Search

Woody biomass energy makes up a large share of renewable energy consumption in the EU, and the largest share in countries like Denmark. However, little is known about how the public perceive it. This paper presents the results of a questionnaire-based survey of the public in Denmark focusing on attitudes toward woody biomass for energy. The main findings are that, while more people favor than oppose it, a large proportion are undecided about the use of woody biomass. The survey also revealed a lack of knowledge about this energy source. A Best-Worst Scaling methodology revealed that Danes prioritize environmental sustainability concerns – namely biodiversity loss, the hindering of the development of other renewable energy sources and the climate change mitigation potential of woody biomass – over societal and/or economic ones when it comes to the promotion of woody biomass. Finally, it was found that concern about climate change, belief in the mitigation potential of woody biomass, and being younger explained the formation of positive attitudes toward woody biomass. Policy makers aiming to take public concerns into account in discussions about Denmark's energy future should focus more on minimizing the negative environmental impacts associated with woody biomass rather than on its economic benefits. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Global warming is a grave environmental issue that has caught the attention of the globe. Due to the consequences of global warming, UNFCCC has established the Kyoto Protocol and the Copenhagen Accord as measures of combating climate change due to the emission of greenhouse gases. It has been three years since the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and the Copenhagen Accord was just newly established. Therefore, there is a necessity to evaluate the performance of the Kyoto Protocol and to comment upon the Copenhagen Accord in its contributions toward climate change mitigation. Major greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters who are among the Kyoto Protocol ratifying developed nations exhibit the potential to achieve the desired Kyoto pledges through the aid of Clean Development Mechanisms (mainly from using renewable energy), as proposed in the Kyoto Protocol. However, the nullifying effects from non-ratified major emitters like the US and ratified but still developing countries have difficulties in adhering to the Kyoto Protocol. The Copenhagen Accord, on the other hand, is considered to be less ambitious and provides limited financial aid through the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund. The formulation of such a document indicates that modern societies continues to waste time in negotiations that emphasize on individual economic and political advantages, rather than taking into account true global considerations. It raises questions regarding how much time is needed before we decide to fully commit to the effective and collective efforts of climate change mitigation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]