EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 266 (2021) E3S Web Conf., 266 (2021) 06008 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 266, 2021
Topical Issues of Rational Use of Natural Resources 2021
Article Number 06008
Number of page(s) 10
Section Economics of Sustainability and Global Investment Trends
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202126606008
Published online 04 June 2021
  1. M. Cai, I. Murtazashvili, J. Brick, R. Salahodjaev, Patience and climate change mitigation: Global evidence, Environmental Research 186 (2020). [Google Scholar]
  2. J. Echavarren, A. Balžekiené, A. Telešiené, Multilevel analysis of climate change risk perception in Europe: Natural hazards, political contexts and mediating individual effects, Safety Science 120, 813–823 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  3. R. Itxaso, S. Faria, M. Neumann, Climate change perception: Driving forces and their interactions, Environmental Science & Policy 108, 112–120 (2020). [Google Scholar]
  4. T. Chvileva, Russian practice of information disclosure on greenhouse gas emissions in non-financial reporting, International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, 17(53), 775–782 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  5. K. Hornafius, S. Hornafius, Carbon negative oil: A pathway for CO2 emission reduction goals, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas 37, 492–503 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  6. N. Romasheva, A. Ilinova, CCS Projects: How Regulatory Framework Influences Their Deployment, Resources, 8, 181, (2019). [Google Scholar]
  7. A. Tsvetkova, E. Katysheva, Assessment of positive and negative aspects of CO2 sequestration projects by argument map development, International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, 18(5.1), 75–80 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  8. D. Jillian, L. Young, D. Lumley, Portfolio Analysis of Carbon Sequestration Technologies and Barriers to Adoption: General Methodology and Application to Geological Storage, Energy Procedia 37, 5063–5079 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  9. A. Hosa, M. Esentia, J. Stewart, S. Haszeldine, Benchmarking worldwide CO2 saline aquifer injections (2010). [Google Scholar]
  10. K. Riahi, E. Rubin, L. Schrattenholzer, Prospects for carbon capture and sequestration technologies assuming their technological learning, Energy 29 (9) 1309–1318 (2004). [Google Scholar]
  11. M. Flett, et al., Gorgon Project: Subsurface evaluation of carbon dioxide disposal under Barrow, Island SPEAsia Pacific Oil and Gas conference 1855–1964 (2008). [Google Scholar]
  12. C. Feenstra, T. Mikunda, S. Brunsting, What happened in Barendrecht? Case study on the planned onshore carbon dioxide storage in Barendrecht, the Netherlands, Energy research Centre of the Netherlands ECN, 44–56 (2010). [Google Scholar]
  13. Mhairi, A. Why we still don’t understand the social aspects of wind power: A critique of key assumptions within the literature, Energy Policy,4: 1834–1841 (2010). [Google Scholar]
  14. M. Flett, et al., Subsurface development of CO2 disposal for the Gorgon Project, Energy Procedia, 1, 3031–3038 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  15. A. Bjorn, S. Kerndrup, I. Lyhne, Beyond public acceptance of energy infrastructure: How citizens make sense and form reactions by enacting networks of entities in infrastructure development, Energy policy, 96, 576–586 (2016). [Google Scholar]
  16. R. Chaudhry, S. Larson, M. Fischiein, D. Hall, Policy stakeholders' perceptions of carbon capture and storage: a comparison of four US States, Journal of cleaner production, 52, 21–32 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  17. L. Dapeng, W. Weiwei, Barriers and incentives of CCS deployment in China: Results from semi-structured interviews, Energy Policy 37, 2421–2432 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  18. C. Röst, Psychologists test societal acceptance of underground storage of CO2. Available at: https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/news/2018/09/psychologists-test-societal-acceptance-of-underground-storage-of-co2 (2018) [Google Scholar]
  19. S. Vercelli et al., Informing People about CCS: A Review of Social Research Studies. Energy Procedia 37, 7464–7473 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  20. L. Yong, S. Chenjunyan, X. Bo, C. Caiyun, C. Vaughan, Impact of community engagement on public acceptance towards waste-to-energy incineration projects: Empirical evidence from China, Waste Management, 76, 431–442 (2018). [Google Scholar]
