Exploring public acceptability of direct air carbon capture with storage: climate urgency, moral hazards and perceptions of the ‘whole versus the parts’

[1]  K. Hujo,et al.  Just transitions for a new eco-social contract: analysing the relations between welfare regimes and transition pathways , 2022, Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research.

[2]  Chad M. Baum,et al.  Taking it outside: Exploring social opposition to 21 early-stage experiments in radical climate interventions , 2022, Energy Research & Social Science.

[3]  T. Satterfield,et al.  Sociotechnical Considerations About Ocean Carbon Dioxide Removal. , 2022, Annual Review of Marine Science.

[4]  A. Bardow,et al.  Environmental trade-offs of direct air capture technologies in climate change mitigation toward 2100 , 2022, Nature Communications.

[5]  Jia-lin Hou,et al.  The Impact of Risk Perception Difference of Members of a Scientific Research Project Team on Information Adoption: The Moderating Effect of Knowledge Inertia , 2022, Sustainability.

[6]  Andrew W. Delton,et al.  Anticipating moral hazard undermines climate mitigation in an experimental geoengineering game , 2022, Ecological Economics.

[7]  C. Hurd,et al.  Forensic carbon accounting: Assessing the role of seaweeds for carbon sequestration , 2022, Journal of phycology.

[8]  Nils Markusson,et al.  Life in the hole: practices and emotions in the cultural political economy of mitigation deterrence , 2022, European Journal of Futures Research.

[9]  E. S. Sanz-Pérez,et al.  Direct air capture: process technology, techno-economic and socio-political challenges , 2022, Energy & Environmental Science.

[10]  D. Sarewitz,et al.  Designing Participatory Technology Assessments: A Reflexive Method for Advancing the Public Role in Science Policy Decision-making , 2021 .

[11]  B. Tutolo,et al.  Alkalinity Generation Constraints on Basalt Carbonation for Carbon Dioxide Removal at the Gigaton-per-Year Scale. , 2021, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  R. Gregory,et al.  Social comfort zones for transformative conservation decisions in a changing climate , 2021, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[13]  R. Gregory,et al.  Under pressure: conservation choices and the threat of species extinction , 2021, Climatic Change.

[14]  Rob Bellamy,et al.  Casting a Wider Net on Ocean NETs , 2021, Frontiers in Climate.

[15]  A Research Strategy for Ocean-based Carbon Dioxide Removal and Sequestration , 2021 .

[16]  H. Schübel.  Justice and food security in a changing climate , 2021 .

[17]  Christine Bertram,et al.  Public Perceptions of Ocean-Based Carbon Dioxide Removal: The Nature-Engineering Divide? , 2020, Frontiers in Climate.

[18]  Anna-Maria Hubert,et al.  A Code of Conduct for Responsible Geoengineering Research , 2020 .

[19]  Sarah C. Klain,et al.  Octopus’s garden under the blade: Boosting biodiversity increases willingness to pay for offshore wind in the United States , 2020, Energy Research & Social Science.

[20]  J. Wilcox,et al.  Principles for Thinking about Carbon Dioxide Removal in Just Climate Policy , 2020 .

[21]  S. Donner,et al.  How well do people understand the climate impact of individual actions? , 2020, Climatic Change.

[22]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  Public perceptions of carbon dioxide removal in the United States and the United Kingdom , 2020, Nature Climate Change.

[23]  M. Lomas,et al.  Potential for large-scale CO2 removal via enhanced rock weathering with croplands , 2020, Nature.

[24]  H. Buck,et al.  The practice of responsible research and innovation in “climate engineering” , 2020, WIREs Climate Change.

[25]  H. D. Coninck,et al.  What role for CCS in delivering just transitions? An evaluation in the North Sea region , 2020, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control.

[26]  A. Cherepovitsyn,et al.  Public perception of carbon capture and storage: A state-of-the-art overview , 2019, Heliyon.

[27]  J. Wilcox,et al.  An Overview of the Status and Challenges of CO2 Storage in Minerals and Geological Formations , 2019, Front. Clim..

[28]  P. Fournier,et al.  Cross-national evidence of a negativity bias in psychophysiological reactions to news , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[29]  Wim Carton,et al.  “Fixing” Climate Change by Mortgaging the Future: Negative Emissions, Spatiotemporal Fixes, and the Political Economy of Delay , 2019, Antipode.

