Elizabeth A. Eide Director, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources National Research Council Penrose Conference, October 2013 Countering the fear of the unknown in new energy development projects: Educating and engaging the public and policy makers
Dec 16, 2015
Elizabeth A. Eide Director, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources
National Research CouncilPenrose Conference, October 2013
Countering the fear of the unknown in new energy development projects:
Educating and engaging the public and policy makers
“…To meet emissions goals, the U.K. is reluctantly turning to fracking for shale gas…the country appears to have few other options…” MIT Technology Review, 09/10/13
“Fracking friends and foes await decision on George Washington National Forest…” WAMU 88.5 podcast, 9/3/13
“Fracking fuels water fights in nation’s dry spots…” Farm and Ranch Weekly, 6/19/13
“Proposed fracking rules anger environmentalists, annoy industry…” National Journal Daily, 5/17/13
“The new boom: Shale gas fueling an American industrial revival…” Washington Post, 11/14/12
“4.4 earthquake hits the Geysers…” NBC Bay Area, 2/12/12
“Fracking led to 109 earthquakes in Youngstown, Ohio, study finds…” UPI.com, 8/19/13
“North Dakota saves for future with today’s oil riches…” Shale Gas Reporter, 9/26/13
Main themes
• Who, What:
• Why:
• How:
Public and policy makers (and the power of perception)
Energy research and development projects should be concerned
Changing perception through education and engagement
Who & WhatPublic and policy makers’ perceptions of and concerns about energy development projects:
- Costs: - Changes to environment: - Hazards and risks for people, property: - Impacts on energy portfolio:
Source: E. Eide
Consumers & funders Always local, sometimes global Real? Perceived? Use, access, convenience
Costs—national and personal
Changes to environment
Hazards and risks—damage to public H&S, infrastructure
Impacts on energy use—use, access, convenience
Aesthetics, noise, air quality, traffic, landscapes,water quality/quantity, jobs, global climate
How much to fund the R&D? What’s the ROI?How much will it save me?
Induced seismicityWater concerns
Where does this technology fit in the U.S. portfolio pie?
What
WhyCosts- Solar energy example: California #1 in total installed capacity and MW capacity; New Jersey #3 in total installed and #2 in MW capacity- Why: Solar Renewable Energy Credits, Renewable Portfolio Standard, federal stimulus funds- The Solyndra lessons: cheap solar cells from China, cyclicity and necessity of govt subsidies, cheap natural gas
http://energy.gov/eere/renewables/solar
WhyChanges to environment- Temporary issues: During initial development (well pads, infrastructure)—associated noise, traffic, new roads- Persistent issues during field lifetime (+ and -): Air quality, noise, water use, traffic, new jobs, etc.- Permanent issues: Legacy, reclamation, bonding
htt
p:/
/ww
w.c
onse
rvati
on.c
a.g
ov/d
og/
photo
_galle
ry/h
isto
ric_
mom
/pages/
photo
_01
.asp
x
Courtesy of Long Beach Public Library Collection (http://www.lbpl.org/)
htt
p:/
/ww
w.c
onse
rvati
on.c
a.g
ov/d
og/
photo
_galle
ry/d
rilli
ng_r
igs/
pages/
photo
_01
.asp
x
Source: California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal ResourcesPhoto credit: J. Jepson
WhyHazards and risks: Induced seismicity- Flooding examples: Cedar Rapids, IA: 100-yr flood, 1993 & 500-yr flood, 2008; Colorado, 1000-yr rainfall, 2013- Hazard & risk—described and quantified: Hazard—physical effects that could be generated; risk—losses or damage that could occur to humans or structures- Public does not understand risk: Risk communication and risk management are critical
SOURCE: Steve Zumwalt/FEMA
htt
p:/
/ww
w.f
em
a.g
ov/m
edia
-lib
rary
-data
/d0
5405
45-b
2d
b-4
86
9-9
f81-
f6abc3
de56
64/6
7949
.jpg
WhyImpacts on energy use: what’s in it for me?- Geothermal is undersold: It is compared to other renewables but is a baseload resource like fossil fuels- Needs a common language: Translate 5-10 GWe growth to how many towns/cities’ lights will stay on- Discuss short-term R&D goals as part of the long-term picture: Address legacy issues before they exist; how can geothermal help folks in high-population areas
htt
p:/
/ww
w.n
asa
.gov/v
isio
n/e
art
h/
lookin
gate
art
h/N
IGH
TLI
GH
TS.h
tml
Source: Courtesy of DMSP and NASA
HowChanging perception—education & engagement- Lessons from the Geysers: Collaboration, information exchange, transparency among operators, researchers, government agencies, public- Address immediate, persistent, long-term environment- Best-practice protocols, including hazard/risk assessment: Active collaboration among the same groups- Continued research & monitoring: Lab, field, modeling
Source: E. Eide
- Geothermal is undersold—be realistic, not pessimistic
- Combine science with organized program of education and engagement
- Hazards and risks, environmental concerns—stay in front, think long term
- In periods with tightened funding, leverage resources through collaborations
- Work to find incentives that will encourage geothermal growth/use as a long-term prospect
Key issues
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12915
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13355Induced seismicity YouTube video based on report:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuh9lHavdvc
Resources
Points for discussion—From Ladsi and Elizabeth- What have been the state, federal, industry, research experiences in the room in communicating with the public about geothermal energy? Successes? Challenges?
- What are some of the key partnerships that have generated successful public engagement?
- What information (and in what form) is most needed for public acceptance and education?