To limit global warming, the use of carbon capture and storage technologies (CCS) is considered to be of major importance. In addition to the technical-economic, ecological and political aspects, the question of social acceptance is a decisive factor for the implementation of such low-carbon technologies. This study is the first literature review addressing the acceptance of industrial CCS (iCCS). In contrast to electricity generation, the technical options for large-scale reduction of CO2 emissions in the energy-intensive industry sector are not sufficient to achieve the targeted GHG neutrality in the industrial sector without the use of CCS. Therefore, it will be crucial to determine which factors influence the acceptance of iCCS and how these findings can be used for policy and industry decision-making processes. The results show that there has been limited research on the acceptance of iCCS. In addition, the study highlights some important differences between the acceptance of iCCS and CCS. Due to the technical diversity of future iCCS applications, future acceptance research must be able to better address the complexity of the research subject.
Background: For a successful transition to a sustainable energy system, not only technical but also social innovations are required. A major challenge to social innovation research is how to translate the social innovation from a novelty with big potential into a mainstream practice. The multilevel perspective (MLP) of socio-technical transitions provides a heuristic to understand how niches can potentially break through to the regime level. In this paper, we examine in how far a multilevel perspective approach is suited to analyze and better understand diffusion trajectories of social rather than technological innovations, taking a social practice theory perspective. Five example projects, selected among the top social innovations for the Energiewende in North Rhine-Westphalia, are analyzed. We discuss to what extend the MLP provides a helpful tool to understand the transition processes.
Results: Social innovations can be very divers. We find that the MLP does not offer a one-size-fits-all framework for the analysis of the diffusion of social innovations. The MLP proves applicable only in those cases where the social innovation (1) can lead to a system change and (2) has a clear competing or symbiotic relationship with an existing regime.
Conclusions: Social innovations that aim to be transformative in the sense that they have the goal to be system changing (rather than incremental) can be analyzed along the heuristics of the MLP. For this type of social innovation, the MLP can be fruitful to learn to better understand the diffusion dynamics of social innovation and the barriers and drivers they might face. However, for social innovations that aim at incremental improvements without challenging the existing system, the MLP cannot be applied to study the diffusion process.
Partizipative Irritationen : Reflexionen zum nachhaltigkeitsbezogenen Partizipationsgeschehen
(2017)
Die Beteiligungslandschaft wird im Kontext nachhaltiger Entwicklung und in der Perspektive der Politischen Psychologie betrachtet. Ausgangspunkt sind Wechselwirkungen zwischen politisch vermittelter und in Verbindung mit Nachhaltigkeit besonders geforderter Partizipationsnotwendigkeit einerseits und individuell empfundenem Vertrauensverlust in die Fähigkeit der Politik zur Lösung von Umweltproblemen andererseits. Betrachtet werden Partizipationsmotive der Politik (z.B. Steigerung von Legitimität) und Partizipationsmotive von Bürgerinnen und Bürgern (z.B. die "echte" Chance auf Mitentscheidung, insbesondere bei Verfahren mit starkem Regionalbezug). Beide Motive sind eingebettet in eine weitgehend entscheidungsferne "Partizipationsarchitektur". Die Verfahren liegen überwiegend auf einer informativen und auf einer konsultativen Ebene. Auch zeigen sich Diskrepanzen auf der Ebene der politischen Aufforderungen zur Partizipation. Diese erfolgen eher, wenn es um Problemlösungen geht und eher nicht, wenn es um Investitionen und wirtschaftliche Gewinne geht. Intensiv werden partizipative Ansätze im Kontext von Klimaschutz und Energiewende verfolgt. Doch auch diese Partizipationsangebote gehen selten über die informative Ebene hinaus. Inhaltlich sind v.a. technische Lösungsansätze zur Reduktion der CO2-Emissionen fixiert worden, hingegen wurden politische wie soziale Lösungsansätze überwiegend ausgespart. Insgesamt besteht die Gefahr partizipativer Irritationen bis hin zu Erschöpfung, wenn Bürgerinnen und Bürger einerseits zur Beteiligung aufgefordert und aktiviert werden, andererseits aber erfahren, dass sie im politischen Geschehen wenig bewirken können.
