The battle between battery and fuel cell powered electric vehicles: A BWM approach

Energies

Volumn 10, Issue 11, 2017, Pages

  Van De Kaa, Geerten ^a   Scholten, Daniel ^a   Rezaei, Jafar ^a   Milchram, Christine ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Automotive; Best worst method; BWM; Standards; Standards battles

Indexed keywords

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY; DECISION MAKING; ELECTRIC VEHICLES; FUEL CELLS; INVESTMENTS; STANDARDS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

AUTOMOTIVE; BATTERY-POWERED ELECTRIC VEHICLES; BEST WORST METHOD; FUEL-CELL-POWERED ELECTRIC VEHICLES; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING METHODS; PERSONAL TRANSPORTATION; STANDARDS BATTLES; TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS;

SECONDARY BATTERIES;

EID: 85035115257     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19961073     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/en10111707     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Shapiro, C.; Varian, H.R. Information Rules, a Strategic Guide to the Network Economy; Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA, USA, 1999.
2. Hill, C.W.L. Establishing a standard: Competitive strategy and technological standards in winner-take-all industries. Acad. Manag. Exec. 1997, 11j, 7-25. [CrossRef]
3. Arthur, W.B. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ. J. 1989, 99, 116-131. [CrossRef]
4. David, P.A. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am. Econ. Rev. 1985, 75, 332-337.
5. Schilling, M.A. Technological lockout: An integrative model of the economic and strategic factors driving technology success and failure. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1998, 23, 267-284.
6. Schilling, M.A. Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: The impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Acad. Manag. J. 2002, 45, 387-398. [CrossRef]
7. Suarez, F.F. Battles for technological dominance: An integrative framework. Res. Policy 2004, 33, 271-286. [CrossRef]
8. Van de Kaa, G.; Van den Ende, J.; De Vries, H.J.; Van Heck, E. Factors for winning interface format battles: A review and synthesis of the literature. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78, 1397-1411. [CrossRef]
9. Rezaei, J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method. Omega 2015, 53, 49-57. [CrossRef]
10. Van de Kaa, G.; De Vries, H. Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2015, 91, 222-235. [CrossRef]
11. Van de Kaa, G.; De Vries, H.J.; Rezaei, J. Platform Selection for Complex Systems: Building Automation Systems. J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng. 2014, 23, 415-438. [CrossRef]
12. Van de Kaa, G.; Kamp, L.M.; Rezaei, J. Selection of biomass thermochemical conversion technology in the Netherlands: A best worst method approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 166, 32-39. [CrossRef]
13. Van de Kaa, G.; Rezaei, J.; Kamp, L.; De Winter, A. Photovoltaic Technology Selection: A Fuzzy MCDM Approach. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 32, 662-670. [CrossRef]
14. Van de Kaa, G.; Van Heck, H.W.G.M.; De Vries, H.J.; Van den Ende, J.C.M.; Rezaei, J. Supporting Decision-Making in Technology Standards Battles Based on a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2014, 61, 336-348. [CrossRef]
15. Rezaei, J.; Wang, J.; Tavasszy, L. Linking supplier development to supplier segmentation using Best Worst Method. Expert Syst. Appl. 2015, 42, 9152-9164. [CrossRef]
16. Rezaei, J.; Nispeling, T.; Sarkis, J.; Tavasszy, L. A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 135, 577-588. [CrossRef]
17. Gupta, H.; Barua, M.K. Supplier selection among SMEs on the basis of their green innovation ability using BWM and fuzzy TOPSIS. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 152, 242-258. [CrossRef]
18. Gupta, H.; Barua, M.K. Identifying enablers of technological innovation for Indian MSMEs using best-worst multi criteria decision making method. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2016, 107, 69-79. [CrossRef]
19. Ghaffari, S.; Arab, A.; Nafari, J.; Manteghi, M. Investigation and evaluation of key success factors in technological innovation development based on BWM. Decis. Sci. Lett. 2017, 6, 295-306. [CrossRef]
20. Rezaei, J.; Hemmes, A.; Tavasszy, L. Multi-criteria decision-making for complex bundling configurations in surface transportation of air freight. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 61, 95-105. [CrossRef]
21. Chitsaz, N.; Azarnivand, A. Water Scarcity Management in Arid Regions Based on an Extended Multiple Criteria Technique. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 233-250.
