*2.3.3. Barriers for technologies at the innovation stage: IGCC and CCS*

The results of the case studies on IGCC and CCS indicate that technological barriers are dominant for technologies at the innovation stage (Case Study 2 and 7). Financial and institu‐ tional barriers are not relevant for the technologies at the innovation stage. As for CCS, Case Study 7 states "As CCS is not market mature and does not have any commercial examples in operation, this report cannot address CCS system transfer." As for IGCC, Case Study 2 states "It might be premature to comment on IPR issues related to IGCC, since this technology is not considered to be commercial globally".

Thus far, Section 2.3 discussed technology-specific barriers. Another barrier, which this paper could not address this time, are country-specific barriers. It is recognized that in order to design proper policy instruments and institutions, understanding of barriers that are specific to a certain country or region is equally important. With this regard, Case study 10 is an exception among the selected case studies in highlighting several differences between India and China as to how these two countries overcome barriers to diffuse wind power technologies. It demonstrates that "there are two key differences in the policy support mechanisms currently used in China and India; 1) China's recent reliance on local content requirements to encourage locally sourced wind turbines, which does not exist in India; and 2) India's use of a fixed tariff price for wind power, versus China's reliance on competitive bidding to set the price for most of its wind projects." In addition, it discusses key differences on corporate strategies between two Chinese and Indian wind turbine manufacturing firms. This type of comparative studies are much needed in order for us to have better understanding of barriers in the diffusion of clean energy technologies.
