The public engagement, education and outreach for CCS Webinar Series kicked off this September with a stellar opportunity to join three international public engagement experts, as they reflected on the key research findings and lessons learned from over 10 years of social research and project engagement experience. World-renowned social researcher and IEAGHG Social Research Network Chair Peta Ashworth started the discussion by setting out her key lessons learned, and what future challenges and opportunities she perceives for public engagement with CCS. An expert panel made up of Sarah Wade, Environmental Regulation and Policy Consultant and Coordinator of the Outreach Working Group for the US Department of Energy Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Initiative, and Norm Sacuta, Communication Manager at the Petroleum Technology Research Centre and Director of Communications for the IEAGHG Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project, then discussed these conclusions and their own experiences of engaging the public, before opening the Webinar up to questions from the audience. This entire Webinar Series has been designed to hear directly from the experts and project practitioners researching and delivering public engagement, education and outreach best practice for CCS. This first Webinar combined elements of social research with real world application and discussion, showcasing important learnings, and concluding with links to further publications and resources for those wishing to learn more.

1. Webinar Series: Public engagement, education and
outreach for carbon capture and storage
Webinar 1: Lessons learned and tackling future challenges
Thursday, 1 September and Friday, 2 September 2016

2.  Over thirty years' experience working in a range of senior
management and research roles.
 Renowned expertise in the field of energy, communication
and stakeholder engagement, and technology
assessment.
 Co-Chairs the Independent Advisory Panel for the
Radioactive Waste Management Facility project for the
Department of Industry, Innovation and Science –
Australia
 Chair of the IEAGHG Social Research Network since its
inception in 2009.
 Conceptualised and led the Science into Society Group
(SISG) within CSIRO’s Division of Earth Science and
Resource Engineering.
Chair in Sustainable Energy Futures, University of Queensland
Professor Peta Ashworth

3.  More than 25 years' experience in environmental
regulation and policy, with primary activities now
focused on public outreach, regulations, and policy
frameworks for CCS technology.
 Outreach Consultant to the Midwest Regional Carbon
Sequestration Partnership.
 Coordinator of the Outreach Working Group for the US
Department of Energy Regional Carbon Sequestration
Partnership Initiative since its inception in 2003.
 Co-authored the NETL Outreach Best Practices
Manual, and supported the production of the World
Resources Institutes CCS Guidelines.
 Chair of the Citizen Advisory Committee of the National
Risk Assessment Project (NRAP)
Principal, WADE LLC
Sarah Wade

4. • Joined PTRC in 2008.
• Directed the communications for the IEAGHG
Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project.
• Developed the first draft of a strategic
communications plan for PTRC’s Aquistore deep
saline CO2 storage project
• Delivers communication support to PTRC’s Heavy Oil
Research Network (HORNET).
• MA in English from the University of Alberta in
Edmonton and an MFA in Creative Writing from the
University of British Columbia in Vancouver.
Communication Manager, Petroleum Technology Research Centre
(PTRC)
Norm Sacuta

5. QUESTIONS
 We will collect questions during
the presentation.
 Your Webinar Host will pose
these question to the
presenters after the
presentation.
 Please submit your questions
directly into the GoToWebinar
control panel.
The webinar will start shortly.

6. Synthesis of CCS Social Research
Ashworth P, Dowd A-M, Rodriguez S, Jeanneret T, Mabon L and Howell, R (2013)
Synthesis of CCS social research: Reflections and current state of play in 2013.
CSIRO EP134303, Australia
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/synthesis-ccs-social-research-
reflections-and-current-state-play-2013
 PDF available.
 Summary of the key results/
findings of a comprehensive
body of social research into
CCS.
 Guide to emerging thinking and
best practices for those
working to improve public
understanding and acceptance
of CCS technology.
 Extended bibliographical
references to assist with further
research.

7. Acknowledgement
This works draws on information and research from a range of
international collaborators:
 The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation,
Australia
 Wade LLC, US
 The Pacific Northwest National Laboratories, US
 The University of California, US
 The University of Illinois, US
 Cambridge University, UK
 Edinburgh University, UK
 The Energy research Centre, Netherlands
 Leiden University, Netherlands
 Mizuho Research Institute, Japan
 The University of Calgary, Canada

8. Three Ts to four Ls
 Trust
 Time
 Transparency
 Livelihoods
 Lifestyles
 Local
 Listen

9. A framework of interactions for CCS projects
=
Local
context
Framing CCS
Information
Governance
Trust Risk
perception
External influences
Level of
acceptance
Communication and engagement
processes

10. Implications for CCS projects
 Implement tools such as social site characterisation and
communication and engagement toolkits in host/ potential
host communities.
 Establish a baseline and observe the impacts of projects on
host communities.
 Develop communities of practice for project communication
and engagement staff ensure project experiences are
openly shared.
 Arrange knowledge sharing between social researchers and
projects – share findings and identify gaps in knowledge
and potential challenges.

