Public acceptance of technologies to tackle climate change

The worldwide emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and greenhouse gases (GHGs) are driving anthropogenic climate change and are leading to global warming. The increase in emissions seen in recent decades represents a significant obstacle to the goal of limiting the global temperature increase to 1.5°C. In fact, estimates suggest that, over the next 31 years, only twice to three times as much CO2 can be emitted as that emitted between 2000 and 2006. This emphasizes the need to decarbonize all sectors in order to rapidly decrease CO2 emissions. However, simply reducing CO2 emissions is no longer considered sufficient to tackle climate change. Climate engineering – the intentional alteration of the climate on a large scale – will likely prove necessary to tackle climate change. Yet, even if technological responses are available for tackling climate change, public acceptance is necessary for their successful deployment. The aim of this thesis was, therefore, to investigate the public’s acceptance of both those energy technologies that can contribute to the decarbonization of the electricity system and the most commonly discussed climate engineering technologies. To ensure the effective deployment of technologies, it is crucial to understand the factors that drive their acceptance. Hence, this thesis also considered and compared several predictors of technology acceptance in the context of three different studies. The first study investigated the public’s preferences as to what they consider to be the best combination of different energy technologies for the future electricity supply. The results showed that the participants tended to construct energy technology portfolios that included technologies they spontaneously liked. Thus, people’s affective reactions (i.e., their experiences of feelings) toward the available energy technologies drove the type of electricity portfolio that they preferred. The identified portfolio preferences were largely in line with the aims of the Swiss energy transition, which focuses on the promotion of domestic renewable energy technologies, such as solar, wind, and biomass power, so as to maintain a low-carbon electricity supply. The second study sought to determine whether the provision of information regarding the impacts of energy technologies through an interactive website (decision support system [DSS]) affects the public’s portfolio preferences. The results showed that the level of attention people paid to the information provided was not directly related to their portfolio choices. Rather, people’s portfolio choices and the way in which they searched for information were driven by their affective reactions toward the different energy technologies, as well as by their political orientation. This shows that people selectively searched for information and, additionally, it suggest that in doing so they tried to confirm their previously held beliefs regarding energy technologies. This has the potential to further polarize people’s views. For this reason, policymakers should carefully consider the use of interactive tools as communication instruments. The third study examined how people’s support for climate engineering differs depending on the technology to be deployed. The results indicated the public’s support to be the highest for afforestation, while their support was found to be somewhat lower for other measures that remove CO2 from the air. Moreover, the public’s support was found to be the lowest for solar radiation management measures that increase the reflectivity of the Earth. People’s benefit perception was identified as the main driver of their support for any technology. Thus, attempts to foster public support should focus on communicating the benefits of the different climate engineering technologies. This thesis found evidence that different types of technologies to tackle climate change are accepted by the public. Both the use of renewable energy technologies to maintain a low-carbon electricity system is supported by a majority, as well as the use of certain climate engineering technologies. From the perspective of public acceptance, therefore, it should be possible to simultaneously deploy both types of technologies. To tackle climate change effectively, policymakers should consider the level of public acceptance, for the deployment of technologies. However, further research is needed to determine the extent to which the public prefers to combine the mitigation of CO2 emissions with the use of technologies designed to engineer the climate