4 New energy technologies
Carbon capture and storage (CCS)
75. Although most of our inquiry, and subsequently
this report, has focused on nuclear power, there are useful lessons
to be learned for new energy technologies. Carbon capture and
storage (CCS) is important because, as Professor Nick Pidgeon,
Director of the Understanding Risk Programme at Cardiff University,
stated, "[energy] policy in the EU and UK depends very heavily
upon CCS technology working".[208]
CCS is one of a number of mitigation technologies important to
tackling global warming, and ensuring a secure energy supply.
It involves capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from fossil fuel power
stations and transporting it via pipelines to be stored in deep
underground structures such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs,
and deep saline aquifers. In the UK, captured carbon would be
stored offshore.[209]
However, in Germany and other countries, onshore storage is being
explored.
76. Professor Pidgeon highlighted "evidence
that there are some severe public perception issues about the
storage of carbon dioxide certainly onshore in other countries"
and warned that "the CCS industry, if it is not careful,
is about to repeat the mistakes that the nuclear industry made
50 years ago".[210]
Dr Andrew Bloodworth, Head of Science, Minerals and Waste, British
Geological Survey (BGS), agreed that the CCS industry "has
not necessarily shown it is learning the lessons that the nuclear
sector has learned very hard".[211]
Pilot work is yet to start in the UK, but in Germany, pilot CCS
projects are underway, including a carbon capture facility at
the Schwarze Pumpe power station and a carbon storage research
project in Ketzin, Brandenberg. We visited the Ketzin site and
met researchers there, followed by meetings with Dr Carsten Enneper,
Director General of Economic and Energy Policy at the Economics
and Europe Ministry, State of Brandenburg, and citizen groups
opposed to CCS. The strength of opposition to CCS in Germany was
compared to nuclear power opposition. Interestingly, while safety
and environmental concerns were often presented as reasons to
oppose CCS, there were suspicions that the underlying reasons
included distrust of industry and concerns that CSS would provide
a means for fossil fuel dependency to continue. Dr Enneper believed
that the Ministry had underestimated the resources committed by
anti-CCS lobby groups and that it could have made greater efforts
to engage with the public. This echoed comments by Mr Bloodworth,
BGS, that campaigning groups were very good at getting their message
across and "will pick a very narrow issue, go for that very
strongly and throw lots of resources at it. They have embraced
the internet and the new media very well".[212]
The Government and regulators
should make better use of their resources to communicate and engage
with the public via the internet and social media. Lessons could
be learned from the communication strategies employed by campaigning
organisations.
77. Mr Carsten also told us that the Ministry
could have encouraged more people to visit the Ketzin project.
Dr Michael Kühn and Fabian Möller, researchers at the
Ketzin project, considered that public outreach was important,
and the site had around 800 visitors to open days in 2011. These
open days were primarily for researchers to engage with the local
community, without a media presence. The researchers had been
able to discuss local people's concerns such as carbon dioxide
leakage, saltwater contamination and induced seismicity (earthquakes).
Whereas the wider perception of the energy industry was that it
was distant and "faceless", the local community near
Ketzin knew the researchers. As a result, the community felt more
able to engage with the research site. The
UK is yet to develop a pilot CCS project and UK public concerns
may be different to those in Germany. However,owever
we consider that public outreach, such as site visits, should
be considered a vital part of the Government's public engagement
strategy for CCS and other novel energy infrastructure.
78. Carbon capture and storage is not the only
area where early risk dialogue and public engagement will be essential.
During our inquiry the examples of shale gas extraction[213]
and geoengineering[214]
were also raised,[215]
both of which have already courted controversy. We
hope our inquiry will highlight the importance of risk dialogue
and understanding public risk perceptions. The Government must
ensure that lessons are learned from risk communication and dialogue
experiences in relation to nuclear energy when developing new
energy technologies and infrastructure.
79. If the Government intends
to rely on carbon capture and storage (CCS) as part of emissions
reduction strategies, it should examine the difficulties experienced
in Germany due to public concerns.
208 Q 24 Back
209
"Carbon capture and storage", Department of Energy
and Climate Change, 3 April 2012, decc.gov.uk Back
210
Q 24 Back
211
Q 29 Back
212
Q 40 Back
213
Shale gas is gas found in shale rock. It is usually extracted
by hydraulic fracturing ("fracking"), which involves
pumping water at high pressure into the rock to cause fractures,
thus releasing the gas Back
214
Geoengineering involves two types of technique to change the
climate on a large scale: (i) carbon dioxide removal from the
atmosphere and (ii) solar radiation management, which involves
reflecting the sun's light back into space Back
215
Q 54 [Fiona Fox] Back
|
