IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v173y2023ics1364032122009856.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology

Author

Listed:
  • Hurlbert, Margot
  • Osazuwa-Peters, Mac

Abstract

Despite the recognition of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) as a credible technology for reducing emissions, its implementation has been stalled, partly due to the public's perception of the technology. The literature on CCS technology diffusion points to negative public perception of the technology as a barrier to implementation, and the role of media in that framing. Yet, there remains a gap in the knowledge of media framing of a successful CCS project. This study analyzes the Saskatchewan case, the first successful commercial scale CCS technology deployment in the world and finds that the media framing of CCS technology in Saskatchewan applied a narrative/storytelling approach by deploying metaphors that connected to local values, beliefs, and norms. Also, it notes certain conditions in Saskatchewan made it possible for some frames to be advanced while others were minimized, discounted, or absent altogether in the discussion. Applying the Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment (SPEED) framework, the study highlights the role of authoritative voices, mostly within Saskatchewan's political system in reframing CCS technology from uncertainty and risk into opportunity; minimizing and sometimes discounting or ignoring the negative frames that have been identified in previous studies as a barrier. It concludes that in Saskatchewan there was a trade-off in framing, where opportunities to advance frames that emphasize how CCS technology can support long term low carbon energy transition and climate change mitigation were missed. This study adds to the literature in that it analyzes a successful case of CCS technology deployment.

