Submit an Article
Become a reviewer
Vol 237
Download volume:

Key Factors of Public Perception of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Projects

S. V. Fedoseev1
Pavel S. Tcvetkov2
About authors
Date submitted:
Date accepted:
Date published:


One of the major challenges of the modern world is the problem of global warming, the solution of which requires the implementation of a set of strategic projects in the field of transition of the energy sector to the path of environmentally balanced development. One of the ways to implement this transition is the development of technologies for capturing and storage of technogenic carbon dioxide, which is recognized as the main one of greenhouse gases. At the same time, in the Russian context, the most expedient is the implementation of technological chains for capturing and storing CO 2 which are aimed at enhanced oil recovery, the effectiveness of which has been proven by world practice. Implementation of these projects requires consolidation of efforts of many parties, including government agencies, enterprises-issuers (power generating facilities and energy-intensive industry), oil-producing enterprises, non-state environmental organizations, media and public. World practice has many examples when uncoordinated actions of one of the stakeholders led to the closure of such a project, and therefore it is necessary to develop a mechanism of interaction between them, taking into account the specifics of Russian conditions. One of the least studied and controversial aspects of this interaction is to involve the public in the implementation of national carbon intensity programs and the local population in the implementation of a specific project. Research in this field has been conducted in the world over the past 14 years, which allowed the current research base to be used to develop fundamental principles for the development and promotion of CO 2 capture and storage technologies in Russia. Key factors affecting the perception of such projects by public were also analyzed and systematized. The research identified the main arguments for and against the development of CO 2 capture and storage technologies. The analysis made it possible to formulate key principles that should be considered when developing a strategy for the development of these technologies in Russia.

