Environmental non-government organizations’ perceptions of geologic sequestration

Environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have been influential in shaping public perceptions of environmental problems, their causes and potential solutions. Over the last decade, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has emerged as a potentially important technological response to climate change. In this paper we investigate how leading US NGOs perceive geologic sequestration, a potentially controversial part of CCS. We examine how and why their perceptions and strategies might differ, and if and how they plan to shape public perceptions of geologic sequestration. We approach these questions through semi-structured interviews with representatives from a range of NGOs, supplemented by content analysis of their documents. We find that while all the NGOs are committed to combating climate change, their views on CCS as a mitigation strategy vary considerably. We find that these views are correlated with NGOs' histories of activism and advocacy, as well as with their sources of funding. Overall, most of these NGOs accept the necessity of geologic sequestration, while only a small fraction do not.

[1]  M. Douglas,et al.  Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers , 1983 .

[2]  Public concerns and the public role in siting nuclear and chemical waste facilities , 1988 .

[3]  P. L. Bondor.  Applications of carbon dioxide in enhanced oil recovery , 1992 .

[4]  M. Finger,et al.  Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global , 1994 .

[5]  W. Fisher,et al.  Doing Good? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices , 1997 .

[6]  J. Fox,et al.  "Introduction", in The Struggle for Accountability: The World Bank, NGOs and Grassroots Movements , 1998 .

[7]  David W. Keith,et al.  Fossil Fuels Without CO2 Emissions , 1998, Science.

[8]  Gunnar Grendstad,et al.  Cultural Theory as Political Science , 1999 .

[9]  G. Rowe,et al.  Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation , 2000 .

[10]  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.

[11]  Hideo Harasawa,et al.  SUMMARY FOR POLICYMAKERS CLIMATE CHANGE 2001 : IMPACTS , ADAPTATION , AND VULNERABILITY , 2001 .

[12]  T. Bewley,et al.  Interviews as a valid empirical tool in economics , 2002 .

[13]  Lyn Richards,et al.  Readme First for a User's Guide to Qualitative Methods , 2002 .

[14]  D. Lupton,et al.  Risk And Everyday Life , 2003 .

[15]  Thomas Edward Curry.  Public awareness of carbon capture and storage : a survey of attitudes toward climate change mitigation , 2004 .

[16]  M Granger Morgan,et al.  Initial public perceptions of deep geological and oceanic disposal of carbon dioxide. , 2004, Environmental science & technology.

[17]  P. Jepson.  Governance and accountability of environmental NGOs , 2005 .

[18]  Yasuko Mori,et al.  Exploration of public acceptance regarding CO2 underground sequestration technologies , 2005 .

[19]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Summary for Policymakers. , 2007 .