Persuasiveness, importance and novelty of arguments about Carbon Capture and Storage

Kevin P.F. Broecks, Sander van Egmond, Frank J. van Rijnsoever, Marlies Verlinde-van den Berg and Marko P. Hekkert

Environmental Science & Policy, 2016, vol. 59, issue C, 58-66

Abstract: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a promising technology for reducing carbon emissions, but the public is often reluctant to support it. To understand why public support is lacking, it is crucial to establish what citizens think about the arguments that are used by proponents and opponents of CCS. We determined the persuasiveness, importance and novelty of 32 arguments for and against CCS using a discrete choice experiment in which respondents made consecutive choices between pairs of pro or con arguments. We used latent class models to identify population segments with different preferences. The results show that citizens find arguments about climate protection, which is the primary goal of CCS, less persuasive than other arguments, such as normative arguments (for example ‘a waste product such as CO2 should be disposed of properly’) or arguments about benefits of CCS for energy production and economic growth. This discrepancy complicates communication that aims to convince citizens of the benefits of CCS for climate protection.

Keywords: Carbon Capture and Storage; Communication; Argument; Choice experiment; Climate change; Public perception (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116300284
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:59:y:2016:i:c:p:58-66

DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.02.004

Access Statistics for this article

Environmental Science & Policy is currently edited by M. Beniston

More articles in Environmental Science & Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().