One of the factors decelerating a further diffusion of the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is the public's negative perception of early pilot or demonstration activities in Germany as well as in other countries. This study examined the public perception of CCS in more detail by looking into different options within the CCS chain, i.e. for the three elements capture, transport and storage. This was analyzed using an experimental approach, realized in an online survey with a representative German sample of 1830 citizens. Each participant evaluated one of 18 different CCS scenarios created using three types of CO2 source (industry, biomass, coal), two transport options (pipeline vs. no specification), and three storage possibilities (saline aquifer, depleted gas field, enhanced gas recovery (EGR)).
Overall, we found that the ratings of CCS were neutral on average. However, if the CO2 is produced by a biomass power plant or industry, CCS is rated more positively than in a scenario with a coal-fired power plant. The specifications of transport and storage interacted with each other such that scenarios including EGR or a depleted gas field without mentioning a pipeline were evaluated better than storing it in a saline aquifer or a depleted gas field and mentioning a pipeline as means of transport. Exploratory regression analyses indicate the high relevance of the respective CO2 source in general as well as the perceived importance of this source for Germany.
Among the factors that decelerate progress of CCS demonstration and deployment is the lack of public acceptance of local projects in Germany as well as in other countries. The study presented here aims to take the issue of public CCS perceptions further by empirically investigating the relevance of different specifications of the three main steps of the CCS chain, i.e. capture, transport and storage. An experimental approach is chosen and applied in an online survey with a representative sample from Germany with 1830 participants. With regard to possible CO2 sources we varied whether the CO2 of a specific setting is captured i) as part of an energy-intensive industry process (e.g. production of steel or cement), ii) from a power plant running on biomass, or iii) a coal-fired power plant. For transport, half of the settings described made reference to transport of CO2 via pipelines, the other half did not provide information about transport. With regard to storage the setting descriptions i) either explained that CO2 can be stored in saline aquifers, ii) can be used to enhance gas production from an emptying natural gas field or iii) can be stored in a depleted natural gas field. We find that overall the average of the ratings for perception of the settings fall into the neutral part of the answering scale. If the source of CO2 is a coal-fired power plant the setting is perceived less positively than if it includes biomass or industry. A significant interaction effect between transport and storage specifications is observed. This points out that storage in saline aquifers is perceived more negatively than a combination with enhanced gas recovery while storage in a depleted natural gas field is rated less positively if a pipeline is mentioned and more positively if no transport option is mentioned.
The present study investigates and compares the public perception of CO2 offshore storage, CO2 onshore storage and CO2 transport via pipeline in Germany nationwide and in two coastal regions. For this purpose, three representative surveys were carried out and analyzed with the methods of descriptive statistics and ordinal regressions. The results of our descriptive statistical analyses show clear regional differences with regard to self-reported awareness, factual knowledge, risk perceptions and general attitudes towards CO2 offshore/onshore storage and CO2 transport via pipeline. With regard to the public perception of the two storage options - offshore and onshore - no major differences could be identified: both are hardly accepted by the German public. In comparison to CO2 offshore storage/CO2 onshore storage, the attitudes towards CO2 transport via pipeline were perceptibly more positive in all regions. Our regression analyses revealed that the perceptions of the personal and societal risks of CO2 transport via pipeline/CO2 offshore storage/CO2 onshore storage as well as the perceptions of the personal and societal benefits of CCS are the most important direct determinants of general attitudes towards CO2 transport via pipeline, CO2 offshore storage and CO2 onshore storage.
