Premium
But They Told Us It Was Safe! Carbon Dioxide Removal, Fracking, and Ripple Effects in Risk Perceptions
Author(s) -
Cox Emily,
Pidgeon Nick,
Spence Elspeth
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/risa.13717
Subject(s) - greenhouse gas , shale gas , portfolio , perception , risk perception , software deployment , emerging technologies , business , climate change , climate change mitigation , natural resource economics , political science , environmental economics , public relations , oil shale , engineering , economics , psychology , finance , waste management , computer science , ecology , software engineering , neuroscience , artificial intelligence , biology
Reaching net‐zero for global greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050 will require a portfolio of new technologies and approaches, potentially requiring direct removal and sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide using negative emissions technologies (NETs). Since energy and climate systems are fundamentally interconnected it is important that we understand the impacts of policy decisions and their associated controversies in other related technologies and sectors. Using a secondary analysis of data from a series of deliberative workshops conducted with lay publics in the United Kingdom, we suggest that perceptions of CO 2 removal technologies were negatively impacted by risk perceptions and recent policy decisions surrounding shale gas and fracking. Using the social amplification of risk framework, we argue that heightened risk perceptions have extended via “ripple effects” across these technologies. Participants’ attitudes were underpinned by deeper misgivings regarding the actions and motives of experts and policymakers; a pervasive discourse of “but they told us it was safe” regarding fracking negatively affected people's trust in assurances of the safety and efficacy of CO 2 removal. This has the potential to undermine attempts to build societal agreement around future deployment of CO 2 removal technologies.