Communicating carbon removal

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
R. Bellamy, K. Raimi
{"title":"Communicating carbon removal","authors":"R. Bellamy, K. Raimi","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2023.1205388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is “unavoidable” if net zero emissions are to be achieved, and is fast rising up the climate policy agenda. Research, development, demonstration, and deployment of various methods has begun, but technical advances alone will not guarantee a role for them in tackling climate change. For those engrossed in carbon removal debates, it is easy to forget that most people have never heard of these strategies. Public perception of carbon removal is therefore particularly sensitive to framings—the ways in which scientists, entrepreneurs, activists, politicians, the media, and others choose to organize and communicate it. In this perspective, we highlight four aspects of carbon removal for which their framing will play a decisive role in whether—and how—different methods are taken forward. First, the use of analogies can be helpful in guiding mental models, but can also inadvertently imply processes or outcomes that do not apply in the new example. Second, a taxonomic split between “nature-based” and “technological” methods threatens to divert attention from the actual qualities of different methods and constrain our policy options. Third, people are likely to overestimate the emissions-reduction potential of carbon removal, but this misperception can be corrected. Fourth, communications overlook the social arrangements for carbon removal and the alternative trajectories that implementation may take. We end by offering key recommendations for how we can communicate carbon removal more responsibly.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1205388","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is “unavoidable” if net zero emissions are to be achieved, and is fast rising up the climate policy agenda. Research, development, demonstration, and deployment of various methods has begun, but technical advances alone will not guarantee a role for them in tackling climate change. For those engrossed in carbon removal debates, it is easy to forget that most people have never heard of these strategies. Public perception of carbon removal is therefore particularly sensitive to framings—the ways in which scientists, entrepreneurs, activists, politicians, the media, and others choose to organize and communicate it. In this perspective, we highlight four aspects of carbon removal for which their framing will play a decisive role in whether—and how—different methods are taken forward. First, the use of analogies can be helpful in guiding mental models, but can also inadvertently imply processes or outcomes that do not apply in the new example. Second, a taxonomic split between “nature-based” and “technological” methods threatens to divert attention from the actual qualities of different methods and constrain our policy options. Third, people are likely to overestimate the emissions-reduction potential of carbon removal, but this misperception can be corrected. Fourth, communications overlook the social arrangements for carbon removal and the alternative trajectories that implementation may take. We end by offering key recommendations for how we can communicate carbon removal more responsibly.
沟通除碳
如果要实现净零排放,从大气中清除二氧化碳是“不可避免的”,并且正在迅速上升到气候政策议程上。各种方法的研究、开发、演示和部署已经开始,但仅靠技术进步并不能保证它们在应对气候变化方面发挥作用。对于那些专注于碳去除辩论的人来说,很容易忘记大多数人从未听说过这些策略。因此,公众对碳去除的看法对框架特别敏感,即科学家、企业家、活动家、政治家、媒体和其他人选择组织和沟通的方式。从这个角度来看,我们强调了碳去除的四个方面,他们的框架将对是否以及如何采用不同的方法发挥决定性作用。首先,类比的使用有助于指导心理模型,但也可能无意中暗示不适用于新例子的过程或结果。其次,“基于自然的”方法和“技术的”方法之间的分类分歧可能会转移人们对不同方法实际性质的关注,并限制我们的政策选择。第三,人们可能高估了碳去除的减排潜力,但这种误解是可以纠正的。第四,沟通忽略了碳去除的社会安排以及实施可能采取的替代轨迹。最后,我们为如何更负责任地沟通碳去除提供了关键建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信