IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v53y2013icp149-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change

Author

Listed:
  • Einsiedel, Edna F.
  • Boyd, Amanda D.
  • Medlock, Jennifer
  • Ashworth, Peta

Abstract

The adaptation and transition to new configurations of energy systems brought on by challenges of climate change, energy security, and sustainability have encouraged more integrative approaches that bring together the social and technical dimensions of technology. The perspectives of energy systems and climate change play an important role in the development and implementation of emerging energy technologies and attendant policies on greenhouse gas reduction. This research examines citizens’ views on climate change and a number of energy systems, with a specific focus on the use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a technology to address greenhouse gas emissions. An all-day workshop with 82 local participants was held in the city of Calgary in Alberta, Canada to explore the views of climate change, energy and CCS. Participants were provided the opportunity to ask experts questions and discuss in small groups their views of climate change policy and energy systems. Results demonstrate that participants’ assessments of energy systems are influenced by social–political–institutional–economic contexts such as trust in industry and government, perception of parties benefiting from the technology, and tradeoffs between energy systems. We discuss our findings in the context of understanding social learning processes as part of socio-technical systems change.

Suggested Citation

  • Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:53:y:2013:i:c:p:149-158
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512009238
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van der Horst, Dan, 2007. "NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2705-2714, May.
    2. Simon Shackley & Michael Thompson, 2012. "Lost in the mix: will the technologies of carbon dioxide capture and storage provide us with a breathing space as we strive to make the transition from fossil fuels to renewables?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 101-121, January.
    3. ., 1998. "Technological Change," Chapters, in: Heinz D. Kurz & Neri Salvadori (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, volume 0, chapter 127, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Andy Stirling, 2007. "Deliberate futures: precaution and progress in social choice of sustainable technology," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 286-295.
    5. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    6. Richard Bull & Judith Petts & James Evans, 2008. "Social learning from public engagement: dreaming the impossible?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(5), pages 701-716.
    7. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Midden, Cees J.H. & Meijnders, Anneloes L., 2007. "Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2780-2789, May.
    8. Stephens, Jennie C. & Jiusto, Scott, 2010. "Assessing innovation in emerging energy technologies: Socio-technical dynamics of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) in the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 2020-2031, April.
    9. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    10. Heather Lovell & Harriet Bulkeley & Susan Owens, 2009. "Converging Agendas? Energy and Climate Change Policies in the UK," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 27(1), pages 90-109, February.
    11. Frank W. Geels, 2005. "Technological Transitions and System Innovations," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3576, December.
    12. Markusson, Nils & Kern, Florian & Watson, Jim & Arapostathis, Stathis & Chalmers, Hannah & Ghaleigh, Navraj & Heptonstall, Philip & Pearson, Peter & Rossati, David & Russell, Stewart, 2012. "A socio-technical framework for assessing the viability of carbon capture and storage technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 903-918.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Rebecca J. Romsdahl, 2020. "Deliberative framing: opening up discussions for local-level public engagement on climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 145-163, September.
    3. Lee, Joo Suk & Choi, Eun Chul, 2018. "CO2 leakage environmental damage cost – A CCS project in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 753-758.
    4. Vassilis Stavrakas & Niki-Artemis Spyridaki & Alexandros Flamos, 2018. "Striving towards the Deployment of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): A Review of Research Priorities and Assessment Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-27, June.
    5. Steve Westlake & Conor H. D. John & Emily Cox, 2023. "Perception spillover from fracking onto public perceptions of novel energy technologies," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 149-158, February.
    6. Hurlbert, Margot & Osazuwa-Peters, Mac, 2023. "Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Martínez Arranz, Alfonso, 2015. "Carbon capture and storage: Frames and blind spots," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 249-259.
    8. Howell, Rhys & Shackley, Simon & Mabon, Leslie & Ashworth, Peta & Jeanneret, Talia, 2014. "Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results from a Scottish large group process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 496-506.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dixon, Tim & Eames, Malcolm & Britnell, Judith & Watson, Georgia Butina & Hunt, Miriam, 2014. "Urban retrofitting: Identifying disruptive and sustaining technologies using performative and foresight techniques," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 131-144.
    2. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    3. Dijk, Marc & Orsato, Renato J. & Kemp, René, 2015. "Towards a regime-based typology of market evolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 276-289.
    4. Galvin, Ray, 2018. "‘Them and us’: Regional-national power-plays in the German energy transformation: A case study in Lower Franconia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 269-277.
    5. van Os, Herman W.A. & Herber, Rien & Scholtens, Bert, 2014. "Not Under Our Back Yards? A case study of social acceptance of the Northern Netherlands CCS initiative," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 923-942.
    6. Barton, John & Davies, Lloyd & Dooley, Ben & Foxon, Timothy J. & Galloway, Stuart & Hammond, Geoffrey P. & O’Grady, Áine & Robertson, Elizabeth & Thomson, Murray, 2018. "Transition pathways for a UK low-carbon electricity system: Comparing scenarios and technology implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2779-2790.
    7. Hurlbert, Margot & Osazuwa-Peters, Mac, 2023. "Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    9. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    10. Foxon, Timothy J., 2011. "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2258-2267.
    11. Pekkarinen, Satu & Melkas, Helinä, 2019. "Welfare state transition in the making: Focus on the niche-regime interaction in Finnish elderly care services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 240-253.
    12. Hiteva, Ralitsa & Foxon, Timothy J., 2021. "Beware the value gap: Creating value for users and for the system through innovation in digital energy services business models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    13. Batinge, Benjamin & Musango, Josephine Kaviti & Brent, Alan C., 2019. "Sustainable energy transition framework for unmet electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1090-1099.
    14. Marc Dijk & Graham Parkhurst, 2014. "Understanding the mobility-transformative qualities of urban park and ride polices in the UK and the Netherlands," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(3/4), pages 246-270.
    15. Grünewald, Philipp H. & Cockerill, Timothy T. & Contestabile, Marcello & Pearson, Peter J.G., 2012. "The socio-technical transition of distributed electricity storage into future networks—System value and stakeholder views," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 449-457.
    16. Castán Broto, Vanesa & Glendinning, Stephanie & Dewberry, Emma & Walsh, Claire & Powell, Mark, 2014. "What can we learn about transitions for sustainability from infrastructure shocks?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 186-196.
    17. Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2012. "How useful is the Multi-Level Perspective for transport and sustainability research?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 483-487.
    18. Rachel M. Krause & Sanya R. Carley & David C. Warren & John A. Rupp & John D. Graham, 2014. "“Not in (or Under) My Backyard”: Geographic Proximity and Public Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage Facilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 529-540, March.
    19. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Hjerppe, Turo & Aapala, Kaisu, 2019. "Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis in valuing peatland ecosystem services—Trade-offs related to peat extraction vs. pristine peatlands in Southern Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 17-28.
    20. Landeta-Manzano, Beñat & Arana-Landín, Germán & Calvo, Pilar M. & Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki, 2018. "Wind energy and local communities: A manufacturer’s efforts to gain acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 314-324.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:53:y:2013:i:c:p:149-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.