Search

Many irreversible long-run capital investments entail opportunities for managers to respond flexibly to changes in the economic environment. However, common levelized cost measures used to guide decision-making, such as the levelized cost of electricity, implicitly assume that the values of random economic variables are known with certainty when investment decisions are made. This assumption implies, often incorrectly, that managerial flexibility carries zero value. This paper improves levelized cost measures by deriving an expansion that accounts for both uncertainties in relevant variables and the value of managerial flexibility in responding to them. This method is applied to quantify the value of flexibility in two example decision problems. In one, an operator of a natural gas electricity generation facility evaluates whether to invest in carbon capture capabilities. Another considers retirement decisions for U.S. nuclear plants. These examples illustrate that simplified cost metrics can inaccurately guide decision-making by inflating cost estimates relative to the proposed levelized cost measure that accounts for uncertainty and flexibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can significantly reduce the amount of CO2 emitted from coal-fired power plants but its operation significantly reduces the plant's net electrical output and decreases profits, especially during times of high electricity prices. An amine-based CCS system can be modified adding amine-storage to allow postponing 92% of all its energy consumption to times of lower electricity prices, and in this way has the potential to effectively reduce the cost of CO2 capture by reducing the costs of the forgone electricity sales. However adding amine-storage to a CCS system implies a significant capital cost that will be outweighed by the price-arbitrage revenue only if the difference between low and high electricity prices is substantial. In this paper we find a threshold for the variability in electricity prices that make the benefits from electricity price arbitrage outweigh the capital costs of amine-storage. We then look at wholesale electricity markets in the Eastern Interconnect of the United States to determine profitability of amine-storage systems in this region. Using hourly electricity price data from years 2007 and 2008 we find that amine storage may be cost-effective in areas with high price variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]