IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i22p6339-d286027.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Knowledge about or Experience with Hydrogen Fueling Stations Improves Their Public Acceptance

Author

Listed:
  • Shunichi Hienuki

    (Institute of Advanced Sciences/Center for Creation of Symbiosis Society with Risk, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan)

  • Yoshie Hirayama

    (Yokohama LCA Environmental Education Laboratory, Yokohama 220-0012, Japan)

  • Tadahiro Shibutani

    (Institute of Advanced Sciences/Center for Creation of Symbiosis Society with Risk, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan)

  • Junji Sakamoto

    (Institute of Advanced Sciences/Center for Creation of Symbiosis Society with Risk, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan)

  • Jo Nakayama

    (Institute of Advanced Sciences/Center for Creation of Symbiosis Society with Risk, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan)

  • Atsumi Miyake

    (Institute of Advanced Sciences/Center for Creation of Symbiosis Society with Risk, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan)

Abstract

Hydrogen, which is expected to be a popular type of next-generation energy, is drawing attention as a fuel option for the formation of a low-carbon society. Because hydrogen energy is different in nature from existing energy technologies, it is necessary to promote sufficient social recognition and acceptability of the technology for its widespread use. In this study, we focused on the effect of initiatives to improve awareness of hydrogen energy technology, thereby investigating the acceptability of hydrogen energy to those participating in either several hydrogen energy technology introduction events or professional seminars. According to the survey results, participants in the technology introduction events tended to have lower levels of hydrogen and hydrogen energy technology knowledge than did participants in the hydrogen-energy-related seminars, but confidence in the technology and acceptability of the installation of hydrogen stations near their own residences tended to be higher. It was suggested that knowledge about hydrogen and technology could lead to improved acceptability through improved levels of trust in the technology. On the other hand, social benefits, such as those for the environment, socioeconomics, and energy security, have little impact on individual levels of acceptance of new technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Shunichi Hienuki & Yoshie Hirayama & Tadahiro Shibutani & Junji Sakamoto & Jo Nakayama & Atsumi Miyake, 2019. "How Knowledge about or Experience with Hydrogen Fueling Stations Improves Their Public Acceptance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:22:p:6339-:d:286027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/22/6339/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/22/6339/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Duan, Hongxia, 2010. "The public perspective of carbon capture and storage for CO2 emission reductions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5281-5289, September.
    3. Martin, Elliot & Shaheen, Susan A & Lipman, Timothy E & Lidicker, Jeffrey R, 2009. "Behavioral response to hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and refueling: Results of California drive clinics," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt20c342sp, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    4. Jennings, Philip, 2009. "New directions in renewable energy education," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 435-439.
    5. Assefa, G. & Frostell, B., 2007. "Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 63-78.
    6. Shunichi Hienuki & Kazuhiko Noguchi & Tadahiro Shibutani & Takahiro Saigo & Atsumi Miyake, 2019. "The Balance of Individual and Infrastructure Values in Decisions Regarding Advanced Science and Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, June.
    7. Mourato, Susana & Saynor, Bob & Hart, David, 2004. "Greening London's black cabs: a study of driver's preferences for fuel cell taxis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 685-695, March.
    8. Hickson, Allister & Phillips, Al & Morales, Gene, 2007. "Public perception related to a hydrogen hybrid internal combustion engine transit bus demonstration and hydrogen fuel," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2249-2255, April.
    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. Matteo Genovese & David Blekhman & Michael Dray & Francesco Piraino & Petronilla Fragiacomo, 2023. "Experimental Comparison of Hydrogen Refueling with Directly Pressurized vs. Cascade Method," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-14, August.
    2. Arturo Vallejos-Romero & Minerva Cordoves-Sánchez & César Cisternas & Felipe Sáez-Ardura & Ignacio Rodríguez & Antonio Aledo & Álex Boso & Jordi Prades & Boris Álvarez, 2022. "Green Hydrogen and Social Sciences: Issues, Problems, and Future Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Lu Zhu & Lanli Hu & Serhat Yüksel & Hasan Dinçer & Hüsne Karakuş & Gözde Gülseven Ubay, 2020. "Analysis of Strategic Directions in Sustainable Hydrogen Investment Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-19, June.
    4. Ye Li & Clemens Kool & Peter-Jan Engelen, 2020. "Analyzing the Business Case for Hydrogen-Fuel Infrastructure Investments with Endogenous Demand in The Netherlands: A Real Options Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-22, July.
    5. Manuela Ingaldi & Dorota Klimecka-Tatar, 2020. "People’s Attitude to Energy from Hydrogen—From the Point of View of Modern Energy Technologies and Social Responsibility," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-19, December.
    6. Chenggang Wang, 2022. "Green Technology Innovation, Energy Consumption Structure and Sustainable Improvement of Enterprise Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Andrzej Soboń & Daniel Słyś & Mariusz Ruszel & Alicja Wiącek, 2021. "Prospects for the Use of Hydrogen in the Armed Forces," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-12, October.
    8. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Homes of the future: Unpacking public perceptions to power the domestic hydrogen transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    9. Kim, Kyungah & Moon, Sungho & Kim, Junghun, 2023. "How far is it from your home? Strategic policy and management to overcome barriers of introducing fuel-cell power generation facilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    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. Zhang, Yong & Yu, Yifeng & Zou, Bai, 2011. "Analyzing public awareness and acceptance of alternative fuel vehicles in China: The case of EV," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7015-7024.
    2. Tarigan, Ari K.M. & Bayer, Stian B., 2012. "Temporal change analysis of public attitude, knowledge and acceptance of hydrogen vehicles in Greater Stavanger, 2006–2009," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 5535-5544.
    3. Yetano Roche, María & Mourato, Susana & Fischedick, Manfred & Pietzner, Katja & Viebahn, Peter, 2010. "Public attitudes towards and demand for hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles: A review of the evidence and methodological implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5301-5310, October.
    4. Huijts, N.M.A. & De Groot, J.I.M. & Molin, E.J.E. & van Wee, B., 2013. "Intention to act towards a local hydrogen refueling facility: Moral considerations versus self-interest," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 63-74.
    5. Hardman, Scott & Shiu, Eric & Steinberger-Wilckens, Robert & Turrentine, Thomas, 2017. "Barriers to the adoption of fuel cell vehicles: A qualitative investigation into early adopters attitudes," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 166-182.
    6. Fraccascia, Luca & Ceccarelli, Gaia & Dangelico, Rosa Maria, 2023. "Green products from industrial symbiosis: Are consumers ready for them?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    7. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Zhang, Xian & Wang, Ke & Hao, Yu & Fan, Jing-Li & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2013. "The impact of government policy on preference for NEVs: The evidence from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 382-393.
    9. Pfoser, Sarah & Schauer, Oliver & Costa, Yasel, 2018. "Acceptance of LNG as an alternative fuel: Determinants and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 259-267.
    10. Libo Wu & Changhe Li & Haoqi Qian & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2013. "Understanding the Consumption Behaviors on Electric Vehicles in China - A Stated Preference Analysis," Working Papers 2013.79, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. 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.
    12. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    13. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    14. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    15. Rahman, Abul & Khanam, Tahamina & Pelkonen, Paavo, 2017. "People’s knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards stump harvesting for bioenergy production in Finland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 107-116.
    16. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    17. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    18. Kristin Thomas & Evalill Nilsson & Karin Festin & Pontus Henriksson & Mats Lowén & Marie Löf & Margareta Kristenson, 2020. "Associations of Psychosocial Factors with Multiple Health Behaviors: A Population-Based Study of Middle-Aged Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    19. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    20. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:22:p:6339-:d:286027. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.