Examining the Effectiveness of Support for UK Wave Energy Innovation since 2000 : Lost at Sea or a New Wave of Innovation?

Almost 20 years after the UK’s first wave energy innovation programme came to an end in the 1980s, a new programme to accelerate the development of wave energy technology was launched. It was believed that wave energy could play a central role in helping to deliver a low-carbon, secure and affordable energy system, as well as provide an important boost to the UK economy through the growth of a new domestic industry. However, despite almost £200m of public funds being invested in UK wave energy innovation since 2000, wave energy technology remains some distance away from commercialisation. Consequently, this report examines the extent to which the failure to deliver a commercially viable wave energy device can be attributed to weaknesses in both government and industry’s support for wave energy innovation in the UK

RCUK Energy Strategy Fellowship response to House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee enquiry "Innovate to accumulate : the Government's approach to low carbon innovation"

[Abstract unavailable

Measuring the energy innovation process : an indicator framework and a case study of wind energy in China

Whilst a well-established literature on metrics to assess innovation performance exists, relatively little work has linked it to the energy technology innovation process. This paper systematically brings together indicator sets and derives an indicator framework for measuring energy innovation, offering an important step forward in the quantitative evaluation of energy innovation performance. It incorporates input, output and outcome metrics that relate to different stages along the energy technology innovation chain, namely research, development, demonstration, market formation and diffusion. To test its efficacy, the indicator framework is applied to the case of wind energy in China, drawing comparisons against global market leaders such as Denmark, Germany and the USA. The paper finds that the framework enables a more rigorous comparative analysis of energy innovation between countries than currently offered by either the application of piecemeal indicators and complements contextually rich qualitative case studies. The empirical analysis shows that China has begun to lead across a range of innovation inputs (e.g. R&D expenditure) and outputs (e.g. publications) but lags considerably behind international competitors against other output and outcome indicators such as patents, revenue and exports

Remaking the UK's energy technology innovation system: From the margins to the mainstream

AbstractThe UK energy technology innovation system (ETIS) has undergone wholesale remaking in recent years, in terms of its aims, funding and organisation. We analyse this process and distinguish between three phases since 2000: new beginnings, momentum building and urgency and review. Within an international trend to ETIS rebuilding, UK experience has been distinctive: from a low starting base in the early-2000s, to system remaking under a strong decarbonisation policy imperative in the late-2000s, to multiple and contested drivers in the early-2010s. Public funding levels have been erratic, with a rapid increase and a more recent decline. The private business sector has played a leading role in this remaking, and as this influence has grown, the role and style of energy innovation has shifted from long term niches to the shorter term mainstream. The UK ETIS suffers from persistent problems: fragmentation, low transparency and weak links to the research evidence base

Synthesis report of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), Longer report. IPCC.

This Synthesis Report (SYR) of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) summarises the state of knowledge of climate change, its widespread impacts and risks, and climate change mitigation and adaptation, based on the peer-reviewed scientific, technical and socio-economic literature since the publication of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) in 2014. The assessment is undertaken within the context of the evolving international landscape, in particular, developments in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process, including the outcomes of the Kyoto Protocol and the adoption of the Paris Agreement. It reflects the increasing diversity of those involved in climate action. This report integrates the main findings of the AR6 Working Group reports1 and the three AR6 Special Reports. It recognizes the interdependence of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies; the value of diverse forms of knowledge; and the close linkages between climate change adaptation, mitigation, ecosystem health, human well-being and sustainable development. Building on multiple analytical frameworks, including those from the physical and social sciences, this report identifies opportunities for transformative action which are effective, feasible, just and equitable using concepts of systems transitions and resilient development pathways. Different regional classification schemes are used for physical, social and economic aspects, reflecting the underlying literature. After this introduction, Section 2, ‘Current Status and Trends’, opens with the assessment of observational evidence for our changing climate, historical and current drivers of human-induced climate change, and its impacts. It assesses the current implementation of adaptation and mitigation response options. Section 3, ‘Long-Term Climate and Development Futures’, provides a long-term assessment of climate change to 2100 and beyond in a broad range of socio-economic futures. It considers long-term characteristics, impacts, risks and costs in adaptation and mitigation pathways in the context of sustainable development. Section 4, ‘Near-Term Responses in a Changing Climate’, assesses opportunities for scaling up effective action in the period up to 2040, in the context of climate pledges, and commitments, and the pursuit of sustainable development. Based on scientific understanding, key findings can be formulated as statements of fact or associated with an assessed level of confidence using the IPCC calibrated language5 . The scientific findings are drawn from the underlying reports and arise from their Summary for Policymakers (hereafter SPM), Technical Summary (hereafter TS), and underlying chapters and are indicated by {} brackets. Figure 1.1 shows the Synthesis Report Figures Key, a guide to visual icons that are used across multiple figures within this report

IPCC, 2023: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report, Summary for Policymakers. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.

This Synthesis Report (SYR) of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) summarises the state of knowledge of climate change, its widespread impacts and risks, and climate change mitigation and adaptation. It integrates the main findings of the Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) based on contributions from the three Working Groups1 , and the three Special Reports. The summary for Policymakers (SPM) is structured in three parts: SPM.A Current Status and Trends, SPM.B Future Climate Change, Risks, and Long-Term Responses, and SPM.C Responses in the Near Term.This report recognizes the interdependence of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies; the value of diverse forms of knowledge; and the close linkages between climate change adaptation, mitigation, ecosystem health, human well-being and sustainable development, and reflects the increasing diversity of actors involved in climate action. Based on scientific understanding, key findings can be formulated as statements of fact or associated with an assessed level of confidence using the IPCC calibrated language

Climate policies after Fukushima : three views

The 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami, and the consequent accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, have had consequences far beyond Japan itself. Reactions to the accident in three major economies Japan, the UK, and Germany, all of whom were committed to relatively ambitious climate change targets prior to the accident are examined. In Japan and Germany, the accident precipitated a major change of policy direction. In the UK, debate has been muted and there has been essentially no change in energy or climate change policies. The status of the energy and climate change policies in each country prior to the accident is assessed, the responses to the accident are described, and the possible impacts on their positions in the international climate negotiations are analysed. Finally, the three countries' responses are compared and some differences between them observed. Some reasons for their different policy responses are suggested and some themes, common across all countries, are identified. Policy relevance: The attraction of nuclear power has rested on the promise of low-cost electricity, low-carbon energy supply, and enhanced energy independence. The Fukushima accident, which followed the Japanese tsunami of March 2011, has prompted a critical re-appraisal of nuclear power. The responses to Fukushima are assessed for the UK, Germany, and Japan. Before the accident, all three countries considered nuclear as playing a significant part in climate mitigation strategies. Although the UK Government has continued to support nuclear new build following a prompt review of safety arrangements, Japan and Germany have decided to phase out nuclear power, albeit according to different timescales. The factors that explain the different decisions are examined, including patterns of energy demand and supply, the wider political context, institutional arrangements, and public attitudes to risk. The implications for the international climate negotiations are also assessed