Dossier: Characterization of European CO2 Storage – European Project SiteChar
Open Access
Oil Gas Sci. Technol. – Rev. IFP Energies nouvelles
Volume 70, Numéro 4, July–August 2015
Dossier: Characterization of European CO2 Storage – European Project SiteChar
Page(s) 767 - 784
Publié en ligne 22 septembre 2014
  • Brunsting S., De Best-Waldhober M., Feenstra C.F.J., Mikunda T. (2011) Stakeholder Participation and Onshore CCS: Lessons from the Dutch CCS Case Barendrecht, Energy Procedia 4, 6376–6383. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dütschke E. (2011) What drives local public acceptance: Comparing two cases from Germany, Energy Procedia 4, 6234–6240. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Breukers S., Pol M., Upham P., Lis A., Desbarats J., Roberts T., Duetschke E., Oltra Ch, Brunsting S., de Best-Waldhober M., Reiner D., Riesch H. (2011) Engagement and communication strategies for CCS projects: Gaps between current and desired practices and exemplary strategies, NEARCO2 report. [Google Scholar]
  • Ha-Duong M., Nadaï A., Campos A.S. (2008) A survey on the public perceptions of CCS in France, Energy Procedia 1, 4757–4764. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • NEA (2004) Stepwise Approach to Decision Making for Long-term Radioactive Waste Management, Experience, Issues and Guiding Principles, ISBN 92-64-02077-2. [Google Scholar]
  • Wade S., Greenberg S. (2009) Afraid to start because the outcome is uncertain? Social site characterisation as a tool for informing public engagement efforts, Energy Procedia 1, 4641–4647. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wade S., Greenberg S. (2011) Social Site Characterisation: From Concept to Application. A re-view of relevant social science literature and a toolkit for social site characterisation. Available at: [Google Scholar]
  • Neele F., Delprat-Jannaud F., Vincké O., Volpi V., Nepveu M., Hofstee C., Wollenweber J., Lothe A., Brunsting S., Pearce J., Battani A., Baroni A., Garcia B. (2013) The SiteChar approach to efficient and focused CO2 storage site characterisation, Energy Procedia 37, 4997–5005. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • NETL (2009) Best Practices for: Public Outreach and Education for Carbon Storage Projects, National Energy Technology Laboratory, US Department of Energy. [Google Scholar]
  • WRI (2009) Engaging Communities in Energy and Infrastructure Projects, World Resources Institute, Washington DC, USA. [Google Scholar]
  • Ashworth P., Bradbury J., Feenstra C.F.J., Greenberg S., Hund G., Mikunda T., Wade S., Shaw H. (2011) Communication/Engagement. Tool Kit for CCS Projects, Energy Transformed Flagship, National Flagships Research, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). [Google Scholar]
  • Raven R.P.J.M., Jolivet E., Mourik R.M., Feenstra Y.C.F.J. (2009) ESTEEM: Managing societal acceptance in new energy projects - A toolbox method for project managers, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76, 963–977. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • IISD (2007) Carbon Capture and Storage Communication Workshops, University of Calgary, International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Climate Change Central (Canada) CCS projects Climate Change Central. [Google Scholar]
  • Hammond J., Shackley S. (2010) Towards a Public Communication and Engagement Strategy for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Projects in Scotland A Review of Research Findings CCS project experiences Tools, Resources and Best Practices, Working paper SCCS. [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., Pol M., Paukovic M., Kaiser M., Zimmer R., Shackley S., Mabon L., Hepplewhite F., Loveridge R., Mazurowski M., Polak-Osiniak D., Rybicki C. (2011) Qualitative and quantitative social site characterisations, Deliverable D8.1 of SiteChar: Characterisation of European CO2 storage. [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., Mastop J., Pol M., Kaiser M., Zimmer R., Shackley S., Mabon L., Howell R. (2012) Trust building and raising public awareness, Deliverable D8.2 of SiteChar: Characterisation of European CO2 storage. [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., Mastop J., Kaiser M., Zimmer R., Shackley S., Mabon L., Howell R. (2012) Public Outreach Activities, Deliverable D8.3 of SiteChar: Characterisation of European CO2 storage. [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., Mastop J., Pol M., Kaiser M., Zimmer R., Shackley S., Mabon L., Howell R. (2012) Quantitative social site characterisations, Deliverable D8.4 of SiteChar: Characterisation of European CO2 storage. [Google Scholar]
  • Schuman H., Presser S. (1981) Questions and answers in attitude surveys, Academic Press, New York. [Google Scholar]
  • ÖGUT (Austrian Society for Environment and Technology), (2007) The Public Participation Manual. Shaping the future together, ÖGUT-News 01/2007. [Google Scholar]
  • Creighton J.L. (2005) The Public Participation Handbook: Making Better Decisions Through Citizen Involvement, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. [Google Scholar]
  • Elliott J., Heesterbeek S., Lukensmeyer C.J., Slocum N. (2005) Participatory Methods Toolkit. A practitioner’s manual, Joint publication of the King Baudouin Foundation and the Flemish Institute for Science and Technology Assessment (viWTA). [Google Scholar]
