Evaluation of Economically Optimal Retrofit Investment Options for Energy Savings in Buildings
In this study, a techno-economic evaluation methodology for energy retrofit of buildings is introduced, geared towards finding the economically optimal set of retrofit measures. Split incentives of building owners and users are considered explicitly in a conventional (static) evaluation to identify the investment alternatives maximizing the net present value (NPV). Energy price uncertainty for various distributional assumptions of the stochastic variables is addressed through Monte Carlo simulation. Results from the simulation are used to compute probabilities and expected NPVs. Based on this, a sequential (dynamic) evaluation methodology is developed, featuring a real options investment appraisal. The methodological advancements introduced are applied to an office building, illustrating the model’s performance. The case study results indicate that energy price changes significantly affect the profitability of retrofit investments, and that increased price volatility creates a substantial value of waiting, making it more rational to postpone the investment. Further insight is gained on various aspects of economic decision-making concerning energy retrofit of buildings.
|Date of creation:||Sep 2011|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eonerc.rwth-aachen.de/fcn|
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ghoshray, Atanu & Johnson, Ben, 2010. "Trends in world energy prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1147-1156, September.
- Jakob, Martin, 2006. "Marginal costs and co-benefits of energy efficiency investments: The case of the Swiss residential sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 172-187, January.
- Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 1994. "The energy-efficiency gap What does it mean?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(10), pages 804-810, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:fcnwpa:2011_014. 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: (Hendrik Schmitz)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.