Acceptability of geothermal installations: A geoethical concept for GeoLaB

The Cape Town Statement on Geoethics

“…that have been organized worldwide (http:/ / www.geoethics.org/ events, accessed 30 October 2017. The consequ ence is that m ore geoscientists are now d iscu ssing the ethical and social im plications of their w ork (Mansu r et al, 2017;Meller et al, 2017;Stew art and Gill, 2017;Stew art and Lew is, 2017;Vasconcelos et al, 2016) and recognize geoethics as a transversal su bject in geosciences (Bobrow sky et al, 2017). Thanks to the involvem ent of m any geoscientists, it has been possible to provid e geoethics w ith a m ore solid conceptu al su bstratu m (for a su m m ary see Pep poloni andDi Capu a, 2014 and2017;Bobrow sky et al, 2017).…”

An online survey to evaluate the awareness and acceptance of geothermal energy among an educated segment of the population in five European and American countries

“…Citizen participation can help to prevent, or at least anticipate, possible future controversies, provide ideas for new and better products and services, increasing the openness and transparency of scientific and technological developments, which is a prerequisite for a relationship of trust between different actors (Meller et al 2018). Involvement of citizens has also demonstrated that they can be proactive and come up with interesting suggestions, such as including energy and environmental issues in educational programs, from elementary school to universities (Pellizzone et al 2015).…”

“…The discussion of geothermal projects in the different social sectors is generally based on environmental, economic, and political aspects (Meller et al 2018). Moreover, the media have also a crucial role about this discussion, depending on the manner they present deep geothermal energy to the public, as analyzed by Stauffacher et al (2015), who highlighted the requirement of transparency and diligent monitoring of communication and public engagement.…”

“…Moreover, the media have also a crucial role about this discussion, depending on the manner they present deep geothermal energy to the public, as analyzed by Stauffacher et al (2015), who highlighted the requirement of transparency and diligent monitoring of communication and public engagement. There are multiple factors that affect opinion on geothermal energy, such as contamination of groundwater, sustainability of water resources, uncertainty about reversibility, seismic activity, cost-benefit ratio, the level of knowledge about the technologies, dissemination channels, the integration of various actors in project planning and public consultation exercises, among others (Dowd et al 2011;Carr-Cornish and Romanach 2014;Chavot et al 2018). Under these considerations, in the context of the research project IGCP636Y "Unifying international research forces to unlock the geothermal energy" of the UNESCO's International Geoscience Program (IGCP), an online survey was conducted to an audience constituted mainly by people with a scientific background and high education level in Canada, Colombia, Chile, France, and Belgium.…”

Induced seismicity hazard and risk by enhanced geothermal systems: an expert elicitation approach

“…Similarly, in Basel (Switzerland) in 2006 there was an event of local magnitude M L 3.4 [17], and yet another of M L 4.4 in 2003 in Berlín (El Salvador) [18]. Public concerns arise when seismic events are felt, potentially leading to projects being abandoned or new projects being pushed back [6,19,20]. Thirdly, if EGS are to maximize their economic and environmental performance, there needs to be a use for their waste heat in addition to generating electricity [4].…”