  • Rowe G., Frewer L.J. (2005) A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms, Science, Technology, & Human Values 30, 251–209. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Beierle T.C., Cayford J. (2002) Democracy in Practice: Public Participation in Environmental Decisions, RFF Press, Washington DC. [Google Scholar]
  • Byers P., Wilcox J. (1991) Focus Groups: A qualitative opportunity for researchers, Journal of Business Communication 28, 63–78. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Bradbury J. (2012) Public understanding of and engagement with CCS, in The Social Dynamics of Carbon Capture and Storage, Markusson N., Shackley S., Evar B. (eds), Routledge, London, pp. 45–73. [Google Scholar]
  • Ashworth P., Carr-Cornish S., Boughen N., Thambimuthu K. (2009) Engaging the public on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage: Does a large group process work? Energy Procedia 1, 4765–4773. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Fishkin J.S., Luskin R.C. (1999) Deliberative polling and citizen consultation, UK CEED Bulletin 55, 6–9. [Google Scholar]
  • Einsiedel E.F., Jelsoe E., Breck T. (2001) Publics at the technology table: the consensus conference in Denmark Canada, And Australia, Public Understanding of Science 10, 83–98. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Roberts T., Mander S. (2011) Assessing public perceptions of CCS: Benefits, challenges and methods, Energy Procedia 4, 6307–6314. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Crosby N., Kelly J.M., Schaefer P. (1986) Citizens Panels: A New Approach to Citizen Participation, Public Administrative Review 46, 170–178. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., Upham P., Dütschke E., De Best Waldhober M., Oltra C., Desbarats J., Riesch H., Reiner D. (2011) Communicating CCS: Applying communications theory to public perceptions of carbon capture and storage, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 5, 1651–1662. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Terwel B.W., Harinck F., Ellemers N., Daamen D.D.L. (2009) How organizational motives and communications affect public trust in organizations: the case of carbon dioxide capture and storage, Journal of Environmental Psychology 29, 290–299. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ter Mors E., Weenig M.W.H., Ellemers N., Daamen D.D.L. (2010) Effective communication about complex environmental issues: Perceived quality of information about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) depends on stakeholder collaboration, Journal of Environmental Psychology 30, 347–357. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., de Best-Waldhober M., Terwel B.W. (2013) ‘I reject your reality and substitute my own!’ Why more knowledge about CO2 storage hardly improves public attitudes, Energy Procedia, accepted for publication in 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Brunsting S., de Best-Waldhober M., Brouwer A.S., Riesch H., Reiner D. (2013) Communicating CCS: Effects of text-only and text-and-visual depictions of CO2 storage on risk perceptions and attitudes, Energy Procedia, accepted for publication in 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Paukovic M., Brunsting S., Straver K., Mastop J., de Best-Waldhober M. (2012) The Dutch general public’s opinion on CCS and energy transition in 2011: Development in awareness, knowledge, beliefs and opinions related to information and media coverage, CATO-2 Deliverable. Available at: [Google Scholar]
  • Lovbrand E., Pielke R., Beck S. (2011) A democracy paradox in studies of science and technology, Science, Technology, Human Values 36, 474. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wickson F., Delgado A., Kjølberg K.L. (2010) Who or What is ‘The Public’? Nature Nanotechnology 5, 757–758. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wynne B. (2006) Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science: Hitting the notes, but missing the music? Community Genetics 9, 211–220. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mabon L., Vercelli S., Shackley S., Anderlucci J., Battisti N., Boot K. (2013) Tell me what you think about the geological storage of carbon dioxide: towards a fuller understanding of public perceptions of CCS, Energy Procedia 37, 7444–7453. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mabon L., Shackley S. (2013) Public engagement in discussing carbon capture and storage, in UNESCO/OECD World Social Science Report 2013: Changing Global Environments, UNESCO/OECD, Hackmann H. (ed.), Paris, pp. 396–400. [Google Scholar]
  • Schröder J., Barbier J. (2013) Report of the InSOTEC Stakeholder Seminar No. 2, 12-13 Nov., Berlin. [Google Scholar]
  • Arnstein S.R. (1969) A ladder of citizen participation, Journal of the American Institute of planners 35, 216–224. [Google Scholar]

Les statistiques affichées correspondent au cumul d'une part des vues des résumés de l'article et d'autre part des vues et téléchargements de l'article plein-texte (PDF, Full-HTML, ePub... selon les formats disponibles) sur la platefome Vision4Press.

Les statistiques sont disponibles avec un délai de 48 à 96 heures et sont mises à jour quotidiennement en semaine.

Le chargement des statistiques peut être long.