| Title | Public Engagements with Induced Seismicity: Lessons for Geothermal Energy in the UK’s Net-Zero Transition |
|---|---|
| Authors | Owen KING |
| Year | 2020 |
| Conference | World Geothermal Congress |
| Keywords | geo-energy, geoscience, enhanced geothermal systems, United Kingdom, induced seismicity, public engagement, net-zero transition, policy, knowledge controversies |
| Abstract | The UK net-zero energy transition is driving research on the prospects and risks of new subsurface energy technologies—including Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS), Mine-water Geothermal and Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS). However, as exemplified by the government’s moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for shale gas, complex underground processes such as induced seismicity often exceed scientific predictions. Since earthquakes induced by fracking were perceptible to local residents, either directly or via seismic monitoring, they escalated public opposition and undermined efforts to secure a social license for the industry. Geo-energy operations—like all major human interventions into the subsurface—produce earth tremors with the potential to generate controversies similar to fracking. The failure of fracking showed how simplistic representations of the subsurface may conceal substantial scientific uncertainties. Controversies around induced seismicity affirmed the key tenet of Science and Technology Studies: that regarding the public as misinformed and deficient of scientific understanding is ineffective in addressing such controversies. Rather, geoscience must actively engage with alternative forms of knowledge and first-hand experiences of subsurface events. This paper reports on the preliminary findings of a UKRI-funded research project on public engagement with induced seismicity. The overarching aim of this research is to identify transferable lessons from fracking-induced seismicity for new geo-energy projects, with a specific focus on EGS. The key objectives are to: (i) explore the social implications of a likely recasting of scientific networks, discourses and dissensus from the fracking controversy into the prospective geothermal industry; and (ii) examine how the public engages with scientific and political framings around induced seismicity, with a view to exploring opportunities for enhanced citizen participation in the co-production of geoscientific knowledge. |