IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcli/v10y2020i8d10.1038_s41558-020-0823-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Cox

    (Cardiff University)

  • Elspeth Spence

    (Cardiff University)

  • Nick Pidgeon

    (Cardiff University)

Abstract

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies may be needed to meet climate change targets. A full understanding of public attitudes towards such approaches is currently lacking. Here we report a mixed-methods study on public perceptions of CDR in the United States and the United Kingdom, focusing on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, direct air capture and terrestrial enhanced rock weathering. A discourse of climate urgency had a substantial impact on perceptions, with CDR seen as offering too slow a response to the climate crisis. CDR also fails to reflect long-term hopes for a sustainable world, being interpreted as not addressing the root causes of climate change. A social license to operate may therefore depend on resolving these temporal dilemmas regarding both the short- and long-term implications of technology development. While research under well-controlled conditions is likely to be acceptable, at-scale deployment without corresponding efforts to reduce emissions may represent a red line for many people.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Cox & Elspeth Spence & Nick Pidgeon, 2020. "Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(8), pages 744-749, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:10:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1038_s41558-020-0823-z
    DOI: 10.1038/s41558-020-0823-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0823-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41558-020-0823-z?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    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. Clements, Jen & Lobley, Matt & Osborne, Juliet & Wills, Jane, 2021. "How can academic research on UK agri-environment schemes pivot to meet the addition of climate mitigation aims?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Baum, Chad M. & Low, Sean, 2023. "Beyond climate stabilization: Exploring the perceived sociotechnical co-impacts of carbon removal and solar geoengineering," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    5. M.J. Mace & Claire L. Fyson & Michiel Schaeffer & William L. Hare, 2021. "Large‐Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal to Meet the 1.5°C Limit: Key Governance Gaps, Challenges and Priority Responses," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S1), pages 67-81, April.
    6. Parrish Bergquist & Christopher Warshaw, 2023. "How climate policy commitments influence energy systems and the economies of US states," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Terre Satterfield & Sara Nawaz & Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent, 2023. "Exploring public acceptability of direct air carbon capture with storage: climate urgency, moral hazards and perceptions of the ‘whole versus the parts’," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(2), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Katherine Romanak & Mathias Fridahl & Tim Dixon, 2021. "Attitudes on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a Mitigation Technology within the UNFCCC," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Ariane Wenger & Michael Stauffacher & Irina Dallo, 2021. "Public perception and acceptance of negative emission technologies – framing effects in Switzerland," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.
    10. Lauren Lutzke & Joseph Árvai, 2021. "Consumer acceptance of products from carbon capture and utilization," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Eli Mitchell-Larson & Myles Allen, 2022. "Prosets: a new financing instrument to deliver a durable net zero transition," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-13, September.
    12. Benjamin K. Sovacool & Chad M. Baum & Sean Low, 2022. "Determining our climate policy future: expert opinions about negative emissions and solar radiation management pathways," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(8), pages 1-50, December.
    13. Alexey Cherepovitsyn & Tatiana Chvileva & Sergey Fedoseev, 2020. "Popularization of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology in Society: Principles and Methods," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-24, November.

    More about this item

    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:nat:natcli:v:10:y:2020:i:8:d:10.1038_s41558-020-0823-z. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.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.