Example 1. The majority of the Delphi survey respondents were from 26 different universities (63%), automotive

Example 2

The majority of the Delphi survey respondents were from 26 different universities (63%), automotive, textile, consultant, gas distributor, electricity generation industries (13%), six different governmental organizations (12%) research institutions (5%) and other institutions (7%) (Fig. 1). The respondents were classified into 5 different age groups (Fig. 2) and the gender distribution was 76.7% male and 23.3% female.

The time of occurrence was evaluated on the data from the first and second round of the Delphi results which is presented in Fig. 3. The Delphi statements and their time of occurrence were assessed by all participants. The number of the respondents and the distribution (%) were displayed on the left side of the figure. A slight shift towards a later time of occurrence between the first and second round was observed for the majority of the statements which is a typical outcome of the Delphi technique and can be interpreted as a greater degree of consensus among the respondents.

(Source: Melih Soner Celiktas, Gunnur Kocar. Hydrogen is not an utopia for Turkey. International Journal of hydrogen energy 35 (2010) 9–18)

The Discussion Section

The Discussion section can either be combined with the Results section or appear separately. The objective of the Discussion section is to provide an interpretation of your results and support for all of your conclusions, using evidence from your experiment and generally accepted knowledge, if appropriate. The Discussion explains the meaning of the results. The significance of findings should be clearly described.

In terms of the impact, it should be noted that the statement ‘‘Nanocomposite catalysts developed for hydrogen generation by methane reforming processes are manufactured in industrial scale’’ had a very low wealth creation score compared to the statement ‘‘Hydrogen production from biomass has been realised in industrial scale’’ which was ranked with the highest score. However, the ranking based on environmental impact and quality of life differed somewhat from the total impact ranking. While the lowest ranked is the same statement of the total impact ranked, but the top ranked was different. On the other hand, the statement ‘‘Continuous bioprocesses have been developed for hydrogen production via microorganisms and solar energy’’ was ranked as the highest for both environmental impact and quality of life. Statements 6, 9 and 10 were all ranked higher in the ranking based on all impact measures. ‘‘Hydrogen is used in energy systems as a common practice’’ received the highest ranking in terms of security of supply. On the other hand, statement 13 was ranked very low for all impact measures except security of supply and Statement 7 was relatively low in regards to security of supply compared to the total ranking list.

(Source: Melih Soner Celiktas, Gunnur Kocar. Hydrogen is not an utopia for Turkey. International Journal of hydrogen energy 35 (2010) 9–18)

Дата добавления: 2014-10-31