IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v353y2026ics0360544226010820.html

Financial risk comparison of energy generation alternatives from sugarcane bagasse

Author

Listed:
  • Martínez-Ruiz, Yessenia
  • Neubauer, Peter
  • Ramírez-Malule, Howard
  • Junne, Stefan

Abstract

Direct combustion (DC) and anaerobic digestion (AD) are widely recognized technologies for converting agro-industrial residues into energy. Although numerous studies have evaluated the technical and economic feasibility of biomass-based energy alternatives, existing financial risk assessments are mainly based on stochastic methods focused on sensitivity analysis, expected values, or the probability of financial losses, while overlooking the influence of uncertainty on adverse and extreme risk scenarios. To address this gap, this study conducts a financial risk comparison between DC and AD for a sugarcane mill, evaluating extreme scenarios of potential financial losses and feedstock requirements. Uncertainty in key technical and economic variables is modeled using Monte Carlo simulation, and extreme risk outcomes are assessed through tail-risk measures. Results indicated that DC remains as a financially viable option under current market conditions, while AD exhibits a higher dependence on policy incentives and greater exposure to adverse risk scenarios. Outcomes are also critically discussed under the consideration of sustainability measures and regulatory frameworks.

Suggested Citation

  • Martínez-Ruiz, Yessenia & Neubauer, Peter & Ramírez-Malule, Howard & Junne, Stefan, 2026. "Financial risk comparison of energy generation alternatives from sugarcane bagasse," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:353:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226010820
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2026.140977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544226010820
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2026.140977?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:353:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226010820. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.