Literature DB >> 20561264

Informed public preferences for electricity portfolios with CCS and other low-carbon technologies.

Lauren A Fleishman1, Wändi Bruine De Bruin, M Granger Morgan.   

Abstract

Public perceptions of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and other low-carbon electricity-generating technologies may affect the feasibility of their widespread deployment. We asked a diverse sample of 60 participants recruited from community groups in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to rank 10 technologies (e.g., coal with CCS, natural gas, nuclear, various renewables, and energy efficiency), and seven realistic low-carbon portfolios composed of these technologies, after receiving comprehensive and carefully balanced materials that explained the costs and benefits of each technology. Rankings were obtained in small group settings as well as individually before and after the group discussions. The ranking exercise asked participants to assume that the U.S. Congress had mandated a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from power plants to be built in the future. Overall, rankings suggest that participants favored energy efficiency, followed by nuclear power, integrated gasification combined-cycle coal with CCS and wind. The most preferred portfolio also included these technologies. We find that these informed members of the general public preferred diverse portfolios that contained CCS and nuclear over alternatives once they fully understood the benefits, cost, and limitations of each. The materials and approach developed for this study may also have value in educating members of the general public about the challenges of achieving a low-carbon energy future.
© 2010 Society for Risk Analysis.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20561264     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01436.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  6 in total

1.  Assessing what to address in science communication.

Authors:  Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Ann Bostrom
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Reflections on an interdisciplinary collaboration to inform public understanding of climate change, mitigation, and impacts.

Authors:  Wändi Bruine de Bruin; M Granger Morgan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Creating a national citizen engagement process for energy policy.

Authors:  Nick Pidgeon; Christina Demski; Catherine Butler; Karen Parkhill; Alexa Spence
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Community acceptance and social impacts of carbon capture, utilization and storage projects: A systematic meta-narrative literature review.

Authors:  Jacob A E Nielsen; Kostas Stavrianakis; Zoe Morrison
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  Developing citizen report cards for primary health care in low and middle-income countries: Results from cognitive interviews in rural Tajikistan.

Authors:  Sebastian Bauhoff; Lila Rabinovich; Lauren A Mayer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Public perception of carbon capture and storage: A state-of-the-art overview.

Authors:  Pavel Tcvetkov; Alexey Cherepovitsyn; Sergey Fedoseev
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2019-12-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.