Public evaluation of electricity technologies and future low-carbon portfolios in Germany and the USA

Energy, Sustainability and Society

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-13

  Scheer, Dirk ^a   Konrad, Wilfried ^b   Scheel, Oliver ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART   (Germany)

^b DIALOGIK Non profit Institute for Communication and Cooperation Research   (Germany)

Author keywords

Electricity technologies and portfolios; Informed decision; Public preferences; Technology acceptance

Indexed keywords

CARBON CAPTURE; DIGITAL STORAGE; EMISSION CONTROL; FOSSIL FUELS;

CAPTURE AND STORAGE TECHNOLOGIES; CLIMATE MITIGATIONS; INFORMED DECISION; LOW-CARBON ELECTRICITIES; LOW-CARBON TECHNOLOGIES; PUBLIC PREFERENCES; QUANTITATIVE RESULT; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE;

SURVEYS;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; CARBON SEQUESTRATION; ELECTRICITY GENERATION; ENERGY RESOURCE; FOSSIL FUEL; NUCLEAR POWER; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; TECHNOLOGY;

GERMANY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84893495929     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21920567     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/2192-0567-3-8     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Fleishmann L, Bruin de Bruin W, Morgan G (2010) Informed public preferences for electricity portfolios with CCS and other low-carbon technologies. Risk Anal 30:1399-1410
2. EU [European Union] (2010) EU energy in figures 2010. CO2 emissions by sector. Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/publications/doc/statistics/ ext_co2_emissions_by_sector.pdf. Accessed 24 July 2012
3. European Commission (2011) A roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050. SEC(2011)288 final, Brussels
4. Wüstenhagen R, Wolsink M, Bürer MJ (2007) Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: an introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35:2683-2691
5. Raven RPJM, Mourik RM, Feenstra CFJ, Heiskanen E (2009) Modulating societal acceptance in new energy projects: towards a toolkit methodology for project managers. Energy 34:564-574
6. Devine-Wright P (2005) Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy 8:125-139
7. Huits NMA, Molin EJE, Steg L (2012) Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: a review based comprehensive framework. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 16:525-531
8. Assefa G, Frostell B (2006) Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: a case study on energy technologies. Technol Soc 29:63-78
9. Grove-White R, Kearnes M, Macnaghten P, Wynne B (2006) Nuclear futures: assessing public attitudes to new nuclear power. Polit Quart 77:238-246
10. Corner A, Venables D, Spence A, Poortinga W, Demski C, Pidgeon N (2011) Nuclear power, climate change and energy security: exploring British public attitudes. Energy Policy 39:4823-4833
11. van Alphen K, van Voorst tot Voorst Q, Hekkert MP, Smits REHM (2007) Societal acceptance of carbon capture and storage technologies. Energy Policy 35:4368-4380
12. Tokushige K, Akimoto K, Tomoda T (2007) Public perceptions on the acceptance of geological storage of carbon dioxide and information influencing the acceptance. Int J Greenh Gas Con 1:101-112
13. Wallquist L, L'Orange Seigo S, Visschers VHM, Siegrist M (2011) Public acceptance of CCS system elements: a conjoint measurement. Int J Greenh Gas Con 6:77-83
14. Jobert A, Laborgne P, Mimler S (2007) Local acceptance of wind energy: factors of success identified in French and German case studies. Energy Policy 35:2751-2760
15. Zhai P, Williams ED (2012) Analyzing consumer acceptance of photovoltaics (PV) using fuzzy logic model. Renew Energy 41:350-357
16. Zoellner J, Schweizer-Ries P, Wemheuer C (2008) Public acceptance of renewable energies: results from case studies in Germany. Energy Policy 36:4136-4141
17. Musall FD, Kuik O (2012) Local acceptance of renewable energy-a case study from southeast Germany. Energy Policy 39:3252-3260
18. European Commission (2006) Energy technologies: knowledge, perception, measures. Brussels. ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp7/energy/docs/ energy_tech_eurobarometer_en.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2012
19. TNS/Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien (2011) Hintergrundpapier Umfrage von TNS Infratest zeigt: Hohe Akzeptanz gegenüber Erneuerbaren Energien in Deutschland. http://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/fileadmin/content/ Panorama/Akzeptanz/Factsheet_Umfrage_TNS_2011.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2012
20. Emnid/N24 (2011) Verbraucher: Verbraucher sind für Energiewende zu Opfern bereit. http://www.n-tv.de/ticker/Geld/Verbraucher-sind-fuer-Energiewende-zu-Opfern-bereit-article3113166.html. Accessed 13 July 2012
21. Renn O, Zwick MM (1997) Risiko-und Technikakzeptanz. Springer, Berlin
22. Sjöberg L (2002) Attitudes toward technology and risk: going beyond what is immediately given. Policy Sci 35:379-400
23. Covello VT (1983) The perception of technological risks: a literature review. Technol Forecast Soc 23:285-297
24. Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285
25. Rohrmann B, Renn O (2000) Risk perception research-an introduction. In: Renn O, Rohrmann B (ed) Cross-cultural risk perception: a survey of empirical studies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 11-54
26. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich GT (2000) Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Anal 20:713-719
27. Sjöberg L (2001) Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Anal 21:189-198
28. Reiner D, Curry T, Figueiredo M, Herzog H, Ansolabehere S, Itaoka K, Johnsson F, Odenbergeret M (2006) American exceptionalism? Similarities and differences in national attitudes toward energy policy and global warming. Environ Sci Technol 40:2093-2098
29. Curry TE, Ansolabehere S, Herzog H (2007) A survey of public attitudes towards climate change and climate change mitigation technologies in the United States: analyses of 2006 results. In: Publication No. LFEE 2007-01 WP. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Energy and the Environment, Cambridge
30. Miller E, Bell L, Buys L (2007) Public understanding of carbon sequestration in Australia: socio-demographic predictors of knowledge, engagement and trust. Aus J Emerg Tech Soc 5:15-33
31. Malone EL, Dooley JJ, Bradbury J (2010) Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement. Int J Greenh Gas Con 4:419-425
32. Pietzner K, Schumann D (ed) (2012) Akzeptanzforschung zu CCS in Deutschland: Aktuelle Ergebnisse, Praxisrelevanz, Perspektiven. Oekom Verlag, München 33. Ashworth P, Jeanneret T, Stenner K, Hobman EV (2012) International comparison of the large group process. Results from Canada, Netherlands, Scotland and Australia. CSIRO, Pullenvale
33. Ashworth P, Jeanneret T, Stenner K, Hobman EV (2012) International comparison of the large group process. Results from Canada, Netherlands, Scotland and Australia. CSIRO, Pullenvale
34. Cremer C, Esken A, Fischedick M, Gruber E, Idrissova F, Kuckshinrichs W, Linßen J, Pietzner K, Radgen P, Roser A, Schnepf N, Schumann D, Supersberger N, Zapp P (2008) Sozioökonomische Begleitforschung zur gesellschaftlichen Akzeptanz von Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) auf nationaler und internationaler Ebene. Wuppertal et al
35. Luskin RC, Fishkin JS, Plane DL (1999) Deliberative Ppolling and Ppolicy Ooutcomes: Eelectric Uutility Iissues in Texas. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. Chicago, 4/ 1999 and at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Washington DC, 11/1999. http://cdd.stanford.edu/ research/papers/2000/utility_paper.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2012
36. De-Best Waldhober M, Daamen D, Faaij A (2009) Informed and uninformed public opinions on CO2 capture and storage technologies in the Netherlands. Int J Greenh Gas Con 3:322-332
37. Scheer D, Konrad W, Scheel O, Ulmer F, Hohlt A (2012) Fokusgruppen im Mixed-Method-Design: Kombination einer standardisierten und qualitativen Erhebung. In: Mack B, Renn O, Schulz M (ed) Fokusgruppen in der empirischen Sozialwissenschaft. Von der Konzeption bis zur Auswertung. Springer VS, Heidelberg, pp 148-168
38. Bloor M, Frankland J, Thomas M (2001) Focus groups in social research. Sage, London
39. Bürkli R (2000) Klimaänderung und Anpassungsprozesse im Wintertourismus. Publikation der Ostschweizerischen Geografischen Gesellschaft, Neue Folge, No. 6
40. Kitzinger J (1994) The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Sociol Health Illn 16:103-121
41. Grudens-Schuck N, Allen BL, Larson K (2004) Focus group fundamentals. Iowa State University Extension, Ames
42. Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie, Deutsches Zentrum für Luftund Raumfahrt, Zentrum für Sonnenenergie-und Wasserstoffforschung, Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (2007) RECCS: Strukturellökologisch-ökonomischer Vergleich Regenerativer Energien mit Carbon Capture and Storage, Wuppertal
43. BMU [Bundesministerium für Umwelt] (2008) BMU-Leitstudie: Weiterentwicklung der "Ausbaustrategie Erneuerbare Energien" vor dem Hintergrund der aktuellen Klimaschutzziele Deutschlands und Europas, Stuttgart.
44. Energiewirtschaftliches Institut der Universität Köln, Energy Environment Forecast Analysis (2008) Energiewirtschaftliches Gesamtkonzept 2030, Köln. http://www.ewi.uni-koeln.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationen/Studien/ Politik_und_Gesellschaft/2008/EW_2008-03-31_Gesamtkonzept-2030.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2012
45. Europäische Kommission (2008) Einstellungen der europäischen Bürger zum Klimawandel. Spezial Eurobarometer 300, Brüssel. http://ec.europa.eu/ public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_300_full_de.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2012
46. Küchler M (1979) Multivariate Analyseverfahren. Teubner, Stuttgart
47. Bots PWG, van Daalen CE (2008) Participatory model construction and model use in natural resource management: a framework for reflection. Syst Pract Act Res 21:389-407
48. Dreyer M, Renn O (2011) Participatory approaches to modelling for improved learning and decision-making in natural resource governance: an editorial. Environ Policy Gov 21:379-385