Public perceptions of climate engineering: Laypersons’ acceptance at different levels of knowledge and intensities of deliberation

Abstract

Over the past years, new options for addressing global warming and atmospheric CO2-concentrations ‐ such as bioenergy carbon capture and storage ‐ have been included in computer models that estimate how much more can be emitted before the global mean temperature increase surpasses 1.5°C. While the public in general remains mainly unaware of these, similar proposals in the past have triggered public protests. The prospect of public opposition therefore calls into question the use of these options in the models.Even if societies decarbonized rapidly, it is unlikely that they will achieve the 1.5°C target without also resorting to CO2 removal, by means, for example, of bioenergy carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Such methods were included in the special report Global Warming of 1.5°C published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2018. This report also discusses solar radiation management, such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) which might be used to change global temperatures. However, public debate about the acceptability of these methods remains absent. We look at laypersons’ perceptions of BECCS and SAI at three stylized stages of increasing knowledge and deliberation. We found a high level of uncertainty among survey respondents as to whether to accept the use of these methods, which decreases when additional information is supplied by stakeholders. When comparing survey participants to members of a citizens’ jury, we found lower levels of acceptance for SAI and similar levels for BECCS among jury members who had deliberated the methods intensively. Despite fears of distracting from the aim of reducing emissions, decision-makers should publicly discuss these methods to avoid planning based on incorrect assumptions about the political feasibility of CO2 removal. People want to be informed about both approaches and the threat of SAI makes them focus their attention on mitigation.

Public Perceptions of Ocean-Based Carbon Dioxide Removal: The Nature-Engineering Divide?

“…For blue carbon management, local people's attachment and connectedness to nature can be observed to influence perceptions of conservation favorably (Queiroz et al, 2017). For land-based CDR approaches, there is an implicit hierarchy in perceptions where seemingly more natural solutions are prioritized over approaches that are perceived as engineering (Merk et al, 2019). Bio-energy with CCS and enhanced weathering are perceived less favorably compared to biochar or afforestation (Merk et al, 2019;Wolske et al, 2019;Carlisle et al, 2020;Cox et al, 2020).…”

“…For land-based CDR approaches, there is an implicit hierarchy in perceptions where seemingly more natural solutions are prioritized over approaches that are perceived as engineering (Merk et al, 2019). Bio-energy with CCS and enhanced weathering are perceived less favorably compared to biochar or afforestation (Merk et al, 2019;Wolske et al, 2019;Carlisle et al, 2020;Cox et al, 2020). Study participants that perceived approaches as unnatural or as tampering with nature evaluated them more negatively (Corner et al, 2013;Wolske et al, 2019).…”

Public engagement with emerging technologies: Does reflective thinking affect survey responses?

“…Some researchers have voiced concerns that quantitative surveys may not accurately reflect public perceptions of unfamiliar technologies as participants have only a short period to form an opinion on limited information (Merk et al, 2019). Contrary to this concern, our research indicates that participants are not forced to engage in fast, limited information processing, but rather, they choose to.…”

Effects of opinion statements on laypeople's acceptance of a climate engineering technology. Comparing the source credibility of researchers, politicians and a citizens' jury

“…Such a format has not yet been used for the issue of CE. However, as part of a research project in Germany, a citizens' jury, consisting of 21 participants, met on three weekends in early 2018 to discuss CE [Bürgerforum Climate Engineering, 2018;Merk et al 2019]. They were informed about CE by experts and intensively discussed a possible future research on and deployment of SAI and bio-energy with CCS.…”