IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v206y2025ics0301421525002885.html

Public preferences for local carbon capture and utilization implementation: A French-German comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Schomakers, Eva-Maria
  • Engelmann, Linda
  • Ziefle, Martina

Abstract

Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) technologies are emerging as critical solutions in addressing the climate crisis, yet their successful implementation hinges on public acceptance. This study compares public acceptance and preferences regarding local CCU implementation in Germany and France. Utilizing choice-based conjoint analysis, we examined the preferences and relevance of varying energy sources, types of hydrocarbon transport, and manufactured end-products among 2390 respondents, revealing significant differences between the two populations. Germans exhibit higher overall acceptance levels for CCU projects and attribute most importance to the energy source used – compared to French respondents, who prioritize CO2 transport over energy source considerations. Both populations demonstrate a strong preference for minimal or no transport options, suggesting that on-site conversion facilities may alleviate community concerns. Also, a clear preference for renewable energy over nuclear power can be observed. The study highlights the importance of tailored communication strategies that address specific cultural narratives and local values to enhance public support for CCU initiatives. The insights allow for policy implications by contributing to a deeper understanding of how societal attitudes shape the future of CCU implementation across Europe.

Suggested Citation

  • Schomakers, Eva-Maria & Engelmann, Linda & Ziefle, Martina, 2025. "Public preferences for local carbon capture and utilization implementation: A French-German comparison," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:206:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525002885
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114781
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421525002885
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114781?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Murshed, Muntasir & Saboori, Behnaz & Madaleno, Mara & Wang, Hong & Doğan, Buhari, 2022. "Exploring the nexuses between nuclear energy, renewable energy, and carbon dioxide emissions: The role of economic complexity in the G7 countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 664-674.
    2. Lamnatou, Chr. & Cristofari, C. & Chemisana, D., 2024. "Renewable energy sources as a catalyst for energy transition: Technological innovations and an example of the energy transition in France," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    3. Fan, Jing-Li & Li, Zezheng & Ding, Zixia & Li, Kai & Zhang, Xian, 2023. "Investment decisions on carbon capture utilization and storage retrofit of Chinese coal-fired power plants based on real option and source-sink matching models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    4. Marco Segreto & Lucas Principe & Alexandra Desormeaux & Marco Torre & Laura Tomassetti & Patrizio Tratzi & Valerio Paolini & Francesco Petracchini, 2020. "Trends in Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy Across Europe—A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Franziska Schütze & Jan Stede, 2024. "The EU sustainable finance taxonomy and its contribution to climate neutrality," Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 128-160, January.
    6. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    7. Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2008. "Energy sustainable communities: Environmental psychological investigations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4126-4135, November.
    8. Tryfonas Pieri & Alexandros Nikitas & Athanasios Angelis-Dimakis, 2023. "Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Capture and Utilisation Products," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Mikulčić, Hrvoje & Ridjan Skov, Iva & Dominković, Dominik Franjo & Wan Alwi, Sharifah Rafidah & Manan, Zainuddin Abdul & Tan, Raymond & Duić, Neven & Hidayah Mohamad, Siti Nur & Wang, Xuebin, 2019. "Flexible Carbon Capture and Utilization technologies in future energy systems and the utilization pathways of captured CO2," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Linzenich, A. & Kaetelhoen, A. & Sternberg, A. & Bardow, A. & Ziefle, M., 2019. "Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 235-249.
    11. Lisanne Simons & Martina Ziefle & Katrin Arning, 2024. "How to shape communication for CO2-derived insulation boards considering different accepter profiles," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(10), pages 25367-25396, October.
    12. Offermann-van Heek, Julia & Arning, Katrin & Sternberg, André & Bardow, André & Ziefle, Martina, 2020. "Assessing public acceptance of the life cycle of CO2-based fuels: Does information make the difference?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    13. Simon P. Philbin, 2020. "Critical Analysis and Evaluation of the Technology Pathways for Carbon Capture and Utilization," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Linzenich, Anika & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2021. "Acceptance of energy technologies in context: Comparing laypeople's risk perceptions across eight infrastructure technologies in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    15. Neves, C. & Oliveira, T. & Santini, F., 2022. "Sustainable technologies adoption research: A weight and meta-analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    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. Ting Xiao & Erin Middleton & Omar Bakelli & Sophia Cheng & Danyang Zhu & Lei Xu & Brian McPherson, 2026. "Public Perceptions and Engagement for Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: Literature Review With a Case Study of Utah, USA," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 16(1), pages 125-157, February.

