Volatility in federal funding of energy R&D
Funding for Research and Development in any given industry or technology is considered essential to its ongoing competitiveness and longevity. This paper analyzes the allocation of federal R&D funding for energy between 2000 and 2012. The results show that funding for energy R&D is very volatile for both the aggregate energy research types, such as coal or nuclear power, and specific research areas, such as carbon capture and sequestration or nuclear waste reprocessing. While overall funding levels are often sources of frustration, budgetary volatility may be as much of a problem.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Offer, G.J. & Howey, D. & Contestabile, M. & Clague, R. & Brandon, N.P., 2010. "Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 24-29, January.
- Edwin Mansfield & John Rapoport & Anthony Romeo & Samuel Wagner & George Beardsley, 1977. "Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 221-240.
- John Van Reenen & Richard B. Freeman, 2009.
"What if Congress doubled R&D spending on the physical sciences?,"
LSE Research Online Documents on Economics
25478, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Richard Freeman & John Van Reenen, 2009. "What if Congress Doubled R&D Spending on the Physical Sciences?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 9, pages 1-38 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Richard Freeman & John Van Reenen, 2009. "What If Congress Doubled R&D Spending on the Physical Sciences?," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1 - 38.
- Richard Freeman & John Van Reenen, 2009. "What if Congress Doubled R&D Spending on the Physical Sciences?," CEP Discussion Papers dp0931, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Nemet, Gregory F. & Kammen, Daniel M., 2007. "U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 746-755, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:67:y:2014:i:c:p:943-950. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.