Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: a wind energy case study. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30:271-280.
12. DECC Renewable Energy Awareness and Attitudes Research 2009 Management Summary 2009, Department of Energy and Climate Change, London.
13. Dütschke E. What drives local public acceptance-comparing two cases from Germany. Energy Procedia 2010, 4:6234-6240.
14. de Groot J.I.M., Steg L. Psychological perspectives on the geological disposal of radioactive waste and carbon dioxide. Geological Disposal of Carbon Dioxide and Radioactive Waste: A Comparative Assessment 2011, 295-315. IAEA, Paris. F.L. Toth (Ed.).
15. Einsiedel E.F., Boyd A.D., Medlock J., Ashworth P. Assessing socio-technical mindsets: public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change. Energy Policy 2013, 53:149-158.
16. 2 Capture and Storage 2011, European Commission, Europe.
17. Feenstra C.F.J., Mikunda T., Brunsting S. What Happened in Barendrechtα Case Study on the Planned Onshore Carbon dioxide Storage in Barendrecht, the Netherlands 2010, ECN/GCCSI, Amsterdam.
18. Haggett C. Over the sea and far awayα A consideration of the planning, politics and public perception of offshore wind farms. J. Environ. Policy Plann. 2008, 10(3):289-306.
19. Hammond, J., Shackley, S., (2010). Towards a Public Communication and Engagement Strategy for CCS Projects in Scotland: A Review of Research Findings, CCS Project Experiences, Tools, Resources and Best Practices. SCCS Working Paper 2010-08. Accessed from: http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/sccs/SCCTS%20WP4%20Final%20Report.pdf.
20. Howell R., Shackley S., Mabon L. Public Perceptions of Low-carbon Energy Technologies: Results from a Scottish Large Group Process 2012, GCCSI, Canberra, (accessed 4/10/13). http://cdn.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/publications/38531/scottishlgpreport.pdf.
21. Huijts N.M.A., Midden C.J.H., Meijnders A.L. Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2780-2789.
22. Itaoka K., Saito A., Akai M. A study on roles of public survey and focus groups to assess public opinions for CCS implementation. Energy Procedia 2011, 4:6330-6337.
23. Itaoka K., Dowd A., Saito A., Paukovic M., de Best-Waldhober M., Ashworth P. Relating individual perceptions of carbon dioxide to perceptions of CCS: an international comparative study. Energy Procedia 2013, 37:7436-7443.
24. L'Orange Seigo S., Wallquist L., Dohle S., Siegrist M. Communication of CCS monitoring activities may not have a reassuring effect on the public. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2011, 5:1674-1679.
25. Mabon L. Values, places and bodies: opportunities for forging a deeper understanding of public perceptions of CCS. Energy Environ. 2012, 23:329-343.
26. Mabon L., Vercelli S., Shackley S., Anderlucci J., Battisti N., Franzese C., Boot K. 'Tell me what you think about the geological storage of carbon dioxide': towards a fuller understanding of public perceptions of CCS. Energy Procedia 2013, 37:7444-7453.
27. Malone E.L., Dooley J.J., Bradbury J.A. Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2010, 4(2):419-425.
28. McLaren D. Procedural justice in carbon capture and storage. Energy Environ. 2012, 23:345-365.
29. 2 storage. Risk Anal. 2009, 29(5):743-751.
30. Palmgren C.R., Morgan M.G., De Bruin W.D., Keith D.W. Initial public perceptions of deep geological and oceanic disposal of carbon dioxide. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38(24):6441-6450.
31. Reiner, D., Curry, T., de Figueredo, M., Herzog, H., Ansolabehere, S., Itaoka, K., Akai, M., Johnsson, F., Odenberger, M, (2006). An international comparison of public attitudes towards carbon capture and storage technologies. In: Paper presented at GHGT-8, Eighth International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, June 19-22, Trondheim, Norway.
32. Reiner D., Nuttall W.J. Public acceptance of geological disposal of carbon dioxide and radioactive waste: similarities and differences. Geological Disposal of Carbon Dioxide and Radioactive Waste: A Comparative Assessment 2011, 295-315. IAEA, Paris. F.L. Toth (Ed.).
33. 2 Storage around Scotland-An Integrated Strategic Research Study, Scottish Carbon Capture and Storage 2009, University of Edinburgh.
34. Scottish Executive Scotland's Renewable Energy Potential: Realising the 2020 Target 2005, Scottish Executive, Edinburgh.
35. Scottish Government, (2011). Low Carbon Scotland: Meeting the Emissions Reduction Targets 2010-2022: The Report on Proposals and Policies Scottish Government: Edinburgh.
36. 2 capture and storage in Europe: results from a survey. Energy Policy 2007, 35:5091-5108.
37. Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust and democracy. Risk Anal. 1993, 13(6):675-682.
38. Spence A., Poortinga W., Pidgeon N., Lorenzoni I. Public perceptions of energy choices: the influence of beliefs about climate change and the environment. Energy Environ. 2010, 21(5):385-407.
39. ter Mors E., Weenig M.W.H., Ellemers N., Daamen D.D.L. Effective communication about complex environmental issues: perceived quality of information about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) depends on stakeholder collaboration. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30:347-357.
40. ter Mors E., Terwel B.W., Daamen D.D.L. The potential of host community compensation in facility siting. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2012, 11(Supplement):S130-S138.
41. 2 capture and storage (CCS) technology: how trust in stakeholders affects public acceptance of CCS. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2011, 5:181-188.
42. Terwel B.W., ter Mors E., Daamen D.D.L. It's not only about safety: beliefs and attitudes of 811 local residents regarding a CCS project in Barendrecht. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2012, 9:41-51.
43. Upham P., Shackley S. The case of a proposed 21.5MWe biomass gasifier in Winkleigh, Devon: implications for governance of renewable energy planning. Energy Policy 2006, 34:2161-2172.
44. Vercelli S., Lombardi S. CCS as part of a global cultural development for environmentally sustainable energy production. Energy Procedia 2009, 1:4835-4841.
45. Wolsink M. Entanglement of interests and motives: assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on facility siting. Urban Stud. 1994, 31(6):851-866.
46. Wustenhagen R., Wolsink M., Burer M.J. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 2007, 35:2683-2691.
47. Wynne B. Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding Sci. 1992, 1:281-304.