IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation for renewable energy: A comparative review


  • Menegaki, Angeliki


Environmental cost-benefit analysis is applied for the evaluation of renewable energy projects. Since some benefits and costs do not have monetary values, economic valuation techniques are applied to estimate them. This paper reviews the literature on the valuation/evaluation of renewable energy resources and summarizes the methods used in them. It discerns four main streams of valuation in renewable energy. The first is economic, welfare oriented and comprises stated and revealed preference methods; the second is the financial option analysis with a financial background; the third is emergy analysis, which is mostly an ecological engineering-based method with capable economic links, and the fourth is again economic but not welfare based. The paper discusses the main directions discerned in these studies and recognizes first that proper valuation takes place only in the first method while the other methods describe only evaluation procedures and second that there is a research gap that has yet to be filled in as compared to other areas of environmental, resource and energy economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Menegaki, Angeliki, 2008. "Valuation for renewable energy: A comparative review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 12(9), pages 2422-2437, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:12:y:2008:i:9:p:2422-2437

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Nick Hanley, 2001. "Cost — Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policymaking," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(1), pages 103-118, February.
    2. Venetsanos, Konstantinos & Angelopoulou, Penelope & Tsoutsos, Theocharis, 2002. "Renewable energy sources project appraisal under uncertainty: the case of wind energy exploitation within a changing energy market environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 293-307, March.
    3. Davis, Graham A. & Owens, Brandon, 2003. "Optimizing the level of renewable electric R&D expenditures using real options analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1589-1608, December.
    4. Awerbuch, Shimon, 1996. "Editor's introduction : The problem of valuing new energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 127-128, February.
    5. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F. & Levy, Alan & Russell, Matthew, 2001. "US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 917-925, September.
    6. Awerbuch, Shimon & Sauter, Raphael, 2006. "Exploiting the oil-GDP effect to support renewables deployment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2805-2819, November.
    7. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    8. Philip Lawn, 2005. "An Assessment of the Valuation Methods Used to Calculate the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), and Sustainable Net Benefit Index (SNBI)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 185-208, June.
    9. Neumayer, Eric, 2000. "On the methodology of ISEW, GPI and related measures: some constructive suggestions and some doubt on the 'threshold' hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 347-361, September.
    10. Bergmann, Ariel & Hanley, Nick & Wright, Robert, 2006. "Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1004-1014, June.
    11. ., 2006. "Public Works," Chapters,in: The Elgar Companion to Development Studies, chapter 98 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Nomura, Noboru & Akai, Makoto, 2004. "Willingness to pay for green electricity in Japan as estimated through contingent valuation method," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(4), pages 453-463, August.
    13. Ek, Kristina, 2005. "Public and private attitudes towards "green" electricity: the case of Swedish wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(13), pages 1677-1689, September.
    14. Close, Josie & Pang, Huey & Lam, K.H. & Li, Thomas, 2006. "10% from renewables? The potential contribution from an HK schools PV installation programme," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 1665-1672.
    15. MacLeod, Michael & Moran, Dominic & Spencer, Ian, 2006. "Counting the cost of water use in hydroelectric generation in Scotland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2048-2059, October.
    16. Awerbuch, Shimon, 2000. "Investing in photovoltaics: risk, accounting and the value of new technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(14), pages 1023-1035, November.
    17. Jenerette, G. Darrel & Marussich, Wendy A. & Newell, Joshua P., 2006. "Linking ecological footprints with ecosystem valuation in the provisioning of urban freshwater," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 38-47, August.
    18. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick, 2002. "Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 107-116, January.
    19. Batley, S. L. & Colbourne, D. & Fleming, P. D. & Urwin, P., 2001. "Citizen versus consumer: challenges in the UK green power market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 479-487, May.
    20. Siddiqui, Afzal S. & Marnay, Chris & Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Real options valuation of US federal renewable energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 265-279, January.
    21. Hanley, Nick & Nevin, Ceara, 1999. "Appraising renewable energy developments in remote communities: the case of the North Assynt Estate, Scotland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 527-547, September.
    22. Wood, Lisa L. & Kenyon, Anne E. & Desvousges, William H. & Morander, Lyn K., 1995. "How much are customers willing to pay for improvements in health and environmental quality?," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 70-77, May.
    23. Costanza, Robert & Farber, Stephen C. & Maxwell, Judith, 1989. "Valuation and management of wetland ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 335-361, December.
    24. Marafia, A-Hamid & Ashour, Hamdy A., 2003. "Economics of off-shore/on-shore wind energy systems in Qatar," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 1953-1963.
    25. Weisser, Daniel, 2004. "Costing electricity supply scenarios: A case study of promoting renewable energy technologies on Rodriguez, Mauritius," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 1319-1347.
    26. Felder, Frank A, 1996. "Integrating financial theory and methods in electricity resource planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-154, February.
    27. Zarnikau, Jay, 2003. "Consumer demand for `green power' and energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(15), pages 1661-1672, December.
    28. Sundqvist, Thomas, 2004. "What causes the disparity of electricity externality estimates?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(15), pages 1753-1766, October.
    29. Bhuiyan, M.M.H & Asgar, M.Ali & Mazumder, R.K & Hussain, M, 2000. "Economic evaluation of a stand-alone residential photovoltaic power system in Bangladesh," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 403-410.
    30. Nick Hanley, 2001. "Cost - benefit analysis and environmental policymaking," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 19(1), pages 103-118, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:rensus:v:12:y:2008:i:9:p:2422-2437. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.