IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/enp/wpaper/eprg0619.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Probabilistic Analysis to Value Power Generation Investments Under Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Fabien A. Roques

    (Electricity Policy Research Group, University of Cambridge)

  • William J. Nuttall

    (Electricity Policy Research Group, University of Cambridge)

  • David M. Newbery

    (Electricity Policy Research Group, University of Cambridge)

Abstract

This paper reviews the limits of the traditional ‘levelised cost’ approach to properly take into account risks and uncertainties when valuing different power generation technologies. We introduce a probabilistic valuation model of investment in three base-load technologies (combined cycle gas turbine, coal plant, and nuclear power plant), and demonstrate using three case studies how such a probabilistic approach provides investors with a much richer analytical framework to assess power investments in liberalised markets. We successively analyse the combined impact of multiple uncertainties on the value of alternative technologies, the value of the operating flexibility of power plant managers to mothball and de-mothball plants, and the value of mixed portfolios of different production technologies that present complementary risk-return profiles.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Fabien A. Roques & William J. Nuttall & David M. Newbery, 2006. "Using Probabilistic Analysis to Value Power Generation Investments Under Uncertainty," Working Papers EPRG 0619, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:enp:wpaper:eprg0619
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/eprg-wp0619.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lisandro Abrego & Carlo Perroni, 2002. "Investment subsidies and Time-Consistent Environmental Policy," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(4), pages 617-635, October.
    2. Warwick J. McKibbin & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2002. "The Role of Economics in Climate Change Policy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 107-129, Spring.
    3. Marsiliani, Laura & Renstrom, Thomas I, 2000. "Time Inconsistency in Environmental Policy: Tax Earmarking as a Commitment Solution," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(462), pages 123-138, March.
    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. Muñoz, José Ignacio & Sánchez de la Nieta, Agustín A. & Contreras, Javier & Bernal-Agustín, José L., 2009. "Optimal investment portfolio in renewable energy: The Spanish case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5273-5284, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Jamasb, Tooraj & Nuttall, William J. & Pollitt, Michael, 2008. "The case for a new energy research, development and promotion policy for the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4610-4614, December.
    4. Foley, A.M. & Ó Gallachóir, B.P. & Hur, J. & Baldick, R. & McKeogh, E.J., 2010. "A strategic review of electricity systems models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 4522-4530.
    5. Santos, Lúcia & Soares, Isabel & Mendes, Carla & Ferreira, Paula, 2014. "Real Options versus Traditional Methods to assess Renewable Energy Projects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 588-594.
    6. Chignell, Simon & Gross, Robert J.K., 2013. "Not locked-in? The overlooked impact of new gas-fired generation investment on long-term decarbonisation in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 699-705.
    7. Locatelli, Giorgio & Mancini, Mauro & Lotti, Giovanni, 2020. "A simple-to-implement real options method for the energy sector," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    8. Thiam, Djiby-Racine, 2010. "Renewable decentralized in developing countries: Appraisal from microgrids project in Senegal," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1615-1623.
    9. Konsta Värri & Sanna Syri, 2019. "The Possible Role of Modular Nuclear Reactors in District Heating: Case Helsinki Region," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, June.
    10. Roques, Fabien A., 2008. "Technology choices for new entrants in liberalized markets: The value of operating flexibility and contractual arrangements," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 245-253, December.
    11. Madlener, Reinhard & Wenk, Christioph, 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).
    12. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & Riesz, Jenny & MacGill, Iain F., 2015. "Using renewables to hedge against future electricity industry uncertainties—An Australian case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 43-56.
    13. Brouwer, Anne Sjoerd & van den Broek, Machteld & Özdemir, Özge & Koutstaal, Paul & Faaij, André, 2016. "Business case uncertainty of power plants in future energy systems with wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 237-256.
    14. Locatelli, Giorgio & Mancini, Mauro, 2010. "Small-medium sized nuclear coal and gas power plant: A probabilistic analysis of their financial performances and influence of CO2 cost," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6360-6374, October.
    15. Sunderkötter, Malte & Weber, Christoph, 2012. "Valuing fuel diversification in power generation capacity planning," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1664-1674.
    16. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2012. "A Monte Carlo based decision-support tool for assessing generation portfolios in future carbon constrained electricity industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 374-392.
    17. Daniel Ziegler & Katrin Schmitz & Christoph Weber, 2012. "Optimal electricity generation portfolios," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 381-399, August.
    18. Geissmann, Thomas, 2017. "A probabilistic approach to the computation of the levelized cost of electricity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 372-381.

    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. Achim Voß, 2015. "How Disagreement About Social Costs Leads to Inefficient Energy-Productivity Investment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(4), pages 521-548, April.
    2. Chiappinelli, Olga & May, Nils, 2022. "Too good to be true? Time-inconsistent renewable energy policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2020. "Commitment Versus Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(1), pages 39-67, May.
    4. Pani, Marco & Perroni, Carlo, 2018. "Energy subsidies and policy commitment in political equilibrium," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 149-160.
    5. Dieter Helm & Cameron Hepburn & Richard Mash, 2003. "Time Inconsistent Environmental Policy and Optimal Delegation," Economics Series Working Papers 175, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    6. Kalk, Andrei & Sorger, Gerhard, 2023. "Climate policy under political pressure," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    7. Herbert Dawid & Christophe Deissenberg & Pavel Ševčik, 2005. "Cheap Talk, Gullibility, and Welfare in an Environmental Taxation Game," Springer Books, in: Alain Haurie & Georges Zaccour (ed.), Dynamic Games: Theory and Applications, chapter 0, pages 175-192, Springer.
    8. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2017. "Commitment vs. Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 6355, CESifo.
    9. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Steckel, Jan Christoph & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2020. "All or nothing: Climate policy when assets can become stranded," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    10. Raphael Calel, 2011. "Market-based instruments and technology choices: a synthesis," GRI Working Papers 57, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    11. McGregor, Peter G. & Kim Swales, J. & Winning, Matthew A., 2012. "A review of the role and remit of the committee on climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 466-473.
    12. Acemoglu, Daron & Rafey, Will, 2023. "Mirage on the horizon: Geoengineering and carbon taxation without commitment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    13. Taran Fæhn & Elisabeth Thuestad Isaksen, 2014. "Diffusion of climate technologies in the presence of commitment problems," Discussion Papers 768, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    14. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    15. Xiang-Yu Wang & Bao-Jun Tang, 2018. "Review of comparative studies on market mechanisms for carbon emission reduction: a bibliometric analysis," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 94(3), pages 1141-1162, December.
    16. Lucy Rees & Rod Tyers, 2004. "On the Robustness of Short Run Gains from Trade Reform," CEPR Discussion Papers 474, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    17. Giovanni Carnazza & Thomas I. Renström & Luca Spataro, 2023. "Is public debt environmentally friendly? The role of EU fiscal rules on environmental quality: An empirical assessment," Working Papers 2023.26, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Webster, Mort & Sue Wing, Ian & Jakobovits, Lisa, 2010. "Second-best instruments for near-term climate policy: Intensity targets vs. the safety valve," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 250-259, May.
    19. Benjamin Jones & Michael Keen & Jon Strand, 2013. "Fiscal implications of climate change," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(1), pages 29-70, February.
    20. Nelson, Tim & Pascoe, Owen & Calais, Prabpreet & Mitchell, Lily & McNeill, Judith, 2019. "Efficient integration of climate and energy policy in Australia’s National Electricity Market," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 178-193.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    investment; uncertainty; Monte-Carlo simulation; operating flexibility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities

    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:enp:wpaper:eprg0619. 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: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/jicamuk.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.