IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i6d10.1007_s10668-023-03232-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of modern portfolio theory to the European electricity mix: an assessment of environmentally optimal scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Fernando deLlano-Paz

    (Facultad de Economía y Empresa)

  • Juan José Cartelle-Barros

    (Escuela Politécnica de Ingeniería de Ferrol, Campus Industrial de Ferrol)

  • Paulino Martínez-Fernández

    (Facultad de Economía y Empresa)

Abstract

The proposed study analyzes the efficiency of the European energy mix of electricity generation technologies from two perspectives: environmental and economic. The context is that of European energy dependence and a technology mix conditioned by the import of fossil fuels. The impact is centered, among other elements, on the leakage of national income and the emission of polluting gases. The aim is to determine the participation that each type of power plant in each country should present in order to minimize the total environmental impact. In order to solve this problem, a double optimization is proposed through the use of two methodologies: one based on a multi-criteria decision-making method (MCDM) model with which to evaluate the environmental performance of each power plant, and a second optimization based on a quadratic model of portfolios modern portfolio theory (MPT), with which to evaluate the efficiency of the portfolio of technologies from the cost/risk binomial. The results confirm that an environmentally efficient portfolio leads to higher levels of economic risk-taking, with a slight increase in the level of assumed cost. Nevertheless, from the results obtained, it is possible to say that hydro (with a share between 11 and 13%) and wind (37–44% mix participation) technologies resulted to be preferred options both environmentally and in terms of minimum risk efficiency. Nuclear power generation stands out as one of the main baseload technologies with shares between 25 and 35% in environmental and cost/risk efficiency. As main findings, Hydro, supercritical lignite, solar PV and wind are identified as preferential technologies to be present in both minimum risk and minimum cost efficient portfolios. In case European Union pursues for minimizing the cost of electricity production, the shares of supercritical lignite, nuclear, solar PV and wind energy go up to the maximum allowed limits. The novelty lies in the application of both methodologies with which to complement the analysis and design efficient portfolios of energy technologies from environmental and economic points of view. One possible future approach would be to assess (with the MPT model) new environmentally optimal portfolios obtained through the application of other MCDM techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernando deLlano-Paz & Juan José Cartelle-Barros & Paulino Martínez-Fernández, 2024. "Application of modern portfolio theory to the European electricity mix: an assessment of environmentally optimal scenarios," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 15001-15029, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03232-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-03232-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-03232-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-03232-x?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de-Llano Paz, Fernando & Antelo, Susana Iglesias & Calvo Silvosa, Anxo & Soares, Isabel, 2014. "The technological and environmental efficiency of the EU-27 power mix: An evaluation based on MPT," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 67-81.
    2. Stephen A. Rhoades, 1993. "The Herfindahl-Hirschman index," Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), issue Mar, pages 188-189.
    3. Awerbuch, Shimon & Yang, Spencer, 2007. "Efficient electricity generating portfolios for Europe: maximising energy security and climate change mitigation," EIB Papers 7/2007, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    4. Ciscar, Juan-Carlos & Saveyn, Bert & Soria, Antonio & Szabo, Laszlo & Van Regemorter, Denise & Van Ierland, Tom, 2013. "A comparability analysis of global burden sharing GHG reduction scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 73-81.
    5. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2012. "Portfolio assessments for future generation investment in newly industrializing countries – A case study of Thailand," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1044-1058.