The results presented in this article illustrate how the local public was informed on specific Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects by regional newspapers in Germany. The analyzed articles were published in four daily newspapers within the German regions where four CO2 onshore storage projects took place or have been planned. The articles were published between 2007 and 2011. In total, 1,115 newspaper articles about the four CO2 onshore storage projects were gathered and analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. Our results showed that the regional media coverage of CCS projects in Germany reached peaks in 2009 and 2010. The main topics changed within the media coverage and it is worth mentioning to what extent the media coverage of CCS disregarded topics with regard to economic, technical, ecological or scientific aspects on CCS. The overall evaluation of CCS within the articles is negative. While commercial CCS projects received more negative evaluation across newspaper articles; opinions about the research and industry project Ketzin were more neutral.
Both focus group discussions and information-choice questionnaires (ICQs) have previously been used to examine informed public opinions about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS). This paper presents an extensive experimental study to systematically examine and compare the quality of opinions created by these two research techniques. Depending on experimental condition, participants either participated in a focus group meeting or completed an ICQ. In both conditions participants received identical factual information about two specific CCS options. After having processed the information, they indicated their overall opinion about each CCS option. The quality of these opinions was determined by looking at three outcome-oriented indicators of opinion quality: consistency, stability, and confidence. Results for all three indicators showed that ICQs yielded higher-quality opinions than focus groups, but also that focus groups did not perform poor in this regard. Implications for the choice between focus group discussions and ICQs are discussed.
The study presents the results of an integrated assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the power plant sector in Germany, with special emphasis on the competition with renewable energy technologies. Assessment dimensions comprise technical, economic and environmental aspects, long-term scenario analysis, the role of stakeholders and public acceptance and regulatory issues. The results lead to the overall conclusion that there might not necessarily be a need to focus additionally on CCS in the power plant sector. Even in case of ambitious climate protection targets, current energy policy priorities (expansion of renewable energies and combined heat and power plants as well as enhanced energy productivity) result in a limited demand for CCS. In case that the large energy saving potential aimed for can only partly be implemented, the rising gap in CO2 reduction could only be closed by setting up a CCS-maximum strategy. In this case, up to 22% (41 GW) of the totally installed load in 2050 could be based on CCS. Assuming a more realistic scenario variant applying CCS to only 20 GW or lower would not be sufficient to reach the envisaged climate targets in the electricity sector. Furthermore, the growing public opposition against CO2 storage projects appears as a key barrier, supplemented by major uncertainties concerning the estimation of storage potentials, the long-term cost development as well as the environmental burdens which abound when applying a life-cycle approach. However, recently, alternative applications are being increasingly considered–that is the capture of CO2 at industrial point sources and biomass based energy production (electricity, heat and fuels) where assessment studies for exploring the potentials, limits and requirements for commercial use are missing so far. Globally, CCS at power plants might be an important climate protection technology: coal-consuming countries such as China and India are increasingly moving centre stage into the debate. Here, similar investigations on the development and the integration of both, CCS and renewable energies, into the individual energy system structures of such countries would be reasonable.
If the current energy policy priorities are retained, there may be no need to focus additionally on carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the power plant sector of Germany. This applies even in the case of ambitious climate protection targets, according to the results of the presented integrated assessment study. These cover a variety of aspects: Firstly, the technology is not expected to become available on a large scale in Germany before 2025. Secondly, if renewable energies and combined heat and power are expanded further and energy productivity is enhanced, there is likely to be only a limited demand for CCS power plants, as a scenario analysis of CCS deployment in Germany shows. Thirdly, cost analysis using the learning curve approach shows that the electricity generation costs of renewable electricity approach those of CCS power plants. This leads to the consequence that, from 2020, several renewable technologies may well be in a position to offer electricity at a cheaper rate than CCS power plants. In addition, a review of new life cycle assessments for CO2 separation in the power plant sector indicates that the greenhouse gas emissions from 1 kW h of electricity generated by first-generation CCS power plants could only be reduced by 68 % to 87 % (95 % in individual cases). Finally, a cautious, conservative estimate of the effective German CO2 storage capacity of approximately 5 billion tonnes of CO2 is calculated, including a fluctuation range yielding values between 4 and 15 billion tonnes of CO2. Therefore, the total CO2 emissions caused by large point sources in Germany could be stored for 12 years (basic value) or for 8 or 33 years (sensitivity values).