Bioenergy Discourse: A Comparison Across Media and Technologies

This study compares the discourse surrounding bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) across two media: social media and academic literature.Through an automated content analysis of Twitter/X posts (n = 11,314) and peer-reviewed articles (n = 140), we identified significant differences in the prevalence of techno-optimism, techno-skepticism, and engagement with critical issues related to socio-environmental impacts and technological uncertainty for these bioproducts.The findings reveal that social media content is generally more optimistic and less critical of these technologies compared to the academic literature, with a notable lack of discussion on the potential social and environmental consequences.Furthermore, our analysis highlights a greater polarization of views in relation to BECCS, with both techno-optimism and techno-skepticism being more prominent across both media.The study emphasizes the importance of effective science communication, balanced evaluations of risks and benefits, and closer collaboration between academia and businesses to foster a more informed and nuanced discourse on disruptive technologies in the bioeconomy.Our findings also emphasize the need for scholars and businesses operating in the biomaterials and bioproducts industry to adopt a critical approach to media literacy.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
BioProducts Business
Published
2024-12-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22382/bpb-2024-003
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Bioenergy Discourse: A Comparison Across Media and Technologies

Hamish van der Ven, Rawie Elnur
BioProducts Business
Climate Change Communication and Perception
article

Bioenergy Discourse: A Comparison Across Media and Technologies

Hamish van der Ven, Rawie Elnur
article en

Abstract

This study compares the discourse surrounding bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) across two media: social media and academic literature.Through an automated content analysis of Twitter/X posts (n = 11,314) and peer-reviewed articles (n = 140), we identified significant differences in the prevalence of techno-optimism, techno-skepticism, and engagement with critical issues related to socio-environmental impacts and technological uncertainty for these bioproducts.The findings reveal that social media content is generally more optimistic and less critical of these technologies compared to the academic literature, with a notable lack of discussion on the potential social and environmental consequences.Furthermore, our analysis highlights a greater polarization of views in relation to BECCS, with both techno-optimism and techno-skepticism being more prominent across both media.The study emphasizes the importance of effective science communication, balanced evaluations of risks and benefits, and closer collaboration between academia and businesses to foster a more informed and nuanced discourse on disruptive technologies in the bioeconomy.Our findings also emphasize the need for scholars and businesses operating in the biomaterials and bioproducts industry to adopt a critical approach to media literacy.

BioProducts BusinessVol. 09(03)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.