Optimal timing for generation investment with uncertain emission mitigation policy

European Transactions on Electrical Power (Impact Factor: 0.63). 01/2011; 21(1):1015 - 1027. DOI: 10.1002/etep.493

ABSTRACT In view of the fact that different mechanisms for mitigating the CO2 emission have been employed or proposed in different countries or regions, and those already implemented are still in an evolutionary procedure, the future CO2 emission prices would be highly uncertain. Given this background, an effort is made for investigating the problem of generation investment decision-making in electricity market environment with uncertainties from the climate change policy for limiting the CO2 emission. According to the changing characteristics of the uncertain factors, the models of the fuel prices, electricity prices, and CO2 emission prices are respectively presented first. Next, under the existing real option approach (ROA) based methodological framework for the generation investment decision-making problem, a mathematical model accommodating multiple kinds of uncertainties and an efficient solving method are developed. Finally, the proposed model and method are illustrated by a numerical example with different scenarios. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


Available from: Iain Macgill, May 30, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The generation business in the U.S. is currently undergoing a transition from a regulated monopoly toward an uncertain, competitive market. Under the competitive market, the price of electric power as well as the corresponding revenue may be much less certain than before. These market uncertainties have increased the significance of two critical factors in generation planning. These factors are financial risks and managerial flexibilities. In order to quantitatively and objectively address these two factors in generation planning, in this dissertation, we design and analyze a series of mathematical models based on the real options approach for generation planning. Hence, this dissertation can be viewed as a comprehensive study of the real options approach in generation planning. The dissertation begins with a simple multiple-project single-option model based on the Black-Scholes option-pricing formula. This is followed by a single-project multiple-option model based on geometric Brownian motion process, binomial lattice, and backward dynamic programming. Next, we design and analyze sophisticated multiple-project multiple-option models where the market values of the projects are assumed to be correlated. As before, we employ the backward dynamic programming over the lattice to determine the optimal options for the multiple projects and the corresponding values of the investment. Also, we investigate the roles of the correlation coefficients among projects in decision making and the value of an option. In addition, we construct and analyze a traditional generation planning model that incorporates forced customer outage costs and forced utility outage costs. By incorporating forced customer outage costs, we attempt to take customer satisfaction level into account. We compare and contrast the models from the real options approach as well as the traditional approach. We hope that the results of this dissertation will encourage utilities to effectively utilize the real options approach in generation planning under market uncertainties. As this approach can address the financial risks and managerial flexibility while the classical discounted cash flow approaches can not, we also hope that generation planning can be performed more quantitatively and objectively under the new economic uncertainties. Typescript (photocopy). Thesis (Ph. D.)--Iowa State University, 2001. Includes bibliographical references.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is the world's first large experiment with an emissions trading system for carbon dioxide (CO2) and it is likely to be copied by others if there is to be a global regime for limiting greenhouse gas emissions. After providing a brief discussion of the origins of the EU ETS, its relation to the Kyoto Protocol, and its precedents in Europe and the U.S., this paper focuses on allowance allocation—the process of deciding who will receive the newly limited rights to emit CO2. We describe how allowances were allocated in the EU ETS, with particular emphasis on the issues and problems encountered, including the lack of readily available installation-level data, the participants in the process, the use of projections, the choices of Member States with respect to auctioning, benchmarking, and new entrant provisions, and the difficult issue of deciding to whom the expected shortage was to be allocated. Finally, we discuss the recently available data on 2005 emissions and what they indicate concerning over-allocation, trading patterns, and abatement. We conclude with some observations about the broader implications of the EU ETS, what seems to be unique about CO2, and the fact that non-economic considerations inform the allocation of allowances.
    Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 01/2007; 1(1):66-87. DOI:10.1093/reep/rem003 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This work presents a novel model for optimization of investments in new power generation under uncertainty. The model can calculate optimal investment strategies under both centralized social welfare and decentralized profit objectives. The power market is represented with linear supply and demand curves. A stochastic dynamic programming algorithm is used to solve the investment problem, where uncertainty in demand is represented as a discrete Markov chain. The stochastic dynamic model allows us to evaluate investment projects in new base and peak load power generation as real options, and determine optimal timing of the investments. In a case study, we use the model to compare optimal investment strategies under centralized and decentralized decision making. A number of interesting results follow by varying the assumptions about market structure and price response on the demand side.
    IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 03/2005; DOI:10.1109/TPWRS.2004.841217 · 3.53 Impact Factor