    6. Tapia Carpio, Lucio Guido, 2021. "Mitigating the risk of photovoltaic power generation: A complementarity model of solar irradiation in diverse regions applied to Brazil," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    7. Paulino Martinez-Fernandez & Fernando deLlano-Paz & Anxo Calvo-Silvosa & Isabel Soares, 2018. "Pollutant versus non-pollutant generation technologies: a CML-analogous analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 199-212, December.
    8. Roques, Fabien A. & Newbery, David M. & Nuttall, William J., 2008. "Fuel mix diversification incentives in liberalized electricity markets: A Mean-Variance Portfolio theory approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1831-1849, July.
    9. Roques, Fabien & Hiroux, Céline & Saguan, Marcelo, 2010. "Optimal wind power deployment in Europe--A portfolio approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3245-3256, July.
    10. Arnesano, M. & Carlucci, A.P. & Laforgia, D., 2012. "Extension of portfolio theory application to energy planning problem – The Italian case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 112-124.
    11. Chu, Cheng-Ta & Hawkes, Adam D., 2020. "Optimal mix of climate-related energy in global electricity systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 955-963.
    12. Dranka, Géremi Gilson & Ferreira, Paula & Vaz, A. Ismael F., 2021. "A review of co-optimization approaches for operational and planning problems in the energy sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    13. Scala, Antonio & Facchini, Angelo & Perna, Umberto & Basosi, Riccardo, 2019. "Portfolio analysis and geographical allocation of renewable sources: A stochastic approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 154-159.
    14. Koltsaklis, Nikolaos E. & Dagoumas, Athanasios S., 2018. "State-of-the-art generation expansion planning: A review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 563-589.
    15. Chang, Miguel & Thellufsen, Jakob Zink & Zakeri, Behnam & Pickering, Bryn & Pfenninger, Stefan & Lund, Henrik & Østergaard, Poul Alberg, 2021. "Trends in tools and approaches for modelling the energy transition," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    16. Lucheroni, Carlo & Mari, Carlo, 2017. "CO2 volatility impact on energy portfolio choice: A fully stochastic LCOE theory analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 278-290.
    17. Alireza Karimi & You Joung Kim & Negar Mohammad Zadeh & Antonio García-Martínez & Shahram Delfani & Robert D. Brown & David Moreno-Rangel & Pir Mohammad, 2022. "Assessment of Outdoor Design Conditions on the Energy Performance of Cooling Systems in Future Climate Scenarios—A Case Study over Three Cities of Texas, Unites States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-19, November.
    18. Dagoumas, Athanasios S. & Koltsaklis, Nikolaos E., 2019. "Review of models for integrating renewable energy in the generation expansion planning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 242(C), pages 1573-1587.
    19. Cartelle Barros, Juan José & Lara Coira, Manuel & de la Cruz López, María Pilar & del Caño Gochi, Alfredo & Soares, Isabel, 2020. "Probabilistic multicriteria environmental assessment of power plants: A global approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    20. Castro, Gabriel Malta & Klöckl, Claude & Regner, Peter & Schmidt, Johannes & Pereira, Amaro Olimpio, 2022. "Improvements to Modern Portfolio Theory based models applied to electricity systems," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    21. Wu, Jung-Hua & Huang, Yun-Hsun, 2014. "Electricity portfolio planning model incorporating renewable energy characteristics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 278-287.
    22. Peter Russ & Juan Carlos Ciscar & Bert Saveyn & Antonio Soria & Laszlo Szabo & Tom Van Ierland & Denise Van Regemorter & Rosella Virdis, 2009. "Economic Assessment of Post-2012 Global Climate Policies - Analysis of Gas Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Scenarios with the POLES and GEM-E3 models," JRC Research Reports JRC50307, Joint Research Centre.
    23. de Faria, Victor A.D. & de Queiroz, Anderson R. & DeCarolis, Joseph F., 2022. "Optimizing offshore renewable portfolios under resource variability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    24. Rocha, Paula & Kuhn, Daniel, 2012. "Multistage stochastic portfolio optimisation in deregulated electricity markets using linear decision rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 397-408.
    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. deLlano-Paz, Fernando & Calvo-Silvosa, Anxo & Iglesias Antelo, Susana & Soares, Isabel, 2015. "The European low-carbon mix for 2030: The role of renewable energy sources in an environmentally and socially efficient approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 49-61.
