Knowledge Sharing Conference
ERIA Discusses Role of Public Engagement and Communication in Advancing CCUS Success in Asia
The 17th Knowledge Sharing Conference, 27 September 2024: Southeast Asian countries are moving forward in their commitment to a carbon-free world by continuously developing Carbon, Capture, Utilisation, and Storage (CCUS) projects in the region. Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia are expected to begin CCUS operations before 2030, with Indonesia and Malaysia aiming to serve as a regional hub. Improvements in the public’s understanding of this emerging technology are essential to support the ongoing development of this carbon-reducing innovation. Public acceptance is also a significant factor in driving the success of CCUS projects in Asia along with government and private sector support.
The Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA), as the secretariat for the Asia CCUS Network (ACN), highlighted strategies to enhance public acceptance of CCUS projects during the 17th ACN Knowledge Sharing Conference, entitled “Public Engagement Strategy for Public Acceptance and Social License to Operate CCUS Project.”
Mr Shigeru Kimura, Special Advisor to the President on Energy Affairs, ERIA emphasised how public acceptance of each CCUS facility – carbon dioxide (CO2) capture, CO2 transportation by ships or pipelines, and CO2 storage – is crucial for Southeast Asian countries to move ahead with the deployment of decarbonisation technologies to reduce carbon emissions. With risks involved in this innovation, especially concerning CO2 storage, it is integral to uphold transparency in information sharing regarding CCUS for local communities and residents around the project site. Mr Kimura shared the example of Japan’s Tomakomai Carbon, Capture, and Storage (CCS) demonstration project and how the operator conducted their public engagement and communication strategies. The company provided transparent information about the CO2 storage activities to the residents and maintained friendly relations with communities through initiatives such as a site visit. In his concluding statement, Mr Kimura stated that because regulations do not serve as a social license of CCUS businesses, governments must encourage business entities to ‘pay attention to the public acceptance of CCS/CCUS facilities.’
Dr Gusti Sidemen, CCUS Research Fellow, ERIA, opened the Presentation Session and served as the event moderator. In his brief remark, Dr Sidemen stipulated that although a company may have the capital, technology, and license to kickstart a CCUS project, the public’s rejection could ultimately stop the development, thus highlighting the crucial role of society and people in the CCUS discussion. To showcase various mechanisms to drive public engagement and communication, ERIA invited Dr Farah Mulyasari, University Pertamina and Expert at Risk Communication at National Center of Excellence of CCS/CCUS, and member of IEAGHG Communication Team as the event speaker. Dr Mulyasari’s presentation outlined the rationale and challenges of CCUS communication, the significance of CCUS outreach, public engagement strategy, and best practices to give a general understanding of this integral topic.
There are several issues regarding CCUS which require the public’s participation and a robust communication method to avoid misperceptions about this emerging technology while also ensuring clarity on the process of the project development. Dr Mulyasari highlighted three key reasons to implement public engagement:
- Engage the stakeholders in climate change mitigation in transition towards a greener society
- Engage local stakeholders in managing perceived risks
- Public engagement is in line with and is a part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
There are two forms of public engagement, to inform at the beginning phase or to consult with the public about the technology that will be implemented in the area. Informing the public is ideal for awareness raising while consulting with the local community deepens their participation in the CCUS activities in their area. These measures serve to demonstrate the value and integrity of CCUS as a carbon-reducing technology while also educating society through increased public knowledge and removing myths concerning CCUS. It can also raise the urgency of deploying large-scale climate mitigation projects and issuing relevant policies and decisions. Dr Mulyasari explained that involving the public is to ensure that this technology ‘would be accepted at a later stage by communities and relevant stakeholders.’ She added, ‘The significance of CCUS outreach also lies in local communities because they are the ones who will be impacted in the short-term by this technology and they’re very specific for each project with unique needs, so, it means that people must feel safe in their project area, especially in their region.’ As such, communities must be included from the start and not after decisions have been made.
Creating a strong public communication strategy is equally important to overcome the wide range of challenges encompassing low public awareness of CCUS, risk perception namely in the storage process, the association of CCUS with fossil fuels which can spur a polarizing debate, and the rise of information sources that are unreliable or non-factual. By harnessing the power of language and image, a company can convey clear scientific information to the wider community, and thus, dispel or minimise public misperceptions of CCUS. This can be done through effective storytelling, drawing to scale, the careful selection of words, and infographics.
