| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
150901
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper develops a model that explains the delay of decisions to adopt profitable energy-saving investments. This problem is known as the energy paradox. The model rationalizes the profitability requirements raised by the irreversibility, the uncertainty and the decrease of costs as a result of learning by doing. In this context, the wait gives investors more visibility and more lower investment costs, which gives them an option value. The representative agent has an interest to postpone its energy saving decision until future benefits increase and equalize its required option value. Formally, we internalize these explanatory factors in a stochastic model where the updated energy saving benefits follows a geometric Brownian motion. To affirm the capacity of the model, we generate simulation results for two equipments for electrical uses. Beyond that, we extend the model to simulate the effects of energy policy instruments to promote adoption of such equipments. Simulations prove that the taxation of energy prices is likely to be more effective than the subsidy for energy-saving equipments. It is also found that the combination of these instruments amplifies the adoption of energy-saving equipments and generates very favorable economic and environmental externalities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
175258
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Investment risk and uncertainty about the availability of biomass feedstock hinders the development of a mature cellulosic biofuel sector. The Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) is a federal program designed to subsidize farmers to establish, produce and deliver biomass feedstock to biorefineries. This study evaluated the impacts of BCAP on the optimal biofuel supply chain decisions considering feedstock yield uncertainty and associated investment risk given diverse risk preferences of the biofuel sector. The expected cost for a risk-neutral biofuel sector was minimized using a two-stage stochastic mixed integer linear program, whereas the Conditional Value-at-Risk of the supply chain was optimized for a risk-averse sector. Ex-ante analysis of a switchgrass-based biofuel sector in west Tennessee indicates BCAP payments could lower expected cost and investment risk for both risk-averse and risk-neutral biofuel sectors. However, the cost saving and risk reduction resulting from BCAP incentives for the risk-averse biofuel sector were higher than the risk-neutral biofuel sector. In addition, BCAP payments may drive more cropland to be converted for switchgrass, which potentially mitigates water-induced soil erosion and reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with net carbon sequestration, but may also create unintended consequence of competition for land between food and fuel use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|