EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 61 (2018) E3S Web Conf., 61 (2018) 00006 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 61, 2018
International Conference on Renewable Energy (ICREN 2018)
Article Number 00006
Number of page(s) 16
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20186100006
Published online 31 October 2018
  1. UNEP, 2016. Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment, Frankfurt: Frankfurt School of Finance & Managemen. [Google Scholar]
  2. Langholtz, M. et al., 2014. Climate risk management for the US cellulosic biofuels supply chain. Climate Risk Management, Volume 3, pp. 96–115. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Adler, P. R., Grosso, S. J. D. & Parton, W. J., 2007. Life-cycle assessment of net greenhouse-gas flux for bioenergy cropping systems. Ecological Application, Volume 17, pp. 675–691. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Schneider, U. A. & McCarl, B. A., 2003. Economic Potential of Biomass Based Fuels for Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 24 (4), p. 291–312. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Wihersaari, M., 2005. Aspects on bioenergy as a technical measure to reduce energy related greenhouse gas emissions. Konetekniikan osasto: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. [Google Scholar]
  6. Wu, Y. et al., 2018. A risk assessment framework of PPP waste-to-energy incineration projects in China under 2-dimension linguistic environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 183, pp. 602–617. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Pries, F., Talebi, A., Schillo, R. S. & Lemay, M. A., 2016. Risks affecting the biofuels industry: A US and Canadian company perspective. Energy Policy, Volume 97, pp. 93–101. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Leung, W., 2001. How to Design a Questionnaire, s.1.: STUDENT BMJ [Google Scholar]
  9. Goswami, D. Y. & Kreith, F., 2007. Handbook of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 1st ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. IRM, A., 2002. Risk Management Standard., London: The Institute of Risk Management. [Google Scholar]
  11. ISO, I., 2009. 31000: 2009 Risk Management—Principles and Guidelines, Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization. [Google Scholar]
  12. Berg, H. P., 2010. Risk Management: Procedures, Methods and Experiences. Reliability: Theory & Applications, 2 (17). [Google Scholar]
  13. Szymański, P., 2017. Risk management in construction projects. Poznan, ELSEVIER Procedia Engineering, pp. 174–182. [Google Scholar]
  14. Curtis, P., Carey, M. & Deloitte & Touche LLP, 2012. Risk Assessment in Practice, Durham: COSO: Commitee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. [Google Scholar]
  15. PMI, 2013. A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guides). 5th ed. Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute. [Google Scholar]
  16. PRINCE2, 2017. Managing successful projects with PR1NCE2. 6th ed. Norwich: The Stationery Office (TSO). [Google Scholar]
  17. Forbes, D. R., Smith, S. D. & Homer, R. M. W., 2008. A comparison of techniques for identifying risks in sustainability assessment of housing. s.1., In Procs 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  18. The Economist Group, 2011. Managing the Risk in Renewable Energy, s.1.: The Economist Intelligence Unit. [Google Scholar]
  19. Balackova, H., 2002. Brainstorming: A Creative Problem-Solving Method, Prague: Masaryk Institute of Advanced Studies, Czech Technical University. [Google Scholar]
  20. Hsu, C. C. & Sandford, B. A., 2007. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 12 (10), pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  21. IEA, 2011. Risk Quantification and Risk Management in Renewable Energy Projects, s.1.: Altran GmbH & Co., KG, IEA-RETD [Google Scholar]
  22. Cuhls, K, 2002. Delphi Method, Germany: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research. [Google Scholar]
  23. Brahm, C. & Kleiner, B. H., 1996. Advantages and disadvantages of group decision-making approaches. Team Performance Management. An International Journa, 2 (1), pp. 30–35. [Google Scholar]
  24. Wood, G. D. & Ellis, R. C. T., 2003. Risk management practices of leading UK cost consultants. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10 (4), pp. 254–62. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. IRM, 2008. Innovation, Value Creation and Opportunity Special Interest Group, s.1.: The Institute of Risk Management. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rostami, A., 2016. Tools and techniques in Risk identification: a research within SMEs in the UK construction industry. Universal journal of management, 4 (4), pp. 203–210. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kansal, R. K. & Sharma, M., 2012. Risk Assessment Methods and Application in the Construction Project. International Journal of Modern Engineering Research (IJMER), May-June, Volume II, pp. 1081-1085. [Google Scholar]
  28. Moddares, M., Kaminskiy, M. & Krivtsov, V., 1999. Reliability Engineering and Risk Analysis: A Practical guide. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  29. Martinez, J., 2001. Integrated Risk Management: A Concept for Risk Containment. s.1. :CRC Press LLC. [Google Scholar]
