Socio-political dimensions of CCS deployment through the lens of social network analysis

Abstract

Abstract The Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment (SPEED) framework was proposed to improve understanding of energy technology deployment. It was intended to help energy policy-makers develop and implement more effective strategies to accelerate the deployment of emerging energy technologies. The theoretical underpinnings lie in the fields of sustainability science, political science, and risk perception. Part of the objectives of the SPEED framework are to identify the dominant socio-political influences on energy technology decisions and examine how policy can facilitate a societal response to climate change by contributing insights to stakeholders. The focus is at the state level because it is at the state level that emergent energy technologies are sited, permitted, and built. The purpose of this study was to examine the structure of communication about carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology from the perspective of individuals actively involved in decisions that affect deployment and diffusion. We use density of function-system networks to examine differences between states and categories stakeholders. The information is used to inform the discussion of the current structure of communication and how it might present either barriers or opportunities for CCS innovation. Five function systems are used, each divided into benefits (positive) or risks (negative) associated with CCS: Economic benefit (ECP), economic risk (ECN), environmental benefit (ENP), environmental risk (ENN), health and safety benefit (HLP), health and safety risk (HLN), political benefit (POP), political risk (PON), technical benefit (TEP), and technical risk (TEN). An additional category of CCS statements that could not be definitively assigned to one of these categories was included as an ‘other’ category (OTP and OTN). Networks were constructed for all stakeholders, each state, and each stakeholder type based on ties of shared intensity of communication about the particular frame. From these networks, density measurements were calculated and reported. In the case studies presented here, technical risk dominates communication about CCS at the state level. The economic, technical, and political system functions appear to present the greatest barrier due to largely negative communication. This study focuses on how the development of shared meaning creates ties between individuals in a CCS policy network.