Investment decisions under uncertainties in geothermal power generation

被引:4
|
作者
Dewi, Marmelia P. [1 ]
Setiawan, Andri D. [2 ]
Latief, Yusuf [1 ]
Purwanto, Widodo Wahyu [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Indonesia, Fac Engn, Civil Engn Dept, Depok, Indonesia
[2] Univ Indonesia, Fac Engn, Ind Engn Dept, Depok, Indonesia
[3] Univ Indonesia, Fac Engn, Chem Engn Dept, Depok, Indonesia
关键词
uncertainty; real options analysis; geothermal project investments; geothermal power plant; NPV; RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS; REAL OPTIONS VALUATION; STRATEGIES; IMPACT; RISK;
D O I
10.3934/energy.2022038
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
Geothermal energy is one of the strategies employed by the Indonesian government to meet rising electricity demand. Developing geothermal energy is often characterized by uncertainties and requires sequential decision-making which is divided into four development phases: 1) identification, 2) exploration, 3) exploitation, and 4) engineering, procurement, construction, and commissioning (EPPC) before it can be commercialized. Traditional valuation techniques often produce a negative net present value (NPV), suggesting decision to reject the project's investment plan. This paper investigates the economic viability of a geothermal power generation project using both NPV and real options analysis (ROA). Costs and uncertainties associated with the various development phases as well as the investment structure of geothermal projects are studied. We develop a framework for assessing the impact of four uncertainties using a binomial lattice: capacity factor, electricity price, make-up well -drilling costs, and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Secondary data from an Indonesian context geothermal power plant was used. Positive option values were found for the lattice approach compared to negative values found for the common NPV calculation. The result of this study showed the successful outcome of the exploration stage is very critical to determining the continuation of the project. The framework supports decision-makers in evaluating the impact of geothermal power generation projects in the face of uncertainty by providing a rigorous analysis. The movement of the underlying asset's value in the whole project's lifetime will assist the management in deciding on whether to exit or continue.
引用
收藏
页码:844 / 857
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] INVESTMENT DECISIONS UNDER UNCERTAINTY - EGERTON,RAD
    SHACKLE, GLS
    ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1964, 74 (293): : 172 - 174
  • [32] A Tax Paradox for Investment Decisions under Uncertainty
    Gries, Thomas
    Prior, Ulrich
    Sureth, Caren
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMIC THEORY, 2012, 14 (03) : 521 - 545
  • [33] INVESTMENT DECISIONS UNDER UNCERTAINTY: RESEARCH TRENDS
    Paskevicius, Arvydas
    Petras, Dubinskas
    MANAGERIAL AND ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AREA, 2009, : 1393 - 1401
  • [34] Capacity Investment Decisions Under Risk Aversion
    Lu, Lijian
    Yan, Xiaoming
    NAVAL RESEARCH LOGISTICS, 2016, 63 (03) : 218 - 235
  • [35] Investment and leverage decisions under caps and floors
    Rodrigues, Artur
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF FINANCIAL ANALYSIS, 2025, 97
  • [36] Investment Decisions under a Dual Tax System
    Zhang, Haozhen
    TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS REVIEW, 2012, 4 (03) : 100 - 122
  • [37] INVESTMENT DECISIONS UNDER MAJORITY-RULE
    CARRERA, C
    RICHMOND, J
    ECONOMICA, 1988, 55 (219) : 365 - 378
  • [38] Analytical solution for an investment problem under uncertainties with shocks
    Nunes, Claudia
    Pimentel, Rita
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2017, 259 (03) : 1054 - 1063
  • [39] Investment decisions in generation assets: A portfolio theory approach
    Sousa e Silva, M.
    Correia, P. F.
    IEMC - EUROPE 2008: INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, EUROPE, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: MANAGING ENGINEERING, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION FOR GROWTH, 2008, : 63 - 68
  • [40] Risk of temperature differences in geothermal wells and generation strategies of geothermal power
    Sakakibara, Keiji
    Kanamura, Takashi
    GREEN FINANCE, 2020, 2 (04): : 424 - 436