What a waste! Assessing public perceptions of Carbon Dioxide Utilisation technology

Christopher R. Jones; Rebecca L. Radford; Katy Armstrong; Peter Styring

doi:10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001

What a waste! Assessing public perceptions of Carbon Dioxide Utilisation technology

Christopher R. Jones, Rebecca L. Radford, Katy Armstrong, Peter Styring

Department of Psychology

University of Sheffield

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

16 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU) technologies hold promise by helping to limit atmospheric releases of CO₂ while simultaneously generating saleable products; however, to date there has been very little systematic research into public perceptions of the technology.

This short communication reports briefly upon the results of a small pilot study designed to (a) test a methodology for investigating public perceptions of CDU; and (b) elucidate new understanding of people's attitudes towards the technology.

The results indicate that while people believe that CDU will have economic benefits (e.g., creating employment opportunities and saleable products) there is scepticism over the perceived long-term environmental benefits of the technology (e.g., in mitigating climate change).

The findings of this research have important implications for the framing of communications about CDU technology within the public sphere.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	51-54
Number of pages	4
Journal	Journal of CO2 Utilization
Volume	7
Early online date	14 Jun 2014
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001
Publication status	Published - 1 Sept 2014

Keywords

public perception
attitudes
Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU)
UKRI
EPSRC
EP/H035702/1
EP/K007947/1

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001

What a wasteAccepted author manuscript (Post-print), 202 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{c9ff3a988c67470ab59c1d81dd3b51a0,

title = "What a waste! Assessing public perceptions of Carbon Dioxide Utilisation technology",

abstract = "Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU) technologies hold promise by helping to limit atmospheric releases of CO2 while simultaneously generating saleable products; however, to date there has been very little systematic research into public perceptions of the technology.This short communication reports briefly upon the results of a small pilot study designed to (a) test a methodology for investigating public perceptions of CDU; and (b) elucidate new understanding of people's attitudes towards the technology.The results indicate that while people believe that CDU will have economic benefits (e.g., creating employment opportunities and saleable products) there is scepticism over the perceived long-term environmental benefits of the technology (e.g., in mitigating climate change).The findings of this research have important implications for the framing of communications about CDU technology within the public sphere.",

keywords = "public perception, attitudes, Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU), UKRI, EPSRC, EP/H035702/1, EP/K007947/1",

author = "Jones, {Christopher R.} and Radford, {Rebecca L.} and Katy Armstrong and Peter Styring",

year = "2014",

month = sep,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001",

language = "English",

volume = "7",

pages = "51--54",

journal = "Journal of CO2 Utilization",

issn = "2212-9820",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What a waste! Assessing public perceptions of Carbon Dioxide Utilisation technology

AU - Jones, Christopher R.

AU - Radford, Rebecca L.

AU - Armstrong, Katy

AU - Styring, Peter

PY - 2014/9/1

Y1 - 2014/9/1

N2 - Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU) technologies hold promise by helping to limit atmospheric releases of CO2 while simultaneously generating saleable products; however, to date there has been very little systematic research into public perceptions of the technology.This short communication reports briefly upon the results of a small pilot study designed to (a) test a methodology for investigating public perceptions of CDU; and (b) elucidate new understanding of people's attitudes towards the technology.The results indicate that while people believe that CDU will have economic benefits (e.g., creating employment opportunities and saleable products) there is scepticism over the perceived long-term environmental benefits of the technology (e.g., in mitigating climate change).The findings of this research have important implications for the framing of communications about CDU technology within the public sphere.

AB - Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU) technologies hold promise by helping to limit atmospheric releases of CO2 while simultaneously generating saleable products; however, to date there has been very little systematic research into public perceptions of the technology.This short communication reports briefly upon the results of a small pilot study designed to (a) test a methodology for investigating public perceptions of CDU; and (b) elucidate new understanding of people's attitudes towards the technology.The results indicate that while people believe that CDU will have economic benefits (e.g., creating employment opportunities and saleable products) there is scepticism over the perceived long-term environmental benefits of the technology (e.g., in mitigating climate change).The findings of this research have important implications for the framing of communications about CDU technology within the public sphere.

KW - public perception

KW - attitudes

KW - Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU)

KW - UKRI

KW - EPSRC

KW - EP/H035702/1

KW - EP/K007947/1

UR - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2212982014000298

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001

DO - 10.1016/j.jcou.2014.05.001

M3 - Article

SN - 2212-9820

VL - 7

SP - 51

EP - 54

JO - Journal of CO2 Utilization

JF - Journal of CO2 Utilization

ER -

What a waste! Assessing public perceptions of Carbon Dioxide Utilisation technology

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this