    2. Paulino Martinez-Fernandez & Fernando deLlano-Paz & Anxo Calvo-Silvosa & Isabel Soares, 2019. "Assessing Renewable Energy Sources for Electricity (RES-E) Potential Using a CAPM-Analogous Multi-Stage Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Zhang, Shuang & Zhao, Tao & Xie, Bai-Chen, 2018. "What is the optimal power generation mix of China? An empirical analysis using portfolio theory," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 522-536.
    4. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Flores, Yarela, 2018. "Planning in a changing environment: Applications of portfolio optimisation to deal with risk in the electricity sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3808-3823.
    5. deLlano-Paz, Fernando & Calvo-Silvosa, Anxo & Antelo, Susana Iglesias & Soares, Isabel, 2017. "Energy planning and modern portfolio theory: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 636-651.
    6. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Negrete-Pincetic, Matías, 2018. "Portfolio applications in electricity markets review: Private investor and manager perspective trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 192-204.
    7. deLlano-Paz, Fernando & Martínez Fernandez, Paulino & Soares, Isabel, 2016. "Addressing 2030 EU policy framework for energy and climate: Cost, risk and energy security issues," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P2), pages 1347-1360.
    8. Paulino Martinez-Fernandez & Fernando deLlano-Paz & Anxo Calvo-Silvosa & Isabel Soares, 2018. "Pollutant versus non-pollutant generation technologies: a CML-analogous analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 199-212, December.
    9. M, Jisma & Mohan, Vivek & Thomas, Mini Shaji & Madhu M, Nimal, 2022. "Risk-Calibrated conventional-renewable generation mix using master-slave portfolio approach guided by flexible investor preferencing," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    10. de-Llano Paz, Fernando & Antelo, Susana Iglesias & Calvo Silvosa, Anxo & Soares, Isabel, 2014. "The technological and environmental efficiency of the EU-27 power mix: An evaluation based on MPT," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 67-81.
    11. López Prol, Javier & de Llano Paz, Fernando & Calvo-Silvosa, Anxo & Pfenninger, Stefan & Staffell, Iain, 2024. "Wind-solar technological, spatial and temporal complementarities in Europe: A portfolio approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    12. Tietjen, Oliver & Pahle, Michael & Fuss, Sabine, 2016. "Investment risks in power generation: A comparison of fossil fuel and renewable energy dominated markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 174-185.
    13. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2013. "Assessing the value of wind generation in future carbon constrained electricity industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 400-412.
    14. Østergaard, P.A. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Sorknæs, P. & Mathiesen, B.V., 2022. "Review and validation of EnergyPLAN," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    15. Athanasios Zisos & Dimitrios Chatzopoulos & Andreas Efstratiadis, 2024. "The Concept of Spatial Reliability Across Renewable Energy Systems—An Application to Decentralized Solar PV Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Botor, Benjamin & Böcker, Benjamin & Kallabis, Thomas & Weber, Christoph, 2021. "Information shocks and profitability risks for power plant investments – impacts of policy instruments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. Ioannou, Anastasia & Angus, Andrew & Brennan, Feargal, 2017. "Risk-based methods for sustainable energy system planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 602-615.
    18. Tapia Carpio, Lucio Guido & Cardoso Guimarães, Frederico A., 2024. "Regional diversification of hydro, wind, and solar generation potential: A mean-variance model to stabilize power fluctuations in the Brazilian integrated electrical energy transmission and distributi," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    19. Marrero, Gustavo A. & Puch, Luis A. & Ramos-Real, Francisco J., 2015. "Mean-variance portfolio methods for energy policy risk management," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 246-264.
    20. Haugen, Mari & Blaisdell-Pijuan, Paris L. & Botterud, Audun & Levin, Todd & Zhou, Zhi & Belsnes, Michael & Korpås, Magnus & Somani, Abhishek, 2024. "Power market models for the clean energy transition: State of the art and future research needs," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 357(C).

    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:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03232-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.