IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i12p3092-d1677135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Real Options Model for CCUS Investment: CO 2 Hydrogenation to Methanol in a Chinese Integrated Refining–Chemical Plant

Author

Listed:
  • Ruirui Fang

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China)

  • Xianxiang Gan

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China)

  • Yubing Bai

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China)

  • Lianyong Feng

    (School of Economics and Management, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China)

Abstract

The scaling up of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) deployment is constrained by multiple factors, including technological immaturity, high capital expenditures, and extended investment return periods. The existing research on CCUS investment decisions predominantly centers on coal-fired power plants, with the utilization pathways placing a primary emphasis on storage or enhanced oil recovery (EOR). There is limited research available regarding the chemical utilization of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). This study develops an options-based analytical model, employing geometric Brownian motion to characterize carbon and oil price uncertainties while incorporating the learning curve effect in carbon capture infrastructure costs. Additionally, revenues from chemical utilization and EOR are integrated into the return model. A case study is conducted on a process producing 100,000 tons of methanol annually via CO 2 hydrogenation. Based on numerical simulations, we determine the optimal investment conditions for the “CO 2 -to-methanol + EOR” collaborative scheme. Parameter sensitivity analyses further evaluate how key variables—carbon pricing, oil market dynamics, targeted subsidies, and the cost of renewable electricity—influence investment timing and feasibility. The results reveal that the following: (1) Carbon pricing plays a pivotal role in influencing investment decisions related to CCUS. A stable and sufficiently high carbon price improves the economic feasibility of CCUS projects. When the initial carbon price reaches 125 CNY/t or higher, refining–chemical integrated plants are incentivized to make immediate investments. (2) Increases in oil prices also encourage CCUS investment decisions by refining–chemical integrated plants, but the effect is weaker than that of carbon prices. The model reveals that when oil prices exceed USD 134 per barrel, the investment trigger is activated, leading to earlier project implementation. (3) EOR subsidy and the initial equipment investment subsidy can promote investment and bring forward the expected exercise time of the option. Immediate investment conditions will be triggered when EOR subsidy reaches CNY 75 per barrel or more, or the subsidy coefficient reaches 0.2 or higher. (4) The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) from photovoltaic sources is identified as a key determinant of hydrogen production economics. A sustained decline in LCOE—from CNY 0.30/kWh to 0.22/kWh, and further to 0.12/kWh or below—significantly advances the optimal investment window. When LCOE reaches CNY 0.12/kWh, the project achieves economic viability, enabling investment potentially as early as 2025. This study provides guidance and reference cases for CCUS investment decisions integrating EOR and chemical utilization in China’s refining–chemical integrated plants.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruirui Fang & Xianxiang Gan & Yubing Bai & Lianyong Feng, 2025. "A Real Options Model for CCUS Investment: CO 2 Hydrogenation to Methanol in a Chinese Integrated Refining–Chemical Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-21, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:12:p:3092-:d:1677135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/12/3092/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/12/3092/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fuss, Sabine & Szolgayová, Jana, 2010. "Fuel price and technological uncertainty in a real options model for electricity planning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(9), pages 2938-2944, September.
    2. Fan, Jing-Li & Li, Zezheng & Ding, Zixia & Li, Kai & Zhang, Xian, 2023. "Investment decisions on carbon capture utilization and storage retrofit of Chinese coal-fired power plants based on real option and source-sink matching models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    3. Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2011. "A real options–based CCS investment evaluation model: Case study of China’s power generation sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(12), pages 4320-4333.
    4. Yao, Xing & Zhong, Ping & Zhang, Xian & Zhu, Lei, 2018. "Business model design for the carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) project in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 519-533.
    5. Hongju Da & Degang Xu & Jufeng Li & Zhihe Tang & Jiaxin Li & Chen Wang & Hui Luan & Fang Zhang & Yong Zeng, 2023. "Influencing Factors of Carbon Emission from Typical Refining Units: Identification, Analysis, and Mitigation Potential," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt46x6h0n0 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Wang, Xingwei & Cai, Yanpeng & Dai, Chao, 2014. "Evaluating China's biomass power production investment based on a policy benefit real options model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 751-761.
    8. Wu, Ning & Parsons, John E. & Polenske, Karen R., 2013. "The impact of future carbon prices on CCS investment for power generation in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 160-172.
