Public Preferences to CCS:How does it Change Across Countries?

AbstractThe aim of this research was to extend an Australian developed large group process which proved effective in engaging the general public on issues related to climate change, energy technologies, and the overall shift towards a low carbon society. The results from Australia, the Netherlands, Canada and Scotland found that in each of the geographic locations the context varied, and participants reported different experiences and understanding of each topic. This paper explores how context may have impacted on the results, the differences that arise and discusses the implications for policy makers and research developers

Social licence to operate: an opportunity to enhance CSR for deeper communication and engagement

Purpose - The purpose of this study is to investigate how the social licence to operate (SLO) concept is currently perceived and communicated during stakeholder engagement, as an extension of corporate social responsibility (CSR). To ensure an applied exploration of SLO, this paper focused on the wind industry.Design/methodology/approach - Telephone interviews were conducted with 18 wind industry representatives responsible for stakeholder engagement in Australia. Questions focused upon understanding of consultation and SLO, perceptions of SLO in practice, and experiences regarding community engagement.Findings - SLO is broadly understood by the case study wind industry representatives as majority acceptance held by community and other stakeholders, although no common definition was expressed. This indicates that the concept has not transferred clearly or directly to the wind industry. Despite this, the benefits of seeking an SLO through consultative and ongoing communication practices were recognised across the wind industry as a positive risk mitigation strategy.Research limitations/implications - Future research could examine the understanding and communication approaches of SLO in other industries, cultures and geographic locations.Practical implications - It appears the wind industry intends to seek an SLO more broadly from the Australian public, beyond specific projects. This is likely to occur within the context of increased scrutiny on the performance of many industries and by the changing expectations and demands of communities.Social implications - Some wind corporations were considered to have previously conducted poor or shallow consultation, and this was perceived to have negatively affected the reputation of the wider industry. Mismanagement of expectations prior to the development phase was of particular concern to interviewees. Given this, an SLO could be put at risk by the poor or insufficient engagement and communication processes and reputation of their predecessors.Originality/value - The key contribution of this study is to inform CSR practices that seek to engage and maintain high stakeholder support through an SLO approach, where corporate communication is vital

EnergyFit Homes Initiative working paper 3: National consumer survey results

This report is a milestone deliverable from CSIRO for the EnergyFit Homes Initiative. The project partners to this Initiative are the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, CSR, AGL Energy, Australian Windows Association, Clean Energy Council, Energy Efficiency Council, Stockland, Fletcher Insulation, Knauf Insulation, the Centre for Liveability Real Estate, and the Energy Efficiency Certificate Creators Association. This report presents the results from a national telephone survey of consumers about understanding what information, from what sources at what time, and in what form is required to drive market uptake of low carbon homes. In total, a random sample of 866 Australians was interviewed for this survey. Respondents represented all Australian states and territories in proportions comparable to the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census data (2011). Results indicate respondents have a strong interest in energy efficient (EE) homes and their associated lower running costs, and that such homes are regarded as a priority, possible to achieve and not a hassle. Promoting key EE features , namely ceiling insulation, natural light, EE lighting, EE heating systems, and EE air conditioning, would likely be well-received by prospective buyers and tenants. EE homes were seen as providing comfort if they were cool in summer and warm in winter, had natural light, had good airflow/ventilation and were quiet. Therefore, promoting these features could increase the association of comfort with EE homes. The environmental benefits of EE homes were highlighted as motivating a decision and likely to elicit a response to buy or lease a home, especially if they were seen as popularly supported. Respondents were willing to pay for specific energy efficiency information about their prospective home, with about one third of respondents willing to pay $100 or more for information, although, respondents placed more emphasis on information on upfront costs than longer term running costs. Respondents indicated their preferred timing for feature-specific information when buying or renting was in the building inspection report, at ‘open for inspection’ events, and in home sales/rental advertising. Their preferred channels of information were via friends and family, product brochures, browsing at hardware stores, and use of energy ratings tools