Go to volume 237


  1. Global temperature. Electronic source. Earth Science Communications Team in NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. URL: (data access of 04.10.2018).
  2. Muslimov R.Kh. Oil recovery: past, present, future. Kazan': FEN, 2014, p. 750 (in Russian).
  3. Statistical portal «Statista». URL: (data access of 04.10.2018).
  4. Cherepovitsyn A.E., Il'inova A.A. Conceptual representation of carbon dioxide disposal technologies and their safety. Rossiiskii ekonomicheskii internet-zhurnal. 2014. N 4 (in Russian).
  5. Cherepovitsyn A.E., Sidorova K.I., Smirnova N.V. The feasibility of using CO2 sequestration technologies in Russia. Neftegazovoe delo: elektronnyi nauchnyi zhurnal. 2013. N 5, p. 459-473 (in Russian).
  6. Boyd E. Governing the Clean Development Mechanism: global rhetoric versus local realities in carbon sequestration projects. Environment and planning A. 2009. Vol. 41(10), p. 2380-2395.
  7. Cherepovitsyn A., Ilinova A. Ecological, Economic and Social Issues of Implementing Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Technologies in the Oil and Gas Industry in Russia. Journal of Ecological Engineering. 2016. N 17. Iss. 2, p. 19-23. DOI: 10.12911/22998993/62281
  8. Gross C. Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy policy. 2007. Vol. 35. Iss. 5, p. 2727-2736.
  9. Howell R., Shackley S., Mabon L., Ashworth P., Jeanneret T. Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results from a Scottish large group process. Energy Policy. 2014. Vol. 66, p. 496-506.
  10. Feenstra C.F.J., Mikunda T., Brunsting S. What happened in Barendrecht? Case study on the planned onshore carbon dioxide storage in Barendrecht, the Netherlands. Global CCS Institute. 2010, p. 44.
  11. Haug J.K., Stigson P. Local acceptance and communication as crucial elements for realizing CCS in the Nordic region. Energy Procedia. 2016. Vol. 86, p. 315-323.
  12. Huijts N.M.A., Midden C.J.H., Meijnders A.L. Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage. Energy policy. 2007. Vol. 35. Iss. 5, p. 2780-2789.
  13. Itaoka K., Saito A., Akai M. Policy Parity for CCS? – Public Preference on Low Carbon Electricity. Energy Procedia. 2017. Vol. 114, p. 7573-7580.
  14. Riesch H., Oltra C., Lis A. et al. Internet-based public debate of CCS: lessons from online focus groups in Poland and Spain. Energy policy. 2013. Vol. 56, p. 693-702.
  15. Klass A.B., Wilson E.J. Climate change and carbon sequestration: Assessing a liability regime for long-term storage of carbon dioxide. Emory LJ. 2008. Vol. 58, p. 103.
  16. Kraeusel J., Möst D. Carbon Capture and Storage on its way to large-scale deployment: Social acceptance and willingness to pay in Germany. Energy Policy. 2012. Vol. 49, p. 642-651.
  17. McConnell C., Toohey P., Thompson M. Strategic Analysis of the Global Status of Carbon Capture and Storage, Report 5: Synthesis Report: Prepared for the Global CCS Institute. Worley Parsons and Schlumberger, 2009.
  18. Peshkova G., Cherepovitsyn A., Tcvetkov P. Prospects of the environmental technologies implementation in the cement industry in Russia. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 2016. Vol. 17. Iss. 4, p. 17-24. DOI: 10.12911/22998993/64607
  19. Chaudhry R., Larson S., Fischiein M., Hall D.M. Policy stakeholders' perceptions of carbon capture and storage: a comparison of four US States. Journal of cleaner production. 2013. Vol. 52, p. 21-32.
  20. Ter Mors E., Weening M.W.H., Ellemers N. et al. Public information: On why and when multiple information sources are more effective than single information sources in communication about CCS. Energy Procedia. 2009. Vol. 1. Iss. 1, p. 4715-4718.
  21. Selma L., Seigo O., Dohle S. et al. Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014. Vol. 38, p. 848-863.
  22. Desbarats J., Upham P., Riesch H., Reiner D. et al. Review of the public participation practices for CCS and non-CCS projects in Europe. Report of the FP7 project «NearCO2». 2010. N 11, p. 125.
  23. Fischedick M., Pietzner K., Supersberger N. et al. Stakeholder acceptance of carbon capture and storage in Germany. Energy Procedia. 2009. Vol. 1. Iss. 1, p. 4783-4787.
  24. Tcvetkov P., Cherepovitsyn A. Prospects of CCS Projects Implementation in Russia: Environmental Protection and Economic Opportunities. Journal of Ecological Engineering. 2016. Vol. 17. Iss. 2, p. 24-32. DOI: 10.12911/22998993/62282
  25. van Os H.W.A., Herber R., Scholtens B. Not Under Our Back Yards? A case study of social acceptance of the Northern Netherlands CCS initiative. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2014. Vol. 30, p. 923-942.
  26. Terwel B.W., Harinck F., Ellemers N. et al. Voice in political decision-making: The effect of group voice on perceived trustworthiness of decision makers and subsequent acceptance of decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2010. Vol. 16. Iss. 2, p. 173.
  27. Wallquist L., Visschers V.H., Siegrist M. Antecedents of risk and benefit perception of CCS. Energy Procedia. 2011. Vol. 4, p. 6288-6291.

Similar articles

Geological and Geomechanical Model of the Verkhnekamsk Potash Deposit Site
2019 Yu. A. Kashnikov, A. O. Ermashov, A. A. Efimov
Normalization of Thermal Mode of Extended Blind Workings Operating at High Temperatures Based on Mobile Mine Air Conditioners
2019 V. R. Alabyev, V. V. Novikov, L. A. Pashinyan, T. P. Bazhina
Improving Methodological Approach to Measures Planning for Hydraulic Fracturing in Oil Fields
2019 I. V. Burenina, L. A. Avdeeva, I. A. Solovjeva, M. A. Khalikova, M. V. Gerasimova
Improving Methods of Frozen Wall State Prediction for Mine Shafts under Construction Using Distributed Temperature Measurements in Test Wells
2019 L. Yu. Levin, M. A. Semin, O. S. Parshakov
Non-linear Electrical Load Location Identification
2019 S. Pirog, Ya. E. Shklyarskiy, A. N. Skamyin
Technology of Blasting of Strong Valuable Ores with Ring Borehole Pattern
2019 I. V. Sokolov, A. A. Smirnov, A. A. Rozhkov