|
Introduction
The IPCC Special Report on CO2 Capture and Storage (SRCCS) was released in September 2006. The IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEA GHG) played an active role in the development of this important report and its members requested that IEA GHG consider the impact the release of the report had on the public awareness of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) by gauging the response of the media to the reports publication.
To undertake this review of media impact IEA GHG agreed contracts with two specialist organisations. The first of these studies was agreed with the Copernicus Institute, University of Utrecht, the Netherlands and the second with Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester, UK. Two contracts were agreed because of the different approaches used and the different geographical distribution of the media searches proposed. The Copernicus Institute proposed to use a web based search tool to review media articles in the European press, the countries covered included; UK[1], Netherlands, France, Spain[2], Italy and Germany. In contrast, the Tyndall Centre study involved a dedicated exercise where an individual would review news articles in the English speaking press alone. This review covered newspaper articles in: UK, USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In each case, articles were scanned for three months before the release of the IPCC SRCCS (released week 39, 26th -30th September 2005) and for three months after. Overall, it was considered that the two studies gave a good global coverage of media response covering most regions of the world that were actively developing CCS projects with the noted exception of Japan.
[1] The review was not exclusive to UK newspapers but included all English speaking papers; therefore it also covered USA, Canada etc., which do overlap with the Tyndall study. However it is felt to be an interesting exercise to see if the two studies compare or contrast with each other. [2] The study reviewed the Spanish speaking press in general and not just Spain, which meant that areas of South America were also covered. |
Conclusions
The studies when taken together indicate that there is a still someway to go in convincing people that the technology is both technically and economically viable and safe. The release of IPCC SRCCS appears to have not been totally successful in helping to allay peoples concerns over the technology. Public concerns are likely to become heightened as the technology moves nearer to widespread implementation. Unless these issues are addressed early then the publics concerns could prove to be a major barrier to CCS implementation. The study has also shown that public awareness is still limited in a number of countries and regions of the world. The other key barriers that the study has highlighted are the need for the development of appropriate regulatory frameworks and the need for financial incentives for CCS to be taken up by commercial developers in sectors like the power industry and major manufacturing industries.
Recommendations
The main recommendations resulting from this study are:
|
| This report is free to download. |
