Quantifying and monitoring
potential ecosystem impacts
of geological carbon storage
Quantifying and monitoring poential ecoystem
Fact Sheet 6
A potentially controversial scientific project - engaging
with the public, authorities and stakeholders
The goal of the QICS project is to provide useful knowledge and data for the benefit of a wide range of stakeholders interested
in the development of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS); specifically regarding potential ecosystem impacts of a leak
from a sub-seabed geological CO2 storage site, and suitable monitoring strategies. These stakeholders include CCS developers
(industry), regulators, policy makers and the general public.
The QICS experimental release of carbon dioxide could be seen as a deliberate ‘pollution’ of a Scottish marine bay, in an Area
of Outstanding Natural Beauty with a heavy reliance on tourism and marine activities. As such the experiment was potentially
controversial; it was essential for the project to gain the understanding and approval of regulators, interest groups and
especially the local community.
In order to maximise both outcomes and acceptance of the project we planned a structured communication and engagement
strategy. Initially we sought outline approval from relevant regulators and national authorities. Having identified a site for the
experiment we then engaged with local authorities, residents and workers, land owners and users. Stakeholders, organisations
and groups with an interest in the project and more widely in CCS, were then
invited to join the project advisory panel. From the outset, dialogue by project
members emphasized that our role was neither to advocate nor to criticise
Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS), but to generate knowledge from a
scientific programme.
Gaining support for regulators
The project has taken care to both explain the experiment and obtain
consent from the relevant parties. As a novel experiment, no established
regulatory pathway existed, this was helpful, allowing us to directly
engage with senior individuals, rather than embarking on a bureaucratic
procedure. Key organizations in this process were the regulatory
authority, in this case Marine Scotland; the owners of the land site;
The Crown Estate, the statutory body responsible for the UK marine
sediments; the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, relevant NGOs
and the local planning authorities. The regulator and local authorities
were also invited to join the Stakeholder Advisory Panel.
www.qics.co.uk
Quantifying and monitoring potential ecosystem
Quantifying and monitoring
impacts of geological carbon storage
potential ecosystem impacts
of geological carbon storage
Stakeholder Advisory Panel
Following success in other projects, the stakeholder group of organisations with an interest in CCS was seen as an essential
component of the project, comprising representatives from industry, regulators, government, planners, marine users, public
and non-governmental organisations. The panel provided a forum to optimize the scientific planning, project relevance,
engagement and communication strategies, as well as ensure that all environmental standards were met. Discussions ensured
that any negative impact on local businesses was minimised. A secondary benefit of such a group, with multiple perspectives on
CCS, was the discussion generated. Interaction between panel members and QICS scientists occurred via occasional workshops,
although sometimes through teleconference, in person or by email.
Local public consultation and benefit
A central element of the communications strategy was to involve local
communities who might interact with the experiment. Even though
formal consents and approvals for the submarine release of CO2 had
been obtained, the cooperation of people local to the planned release
site was essential for it to be successful. The first step, prior to work
starting, was to hold a public consultation in the local village closest
to the release site to inform people about the purpose and nature of
the experiment, to reassure them of minimal disruption to normal
activities and to let members of the public voice their concerns and
opposition, or support, in open debate. Proactive contact with local
newspapers before the meeting resulted in news interviews and
internet articles. The obvious local interest question is ‘why here?’ QICS
researchers explained the technical and scientific criteria required for
the experiment and how we could extrapolate from a shallow bay to
operational CCS in the North Sea.
Additionally local markets were leafleted and radio and television
interviews given. School visits were arranged and the QICS site
was included in the local research institute annual open day, with
open seminars for the general public. Information posters were
displayed at the CO2 shore station and in the nearby campsite. The
QICS experimental site was manned 24 hours a day 7 days a week
during the CO2 release phase and a Facebook group (QICS local
forum) maintained during the CO2 gas release to inform about daily
activities and preliminary findings. In communicating with concerned
parties it proved useful to put the scale of the experimental release in
perspective. We contrasted the amount of CO2 released (on average
140 kg per day) with typical CO2 production rates of, for example,
households and compared the expected area of disruption (of the
order of 15 m radius) with the disturbance caused by typical trawling
activities. QICS project researchers used local facilities, where possible,
to contribute to the local economy.
QICS Project Office
www.bgs.ac.uk/qics/ www.qics.co.uk
Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UK
Project Leader: Jerry Blackford
QICS [email protected]
led by Plymouth Marine Laboraory in the UK, contact Jerry Blackford | [email protected] further information
Contact: