IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/89717.html

Costo de generación eléctrica incorporando externalidades ambientales: Mezcla óptima de tecnologías de carga base
[Cost of electric generation accounting for environmental externalities: Optimal mix of baseload technologies]

Author

Listed:
  • Gómez-Ríos, María del Carmen
  • Juárez-Luna, David

Abstract

This paper aims to calculate the Total Levelized Cost of Generation with Externalities (CTNGE, in Spanish) of three baseload technologies: coal thermoelectric, combined cycle and nuclear power plant. Monte Carlo simulation is used to estimate the CTNGE probability densities. The portfolio theory is used to find the mix of technologies that provides the least risky CTNGE and with the lowest average. We find that the nuclear power plant has the lowest CTNGE. The coal-fired thermoelectric plant is the technology with the largest and riskiest CTNGE. The analysis suggests that, when generating electricity, it is convenient to leave out the coal-fired thermoelectric plant and focus on two technologies: combined cycle and nuclear power plant, assigning a higher participation to the latter. One limitation of the work is that the probability densities of the CTNGE estimated through the Monte Carlo simulation depend on the data used. The present analysis suggests that the CTNGE can be significantly modified by including the cost of CO2.

Suggested Citation

  • Gómez-Ríos, María del Carmen & Juárez-Luna, David, 2018. "Costo de generación eléctrica incorporando externalidades ambientales: Mezcla óptima de tecnologías de carga base [Cost of electric generation accounting for environmental externalities: Optimal mix of baseload technologies]," MPRA Paper 89717, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:89717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/89717/1/MPRA_paper_89717.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aen:journl:2006v27-04-a01 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    3. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    4. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474, December.
    5. Birgir Hrafnkelsson & Gudmundur V. Oddsson & Runar Unnthorsson, 2016. "A Method for Estimating Annual Energy Production Using Monte Carlo Wind Speed Simulation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, April.
    6. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Juárez-Luna, David & Mosiño, Alejandro, 2024. "Electricity generation portfolios in Mexico: Environmental, economic, and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).

    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. Fuss, Sabine & Szolgayová, Jana & Khabarov, Nikolay & Obersteiner, Michael, 2012. "Renewables and climate change mitigation: Irreversible energy investment under uncertainty and portfolio effects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 59-68.
    2. 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.
    3. Kitzing, Lena, 2014. "Risk implications of renewable support instruments: Comparative analysis of feed-in tariffs and premiums using a mean–variance approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 495-505.
    4. Reinhard Madlener & Christioph Wenk, 2008. "Efficient Investment Portfolios for the Swiss Electricity Supply Sector," FCN Working Papers 2/2008, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    5. Jano-Ito, Marco A. & Crawford-Brown, Douglas, 2017. "Investment decisions considering economic, environmental and social factors: An actors' perspective for the electricity sector of Mexico," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 92-106.
    6. Kim, Yeong Jae & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Sharma, Bijay P., 2021. "Constructing efficient portfolios of low-carbon technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    7. Daniel Ziegler & Katrin Schmitz & Christoph Weber, 2012. "Optimal electricity generation portfolios," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 381-399, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Allan, Grant & Eromenko, Igor & McGregor, Peter & Swales, Kim, 2011. "The regional electricity generation mix in Scotland: A portfolio selection approach incorporating marine technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 6-22, January.
    10. Westner, Günther & Madlener, Reinhard, 2011. "Development of cogeneration in Germany: A mean-variance portfolio analysis of individual technology’s prospects in view of the new regulatory framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 5301-5313.
    11. Geoffrey Poitras & John Heaney, 2015. "Classical Ergodicity and Modern Portfolio Theory," Post-Print hal-03680380, HAL.
    12. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Optimal diversity: Increasing returns versus recombinant innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 565-580, December.
    13. 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).
    14. Etsusaku Shimada, 2026. "When Does Optimization Become Incoherent? Irreversibility, Non-Compensability, and Feasible Choice," KIER Working Papers 1124, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    15. Alberto Rechelo Neto, Carlos & Sauer, Ildo Luis, 2006. "LNG as a strategy to establish developing countries' gas markets: The Brazilian case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 4103-4114, December.
    16. Jang Ho Kim & Woo Chang Kim & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2017. "Penalizing variances for higher dependency on factors," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 479-489, April.
    17. Juárez-Luna, David & Mosiño, Alejandro, 2024. "Electricity generation portfolios in Mexico: Environmental, economic, and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    18. Meunier, Guy, 2013. "Risk aversion and technology mix in an electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 866-874.
    19. Inzunza, Andrés & Muñoz, Francisco D. & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "Measuring the effects of environmental policies on electricity markets risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    20. Kundu, Srikanta & Paul, Amartya, 2022. "Effect of economic policy uncertainty on stock market return and volatility under heterogeneous market characteristics," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 597-612.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:89717. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.