Failure to garner public acceptance could lead to the complete rejection of CCUS as was the case of Shell’s Barendrecht project in the Netherlands in 2010. The project’s downfall was fueled by numerous factors including duelling experts and industrial fatigue in the area, however, it was ultimately driven by the total lack of local support. This underscores the need for immediate consultation with the community from the beginning to avoid a lack of transparency or communication between the parties involved. Dr Mulyasari provided positive and negative examples of public engagement activities throughout four project phases: Project Planning & Development, Construction, Operation, and Project Closure.
During planning and development, an EIA can be conducted which would involve the community in the process of identifying the environmental and societal impacts of the project. However, she cautions that holding consultation sessions or meetings without considering the community’s inputs in the decision-making process could have a negative effect as the locals feel taken for granted. In the construction phase, a form of positive engagement is by assigning a team that is prepared and equipped for quick responses, while the negative form is to ignore the concerns of the communities. In the operation phase, community investment initiatives would foster communication with the public while avoiding such programmes could lead to a lack of communication. In the project closure phase, a company can involve the local communities in the future planning of the site which can lead to a mutually beneficial outcome. Negative activities like sudden closure without notice could lead to a public uproar due to the economic and social impact of such moves hence this is not a recommended action. As such, a public engagement strategy should begin with a CCUS stakeholder analysis followed by CCUS opinion-sharing factors, arguments, a framework message, CCUS local media landscape, a communication plan, and lastly, a baseline survey. In implementing this strategy, ‘hopefully, CCUS can be accepted by the community, so the license to operate can be acquired.’
Dr Mulyasari additionally provided information regarding the CCUS Gundih Project in Central Java, Indonesia and the strategies that were applied by PT Pertamina (Persero) to garner local support. The company emphasised the importance of local community involvement in its stakeholder analysis and carefully identified the initiatives that would shape the company’s messaging framework and communication action plan. Dr Mulyasari underlined the need for a baseline survey which was distributed to people who live on and around the project site. She explained, ‘A baseline survey is needed to know the local perception of this technology so the project can identify whether there are issues that need to be addressed in the first place.’
During the Open Discussion session, Dr Sidemen explained to the participants that although developing countries require time to develop CCUS, these nations can further their understanding of the technical and social issues behind this emissions-reducing tech, particularly on how it can curb the emissions of hard-to-abate sectors. Dr Mulyasari was asked to share her insights with the validation of baseline emissions given her experience as part of an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) project team. A primary objective of the team was to support one of the company’s ESG calculations or ratings, which required validating the baseline emissions. As such, the group first worked to identify the Scope 1-3 emissions to standardise the calculation for each scope. Dr Mulyasari underscored the notion that validating baseline emissions is less of a challenge in comparison to determining a standard calculation for the baseline emissions. ‘That was what our group had difficulties doing last year to improve the ESG rating and calculations,’ she added. She calls for companies, industries, and governments to determine a standard calculation for different types of industries which emit emissions differently, underlining the need to foster communication with relevant stakeholders.
Regarding regulatory improvements to enhance public communication, Dr Mulyasari praised Indonesia for having taken the steps to issue Presidential Regulation 14/2024 and Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Regulation 2/2023 which establishes the framework for carrying out CCUS operations. However, Dr Mulyasari shed light on how public engagement is not a precondition of the licensing process for project approval. A lack of involvement of local communities could lead to the same fate as Shell’s Barendrecht project. Furthermore, it is essential to ensure greater transparency and accessible information sharing related to the risks and benefits of CCUS to the public.
Dr Mulyasari additionally suggested that companies demonstrate to local communities that their needs are being met and that a benefit-sharing mechanism exists to ensure fair compensation. The final recommendation is to require a social impact assessment to showcase the social impact on the communities and share those insights with local residents. She informed participants that the private sector can take a leading role in CCUS project communication and engagement. Success in this regard could increase the private sector’s value in terms of their economic and industry position if they can garner the trust of communities during the green transition. In her concluding remarks, Dr Mulyasari stated that public engagement is very dynamic as is the public, hence, the engagement and communication plan must also be dynamic.
Dr Han Phoumin, Senior Energy Economist, ERIA explained that although public engagement can be overlooked, it plays a significant role in CCUS projects. In his Closing Remarks, Dr Phoumin added, ‘If CCUS is to be successful, I think the early stage of engagement of stakeholders, when people address their concerns, particularly the concern about the environment and what is in their backyard, is important so that that they understand the role of CCUS in abating emissions.’ This demonstrates how essential local communities are in CCUS deployment, further driving the need to focus on public engagement from the early stage of project development.
DOWNLOAD PRESENTATION