    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. Linzenich, Anika & Arning, Katrin & Ziefle, Martina, 2021. "Acceptance of energy technologies in context: Comparing laypeople's risk perceptions across eight infrastructure technologies in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    2. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Bourdin, Sébastien & Delcayre, Hugo, 2024. "Does size matter? The effects of biomethane project size on social acceptability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    4. Katja Witte, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from Industrial Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-29, November.
    5. Mariusz Kruczek & Malgorzata Markowska & Aikaterini Servou & Christos Roumpos & Eleni Mertiri & Priscilla Ernst & Jaroslaw Darmosz & Thomas Kempka, 2025. "Navigating Socio-Technical Challenges in Energy Efficiency: Case Studies on Hybrid Pumped-Hydropower Storage in Poland and Greece," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-32, January.
    6. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Hübner, Gundula & Leschinger, Valentin & Müller, Florian J.Y. & Pohl, Johannes, 2023. "Broadening the social acceptance of wind energy – An Integrated Acceptance Model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Bonaiuto, M. & Mosca, O. & Milani, A. & Ariccio, S. & Dessi, F. & Fornara, F., 2024. "Beliefs about technological and contextual features drive biofuels’ social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    9. Altsitsiadis, E. & Kaiser, M. & Tsakas, A. & Kyriakidis, A. & Stamos, A., 2024. "Investigating the Regional and Individual Drivers of the Support for Renewable Energy Transition: The Role of Severe Material Deprivation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2419, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Zhang, Weiwei & Wang, Yuanrong & Chen, Ximei & Li, Yunzhuo & Dai, He, 2025. "Exploring the diffusion mechanisms of CCS-EOR technology: A quadripartite evolutionary game," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    11. Čábelková, Inna & Strielkowski, Wadim & Streimikiene, Dalia & Cavallaro, Fausto & Streimikis, Justas, 2021. "The social acceptance of nuclear fusion for decision making towards carbon free circular economy: Evidence from Czech Republic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    12. Adil, Ali M. & Ko, Yekang, 2016. "Socio-technical evolution of Decentralized Energy Systems: A critical review and implications for urban planning and policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1025-1037.
    13. Sherry-Brennan, Fionnguala & Devine-Wright, Hannah & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2010. "Public understanding of hydrogen energy: A theoretical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5311-5319, October.
    14. Nikolaos Koukouzas & Marina Christopoulou & Panagiota P. Giannakopoulou & Aikaterini Rogkala & Eleni Gianni & Christos Karkalis & Konstantina Pyrgaki & Pavlos Krassakis & Petros Koutsovitis & Dionisio, 2022. "Current CO 2 Capture and Storage Trends in Europe in a View of Social Knowledge and Acceptance. A Short Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-30, August.
    15. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    16. Lisiak-Zielińska, Marta & Jałoszyńska, Sylwia & Borowiak, Klaudia & Budka, Anna & Dach, Jacek, 2023. "Perception of biogas plants: A public awareness and preference - A case study for the agricultural landscape," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    17. Timo Kaphengst & Eike Karola Velten, 2014. "Energy Transition and Behavioural Change in Rural Areas – The Role of Energy Cooperatives. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 60," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47214.
    18. Schriever, Marlene & Halstrup, Dominik, 2018. "Exploring the adoption in transitioning markets: Empirical findings and implications on energy storage solutions-acceptance in the German manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 460-468.
    19. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    20. Bishal Bharadwaj & Franzisca Weder & Peta Ashworth, 2023. "More support for hydrogen export than its domestic application in Australia," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-8, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:enepol:v:206:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525002885. 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.