Do the existing correlations between and among CCS centric policy and strategy substantially support the outcomes elated to determination, management and communication of CCS risk in a holistic approach
What environmental factors and implications have been articulated in the process of understanding risk management aspects and initiating control measures that are socially relevant and economically feasible
This research effort might be expanded to include such far reaching dynamics related CCS as relative cost of technologies associated with CCS risk assessment, management and communication. In fact the current level of research does not adequately recognize the need for future developments in the sphere of relative cost reductions with newer and efficient technologies. For example there is a huge gap between socially and economically feasible technologies and their prices or costs, i.e. insurance premiums. Insurance companies have gone one step further by developing a highly advanced system of metrics in insuring CCS sites. This aspect has received much less attention in the current literature on the subject.
Current literature on the subject of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is basically influenced by a characteristic paradigmatic bias in favor of quantitative assessment of risk as a purely scientific system of metrics that invariably seeks to address fears and concerns of a highly scientific community of researchers while the social scientist's predicament of understanding the holistic picture of CCS related outcomes is ignored (Veltman, Singh, & Hertwich , 2010). Thus this study focuses on such strategically significant CCS related issues as the technical risk mitigation process chain analysis for identification and delineation of risks and their variability impacts on the environment; determination and management of risk; risk mitigation related regulatory frameworks vs provision of incentives; and above all the viability of developing and sustaining technologies for constant engagement of technology providers, and insurers in a parallel and congruent risk management process (Jagger, 2009).
According to Delbeke, Klaassen van Ierland and Zapfel the role of environmental policy making bodies in Europe and elsewhere has been enlarged to include a dynamic process of CCS impact assessment and the cost related outcomes of technologies that are being developed and adopted for the purpose. While these authors do not obviously make an effort to build a