Perceived Risks of Energy Pipelines a Proposal for More Integrated Risk Management
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Graduate Studies Graduate Capstones 2017 Perceived Risks of Energy Pipelines A Proposal for More Integrated Risk Management Ho Wai Wong, Bernard Ho Wai Wong, B. (2017). Perceived Risks of Energy Pipelines A Proposal for More Integrated Risk Management (Unpublished report). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/33109 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/108757 report University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Perceived Risks of Energy Pipelines: A Proposal for More Integrated Risk Management by Bernard Ho Wai Wong A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN SUSTAINABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CALGARY, ALBERTA AUGUST, 2017 © Bernard Ho Wai Wong 2017 Abstract This project attempts to answer the following questions: Is there a risk perception gap regarding the safety of energy pipelines? How can the gap be closed if there is one? Research on perceived risks of pipelines is important because the public’s risk perceptions and the resulting attitudes, behaviors, and judgements can significantly impact projects and operations. Existing risk perception research has not included pipelines. This project integrates literature review and survey data analysis to identify patterns of perceived risks of pipelines. The project finds that the perceived risks of pipelines are strongly influenced by psychological, sociological, and anthropological factors. Also, this project finds that the media plays a large role in influencing the public’s perceptions. This project proposes strategies for managing the perception gap, including 1) improving perceived benefit distribution, 2) improving familiarity, 3) acknowledging and accommodating the public’s different world views, and 4) systematically managing perceptions in the media. ii Table of Contents Approval Page ................................................................................................................................................ i Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. iv Chapter 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 What is risk perception? ................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Research Question ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Relevance to Energy, Economy, and Environment ...................................................................... 4 1.4 Background ................................................................................................................................... 6 1.4.1 Technical Risks ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.4.2 Non-technical Risks .............................................................................................................. 8 Chapter 2 Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Psychometric Paradigm............................................................................................................... 11 2.1.1 Signals ................................................................................................................................. 15 2.2 Cultural Theory ........................................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Effects of Personal Attributes and Trust on Risk Perception ...................................................... 24 2.3.1 Gender ................................................................................................................................. 24 2.3.2 Age ...................................................................................................................................... 25 2.3.3 Location .............................................................................................................................. 25 2.3.4 Trust .................................................................................................................................... 26 2.4 Social Amplification of Risk....................................................................................................... 26 Chapter 3 Method .................................................................................................................................... 31 3.1 Data Sources ............................................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Methods....................................................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 4 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 37 4.1 Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 40 4.2 Findings....................................................................................................................................... 46 4.3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 48 Chapter 5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 57 5.1 Limitations and Future Research ................................................................................................ 59 Chapter 6 Reference ................................................................................................................................ 63 Appendix A Data Tables ..................................................................................................................... 72 iii List of Figures Figure 1: Cognitive Map for Unknown and Dread Risk Model Psychometric Paradigm .......................... 12 Figure 2: Grid and Group Model of Cultural Theory ................................................................................. 20 Figure 3: Social Amplification of Risk Framework .................................................................................... 27 Figure 4: Economy and Pipelines versus Environment as the Top Issue in Canada by Gender, Age, and Province (EKOS Data) ................................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 5: Economy versus Environment as the Top Issue in Canada by Gender, Age, Province, and Political Allegiance (Abacus Data) ............................................................................................................. 38 Figure 6: Economy versus Environment as the Top Issue in Canada by Gender, Age, and Political Allegiance (CBC Data) ............................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 7: Perceived Safety of Oil Transport by Pipelines by Gender, Age, and Province ......................... 39 Figure 8: Perceived Safety of Oil Transport by Trains by Province ........................................................... 39 Figure 9: Perceived Safety of Different Methods of Oil Transport (Quebec versus All of Canada) .......... 40 iv Chapter 1 Introduction Until 2015, North America has been experiencing an increase in crude oil production, including the increasing production in the Canadian oil sands (Rogoff, 2016). As a result, the energy industry faces challenges in accessing markets, and one of the reasons is limited pipeline capacity (NRC, 2016a). Pipeline safety performance measures suggest that pipeline transport is relatively safe, but the public still have concerns about safety and the environment which are accentuated by a series of high-consequence pipeline incidents across North America, including the Kalamazoo River oil pipeline spill in 2010. Energy pipeline development, like many other types of major energy development, often faces significant local opposition. Local concerns are often not what opinion leaders and decision- makers assume, and climate change is not an important factor that drives local opposition (Cleland, Bird, Fast, Sajid, & Simard, 2016). The research by Cleland et al. (2016) has found that important factors that drive local opposition include the following: Health and safety