  21. Global CCS Institute. Deployment of CCS in the Cement Industry. Available at: http://hub.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/deployment-ccs-cement-industry (2019). [Google Scholar]
  22. Independent Statistics and Analysis. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Available at: https://www.eia.gov/ (2019). [Google Scholar]
  23. M. Uno, Y. Mori, Y. Endo, Experimental study regarding public perception of CO2 underground sequestration technologies, Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies 7, 2481–2484 (2005). [Google Scholar]
  24. E. Mors, M. Weening, N. Ellemers, Public information: On why and when multiple information sources are more effective than single information sources in communication about CCS, Energy Procedia 1, 4715–4718 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  25. E. Pischkea, et al., From Kyoto to Paris: Measuring renewable energy policy regimes in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Mexico and the United States, Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 50, 82–91 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  26. C. Boomsma, E. Mors, Great green bribe or good practice? Community compensation in the context of Carbon Capture and Storage. International Association People Environment Studies Conference, Italy, 8-13 July 2018. Available at: https://www.alignccus.eu/sites/default/files/BoomsmaTerMors2018%20IAPS%20abstract.pdf (2018) [Google Scholar]
  27. N. Gaurina-Medimyrec, M. Novak, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Geological Sequestration of CO2 Available at: https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs-geological-sequestration-of-co2 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  28. P. Singha, M. Haines, A Review of Existing Carbon Capture and Storage Cluster Projects and FutureOpportunities, Energy Procedia 63, 7247–7260 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  29. E. Koytsoumpa, C. Bergins, E. Kakaras, The CO2 economy: Review of CO2 capture and reuse technologies, J. Supercrit. Fluids 132, 3–16 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  30. A. Ilinova, A. Cherepovitsyn, O. Yevseyeva, Stakeholder Management: An Approach in CCS Projects, Resources, 7(4), 8 (2019). [Google Scholar]
  31. G. Lavrenchenko, A. Kopytin, Prospects for the improvement and widespread use of CCS technologies, Tekhnicheskie Gasy. [Industrial Gases] 2, 3–15 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  32. G. Karkashadze, Y. Harin, Modern approaches to carbon dioxide disposal technologies in coal seams and rock masses, Mining information and analytical Bulletin (scientific and technical journal) 13, 291–306 (2007). [Google Scholar]
  33. S. Pereverzeva, P. Konosavsky, A. Tudvachev, I. Kharkhordin, Storage of industrial carbon dioxide emissions into geological structures, (in Russian), Vestnik of Saint-Peterburg University 7(1), 5–17 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  34. P. Tcvetkov, A. Cherepovitsyn, P. Fedoseev, Public perception of carbon capture and storage: A state-of-the-art overview, Heliyon, 5 12 (2019). Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844019365041 [Google Scholar]
  35. J. Lipponen, et al., The Politics of Large-scale CCS Deployment, Energy Procedia 114, 7581–7595 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  36. D. Reiner, J. Desbarats, P. Upham, H. Riesch, Review of the public participation practices for CCS and non-CCS projects in Europe, Report of the FP7 project «NearCO2» 11, 125 (2010). [Google Scholar]
  37. B. Terwel, F. Koudenburg, E. Ter Mors, Public responses to community compensation: the importance of prior consultations with local residents, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 24(6), 479–490 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  38. R. Malek, Results of due diligence study phase 3.5 on feasibility of Gorgon CO2 Sequestration Petroleum in Western Australia, Western Australian Department of Mines and Petroleum, 13–17 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  39. Y. Vasilev, P. Vasileva, A. Tsvetkova, International review of public perception of ccs technologies, 19th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM, 19 (5.1.), 415–422 (2019). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.