  30. Muria, T. & Al-Thani, F., 2008. Corporate Risk Management. West Sussex : John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bowles, D. S., 2010. Dam Safety Risk Management for Hydroelectric Projects. In International Conference on Hydropower Projects in Portugal: A New Cycle, Porto, Volume 17, p. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  32. Triantaphyllou, E. & Mann, S. H., 1995. Using the Analytical hierarchy Process for Decision making in Engineering Applications: Some Challenges. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice, 2 (1), pp. 35–44. [Google Scholar]
  33. Saaty, T. L., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. Services Sciences, Volume 1, pp. 83–98. [Google Scholar]
  34. APM, 2000. Project Risk Analysis and Management, Buckinghamshare: The Association for Project Management. [Google Scholar]
  35. Gatzert, N. & Kosub, T., 2016. Risks and risk management of renewable energy projects: The case of onshore and offshore wind parks. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 60, pp. 982–998. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  36. Skytte, K. et al., 2003. Challeneges for Investment in Renewable Electricity in the European Union, Petten: Alener & ADMIRE REBUS. [Google Scholar]
  37. Komendantova, N., Patt, A., Barras, L. & Battaglini, A., 2012. Perception of Risk in Renewable Enerfy Projects: The Case of Concentrated Solar Power in North Africa. Energy policy, Volume 40, pp. 103–109. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, C. W. & Zhong, J., 2015. Financing and risk management of renewable energy projects with a hybrid bond. Renewable Energy, Volume 75, pp. 779–787. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  39. Xu, Y. et al., 2015. Critical risk factors affecting the implementation of PPP waste-to-energy projects in China. Applied energy, Volume 158, pp. 403–411. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  40. Rolik, Y., 2017. Risk Management in Implementing Wind Energy Project. Procedia Engineering, Volume 178, pp. 278–288. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  41. Jinrong, H. & Enyi, Z., 2011. Engineering risk management planning in energy performance contracting in China. Systems Engineering Procedia, Volume 1, pp. 195–205. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. Hitzeroth, M. & Megerle, A., 2013. Renewable energy projects: acceptance risks and their management. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 27, pp. 576–584. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. Guerrero-Liquet, G. C. et al., 2016. Decision-making for risk management in sustainable renewable energy facilities: A case study in the Dominican republic. Sustainability, 8 (5), p. 455. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  44. Bratt, G., 2010. Study of Renewable Energy Project Risk Factors Influencing the Insurance Industry, Glasgow: University of Strathclyde: Engineering. [Google Scholar]
  45. Osborn, A. F., 2001. Applied Imagination. 3rd ed. New York: Creative Education Foundation Press. [Google Scholar]
  46. Galway, L., 2004. Quantitative Risk Analysis for Project Management: A Critical Review, s.1.: RAND Coporation [Google Scholar]
  47. Ferraris, I., de la Canal, M. D. & Labriola, C., 2013. Risk analysis in renewable energy: assessment of the vulnerability of the environment and community. Journal of Energy and Power Engineering„ 7 (8). [Google Scholar]
  48. Razaque, A., Bach, C., Salama, N. & Alotaibi, A., 2012. Fostering Project Scheduling and Controlling Risk Management. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3 (14). [Google Scholar]
  49. Apak, S., Atay, E. & Tuncer, G., 2011. Financial risk management in renewable energy sector: Comparative analysis between the European Union and Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 24, pp. 935–945. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  50. Cleijne, H. & Ruijgrok, W., 2004. MODELLING RISKS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY INVESTMENTS, Austria: European Communities. [Google Scholar]
  51. OED, 2012. Oxford English Dictionary. 7th ed. Oxford: Franklin Watts. [Google Scholar]
  52. Kytle, B. & Ruggie, J. G., 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility as Risk Management: A Model for Multinationals, Cambridge: Harvard Kennedy School. [Google Scholar]
  53. Gaurav, S., Chileshe, N. & Ma, T., 2011. Project risk analysis of solar energy project delays in India. s.1., Solar2011, the 49th AuSES Annual Conference 30th November -2nd December. [Google Scholar]
  54. Lee, P., Lam, P. T. I. & Lee, W. L., 2015. Risks in Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) projects. Energy and Buildings, Volume 92, pp. 116–127. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  55. Michelez, J. et al., 2010. Risk quantification and risk management in renewable energy projects, s.1.: Altran GmbH & Co. KG or IEA - RETD. [Google Scholar]
  56. Karytsas, S. & Choropanitis, I., 2017. Barriers against and actions towards renewable energy technologies diffusion: A Principal Component Analysis for residential ground source heat pump (GSHP) systems. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 78, pp. 252–271. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  57. Papaioannou, M. G., 2006. Exchange rate risk measurement and management: Issues and approaches for firms, (No. 2006-2255): International Monetary Fund (IMF). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.