IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v68y2014icp170-182.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Punctuated continuity: The technological trajectory of advanced biomass gasifiers

Author

Listed:
  • Kirkels, Arjan F.

Abstract

Recent interest in biofuels and bio-refineries has been building upon the technology of biomass gasification. This technology developed since the 1980s in three periods, but failed to break through. We try to explain this by studying the technological development from a quasi-evolutionary perspective, drawing upon the concepts of technological paradigms and technological trajectories. We show that the socio-economic context was most important, as it both offered windows of opportunity as well as provided direction to developments. Changes in this context resulted in paradigm shifts, characterized by a change in considered end-products and technologies, as well as a change in companies involved. Other influences on the technological trajectory were firm specific differences, like the focus on a specific feedstock, scale and more recently biofuels to be produced. These were strengthened by the national focus of supporting policies, as well as specific attention for multiple technologies in policies of the USA and European Commission. Over each period we see strong variation that likely benefitted the long term development of the technology. Despite policy efforts that included variation and institutionalization, our case shows that the large changes in socio-economic context and the technological challenges were hard to overcome.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirkels, Arjan F., 2014. "Punctuated continuity: The technological trajectory of advanced biomass gasifiers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 170-182.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:68:y:2014:i:c:p:170-182
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421514000731
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.01.036?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirkels, Arjan F., 2012. "Discursive shifts in energy from biomass: A 30year European overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 4105-4115.
    2. Piterou, Athena & Shackley, Simon & Upham, Paul, 2008. "Project ARBRE: Lessons for bio-energy developers and policy-makers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 2044-2050, June.
    3. Fleck, James, 1994. "Learning by trying: the implementation of configurational technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 637-652, November.
    4. Kliman, Melvin L., 1983. "Methanol, natural gas, and the development of alternative transportation fuels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 8(11), pages 859-870.
    5. Bakker, Sjoerd & van Lente, Harro & Meeus, Marius T.H., 2012. "Dominance in the prototyping phase—The case of hydrogen passenger cars," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 871-883.
    6. Hellsmark, Hans & Jacobsson, Staffan, 2012. "Realising the potential of gasified biomass in the European Union—Policy challenges in moving from demonstration plants to a larger scale diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 507-518.
    7. Raven, Rob P.J.M., 2006. "Towards alternative trajectories? Reconfigurations in the Dutch electricity regime," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 581-595, May.
    8. Sorda, Giovanni & Banse, Martin & Kemfert, Claudia, 2010. "An overview of biofuel policies across the world," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 6977-6988, November.
    9. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    10. Kirkels, Arjan F. & Verbong, Geert P.J., 2011. "Biomass gasification: Still promising? A 30-year global overview," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 471-481, January.
    11. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    12. Jäger-Waldau, Arnulf & Ossenbrink, Heinz, 2004. "Progress of electricity from biomass, wind and photovoltaics in the European Union," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 157-182, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lönnqvist, Tomas & Grönkvist, Stefan & Sandberg, Thomas, 2017. "Forest-derived methane in the Swedish transport sector: A closing window?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 440-450.
    2. Junmo Kim & Juneseuk Shin, 2018. "Mapping extended technological trajectories: integration of main path, derivative paths, and technology junctures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1439-1459, September.
    3. Kirkels, Arjan, 2016. "Biomass boom or bubble? A longitudinal study on expectation dynamics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 83-96.
    4. Levidow, Les & Upham, Paul, 2017. "Linking the multi-level perspective with social representations theory: Gasifiers as a niche innovation reinforcing the energy-from-waste (EfW) regime," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-13.
    5. Berg, S. & Wustmans, M. & Bröring, S., 2019. "Identifying first signals of emerging dominance in a technological innovation system: A novel approach based on patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 706-722.
    6. Hwang, Seonho & Shin, Juneseuk, 2019. "Extending technological trajectories to latest technological changes by overcoming time lags," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 142-153.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kirkels, Arjan, 2016. "Biomass boom or bubble? A longitudinal study on expectation dynamics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 83-96.
    2. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    3. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Jan H. Miedema & Henny J. Van der Windt & Henri C. Moll, 2018. "Opportunities and Barriers for Biomass Gasification for Green Gas in the Dutch Residential Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    6. Smith, Adrian & Raven, Rob, 2012. "What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1025-1036.
    7. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    8. Jain, Sanjay & Islam, Habib A. & Goossen, Martin C. & Nair, Anil, 2023. "Social movements and institutional entrepreneurship as facilitators of technology transition: The case of free/open-source software," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    9. Nill, Jan & Kemp, Ren, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 668-680, May.
    10. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    11. Gürsan, C. & de Gooyert, V., 2021. "The systemic impact of a transition fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. Leydesdorff, Loet & Bornmann, Lutz, 2021. "Disruption indices and their calculation using web-of-science data: Indicators of historical developments or evolutionary dynamics?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    13. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    14. Dijk, Marc & Orsato, Renato J. & Kemp, René, 2015. "Towards a regime-based typology of market evolution," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 276-289.
    15. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    16. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Vas, Zsófia, 2012. "Az innovációs rendszerek 25 éve. Szakirodalmi áttekintés evolúciós közgazdaságtani megközelítésben [25 years of innovation systems. A literature review from the angle of evolutionary economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1233-1256.
    17. Albert Faber & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Models in evolutionary economics and environmental policy: Towards an evolutionary environmental economics," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    18. Vidushini Siva & Thomas Hoppe & Mansi Jain, 2017. "Green Buildings in Singapore; Analyzing a Frontrunner’s Sectoral Innovation System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Christopher M. Chini & James F. Canning & Kelsey L. Schreiber & Joshua M. Peschel & Ashlynn S. Stillwell, 2017. "The Green Experiment: Cities, Green Stormwater Infrastructure, and Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Patrick Mundler, 2020. "Nourrir, produire, protéger les personnes et les ressources - Les voies d’une transition agroécologique du système bioalimentaire québécois," CIRANO Project Reports 2020rp-32, CIRANO.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:68:y:2014:i:c:p:170-182. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.