The EnergyFit Homes Initiative Working Paper 2: Focus group results

Executive Summary: This report is a milestone deliverable from CSIRO for the EnergyFit Homes Initiative, a project that seeks to empower consumers to recognise and value homes with better health, comfort and sustainability benefits and lower running costs. It is formally known as Project RP3016 and funded by the CRC for Low Carbon Living and other project parties. Twelve focus groups were conducted in four east coast cities and regions to explore the understanding of features that contribute to energy efficient homes, and also the understanding of energy efficient rating tools and information systems. These perspectives were sought from owner occupiers, investors and tenants. In total, 107 participants were involved, including 26 participants in Canberra, 25 in Sydney, 27 in Brisbane, and 29 on the NSW Central Coast. A survey was administered prior to the commencement of focus group discussion and gathered attitudes towards energy efficient features and collected basic demographic information. The survey and focus group discussions resulted in a range of findings that provide opportunities for enhancing the context through which energy efficient housing is promoted and supported. The findings also identified pathways and approaches to communication that could enhance the understanding, uptake and corresponding action on energy efficient housing choices. Specific top-line findings are provided in the dot points below

Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry

BioCCS is a technology gaining support as a possible emissions reduction policy option to address climate change. The process entails the capture, transport and storage of carbon dioxide produced during energy production from biomass. Globally, the most optimistic energy efficiency scenarios cannot avoid an average temperature increase of +2 °C without bioCCS. Although very much at the commencement stage, bioCCS demonstration projects can provide opportunity to garner knowledge, achieve consensus and build support around the technology’s properties. Yet many challenges face the bioCCS industry, including no guarantee biomass will always be from sustainable sources or potentially result in carbon stock losses. The operating environment also has no or limited policies, regulations and legal frameworks, and risk and safety concerns abound. Some state the key problem for bioCCS is cultural, lacking in a ‘community of support’, awareness and credibility amongst its own key stakeholders and the wider public. Therefore, the industry can benefit from the growing social science literature, drawing upon other energy and resource based industries with regard to social choice for future energy options. To this end, the following scoping review was conducted in order to ascertain gaps in existing public perception and acceptance research focusing on bioCCS

Understanding stakeholder attitudes to CCS in Victoria, Australia

This research was designed to understand how Victorian residents perceive and accept potential carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. In total twelve focus group sessions were conducted across Bairnsdale, Traralgon and Melbourne, Victoria. The results demonstrate there is limited awareness of the technology and a need for information and education on CCS. A proportion of the respondents (more than 32%) had questions of a "technical" nature, suggesting that participants sought additional information while considering their acceptance of CCS technology. The findings suggest that support for CCS is positively influenced by subjective norms, and trust in the information source delivering the message. Many of the participants welcomed the opportunity to be engaged on the topic and provided a number of suggestions on how best to engage the Victorian public on the topic of CCS and energy technologies more broadly

Cost-reflective electricity pricing: consumer preferences and perceptions

In Australia, residential electricity peak demand has risen steeply in recent decades, leading to higher prices as new infrastructure was needed to satisfy demand. One way of limiting further infrastructure-induced retail price rises is via 'cost-reflective' electricity network pricing that incentivises users to shift their demand to non-peak periods. Empowering consumers with knowledge of their energy usage is critical to maximise the potential benefits of cost-reflective pricing. This research consulted residential electricity consumers in three Australian states on their perceptions and acceptance of two cost-reflective pricing scenarios (Time-of-Use and Peak Capacity pricing) and associated technologies to support such pricing (smart meters, in-home displays and direct load control devices). An energy economist presented information to focus groups on the merits and limitations of each scenario, and participants' views were captured. Almost half of the 53 participants were agreeable to Time-of-Use pricing, but did not have a clear preference for Peak Capacity pricing, where the price was based on the daily maximum demand. Participants recommended further information to both understand and justify the potential benefits, and for technologies to be introduced to enhance the pricing options. The results have implications for utilities and providers who seek to reduce peak demand