Suggested Citation

  • Hurlbert, Margot & Osazuwa-Peters, Mac, 2023. "Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:173:y:2023:i:c:s1364032122009856
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2022.113104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009856
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2022.113104?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ragnar Lofstedt, 2015. "Effective risk communication and CCS: the road to success in Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 675-691, June.
    2. van Alphen, Klaas & van Voorst tot Voorst, Quirine & Hekkert, Marko P. & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2007. "Societal acceptance of carbon capture and storage technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4368-4380, August.
    3. Sallie Greenberg & Sallie E. Greenberg & Lori M. Gauvreau, 2014. "Communicating science and technology while engaging the public at the Illinois Basin – Decatur Project," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 4(5), pages 596-603, October.
    4. Riesch, Hauke & Oltra, Christian & Lis, Aleksandra & Upham, Paul & Pol, Mariette, 2013. "Internet-based public debate of CCS: Lessons from online focus groups in Poland and Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 693-702.
    5. Barbara Koelbl & Machteld Broek & André Faaij & Detlef Vuuren, 2014. "Uncertainty in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment projections: a cross-model comparison exercise," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 461-476, April.
    6. Simon Shackley & Michael Thompson, 2012. "Lost in the mix: will the technologies of carbon dioxide capture and storage provide us with a breathing space as we strive to make the transition from fossil fuels to renewables?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 101-121, January.
    7. John Michael Humphries Choptiany & Ron Pelot & Kate Sherren, 2014. "An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Carbon Capture and Storage Assessment Methods," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 445-458, May.
    8. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    9. Naomi Vaughan & Timothy Lenton, 2011. "A review of climate geoengineering proposals," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 745-790, December.
    10. Anne Pisarski & Peta Ashworth, 2013. "The Citizen’s Round Table process: canvassing public opinion on energy technologies to mitigate climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 533-546, July.
    11. Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias & Christopher R. Jones, 2019. "Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Jasper Vliet & Andries Hof & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Maarten Berg & Sebastiaan Deetman & Michel Elzen & Paul Lucas & Detlef Vuuren, 2014. "The impact of technology availability on the timing and costs of emission reductions for achieving long-term climate targets," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 559-569, April.
    13. Massimo Tavoni & Enrica Cian & Gunnar Luderer & Jan Steckel & Henri Waisman, 2012. "The value of technology and of its evolution towards a low carbon economy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 39-57, September.
    14. Jiang, Kai & Ashworth, Peta & Zhang, Shiyi & Hu, Guoping, 2022. "Print media representations of carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) technology in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    15. Apt, Jay & Fischhoff, Baruch, 2006. "Power and People," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(9), pages 17-25, November.
    16. Bart W. Terwel, 2015. "Public participation under conditions of distrust: invited commentary on 'Effective risk communication and CCS: The road to success in Europe'," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 692-694, June.
    17. de Coninck, Heleen & Stephens, Jennie C. & Metz, Bert, 2009. "Global learning on carbon capture and storage: A call for strong international cooperation on CCS demonstration," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2161-2165, June.
    18. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    19. Stewart Russell & Nils Markusson & Vivian Scott, 2012. "What will CCS demonstrations demonstrate?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 651-668, August.
    20. Broecks, Kevin P.F. & van Egmond, Sander & van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Verlinde-van den Berg, Marlies & Hekkert, Marko P., 2016. "Persuasiveness, importance and novelty of arguments about Carbon Capture and Storage," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 58-66.
    21. Lasse Wallquist & Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Simone Dohle & Michael Siegrist, 2011. "Adapting communication to the public's intuitive understanding of CCS," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 83-91, March.
    22. Andrea M. Feldpausch‐Parker & Megan O'Byrne & Danielle Endres & Tarla R. Peterson, 2013. "The Adventures of Carbon Bond: Using a melodramatic game to explain CCS as a mitigation strategy for climate change," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 21-29, February.
    23. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    24. Peter Stigson & Anders Hansson & Mårten Lind, 2012. "Obstacles for CCS deployment: an analysis of discrepancies of perceptions," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 601-619, August.
    25. Markusson, Nils & Kern, Florian & Watson, Jim & Arapostathis, Stathis & Chalmers, Hannah & Ghaleigh, Navraj & Heptonstall, Philip & Pearson, Peter & Rossati, David & Russell, Stewart, 2012. "A socio-technical framework for assessing the viability of carbon capture and storage technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 903-918.
    26. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    27. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    28. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Lauren A. Mayer & M. Granger Morgan, 2015. "Developing communications about CCS: three lessons learned," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 699-705, June.
    29. Amit Kanudia & Maryse Labriet & Richard Loulou, 2014. "Effectiveness and efficiency of climate change mitigation in a technologically uncertain World," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 543-558, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katja Witte, 2021. "Social Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) from Industrial Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-29, November.
    2. Anne-Maree Dowd & Michelle Rodriguez & Talia Jeanneret, 2015. "Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Nemet, Gregory F. & Zipperer, Vera & Kraus, Martina, 2018. "The valley of death, the technology pork barrel, and public support for large demonstration projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 154-167.
    4. Lorraine Whitmarsh & Dimitrios Xenias & Christopher R. Jones, 2019. "Framing effects on public support for carbon capture and storage," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Kern, Florian & Gaede, James & Meadowcroft, James & Watson, Jim, 2016. "The political economy of carbon capture and storage: An analysis of two demonstration projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 250-260.
    6. Peter Viebahn & Emile J. L. Chappin, 2018. "Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-45, September.
    7. Laurie Waller & Tim Rayner & Jason Chilvers & Clair Amanda Gough & Irene Lorenzoni & Andrew Jordan & Naomi Vaughan, 2020. "Contested framings of greenhouse gas removal and its feasibility: Social and political dimensions," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.
    8. Pianta, Silvia & Rinscheid, Adrian & Weber, Elke U., 2021. "Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States: Perceptions, preferences, and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    9. Emma ter Mors & Esther van Leeuwen & Christine Boomsma & Renate Meier, 2023. "Media Coverage of Carbon Capture and Storage: An Analysis of Established and Emerging Themes in Dutch National Newspapers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-13, February.
    10. Vassilis Stavrakas & Niki-Artemis Spyridaki & Alexandros Flamos, 2018. "Striving towards the Deployment of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): A Review of Research Priorities and Assessment Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-27, June.
    11. Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    12. Bhumika Gupta & Salil K. Sen, 2019. "Carbon Capture Usage and Storage with Scale-up: Energy Finance through Bricolage Deploying the Co-integration Methodology," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(6), pages 146-153.
    13. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    14. McLaughlin, Hope & Littlefield, Anna A. & Menefee, Maia & Kinzer, Austin & Hull, Tobias & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Bazilian, Morgan D. & Kim, Jinsoo & Griffiths, Steven, 2023. "Carbon capture utilization and storage in review: Sociotechnical implications for a carbon reliant world," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    15. Davies, Lincoln L. & Uchitel, Kirsten & Ruple, John, 2013. "Understanding barriers to commercial-scale carbon capture and sequestration in the United States: An empirical assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 745-761.
    16. Holly Jean Buck, 2016. "Rapid scale-up of negative emissions technologies: social barriers and social implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 155-167, November.
    17. Bhumika Gupta & Salil K. Sen, 2019. "Carbon capture usage and storage with scale-up : energy finance through bricolage deploying the co-integration methodology," Post-Print hal-02559884, HAL.
    18. Dongdong Song & Tong Jiang & Chuanping Rao, 2022. "Review of Policy Framework for the Development of Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Guivarch, Céline & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2017. "Identifying the main uncertainty drivers of energy security in a low-carbon world: The case of Europe," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 530-541.
    20. Merk, Christine & Andersen, Gisle & Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes & Helfrich, Torben, 2023. "Carbon Capture and Storage: Publics in five countries around the North Sea prefer to do it on their own territory," Kiel Working Papers 2252, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:173:y:2023:i:c:s1364032122009856. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.