CO 2 Chem Meeting 21 st September, 2012 . Dr Chris Jones - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

UNDERSTANDING THE FACTORS AFFECTING PUBLIC RESPONSES TO CCUS: INSIGHTS FROM SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Dr Chris Jones CO2Chem Meeting 21st September, 2012.

A bit about me + plan for today

Dr Chris Jones

• University of Sheffield
• Lecturer in Environmental/Social

Psychology

• c.r.jones@shef.ac.uk
• 0114 222 6592

Research interests: Attitude formation and change. Public perceptions of supply- and demand-side energy production and use initiatives.

Plan for talk

1. Public opinion of CCS. 2. Possible reaction to CCU. 3. Attitude groups. 4. Factors influencing attitudes. 5. Morals & Values 6. Local Opinion 7. Conclusions 8. Contact details

The importance of public opinion

• Public opinion can shape technology investment &

deployment.

• Understanding public opinion and engaging in appropriate

public outreach/education is essential.

• This importance has been recognized in emerging best

practice guidelines for CCS (e.g., World Resources Institute, 2010).

• Growing literature assessing opinion of CCS.
• Awareness is low but improving.
• Attitudes typically characterized by ambivalence.
• Very little research into attitudes to utilization of captured

carbon, but presents interesting questions.

Common perceived concerns and benefits of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Benefits Concerns

• Might provide a bridge to a low-carbon future
• Could avoid release of large quantities of CO2
• Allows for the continued use of fossil fuels
• Should enhance energy security
• Helps to clean up coal-fired power plants in

developing countries that require energy

• Allows reduction of emissions without

necessitating much change to lifestyle

• Safety risks related to a CO2 leak or explosion
• The risk of ground water contamination
• Harm to flora and fauna near storage sites
• Wrong solution to climate change (a band aid)
• Availability of storage sites
• Availability of CCS technology/infrastructure
• Long term viability of technology
• Economic cost
• Scale required for mitigation of CO2
• Unknown technology
• Could draw funding from renewables

Adapted and abridged from Ashworth et al. (2010)

Utilization of captured carbon (?)

What will the public think of CCU?

• Publics vs. Public
• Refer to literature on Public Understanding of Science & Tech.
• Attitudes to Science in the UK (RCUK/DIUS, 2008)

– Science/Tech is generally positive – Science/Tech is generally beneficial – People know more about Science/Tech – Speed of development of less concern

• Five principal attitudinal groups

1. Confident 2. Sceptical Enthusiasts 3. Less confident 4. Distrustful 5. Indifferent

The FIVE attitudinal groups

• Confident people (c.25%) are:

– Positive about science, interested, confident in research and regulation, well-informed, highly educated, have feeling of agency.

• Sceptical Enthusiasts (c. 12.5%) are:

– Enthusiastic, positive about science, sceptical of authority, question independence of science/scientists, feel they lack agency, desire more communication and engagement.

• Less Confident people (c. 25%) are:

– Older, low level of education, cautious, concerned with change, feel science is OK but out of control, feel ill- informed but feel science is complicated.

RCUK/DIUS (2008). Public Attitudes to Science 2008. A survey. London: Research Councils UK and the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.

The FIVE attitudinal groups

• Distrustful people (<20%) are:

– Lack trust in Govt. + authority in general, young, mainly female, not interested in science and do not see benefits, concern with some scientific practices (e.g. animal testing).

• Indifferent people (c. 20%) are:

– High proportion of females, relatively low education, large number of parents w/ children < 16, limited understanding

• f science, indifferent to science, not concerned with

control or regulation.

• In sum: It’s difficult to simply split people into for and against

+ willingness to engage with outreach efforts will differ.

RCUK/DIUS (2008). Public Attitudes to Science 2008. A survey. London: Research Councils UK and the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.

Factors influencing attitudes

• The perceived purpose of the technology

– Innovation is good, for the right reasons.

• Trustworthiness of institutions

– Scientists trusted (fragile), govt. and industry less trusted.

• Feelings of powerlessness and exclusion

– Need for inclusion of publics in decision making.

• Speed and direction of innovation

– Concern that speed leads to ethical/regulation oversight.

• Ethics, trade-offs, social distribution of risks/benefits

– Desire for ‘social good’ can lead to acceptance of greater risk.

Chilvers, J. & Macnaghten, P. (2011). The future of science governance: A review of public concerns, governance and institutional response. A literature review for the BIS/Sciencewise-ERC ‘Science, Trust and Public Engagement’ project.

Morals & Values influence opinion

Religious Faith and CCS

• Qualitative study into how religious beliefs, environmental

values and climate change relate to attitudes about CCS.

• Focus groups held with Christian, Muslim and Secular groups.
• All groups were ‘pro-environmental’ but perceived urgency

for mitigating climate change differed.

– Highest in Secular group, lower in religious groups due to belief in afterlife and/or divine intervention.

• Attitudes to CCS

– Secular = fairly favourable due to need to address climate change. – Christian = fairly favourable due to environmental ‘mastery’ values. – Muslim = less favourable due to environmental ‘harmony’ values.

Hope, A.L.B., Jones, C.R. (under review). The Impact of Religious Faith on Attitudes to Environmental Issues and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies: A Qualitative Analysis

“West Virginia coal, that’s what we are” Tourism executive @ Mason County

Local opinion can be different

• Not just NIMBY (Not in my backyard)

– Specific form of opposition characterised by general approval paired with local rejection based on self-interest.

• Perceived threats to ‘place’ identity can prompt protective

responses (Devine-Wright, 2009).

• AEP’s “Mountaineer” Case-Study (Jones & Scott, 2012):

– Full post-combustion validation pilot. – Assessment of project related to perceived impact on existing industry.

Jones, C.R., Scott, F., & Kaklamanou, D. (under review). Public attitudes to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in the United States of America and Canada: A qualitative investigation of public opinion in communities hosting demonstration projects. Int. Jnl of Greenhouse Gas Control.

Conclusions

• Public opinion will affect investment in and

deployment of CCSU projects.

• Publics not public
• Features of technology are important but
• pinion is shaped by other factors.
• Local opinion might differ from general
• pinion – more or less favourable?
• Communication and Engagement will be key.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING

Environment and Behaviour Research Group (EBRG),

• Dept. of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TP.

c.r.jones@sheffield.ac.uk 0114 222 6592