Exploring the critical role of social acceptance in the deployment of hydrogen and carbon capture storage technologies
Imagine a brilliant medical breakthrough that could save millions of lives—but patients refuse to take it. This is the paradox facing climate technologies today. Across the globe, scientists and engineers have developed innovative solutions to decarbonize our energy systems, with hydrogen and carbon capture and storage (CCS) standing out as particularly promising. Yet repeatedly, even the most technically sound projects have stumbled against an invisible barrier: public resistance.
The reality is stark—technical feasibility alone cannot guarantee real-world implementation. As one study revealed, CCS projects have faced delays and cancellations due to public and policy opposition, with concerns centering on "perceived efficacy, potential risks, costs and benefits" . Similarly, while hydrogen technologies are generally viewed positively, this support often weakens when projects move into local communities 5 .
This article explores the emerging science of social acceptance—the critical human dimension that may ultimately determine whether these promising technologies can fulfill their potential in the race against climate change.
Social acceptance isn't a simple yes-or-no question. Researchers typically break it down into three interconnected dimensions:
These dimensions operate at different levels—from national policy debates to local implementation—and success requires progress on all fronts 5 .
Hydrogen acts as an energy carrier that can be produced from various sources:
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) involves capturing carbon dioxide emissions from industrial processes or power generation and storing them safely underground in geological formations. When combined, these technologies create "H2/CCS chains"—hydrogen production with captured carbon stored rather than released 1 .
| Technology | Primary Function | Key Benefits | Public Perception Challenges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hydrogen Energy | Energy storage and carrier | Versatile, clean combustion | Safety concerns, cost perception |
| Carbon Capture | Emission reduction | Allows continued fossil fuel use | Perceived as "band-aid" solution |
| Combined H2/CCS | Low-carbon hydrogen production | Bridge technology | Complexity, trust in operators |
While theoretical frameworks provide structure, understanding real-world perceptions requires gathering empirical data. A groundbreaking study conducted in Albania offers a fascinating case study in measuring public acceptance of hydrogen technologies—the first of its kind in the Western Balkans 5 .
Researchers employed a structured online survey of 440 respondents between May and July 2025, using a questionnaire adapted from internationally validated instruments. The study utilized a mixed sampling approach to ensure diverse representation across demographic groups, with strong reliability measures (Cronbach's alpha of 0.84) ensuring consistent results 5 .
The survey examined five key areas:
The findings revealed a complex picture of public perception—simultaneously promising and challenging:
Interactive chart showing awareness and knowledge levels from the Albanian study
| Awareness Level | Percentage of Respondents |
|---|---|
| Had heard of hydrogen |
84.5%
|
| Familiar with hydrogen technologies |
23.6%
|
| Felt well-informed about hydrogen |
9.3%
|
| Wanted to learn more |
78.0%
|
The data reveals a striking awareness-knowledge gap: while most people had heard of hydrogen, very few felt truly informed about its technologies. This suggests that general awareness campaigns alone are insufficient without deeper educational components 5 .
| Perception Aspect | Agreement Percentage |
|---|---|
| Acknowledged role in reducing emissions |
73.4%
|
| Recognized potential to lower energy dependence |
70.7%
|
| Viewed hydrogen as too dangerous near residential areas |
34.5%
|
| Were undecided about safety concerns |
50.0%
|
Perhaps most tellingly, when asked about barriers to acceptance, respondents highlighted lack of information (50.5%) and infrastructure (19.5%) as the most significant obstacles—far exceeding outright opposition 5 .
The Albanian study demonstrates several crucial patterns in technology acceptance:
The strong interest in learning more (78%) combined with current knowledge gaps suggests significant potential for shifting perceptions through education
The high percentage of undecided respondents on safety questions (50%) indicates a window of opportunity for transparent risk communication
The recognition of hydrogen's role in emissions reduction (73.4%) provides a strong foundation for building support
These findings align with international research showing that "knowledge and awareness of CCUS technologies may affect support" and that "trust in government and developers" plays a crucial role in shaping positive perceptions .
Beyond general public perception, understanding specific stakeholder positions reveals the complex dynamics shaping technology acceptance. A German study analyzing stakeholder perspectives through expert interviews identified both contentious and consensual areas in the hydrogen and CCS debate 1 .
The research uncovered a fundamental conflict between different approaches to decarbonization, particularly regarding "the speed of phasing-out fossil energies" 1 . Stakeholders from industry and government sectors tended to view CCS as necessary for maintaining energy security and competitiveness during the transition, while environmental NGOs expressed concern that reliance on these technologies might slow the shift to renewables.
Despite these differences, the study identified potential compromise positions that could build broader acceptance. These included:
Linking hydrogen technologies with both renewable and fossil energy sources rather than treating them as mutually exclusive
Limiting CCS applications to specific sectors like industrial processes or bioenergy where alternatives are limited
Emphasizing transparency and citizen participation in decision-making processes
The researchers concluded that "consensus can be reached by balancing ecological and economic arguments" rather than insisting on purist positions 1 .
Across multiple studies, several key factors emerge as critical determinants of whether hydrogen and CCS technologies gain public support:
| Factor | Role in Technology Acceptance | Research Insights |
|---|---|---|
| Transparent Communication | Builds understanding and addresses concerns | Lack of information was the top-cited barrier (50.5% of respondents) 5 |
| Procedural Fairness | Ensures community voices are heard in siting decisions | Fair and transparent decision-making processes build support for CCUS projects |
| Benefit Sharing | Distributes project advantages to host communities | Essential for local acceptance, particularly for CCUS projects |
| Trusted Messengers | Provides credible information through respected sources | Educational institutions were the most trusted information source in Albania 5 |
| Risk Management | Addresses safety and environmental concerns | CCS is perceived less positive than CCU mainly due to risks associated with storage and transport 1 |
Based on the Albanian study, educational institutions emerged as the most trusted source of information about hydrogen technologies 5 .
The journey toward widescale implementation of hydrogen and carbon capture technologies is as much about winning hearts and minds as it is about technical innovation. The research reveals a clear path forward:
Move beyond simple awareness campaigns to education that addresses both benefits and risks transparently. The Albanian study shows people want to learn but feel currently underinformed.
Engagement must begin early and continue throughout project development. The German stakeholder research demonstrates that finding common ground is possible when all voices are heard.
Recognize that local concerns matter as much as global climate benefits. Successful implementation requires ensuring host communities see clear benefits and have genuine input.
The challenge is significant, but the potential payoff is enormous. By combining technical excellence with social intelligence, we can build not just the technological infrastructure for a low-carbon society, but the social foundation needed to support it.
The conversation about our climate future is ongoing—and your voice matters. To learn more about these technologies and form your own informed opinion, consider exploring resources from educational institutions, attending public consultation events, or engaging with reputable scientific organizations driving the research forward.