22. Ahmad, W.N.K.W.; Rezaei, J.; Sadaghiani, S.; Tavasszy, L.A. Evaluation of the external forces affecting the sustainability of oil and gas supply chain using Best Worst Method. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 153, 242-252. [CrossRef]
23. Salimi, N. Quality assessment of scientific outputs using the BWM. Scientometrics 2017, 112, 195-213. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24. Salimi, N.; Rezaei, J. Measuring efficiency of university-industry Ph.D. projects using best worst method. Scientometrics 2016, 109, 1911-1938. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Gallagher, S.R. The battle of the blue laser DVDs: The significance of corporate strategy in standards battles. Technovation 2012, 32, 90-98. [CrossRef]
26. Gallagher, S.R.; Park, S.H. Innovation and competition in standard-based industries: A historical analysis of the U.S. home video game market. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2002, 49, 67-82. [CrossRef]
27. Schilling, M.A. Technological leapfrogging: Lessons from the U.S. video game console industry. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2003, 45, 6-32. [CrossRef]
28. Cusumano, M.A.; Mylonadis, Y.; Rosenbloom, R.S. Strategic maneuvering and mass-market dynamics: The triumph of VHS over Beta. Bus. Hist. Rev. 1992, 66, 51-94. [CrossRef]
29. Garud, R.; Kumaraswamy, A. Changing Competitive Dynamics in Network Industries: An Exploration of Sun Microsystems' Open Systems Strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 1993, 14, 351-369. [CrossRef]
30. Van de Kaa, G.; Van den Ende, J.; De Vries, H.J. Strategies in network industries: The importance of inter-organisational networks, complementary goods, and commitment. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2015, 27, 73-86. [CrossRef]
31. Farrell, J.; Saloner, G. Standardization, compatibility, and innovation. Rand J. Econ. 1985, 16, 70-83. [CrossRef]
32. Katz, M.L.; Shapiro, C. Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. Am. Econ. Rev. 1985, 75, 424-440.
33. Funk, J.L. Competition between regional standards and the success and failure of firms in the world-wide mobile communication market. Telecommun. Policy 1998, 22, 419-441. [CrossRef]
34. Srinivasan, A.; Venkatraman, N. Indirect Network Effects and Platform Dominance in the Video Game Industry: A Network Perspective. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2010, 57, 661-673. [CrossRef]
35. Farrell, J.; Saloner, G. Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product preannouncements, and predation. Am. Econ. Rev. 1986, 76, 940-955.
36. Den Uijl, S.; De Vries, H.J. Pushing technological progress by strategic manoeuvring: The triumph of Blu-ray over HD-DVD. Bus. Hist. 2013, 55, 1361-1384. [CrossRef]
37. Liu, H. Dynamics of Pricing in the Video Game Console Market: Skimming or Penetration? J. Mark. Res. 2010, 47, 428-443. [CrossRef]
38. Katz, M.L.; Shapiro, C. Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities. J. Political Econ. 1986, 94, 822-841. [CrossRef]
39. Lieberman, M.B.; Montgomery, D.B. First Mover advantages. Strateg. Manag. J. 1988, 9, 41-58. [CrossRef]
40. Lieberman, M.B.; Montgomery, D.B. First-mover (dis)advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strateg. Manag. J. 1998, 19, 1111-1125. [CrossRef]
41. Van Mierlo, J.; Maggetto, G.; Lataire, P. Which energy source for road transport in the future? A comparison of battery, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. Energy Convers. Manag. 2006, 47, 2748-2760. [CrossRef]
42. Steenberghen, T.; Lopez, E. Overcoming barriers to the implementation of alternative fuels for road transport in Europe. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 577-590. [CrossRef]
43. Thomas, C.E. Fuel cell and battery electric vehicles compared. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34, 6005-6020. [CrossRef]
44. Sandy Thomas, C.E. Transportation options in a carbon-constrained world: Hybrids, plug-in hybrids, biofuels, fuel cell electric vehicles, and battery electric vehicles. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34, 9279-9296. [CrossRef]
45. Offer, G.J.; Howey, D.; Contestabile, M.; Clague, R.; Brandon, N.P. Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 24-29. [CrossRef]
46. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Annual Energy Outlook 2015; EIA:Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
47. Gertner, J. Inside Toyota and Tesla's Duel to Fuel the Cars of the Future. Available online: http://www.fastcompany.com/3033198/duel-for-fuel (accessed on 24 October 2017).
48. Tovey, A. Hydrogen or Electric: Which Will Drive Petrol Cars off the Road? Available online: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/engineering/11966944/Hydrogen-orelectric-which-will-drive-petrol-cars-off-the-road.html (accessed on 24 October 2017).
