• Energy Research

Many researchers and politicians believe that the COVID-19 crisis may have opened a “window of opportunity” to spur sustainability transformations. Still, evidence for such a dynamic is currently lacking. Here, we propose the linkage of “big data” and “thick data” methods for monitoring debates on transformation processes by following the COVID-19 discourse on ecological sustainability in Germany. We analysed variations in the topics discussed by applying text mining techniques to a corpus with 84,500 newspaper articles published during the first COVID-19 wave. This allowed us to attain a unique and previously inaccessible “bird’s eye view” of how these topics evolved. To deepen our understanding of prominent frames, a qualitative content analysis was undertaken. Furthermore, we investigated public awareness by analysing online search behaviour. The findings show an underrepresentation of sustainability topics in the German news during the early stages of the crisis. Similarly, public awareness regarding climate change was found to be reduced. Nevertheless, by examining the newspaper data in detail, we found that the pandemic is often seen as a chance for sustainability transformations—but not without a set of challenges. Our mixed-methods approach enabled us to bridge knowledge gaps between qualitative and quantitative research by “thickening” and providing context to data-driven analyses. By monitoring whether or not the current crisis is seen as a chance for sustainability transformations, we provide insights for environmental policy in times of crisis.

In recent years, research on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) has significantly increased. Numerous studies have analyzed demonstration projects, outlined scenarios, modeled pathways, or focused on CDR’s national or international governance. However, regional case studies investigating the dynamics that may facilitate or impede the broader adoption of CDR methods in spatially explicit settings are critically absent. Understanding implementation contexts on the ground is vital, and comparing them across different removal methods is essential for effectively scaling up CDR. This paper aims to address this research gap by comparatively examining the development of biomass-based CDR in three regions of Germany. Taking an exploratory approach, we conducted surveys in these regions to gain insight into stakeholder perceptions of the following six CDR methods: forest management, agriculture and soil carbon, long-lasting building materials, rewetting of peatlands and paludiculture, biochar, and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. In this article, we present the results of the stakeholder survey, which offers multiple perspectives that can shape future studies of regional implementation and yield policy-relevant guidance. Although our research primarily focuses on the regional level in Germany, it sheds light on various conflicts, uncertainties, and potentials that are likely to be relevant for the rollout of CDR in other countries. By examining these aspects, we contribute to the broader discourse on CDR and its potential implementation.

There is an increasingly vocal debate on potential long-term changes in environmental sustainability spurred by the global COVID-19 pandemic. This article scrutinizes the social science basis of selected popular hypotheses regarding the nexus between the COVID-19 pandemic and the societal transitions towards environmental sustainability. It presents results that were derived through an interdisciplinary dialogue among social scientists. First, it is confirmed that the COVID-19 crisis has likely created a potential window of opportunity for societal change. Yet, to ensure that societal change is enduring and actually supporting the transition towards environmental sustainability, a clear and well-targeted political framework guiding private investments and behavior is required. Second, it is emphasized that there are important structural differences between the COVID-19 crisis and environmental crises, like time scales. Consequently, many strategies used to address the COVID-19 crisis are hardly suitable for long-term transitions towards environmental sustainability. Third, it is argued that transitions towards environmental sustainability—building both on reducing environmental degradation and building socio-techno-ecological resilience—may create co-benefits in terms of preventing and coping with potential future pandemics. However, research still needs to explore how big these synergies are (and whether trade-offs are also possible), and what type of governance framework they require to materialize.

Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration has become a common practice in technology development projects. Rarely, however, the integration (and translation) of knowledge from different disciplines and different societal contexts is reported in detail. In this article, we address this gap and present the inter- and transdisciplinary technology development in the international research project “DigiMon—Digital Monitoring of CO2 Storage Projects” that aims to develop a human-centered monitoring system. Based on interviews, surveys and stakeholder workshops in Norway, Greece, Germany and The Netherlands, we identify characteristics of CO2 storage monitoring systems that reflect the concerns and expectations of publics and stakeholders. We document the translation of social scientific findings into technical expertise for the design of a monitoring system. We discuss how the interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary process has affected the technology development. In outlining how this process was set up, carried out and validated, we are able to show a viable route for the meaningful incorporation of heterogeneous knowledge in complex energy infrastructures. Furthermore, we discuss the features of the project organization that made this comprehensive process possible. Thus, our results contribute to inter- and transdisciplinary research organization in general and to the development of methods for monitoring CO2 storage in particular.

Abstract Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is discussed as a technology for mitigating climate change. With social scientific research on CCS having increased considerably over the last decade, this paper offers a first comprehensive review and evaluation of studies that investigate the way CCS projects are communicated to (local) stakeholders and the general public. We conduct a systematic review of 115 papers for a state-of-the-art assessment of research on communication practices in CCS projects. Based on this review we compile an extensive list of the recommendations provided for CCS outreach activities and scrutinize it for limitations. This enables us to show that “best practices” in communication need to be applied in context sensitive approaches and to highlight factors in communication (such as social media) which have been underutilized up to now. Furthermore, we identify two conceptual shortcomings that limit the scope of CCS communication research: first, the majority of the literature refers to CCS as applied to the fossil fuel-based energy sector and thereby narrows the debate. Second, while the social scientific debate has moved on from the mere study of acceptance of CCS to practices of communication, we find that the theoretical lens applied to communication is still largely focused on convincing people to accept CCS. We argue that future research should tackle these shortcomings by paying more attention to CCS projects that go beyond coal or natural gas power plants. Additionally, it is advised to theoretically reframe communication efforts by emphasizing long-term alliance building through participation and joint goals instead of focussing on short-term persuasion and simple strategies of raising acceptance.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies are controversially discussed worldwide. Germany is no exception. Here, CO2 storage is banned, although successful pilot plants were installed in the late 2000s. However, the recent burgeoning political interest in this technology prompts us to investigate why and how the (public) image of CCS technologies has changed over time and with regard to different CCS applications. For this purpose, we examine the coverage of CCS in German newspapers over the last 20 years on the basis of a quantitative analysis of about 4000 newspaper articles. A sample of 571 articles with different political orientations was studied qualitatively to analyse reporting on different CCS frames and actors. We find evidence that the media debate is shifting towards the application of CCS for negative emissions technologies and carbon removal. However, the negative image of CCS connected to coal fired power plants persists, suggesting that public and political support remain a problem for a technology fixed in binary negotiations for or against it.

AbstractAn optimistic narrative has gained momentum during the first year of the pandemic: the COVID-19 crisis may have opened a window of opportunity to “rebuild better”, to spur societal transitions towards environmental sustainability. In this comment, we review first evidence of individual and political changes made so far. Findings suggest that economies worldwide are not yet building back better. Against this background, we argue that a naïve opportunity narrative may even impair the progress of transitions towards environmental sustainability because it may render green recovery measures ineffective, costly, or infeasible. Based on these observations, we derive conditions for green recovery policies to succeed. They should consist of a policy mix combining well-targeted green subsidies with initiatives to price emissions and scrap environmentally harmful subsidies. Moreover, green recovery policies must be embedded into a narrative that avoids trading off environmental sustainability with other domains of sustainability—and rather highlights respective synergies that can be realized when recovering from the COVID-19 crisis.