The real options as valuation methodology for a project in the electrical sector
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17230/ecos.2019.48.4Keywords:
Real options, Expansion option, Binomial trees, Energy sectorAbstract
This paper intends to apply the theory of real options in a construction project for a small hydroelectric power station in Colombia. The calculation of the net present value and the internal rate of return indicate that the project is viable, however, these methodologies are unaware of the option of expansion existing in said project. The article presents the calculation of this option based on the binomial tree methodology, where volatility is obtained through an EGARCH model based on the daily returns of energy prices. It is concluded that the real option makes the project viable, while developing tools that help to work this type of case in the valuations of projects belonging to the energy sector.
Downloads
References
Acevedo, N., Jiménez, L., & Agudelo, A. (2018). Evaluation of certified emission reductions in power generation project through real options. Espacios, 39(13).
Agaton, C., & Karl, H. (2018). A real options approach to renewable electricity generation in the Philippines. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 8(1). doi:10.1186/s13705-017-0143-y
Ahumada V., & Andalaft, A. (2013). The methodology of real options: An application to the case of a paper com-pany in the Biobio region, Chile. Ingeniare, 21(3), 337-346. doi:10.4067/S0718-33052013000300004
Arango, M., & Botero, B. (2017). The application of real options as a tool for decision-making in the elec-tricity market. Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies. doi: 10.23919/CIS-TI.2017.7975807
Banco Central de Reserva de Perú (2019). Cuadros Estadísticos. Recuperado de https://estadisticas.bcrp.gob.pe/estadisticas/series
Bjørgum, Ø. (2016). MNCs entering an emerging industry: The choice of governance mode under high uncer-tainty. Cogent Business and Management, 3(1). doi:10.1080/23311975.2016.1258135
Bonis, S., Palenzuela, V., & Herrero, G. (2007). Real Options and Monte Carlo Simulation. Universia Business Review, 16, 52-63.
Bonis, S., Palenzuela, V., & Herrero, G. (2009). Real options in the electricity sector. Endesa’s expansion in Latin America. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad, 12(38), 65-94.
Cartea, Á., & González, C. (2012). How much should we pay for interconnecting electricity markets? A real options approach. Energy Economics, 34(1), 14-30. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2011.06.002
Cartea, A., & Jaimungal, S. (2017). Irreversible investments and ambiguity aversion. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance, 20(7). doi:10.1142/S0219024917500443
Chen, S., Zhang, Q., Wang, G., Zhu, L., & Li, Y. (2018). Investment strategy for underground gas storage facilities based on real option model considering gas market reform in China. Energy Economics, 70, 132-142. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.12.034
Concha, A., Andalaft, A., & Farías, O. (2009). Coal gasification for power generation: Analysis with real options valuation. Ingeniare, 17(3), 347-359.
Cuervo, F. (2015). Valuation of renewable and unconventional electricity sources: An approach from real op-tions. Cuadernos de Administración, 28(51), 45-64. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.cao28-51.vfrc
Damoradan, A. (2019). Damodaran online. Nueva York, NY: New York. University, Stern School of Business. Recuperado de http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/
Fertig, E., Heggedal, A., Doorman, G., & Apt, J. (2014). Optimal investment timing and capacity choice for pumped hydropower storage. Energy Systems, 5(2), 285-306. doi:10.1007/s12667-013-0109-x
Fleten, S., Haugom, E., & Ullrich, C. (2017). The real options to shutdown, startup, and abandon: U.S. electricity industry evidence. Energy Economics, 63, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.01.016
Fleten, S., Linnerud, K., Molnár, P., & Tandberg, M. (2016). Green electricity investment timing in practice: Real options or net present value? Energy, 116, 498-506. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.09.114
Gazheli, A., & Di Corato, L. (2013). Land-use change and solar energy production: A real option approach. Ag-ricultural Finance Review, 73(3), 507-525. doi:10.1108/AFR-05-2012-0024
Gónima, V. (2016). Avances recientes en el uso de opciones reales en la evaluación de proyectos de generación de energía con fuentes alternativas (tesis de grado). Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia.
Henao, A., Sauma, E., Reyes, T., & Gonzalez, A. (2017). What is the value of the option to defer an investment in Transmission Expansion Planning. An estimation using Real Options. Energy Economics, 65, 194-207. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.05.001
Jain, S., Roelofs, F., & Oosterlee, C. W. (2013). Valuing modular nuclear power plants in finite time decision horizon. Energy Economics, 36, 625-636. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2012.11.012
Macías, A. (2018). Estudio de generación eléctrica bajo escenario de cambio climático. Unidad de Planeación Minero Energética, 1-107.
Maya, C., Hernández, J., & Gallego, Ó. (2012). The valuation of eolic energy projects in Colombia under the real option approach. Cuadernos de Administración, 25(44), 193-231.
Mendoza, G., & Gutiérrez, G. (2016). Energy and reserve genco’s self-scheduling: Real option approach formu-lation. Ingeniare, 24(1), 70-84.
Min, K., Lou, C., & Wang, C. (2012). An exit and entry study of renewable power producers: A real options ap-proach. Engineering Economist, 57(1), 55-75. doi:10.1080/0013791X.2011.651566
Ming, Z., Ping, Z., Shunkun, Y., & Ge, Z. (2016). Decision-making model of generation technology under uncer-tainty based on real option theory. Energy Conversion and Management, 110, 59-66. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2015.12.005
Nishimura, N. (2011). An application of the real options approach to R&D investment decision making in a ser-vice division of an energy firm. International Journal of Services, Technology and Management, 15(3-4), 218-238. doi:10.1504/IJSTM.2011.040377
Otero, S., Andalaft, A., & Vásquez, E. (2008). The finite difference method in real options valuation. Ingeniare, 16(2), 232-243.
Rohlfs, W., & Madlener, R. (2011). Valuation of CCS-ready coal-fired power plants: A multi-dimensional real options approach. Energy Systems, 2(3-4), 243-261. doi:10.1007/s12667-011-0034-9
Santos, L., Soares, I., Mendes, C., & Ferreira, P. (2013). Real Options versus Traditional Methods to assess Re-newable Energy Projects. Renewable Energy, 68(C), 588-594.
Scarcioffolo, A., Perobelli, F., & Chimeli, A. (2018). Counterfactual comparisons of investment options for wind power and agricultural production in the United States: Lessons from Northern Ohio. Energy Econom-ics, 74(C), 299-309. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2018.06.011
Westner, G., & Madlener, R. (2012). Investment in new power generation under uncertainty: Benefits of CHP vs. condensing plants in a copula-based analysis. Energy Economics, 34(1), 31-44. doi:10.1016/j.ene-co.2011.02.014
Zhang, M., Zhou, P., & Zhou, D. (2016). A real options model for renewable energy investment with application to solar photovoltaic power generation in China. Energy Economics, 59(C), 213-226. doi:10.1016/j.ene-co.2016.07.028
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