49. Lewis, T. Electric vs. Fuel Cell Vehicles: 'Green' Auto Tech Explained. Available online: http://www.livescience.com/49594-electric-fuel-cell-vehicles-explainer.html (accessed on 24 October 2017).
50. Shirouzu, N.; Lienert, P. INSIGHT-Auto Power Play: Japan's Hydrogen Car vs. China's Battery Drive. Available online: http://www.reuters.com/article/autoshow-japan-electric-id USL3N12M2A920151028 (accessed on 24 October 2017).
51. Zubaryeva, A.; Thiel, C.; Barbone, E.; Mercier, A. Assessing factors for the identification of potential lead markets for electrified vehicles in Europe: Expert opinion elicitation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2012, 79, 1622-1637. [CrossRef]
52. Van Bree, B.; Verbong, G.P.J.; Kramer, G.J. A multi-level perspective on the introduction of hydrogen and battery-electric vehicles. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2010, 77, 529-540. [CrossRef]
53. Rezaei, J. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method: Some properties and a linear model. Omega 2016, 64, 126-130. [CrossRef]
54. Schumpeter, J.A. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1934.
55. Chalk, S.G.; Miller, J.F. Key challenges and recent progress in batteries, fuel cells, and hydrogen storage for clean energy systems. J. Power Source 2006, 159, 73-80. [CrossRef]
56. Edwards, P.P.; Kuznetsov, V.L.; David, W.I.; Brandon, N.P. Hydrogen and fuel cells: Towards a sustainable energy future. Energy Policy 2008, 36, 4356-4362. [CrossRef]
57. Mori, D.; Hirose, K. Recent challenges of hydrogen storage technologies for fuel cell vehicles. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009, 34, 4569-4574. [CrossRef]
58. Ross, D.K. Hydrogen storage: The major technological barrier to the development of hydrogen fuel cell cars. Vacuum 2006, 80, 1084-1089. [CrossRef]
59. Adepetu, A.; Keshav, S. The relative importance of price and driving range on electric vehicle adoption: Los Angeles case study. Transportation 2017, 44, 353-373. [CrossRef]
60. Axsen, J.; Kurani, K.S.; Burke, A. Are batteries ready for plug-in hybrid buyers? Transp. Policy 2010, 17, 173-182. [CrossRef]
61. Boulanger, A.G.; Chu, A.C.; Maxx, S.; Waltz, D.L. Vehicle electrification: Status and issues. Proc. IEEE 2011, 99, 1116-1138. [CrossRef]
62. Perujo, A.; Van Grootveld, G.; Scholz, H. Present and Future Role of Battery Electrical Vehicles in Private and Public Urban Transport. In New Generation of Electric Vehicles; InTech: London, UK, 2012; pp. 3-28.
63. Steinhilber, S.; Wells, P.; Thankappan, S. Socio-technical inertia: Understanding the barriers to electric vehicles. Energy Policy 2013, 60, 531-539. [CrossRef]
64. Tsang, F.; Pedersen, J.S.; Wooding, S.; Potoglou, D. Bringing the Electric Vehicle to the Mass Market, a Review of Barriers, Facilitators and Policy Interventions; RAND Europe: Cambridge, UK, 2012.
65. Brown, S.; Pyke, D.; Steenhof, P. Electric vehicles: The role and importance of standards in an emerging market. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 3797-3806. [CrossRef]
66. Nemry, F.; Brons, M. Plug-In Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles: Market Penetration Scenarios for Electric Drive Vehicles; JRC European Commission: Seville, Spain, 2010.
67. Wittenberg, A. Fast-Charge Plugs Do Not Fit All Electric Cars. Available online: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fast-charge-plugs-do-not-fit-all-electric-cars/ (accessed on 24 October 2017).
68. Toyota Fueling the Toyota Mirai. Available online: https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/Mirai-Fueling.pdf (accessed on 24 October 2017).
69. Toyota Toyota Mirai-The Turning Point. Available online: https://ssl.toyota.com/mirai/stations.html (accessed on 24 October 2017).
70. Steg, L. Car use: Lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2005, 39, 147-162. [CrossRef]
71. Fox, J.; Axsen, J.; Jaccard, M. Picking Winners: Modelling the Costs of Technology-specific Climate Policy in the US Passenger Vehicle Sector. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 137, 133-147. [CrossRef]
72. Mangram, M.E. The globalization of Tesla Motors: A strategic marketing plan analysis. J. Strateg. Mark. 2012, 20, 289-312. [CrossRef]
73. Wharton Why Tesla May Have the Keys to the Electric Vehicle Market. Available online: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/how-tesla-is-bringing-electric-vehicles-mainstream/ (accessed on 24 October 2017).
74. Den Hartigh, E.; Ortt, J.R.; Van de Kaa, G.; Stolwijk, C.C.M. Platform control during battles for market dominance: The case of Apple versus IBM in the early personal computer industry. Technovation 2016, 48-49, 4-12. [CrossRef]