    9. Laurikka, Harri, 2006. "Option value of gasification technology within an emissions trading scheme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3916-3928, December.
    10. Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2013. "Modelling the investment in carbon capture retrofits of pulverized coal-fired plants," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 66-75.
    11. Yang, Lin & Xu, Mao & Yang, Yuantao & Fan, Jingli & Zhang, Xian, 2019. "Comparison of subsidy schemes for carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) investment based on real option approach: Evidence from China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    12. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
    13. Hongrui Chu & Lun Ran & Ran Zhang, 2016. "Evaluating CCS Investment of China by a Novel Real Option-Based Model," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2016, pages 1-15, December.
    14. Myers, Stewart C., 1977. "Determinants of corporate borrowing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 147-175, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tan, Zhizhou & Huang, Hui & Lin, Boqiang, 2024. "Impact assessment of the residual lifespan of coal-fired power plants on the investment risk of carbon capture and storage retrofit," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    2. Zhang, M.M. & Wang, Qunwei & Zhou, Dequn & Ding, H., 2019. "Evaluating uncertain investment decisions in low-carbon transition toward renewable energy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 1049-1060.
    3. Herui Cui & Tian Zhao & Ruirui Wu, 2018. "An Investment Feasibility Analysis of CCS Retrofit Based on a Two-Stage Compound Real Options Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Xiping Wang & Hongdou Zhang, 2018. "Valuation of CCS investment in China's coal‐fired power plants based on a compound real options model," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(5), pages 978-988, October.
    5. Xiping Wang & Hongdou Zhang, 2018. "Optimal design of carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment in China's coal‐fired power plants: A real options analysis," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(5), pages 863-875, October.
    6. Tan, Zhizhou & Zeng, Xianhai & Lin, Boqiang, 2023. "How do multiple policy incentives influence investors’ decisions on biomass co-firing combined with carbon capture and storage retrofit projects for coal-fired power plants?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PB).
    7. Su, Qing & Zhou, Peng & Ding, Hao, 2025. "Portfolio optimization of diversified energy transition investments with multiple risks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    8. Ouyang, Yiling & Guo, Jian, 2022. "Carbon capture and storage investment strategy towards the dual carbon goals," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. Chen, Siyuan & Liu, Jiangfeng & Zhang, Qi & Teng, Fei & McLellan, Benjamin C., 2022. "A critical review on deployment planning and risk analysis of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) toward carbon neutrality," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Linnerud, Kristin & Andersson, Ane Marte & Fleten, Stein-Erik, 2014. "Investment timing under uncertain renewable energy policy: An empirical study of small hydropower projects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 154-164.
    11. Brauneis, Alexander & Mestel, Roland & Palan, Stefan, 2013. "Inducing low-carbon investment in the electric power industry through a price floor for emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 190-204.
    12. Chen, Huadong & Wang, Can & Cai, Wenjia & Wang, Jianhui, 2018. "Simulating the impact of investment preference on low-carbon transition in power sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 440-455.
    13. Mingming Zhang & Dequn Zhou & Hao Ding & Jingliang Jin, 2016. "Biomass Power Generation Investment in China: A Real Options Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-22, June.
    14. Hanne Lamberts-Van Assche & Tine Compernolle, 2022. "Using Real Options Thinking to Value Investment Flexibility in Carbon Capture and Utilization Projects: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-24, February.
    15. Yao, Xing & Fan, Ying & Zhu, Lei & Zhang, Xian, 2020. "Optimization of dynamic incentive for the deployment of carbon dioxide removal technology: A nonlinear dynamic approach combined with real options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    16. Bo Sun & Jiajia Tao, 2024. "Investment Decisions of CCUS Projects in China Considering the Supply–Demand Relationship of CO 2 from the Industry Symbiosis Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-25, June.
    17. Liu, Jiangfeng & Zhang, Qi & Li, Hailong & Chen, Siyuan & Teng, Fei, 2022. "Investment decision on carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technologies—A real option model based on technology learning effect," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    18. Lei Zhu & Xing Yao & Xian Zhang, 2020. "Evaluation of cooperative mitigation: captured carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 1261-1285, October.
    19. Boomsma, Trine Krogh & Linnerud, Kristin, 2015. "Market and policy risk under different renewable electricity support schemes," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 435-448.
    20. Romano, Teresa & Fumagalli, Elena, 2018. "Greening the power generation sector: Understanding the role of uncertainty," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 272-286.

    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:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:12:p:3092-:d:1677135. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.