4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Those who care about CCS-Results from a Japanese survey on public understanding of CCS-

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL
Volume 84, Issue -, Pages 121-130

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.02.014

Keywords

Social survey; Awareness; Perception; Risk preference; Communication; Information; CCS

Funding

  1. Ministry of the Environment, Government of Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to assess the present status of the general public's awareness and opinion on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and to analyze attributes of groups who have different opinions on CCS, a Japanese social survey was conducted in 2015. The results of the survey showed that the majority of the Japanese general public did not know much about CCS but were interested in CCS without any opinion on CCS as a part of climate policy portfolio. In terms of implementation of CCS, the Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) perception on CCS influenced opinions, while about half of the respondents did not have clear opinions on a hypothetical plan of implementing offshore CCS near their home. Respondents were categorized to four groups, who were consistently positive, consistently negative, changeable or fundamentally indifferent to CCS, and the points of communication for each group were discussed to get a consensus on CCS policy and implementation. The survey found that some of the characteristics of indifferent people toward CCS had a low level of consciousness regarding concerns on climate change issues and politically passive on national political issues. Required information to communicate CCS issues for each group were identified by the analysis. The results of our analysis highlighted the importance of informing the Japanese general public about the technological maturity, positive and negative impacts or risks of CCS, and the necessity of climate change mitigation action in communicating the issues surrounding CCS implementation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available