Deliberation over new hydrogen energy technologies: evidence from two Citizens’ Panels in the UK

Abstract

Hydrogen energy and hydrogen energy technologies are still largely at the experimental and demonstration project stages. If the hydrogen is produced sustainably from renewable sources, it may be a potential means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and achieving other environmental objectives. But hydrogen technologies are still ‘emergent’ – seeking a niche to compete against incumbent technologies in stationary and mobile applications. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (buses and automobiles) and hydrogen refuelling stations have been developed, but they have yet to become established in the market. Much attention has been given to technical risk assessment of hydrogen as a hazardous gas, but broader ‘whole systems’ appraisals of a hydrogen infrastructure (for domestic and transport uses) are lacking. Importantly, public risk perceptions are seen as crucial factors influencing acceptance or rejection. This paper examines qualitative evidence about public attitudes towards hydrogen energy technologies and compares results from two Citizens’ Panels carried out recently in England and Wales. These Citizens’ Panels enabled selected samples of the general public to question the experts and deliberate over the issues raised. The paper highlights unresolved questions concerning ‘critical trust’ of experts and other stakeholders, and citizens’ demands for greater familiarity with the hydrogen technologies in practical, everyday settings, in order to offer judgements about their desirability and feasibility.

Keywords:

• deliberation
• new technologies
• hydrogen
• citizen panel

Acknowledgements

The research on which this paper is based was funded by the EPSRC through the UK Sustainable Hydrogen Energy Consortium: http://www.uk-shec.org. We wish to thank the local authorities in Teesside and Wales for their assistance in recruiting members of the Citizens’ Panels. We also wish to thank all the participants and experts for their contributions to the meetings. The views expressed in this paper are the sole responsibility of the authors.