I denna avhandling studeras en ny teknik för att hantera växthuseffekten. Den nya tekniken heter koldioxidavskiljning och lagring (CCS) och granskades av FN:s klimatpanel 2005 och tillskrevs då möjligheterna att stå för 15-55% av alla CO2-reducering fram till 2100 och detta till en 30% lägre kostnad än vad som annars vore möjligt. EU är en framträdande pådrivare av CCS och för fram att växthuseffekten inte kan hanteras utan att CCS implementeras skyndsamt. CCS beskrivs i dessa sammanhang som en hållbar teknik. CCS är emellertid förbunden med långtidslagring, en betydande teknisk komplexitet och tillämpas främst på kolkraftverk. Storskaliga satsningar på CCS kan medföra att kolanvändningen ökar. Syftet med avhandlingen är att analysera de vetenskapliga och politiska ansträngningarna att visa att CCS är en eftersträvansvärd teknik för att hantera växthuseffekten. Utifrån perspektivet ekologisk modernisering och genom granskning av studier av vetenskapliga rapporter, artiklar i massmedia, politiska dokument och intervjuer genomförs studien. Scenerier och prognoser har en central funktion för att kunna påvisa att CCS är en eftersträvansvärd teknik. I flera av dessa scenarier framställs en närmast linjär teknikutveckling och flera betydelsefulla problem och hinder bortses från. CCS framstår som en teknik med stor teknisk och ekonomisk potential och i massmedia beskrivs CCS ofta som oumbärlig. En mer nyanserad bild framträder vid intervjuer med CCS-experter då fler osäkerheter och hinder lyfts fram. Förståelsen för varför denna teknik för stöd av många starka aktörer blir även tydligare. Den dominerande beskrivningen av CCS egenskaper och inverkan på energisystemen ligger i linje med det som är utmärkande för den ekologiska modernisering och således även för det dominerande sättet att bedriva energi- och klimatpolitik idag. / In this dissertation an emerging technology to manage climate change is studied. The technology is carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) and was reviewed by the IPCC in 2005. IPCC claims that CCS could contribute 15–55% to the cumulative mitigation effort worldwide until 2100 and reduce the costs of stabilizing CO2 concentrations by 30%. The EU promotes CCS and believes that climate change cannot be managed unless CCS is promptly implemented. In this context CCS is labelled as a sustainable technology. However CCS deals with long-term waste disposal, a significant technological complexity and is meant to be installed mainly in coal-fired power plants. Large scale implementation of CCS might lead to a rise in coal usage and concerns are raised this will impede the development of renewable energy. The aim of this dissertation is to analyze the scientific and political efforts to show that CCS is a rational and viable solution to the climate change problems. The study is conducted from the perspective of ecological modernization and is undertaken through a review of scientific reports, mass media articles, political documents and interviews. Scenarios and prognoses have a central position in making a future of large-scale CCS implementation plausible: through the scenarios, a linear development trend is visualized in which technological and scientific problems are assumed to be solved as CCS is implemented. CCS is described as a technology with substantial potential and is in the mass media often pictured as indispensable. A more nuanced picture appears when analyzing interviews with CCS-experts. The understanding of why this technology is supported by several influential actors is deepened. The dominating description of CCS and impact on the energy systems is compatible to the characteristics of ecological modernization and thus also to the predominating way of practising energy and climate politics today.

xvi, 203 p. : ill. (some col.) / Global climate negotiations have been at a standstill for over a decade now over the issue of distributing the responsibility of mitigating climate change among countries. During the past few years, countries such as India and China - the so-called emerging economies that were under no obligation to mitigate under the Kyoto Protocol - have increasingly come under pressure to accept limits comparable to those for industrialized countries. These countries, in turn, have strongly resisted these pressures. My dissertation examines India's participation in these ongoing climate negotiations. Based on qualitative interviews with relevant Indian officials, textual analysis and participant observation, I tell the story of why and how this so-called emerging economy has been resisting a cap on its emissions despite being one of the most vulnerable countries to the consequences of climate change. I draw upon the literatures of environmental justice, international relations, postcolonialism and political ecology to develop my dissertation and adopt a self-reflexive approach in my analysis. The need for global cooperation to address global environmental issues has arguably provided greater bargaining power to countries formerly marginalized in the global political economy. Following the dynamics of North-South environmental politics, India's climate politics consists of utilizing this power to increase its access to global resources as well as to hold hegemonic industrialized countries accountable for their historical and continuing exploitation of the environmental commons. A key aspect of India's climate politics consists of self-identification as a developing country. Developed countries with higher cumulative and per capita emissions are seen to have the primary responsibility to mitigate climate change and to provide financial and technological support to developing countries to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Developing countries are seen to have a right to pursue development defined as economic growth. The climate crisis is thus seen by my respondents as an opportunity to address the unequal status quo between developed and developing countries. I suggest that this crisis also creates opportunities to redefine development beyond a narrow focus on economic growth. This may be enabled if the demand for justice in an international context is extended to the domestic sphere. / Committee in charge: Shaul Cohen, Chairperson; Alec Murphy, Member; Ted Toadvine, Member; Peter Walker, Member; Anita Weiss, Outside Member