11. Suggested future research
 Focus on developing countries – test findings in these
specific locations.
 Continue investigation of psychological factors, values, and
world views – impacts on project acceptance.
 Host site compensation models – test in various cultural
locations in conjunction with international researchers.
 Conduct further investigations around perceptions in
relation to transportation of CCS, in particular issues related
to the siting of pipelines for the transportation of CO2.

12. Energy technologies can be divisive
I don’t think this technology should be utilised at all let alone in
any populated area.
Definitely would not be happy if it was proposed in my area.
I'm not sure how far away would make me feel better.
Provided I was consulted along the way and I was sure it was
completely safe - go ahead!
After reading all the information I think I would be okay if they
were to start a project in my area, I am not sure how far they
should be, far away enough that there is minimal noise, traffic
congestion, and an eyesore to the environment?

13. Local versus global benefits
While it is often acknowledged that the industrial impact of
new developments is felt by local communities, the larger
benefits on which these projects are sold to governments,
investors, shareholders, and society as a whole are
disproportionately not local.
Gallois,C., Ashworth, P., Leach, J. and K. Moffat (2016) The Language of Science and Social Licence to
Operate. Journal of Language and Psychology.
• Projects are governed by resource availability –
limited flexibility
• Meaning of local
• Non-accommodative communication – us versus
them

14. Audience Approach
Influential stakeholders:
Politicians, CEO’s, Media, Finance,
NGO’s , Insurance
$$$
Large group process
Special functions
Parliament engagement
Community Workshops
Shop fronts
Meetings
One-on-one
Education Schools programs
Universities
VET sector
Project Specific Local regions:
Influential
Community
Education
14 |

15. Education and information

16. The four Ls
 Livelihoods
 Lifestyles
 Local
 Listen

17. Please submit questions in English directly through
the GoToWebinar control panel
Q. What is potentially different when we
talk about commercial scale projects?
Much of the good work that has been
done is for contained and finite projects
with 3-5 year time frames. What is
anticipated to change when we are
presenting projects of larger volumes and
longer duration?
Q. Given that the funding for large scale
CCS projects is not as forthcoming as we
once hoped and there are challenges in
continuing the pipeline of demonstrator
projects – what impact do you think this
will have/ is having on public engagement
with CCS?

18. Further research

19. What happens to CO2 underground?
Q&A from the IEAGHG Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project
PTRC for the Global CCS Institute:
Sacuta, Norm. What Happens to CO2 Underground?, Feb 2014,
Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Limited, Melbourne.
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/what-happens-when-
co2-stored-underground-qa-ieaghg-weyburn-midale-co2-
monitoring-and
 PDF, online version and limited printed
copies available on request
 Short, simple, research-supported
answers to 46 of the most commonly
asked questions about CCS, CO2
monitoring and storage.
 Answers are based on the 12 years of
research findings and experiences of
the IEAGHG Weyburn-Midale CO2
Monitoring and Storage Project.
 The Q&A document was tested with
two community reference groups and
peer reviewed by a panel of public
engagement experts.
 A summary of the focus group and
expert panel results are also available
to download.

20. Communications for CCS
Identifying the benefits, managing risk and maintaining the trust of stakeholders
Global CCS Institute: Max Prangnell, Feb 2013
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/communications-
carbon-capture-and-storage-identifying-benefits-managing-risk-
and
 PDF, online version
available.
 Analysis of the
communication and
engagement activities of
five recent CCS
demonstration projects
based on interviews with
the communication and
engagement staff from the
following projects:
– ROAD (Netherlands)
– Compostilla (Spain)
– Longannet (UK)
– Weyburn (Canada)
– Jaeschwalde
(Germany)

21. Social site characterisation and stakeholder engagement
Case Study on the ULCOS CCS Project
Jammes, L, Vervier, p. (2013) Social Site Characterisation and
Stakeholder Engagement, France.
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/social-site-characterisation-
stakeholder-management
 PDF with Executive Summary available in
Japanese language translation available.
 Set of four detailed case studies designed to
demonstrate a methodology for creating a
favourable negotiating environment for all
CCS project stakeholders.
 The processes are applied to the original
ULCOS CCS Project, Lorraine, France.
 Each case study provides detailed process
descriptions, actual project results and a
reflection on the usefulness of the processes
used, for the following stakeholder analysis
and strategy techniques:
― Social site characterisation
1. Context Analysis
2. Stakeholder identification and mapping
3. Materiality analysis of project related
issues
― Stakeholder Engagement Planning

