IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v87y2015icp542-552.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The importance of iteration and deployment in technology development: A study of the impact on wave and tidal stream energy research, development and innovation

Author

Listed:
  • MacGillivray, Andrew
  • Jeffrey, Henry
  • Wallace, Robin

Abstract

The technological trajectory is the pathway through which an innovative technology develops as it matures. In this paper we model the technological trajectory for a number of energy technologies by analysing technological change (characterised by unit-level capacity up-scaling) and diffusion (characterised by growth in cumulative deployed capacity) using sigmoidal 5 Parameter Logistic (5PL) functions, observed and reported as a function of unit deployment.

Suggested Citation

  • MacGillivray, Andrew & Jeffrey, Henry & Wallace, Robin, 2015. "The importance of iteration and deployment in technology development: A study of the impact on wave and tidal stream energy research, development and innovation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 542-552.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:87:y:2015:i:c:p:542-552
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515301300
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.002?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. Allan, Grant & Gilmartin, Michelle & McGregor, Peter & Swales, Kim, 2011. "Levelised costs of Wave and Tidal energy in the UK: Cost competitiveness and the importance of "banded" Renewables Obligation Certificates," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 23-39, January.
    2. MacGillivray, Andrew & Jeffrey, Henry & Winskel, Mark & Bryden, Ian, 2014. "Innovation and cost reduction for marine renewable energy: A learning investment sensitivity analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 108-124.
    3. Bewley, Ronald & Fiebig, Denzil G., 1988. "A flexible logistic growth model with applications in telecommunications," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 177-192.
    4. Winskel, Mark & Markusson, Nils & Jeffrey, Henry & Candelise, Chiara & Dutton, Geoff & Howarth, Paul & Jablonski, Sophie & Kalyvas, Christos & Ward, David, 2014. "Learning pathways for energy supply technologies: Bridging between innovation studies and learning rates," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 96-114.
    5. Jacobsson, Staffan & Lauber, Volkmar, 2006. "The politics and policy of energy system transformation--explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-276, February.
    6. Grubler, Arnulf & Nakicenovic, Nebojsa & Victor, David G., 1999. "Dynamics of energy technologies and global change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 247-280, May.
    7. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107005198, October.
    8. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    9. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182935, October.
    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. Jordaan, Sarah M. & Romo-Rabago, Elizabeth & McLeary, Romaine & Reidy, Luke & Nazari, Jamal & Herremans, Irene M., 2017. "The role of energy technology innovation in reducing greenhouse gas emissions: A case study of Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1397-1409.
    2. Maïder SAINT-JEAN & Nabila ARFAOUI & Eric BROUILLAT & David VIRAPIN, 2019. "Mapping technological knowledge patterns: evidence from ocean energy technologies," Cahiers du GREThA 2019-09, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée(GREThA).
    3. Santhakumar, Srinivasan & Smart, Gavin & Noonan, Miriam & Meerman, Hans & Faaij, André, 2022. "Technological progress observed for fixed-bottom offshore wind in the EU and UK," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    4. Segura, E. & Morales, R. & Somolinos, J.A., 2018. "A strategic analysis of tidal current energy conversion systems in the European Union," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 527-551.
    5. Segura, E. & Morales, R. & Somolinos, J.A. & López, A., 2017. "Techno-economic challenges of tidal energy conversion systems: Current status and trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 536-550.
    6. Fox, Clive J. & Benjamins, Steven & Masden, Elizabeth A. & Miller, Raeanne, 2018. "Challenges and opportunities in monitoring the impacts of tidal-stream energy devices on marine vertebrates," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 1926-1938.

    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. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2016. "The capacity for adopting energy innovations in Portugal: Historical evidence and perspectives for the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 113(PB), pages 308-318.
    2. Mercure, J.-F. & Pollitt, H. & Chewpreecha, U. & Salas, P. & Foley, A.M. & Holden, P.B. & Edwards, N.R., 2014. "The dynamics of technology diffusion and the impacts of climate policy instruments in the decarbonisation of the global electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 686-700.
    3. Cherp, Aleh & Vinichenko, Vadim & Jewell, Jessica & Suzuki, Masahiro & Antal, Miklós, 2017. "Comparing electricity transitions: A historical analysis of nuclear, wind and solar power in Germany and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 612-628.
    4. Hu, Rui & Skea, Jim & Hannon, Matthew J., 2018. "Measuring the energy innovation process: An indicator framework and a case study of wind energy in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 227-244.
    5. Subtil Lacerda, Juliana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2016. "Diversity in solar photovoltaic energy: Implications for innovation and policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 331-340.
    6. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    7. Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Krey, Volker & Grubler, Arnulf, 2016. "Representing spatial technology diffusion in an energy system optimization model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 350-363.
    8. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2019. "Emergence of floating offshore wind energy: Technology and industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 66-82.
    9. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2015. "The construction of a new technological innovation system in a follower country: Wind energy in Portugal," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 197-210.
    10. Santhakumar, Srinivasan & Meerman, Hans & Faaij, André, 2021. "Improving the analytical framework for quantifying technological progress in energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    11. Florian Knobloch & Hector Pollitt & Unnada Chewpreecha & Vassilis Daioglou & Jean-Francois Mercure, 2017. "Simulating the deep decarbonisation of residential heating for limiting global warming to 1.5C," Papers 1710.11019, arXiv.org, revised May 2018.
    12. Shouro Dasgupta & Enrica De Cian, 2016. "Institutions and the Environment: Existing Evidence and Future Directions," Working Papers 2016.41, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Zhang, Shuwei & Bauer, Nico & Yin, Guangzhi & Xie, Xi, 2020. "Technology learning and diffusion at the global and local scales: A modeling exercise in the REMIND model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Juliana Subtil Lacerda & Jeroen C. J. M. Van den Bergh, 2014. "International Diffusion of Renewable Energy Innovations: Lessons from the Lead Markets for Wind Power in China, Germany and USA," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-28, December.
    15. Guivarch, Céline & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2017. "Identifying the main uncertainty drivers of energy security in a low-carbon world: The case of Europe," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 530-541.
    16. Mertzanis, Charilaos, 2018. "Institutions, development and energy constraints," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 962-982.
    17. Santhakumar, Srinivasan & Meerman, Hans & Faaij, André, 2024. "Future costs of key emerging offshore renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    18. del Río, Pablo & Bleda, Mercedes, 2012. "Comparing the innovation effects of support schemes for renewable electricity technologies: A function of innovation approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 272-282.
    19. Ciarli, Tommaso & Savona, Maria, 2019. "Modelling the Evolution of Economic Structure and Climate Change: A Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 51-64.
    20. Sijm, Jos & Lehmann, Paul & Chewpreecha, Unnada & Gawel, Erik & Mercure, Jean-Francois & Pollitt, Hector & Strunz, Sebastian, 2014. "EU climate and energy policy beyond 2020: Are additional targets and instruments for renewables economically reasonable?," UFZ Discussion Papers 3/2014, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).

    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:87:y:2015:i:c:p:542-552. 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.