Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorHoward J. Herzog.en_US
dc.contributor.authorWolff, Joshua Michaelen_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Technology and Policy Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-17T18:59:09Z
dc.date.available2015-09-17T18:59:09Z
dc.date.copyright2015en_US
dc.date.issued2015en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/98605
dc.descriptionThesis: S.M. in Technology and Policy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Engineering Systems Division, Technology and Policy Program, 2015.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 90-97).en_US
dc.description.abstractCarbon capture and storage (CCS) represents an important pathway for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in order to mitigate climate change. However, there is significant uncertainty about how the technology will be accepted by the public, which is difficult to predict for relatively unknown technologies such as CCS. As such, this thesis explores the use of a similar but better known technology-hydraulic fracturing-as an analogue for learning lessons about public acceptance of the geologic storage component of CCS. The thesis asks two questions: (1) What factors are associated with public acceptance of geologic storage? And (2) What actions should communities, regulators, and stakeholders take to ensure the safe and efficient deployment of CCS technology? The thesis investigates these questions using three separate but related analyses. A series of regressions explores links between states' history of fossil fuel extraction and current regulatory attitudes toward hydraulic fracturing. A comparative case study characterizes trends in the development of laws and regulations related to hydraulic fracturing in three states: Pennsylvania, New York State, and Colorado. Finally, a survey identifies factors associated with positive and negative public perceptions of both hydraulic fracturing and CCS. The survey includes an experimental question that measures the extent to which compensation can be used to improve public acceptance for facility siting. Through these analyses, the thesis reaches several conclusions. States with an extensive history of fossil fuel extraction are more likely to regulate hydraulic fracturing with a moderate level of regulatory stringency, and similar tendencies toward CCS are likely. Municipalities are playing an increasingly significant role in the regulation of hydraulic fracturing, and are likely to be important stakeholders for CCS projects as well. A number of demographic and worldview factors are associated with public acceptance, but none were found to have substantial predictive power. However, the amount of compensation offered to nearby residents was found to have a moderate effect on public acceptance. Developers should therefore consider compensation a tool for increasing the likelihood of acceptance among residents nearby a potential project site. Policymakers should in turn institute market incentives such as robust carbon prices to foster a financial environment that encourages developers to engage with municipalities and residents.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Joshua Michael Wolff.en_US
dc.format.extent120 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectEngineering Systems Division.en_US
dc.subjectTechnology and Policy Program.en_US
dc.titleAcceptance by proxy : analyzing perceptions of hydraulic fracturing to better understand public acceptance for geologic storage of carbon dioxideen_US
dc.title.alternativeAnalyzing perceptions of hydraulic fracturing to better understand public acceptance for geologic storage of carbon dioxideen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M. in Technology and Policyen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Division.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Technology and Policy Program.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Division
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Technology and Policy Program
dc.identifier.oclc920470164en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record