22. Understanding how individuals perceive carbon
dioxide
CSIRO: Kenshi Itaoka, Aya Saito, Mia Paukovic, Marjolein de Best-Waldhober,
Anne-Maree Dowd, Talia Jeanneret, Peta Ashworth and Mallory James
June 2012
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/understanding-how-individuals-
perceive-carbon-dioxide-implications-acceptance-carbon
 PDF available.
 Investigation into public
perception of CO2 in Japan,
Australia, and the Netherlands.
 Analysis of how perceptions of
CO2 relate to perceptions of
CCS, and examines how
improved information provision
about the underlying properties
and characteristics of CO2
influences individual attitudes
towards low-carbon energy
options, particularly CCS.

23. Social site characterisation
CSIRO: Sarah Wade (AJW Inc, USA) and Sallie Greenberg (USA),
June 2011
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/social-site-
characterisation-concept-application
 PDF, e-book, online version
available.
 Social science literature
review.
 Practical activities, tools and
resources to improve
understanding of a projects
local community.
 Can be used in conjunction
with the Communications and
Engagement Toolkit for CCS
Projects

24. Communication/Engagement toolkit for CCS
projects
CSIRO: Peta Ashworth , Judith Bradbury, C.F.J. (Ynke) Feenstra, Sallie
Greenberg, Gretchen Hund, Thomas Mikunda, Sarah Wade and Hylton
Shaw, Mar 2011
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/communication-and-
engagement-toolkit-ccs-projects
 PDF, e-book, online version
 Globally trialled and peer
reviewed practical guide for
CCS developers
 Contains tools, activities and
work sheets
 Can be used in conjunction
with:
― Social Site
Characterisation Toolkit
― Communicating the
Risks of CCS

25. Communicating the risks of CCS
Wade LLC: Judith Bradbury (US), Sallie Greenberg (US), Sarah Wade,
(US), June 2011
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/communicating-risks-ccs
 PDF, online version available.
 Risk communication research
and best practice review.
 Lessons learned from five
North American CCS case
studies.
 Five-step strategy for
understanding community
views of projects and
developing risk communication
programs.
 Links to further risk
communication resources
 Can be used in conjunction
with the Communications and
Engagement Toolkit

26. Communicating CCS: A Japanese Framework
Chiaki Shinohara, Japan NUS Co. Ltd (JANUS), Oct, 2014
www.globalccsinstitute.com/insights/authors/ChiakiShinohara/2014/
10/02/communicating-ccs-japanese-framework
 Summary of the results and outputs
of a three phase program from the
Japanese Knowledge Network
available.
 Assessments of existing
communication efforts to date.
 Development of an ‘Argumentation
model’ supporting CCS in Japan.
 Links to a communications
framework for communicating CCS
to the general public including tools
developed to build the Japanese
public’s awareness of CCS and
address common questions.
 Links to all resources and a
webinar explaining the three phase
project.

27. Communication, project planning and management
for CCS projects: an international comparison
CSIRO: Peta Ashworth , Judith Bradbury, C.F.J. (Ynke) Feenstra,
Sallie Greenberg, Gretchen Hund, Thomas Mikunda and Sarah Wade,
Nov 2010
www.globalccsinstitute.com/publications/communication-project-
planning-and-management-carbon-capture-and-storage-projects
 PDF, online version available.
 Summary lessons from a
series of case study reports
from CSIRO-led international
research team.
 Should be read in conjunction
with case studies:
– Barendrecht Project – The
Netherlands
– Carson Project – United
States of America
– Future Gen Project –
United States of America
– Zero Gen Project –
Australia
– CO2CRC Otway Project –
Australia

28. Useful links
 World Resources Institute - Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon
Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage Projects
www.wri.org/publication/ccs-and-community-engagement
 ESTEEM: Engage Stakeholders through a Systematic Toolbox to Manage
New Energy Projects
www.esteem-tool.eu/
 National Energy Technology Laboratory, US DOE – Best Practices for Public
Outreach and Education for Carbon Storage Projects
http://bit.ly/2bsDIEW
 B. Fischhoff – Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged
http://bit.ly/2bCH4Tq
 UK Government CCS FEED knowledge products
http://bit.ly/2b6mY2v