[30]  K. Arning,et al.  Same or different? Insights on public perception and acceptance of carbon capture and storage or utilization in Germany , 2019, Energy Policy.

[31]  D. Rose,et al.  Lightning Rods, Earthquakes, and Regional Identities: Towards a Multi‐Scale Framework of Assessing Fracking Risk Perception , 2018, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[32]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  Ambivalence, naturalness and normality in public perceptions of carbon capture and storage in biomass, fossil energy, and industrial applications in the United Kingdom , 2018, Energy Research & Social Science.

[33]  Nils Markusson,et al.  Towards a cultural political economy of mitigation deterrence by negative emissions technologies (NETs) , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[34]  David William Keith,et al.  A Process for Capturing CO2 from the Atmosphere , 2018, Joule.

[35]  Edda Sif Aradóttir,et al.  Creating a carbon dioxide removal solution by combining rapid mineralization of CO2 with direct air capture , 2018, Energy Procedia.

[36]  Romany M. Webb,et al.  Geological storage of CO2 in sub-seafloor basalt: the CarbonSAFE pre-feasibility study offshore Washington State and British Columbia , 2018, Energy Procedia.

[37]  Edda Sif Aradóttir,et al.  A brief history of CarbFix: Challenges and victories of the project’s pilot phase , 2018, Energy Procedia.

[38]  H. Buck.  The politics of negative emissions technologies and decarbonization in rural communities , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[39]  K. Rehdanz,et al.  Public perception of climate engineering and carbon capture and storage in Germany: survey evidence , 2018 .

[40]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 3: Innovation and upscaling , 2018 .

[41]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects , 2018 .

[42]  T. Amann,et al.  Potential and costs of carbon dioxide removal by enhanced weathering of rocks , 2018 .

[43]  Sarah C. Klain,et al.  Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm , 2017, PloS one.

[44]  Kimberly S. Wolske,et al.  The influence of learning about carbon dioxide removal (CDR) on support for mitigation policies , 2017, Climatic Change.

[45]  Jeremy M. Grimshaw,et al.  A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems , 2017, Implementation Science.

[46]  D. Campbell,et al.  Exploring temporal and spatial preferences for climate change adaptation , 2017 .

[47]  Felix Creutzig,et al.  Negative emissions—Part 1: Research landscape and synthesis , 2018 .

[48]  G. Peters,et al.  The trouble with negative emissions , 2016, Science.

[49]  Holly Jean Buck,et al.  Rapid scale-up of negative emissions technologies: social barriers and social implications , 2016, Climatic Change.

[50]  Christian Baatz.  Can we have it Both Ways? On Potential Trade-Offs between Mitigation and Solar Radiation Management , 2016 .

[51]  D. Winickoff,et al.  Engaging the Global South on climate engineering research , 2015 .

[52]  Carol L. Silva,et al.  Geoengineering and Climate Change Polarization: Testing a Two-channel Model of Science Communication , 2015 .

[53]  Carol L. Silva,et al.  Geoengineering and Climate Change Polarization , 2015 .

[54]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review , 2014 .

[55]  Selma L’Orange Seigo,et al.  Predictors of risk and benefit perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in regions with different stages of deployment , 2014 .

[56]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection , 2014, Science.

[57]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[58]  A. Corner,et al.  Messing with nature? Exploring public perceptions of geoengineering in the UK , 2013 .

[59]  N. Pidgeon,et al.  Understanding shifting perceptions of nanotechnologies and their implications for policy dialogues about emerging technologies , 2013 .

[60]  Manohar Mariapan,et al.  Public perceptions of carbon capture and storage (CCS) , 2013 .

[61]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  The Role of Convictions and Trust for Public Protest Potential in the Case of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS) , 2012 .

[62]  D. Kahan,et al.  Cultural cognition of scientific consensus , 2011 .

[63]  T. Earle,et al.  Trust in Risk Management: A Model‐Based Review of Empirical Research , 2010, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[64]  Kenshi Itaoka,et al.  Influential information and factors for social acceptance of CCS: The 2nd round survey of public opinion in Japan , 2009 .

[65]  Edward B. Royzman,et al.  Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion , 2001 .

[66]  M. Siegrist,et al.  Perception of Hazards: The Role of Social Trust and Knowledge , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[67]  M. Siegrist.  The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[68]  R Gregory,et al.  A hint of risk: tradeoffs between quantitative and qualitative risk factors. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.