IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwkwp/2252.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Carbon Capture and Storage: Publics in five countries around the North Sea prefer to do it on their own territory

Author

Listed:
  • Merk, Christine
  • Andersen, Gisle
  • Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes
  • Helfrich, Torben

Abstract

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) has been identified as an essential part of the lowest-cost path toward reaching the goals of the Paris Agreement. In Europe, an accelerated pace of CCS development indicates that a CO2 transport and storage system could be established by 2030. However, we know little about how the public views the market for transport and storage of CO2 currently under development in Europe. In early 2023, we conducted an experimental comparative survey to study public opinions on cross-border CO2 trade for storage in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK. The share of respondents that perceive CCS as somewhat positive or very positive varies considerably between the countries; we find the highest share in Denmark (69%), followed by the UK (68%), Norway (67%), the Netherlands (57%) and the lowest share in Germany (49%). Especially concerns about environmental risks and costs lead to more negative views, while perceptions of job creation and economic opportunities lead to more positive evaluations. The experimental results show that importing CO2 for storage is among the least preferred options in all countries, while the storage of CO2 that has been captured in the own country is the most preferred option; the gap in the share of positive evaluations is substantial and amounts to up to 20 percentage points in the UK. Respondents who feel that countries are responsible for reducing national greenhouse gas emissions and storing their own captured CO2 drive the pattern of a more positive evaluation of a domestic CCS value chain and a more negative evaluation of importing CO2.

Suggested Citation

  • Merk, Christine & Andersen, Gisle & Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes & Helfrich, Torben, 2023. "Carbon Capture and Storage: Publics in five countries around the North Sea prefer to do it on their own territory," Kiel Working Papers 2252, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkwp:2252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/273361/1/1851793445.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias & Christopher R. Jones, 2019. "Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Merk, Christine & Liebe, Ulf & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2023. "German citizens’ preference for domestic carbon dioxide removal by afforestation is incompatible with national removal potential," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 270884, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    3. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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).
    2. Pianta, Silvia & Rinscheid, Adrian & Weber, Elke U., 2021. "Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States: Perceptions, preferences, and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Katja Witte, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from Industrial Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-29, November.
    4. Xexakis, Georgios & Hansmann, Ralph & Volken, Sandra P. & Trutnevyte, Evelina, 2020. "Models on the wrong track: Model-based electricity supply scenarios in Switzerland are not aligned with the perspectives of energy experts and the public," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    5. Wang, Peng-Tao & Wei, Yi-Ming & Yang, Bo & Li, Jia-Quan & Kang, Jia-Ning & Liu, Lan-Cui & Yu, Bi-Ying & Hou, Yun-Bing & Zhang, Xian, 2020. "Carbon capture and storage in China’s power sector: Optimal planning under the 2 °C constraint," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    6. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.
    7. Zeng, Bingxin & Zhu, Lei & Yao, Xing, 2020. "Policy choice for end-of-pipe abatement technology adoption under technological uncertainty," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 121-130.
    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. Elspeth Spence & Emily Cox & Nick Pidgeon, 2021. "Exploring cross-national public support for the use of enhanced weathering as a land-based carbon dioxide removal strategy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-18, March.
    10. 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).
    11. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    12. Yu, H. & Reiner, D. & Chen, H. & Mi, Z., 2018. "A comparison of public preferences for different low-carbon energy technologies: Support for CCS, nuclear and wind energy in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1826, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Wang, Honglin & Liu, Yanrong & Laaksonen, Aatto & Krook-Riekkola, Anna & Yang, Zhuhong & Lu, Xiaohua & Ji, Xiaoyan, 2020. "Carbon recycling – An immense resource and key to a smart climate engineering: A survey of technologies, cost and impurity impact," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    14. Vögele, Stefan & Rübbelke, Dirk & Mayer, Philip & Kuckshinrichs, Wilhelm, 2018. "Germany’s “No” to carbon capture and storage: Just a question of lacking acceptance?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 205-218.
    15. Tarkowski, R. & Uliasz-Misiak, B., 2022. "Towards underground hydrogen storage: A review of barriers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    16. Lange, Marcus & Cummins, Valerie, 2021. "Managing stakeholder perception and engagement for marine energy transitions in a decarbonising world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    17. Fridahl, Mathias, 2017. "Socio-political prioritization of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 89-99.
    18. Guillot, Victor & Siggini, Gildas & Assoumou, Edi, 2023. "Interactions between land and grid development in the transition to a decarbonized European power system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    19. Ibrahim Mosly & Anas A. Makki, 2018. "Current Status and Willingness to Adopt Renewable Energy Technologies in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Anna C. M. Queiroz & Géraldine Fauville & Adina T. Abeles & Aaron Levett & Jeremy N. Bailenson, 2023. "The Efficacy of Virtual Reality in Climate Change Education Increases with Amount of Body Movement and Message Specificity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-24, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    carbon capture and storage; public perceptions; trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F35 - International Economics - - International Finance - - - Foreign Aid
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:ifwkwp:2252. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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.