Influential information and factors for social acceptance of CCS: The 2nd round survey of public opinion in Japan

Abstract

Abstract A public survey was conducted concerning carbon capture and storage technology (CCS) in the months of February and April 2007 in Japan, Previously another CCS survey took place in December 2003, and a set of the questions asked in the 2007 survey were purposely the same as that used in the 2003 survey, Japanese adults were randomly selected to answer a questionnaire either in printed format or in online format. Several versions of the questionnaire were used, and each contained a different educational part, imparting relevant CCS information. 334 people successfully responded to our paper survey in Tokyo and Sapporo while 2156 people completed our online survey across the nation. The questionnaire for the survey contained 5 sets of different information package on CCS and questions asking pros and cons on CCS implementation to analyze influence of information provided on CCS. Based on the results of survey we found: that not many people still know about CCS. Those who have knowledge on CCS show a preference for CCS implementation, however; preference was decreased after obtaining information which we considered was neutral on CCS. These results suggest a possibility that information on negative aspects of CCS (risks, etc.) would not be well known in the general public. We also found that preference for CSS decreased slightly after providing different information on CCS to respondents in the group with the newspaper articles which we considered neutral in comparison with other groups. The newspaper articles contained the information on negative opinions against CCS besides risk-related information as well as information based on an IPCC Special Report: it is assumed that such negative opinions may have influenced opinion formation of respondents. Since CCS is new technology, information about how other people or entities evaluate CCS would influence public opinion. In the sub-sample provided with industrial and natural analogues of preference on geological storage, the views were slightly more positive about CSS in comparison with reported opinions of other groups. This implies information on natural or industrial analogue would help manage perception of risk in a positive way. The result of path analysis to data of a public survey identified four factors, (1) risks and leakage, (2) effectiveness of CCS, (3) responsibility, and (4) fossil fuel use. We found that the factor of understanding the effectiveness of CCS is most positively influential for general acceptance of CCS. I Implementation of geological storage and the factor of risks and leakage become much more influential negatively in the implementation of geological storage compared to general acceptance of CCS, implying that implementation of CC2 geological storage also needs careful communication of risk.