Basic Information of respondents

Average and Central Tendency of Preferred Energy

Descriptive Statistics One-Sample Test & Confidence Interval (CI)

Std. Devia-
Test Value = 0
N Minimum Maximum Mean tion Variance Skewness
Std. Er- 95% CI
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic ror
t df Lower Upper
tidal_over_offshore
7 2.00 9.00 5.1429 2.26779 5.143 .595 .794 tidal_over_offshore 6.000 6 3.0455 7.2402

off- offshore_over_wave
35 1.00 9.00 5.9429 1.62595 2.644 -.861 .398 21.623 34 5.3843 6.5014
shore_over_wave
wave_over_offshor wave_over_offshore 10.447
4 2.00 9.00 5.5000 3.10913 9.667 .000 1.014 3.538 3 .5527
e 3
tidal_over_wave 31 3.00 9.00 5.9677 1.70262 2.899 .530 .421 tidal_over_wave 19.515 30 5.3432 6.5923
wave_over_tidal 6 3.00 9.00 4.6667 2.25093 5.067 1.882 .845
wave_over_tidal 5.078 5 2.3045 7.0289
Valid N (listwise) 0

Cross tabulation & Graphs

Work From * Key_technology Crosstabulation
Chi-Square Tests
Key_technology
Offshore Wind Tidal Energy Both Total
Work From UK Count 13 3 17 33 Asymptotic
% within Work From 39.4% 9.1% 51.5% 100.0% Significance

France Count 6 3 5 14 Value df (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square
% within Work From 42.9% 21.4% 35.7% 100.0% 4.502a 6 .609
Other EU Countries Count 3 1 2 6
Likelihood Ratio
4.925 6 .553
% within Work From 50.0% 16.7% 33.3% 100.0%
Non EU Countries Count 1 0 4 5 Linear-by-Linear Asso-
ciation .127 1 .722
% within Work From 20.0% 0.0% 80.0% 100.0%
Total Count 23 7 28 58
N of Valid Cases 58
% within Work From 39.7% 12.1% 48.3% 100.0%

** Pearson significance values greater than 0.05 show lack of correlation

Notes
Most of the respondents were UK residents employed in private sector
Despite wave energy being the most used, more people preferred to use offshore and tidal energy over it