Results 1 - 10 of 2464
Results 1 - 10 of 2464. Search took: 0.022 seconds
|Sort by: date | relevance|
[en] A cost benefit analysis is performed to assess the costs of completing unfinished nuclear power plants in four regions of the United States of America, (north-east, south-east, mid-west and west). The analysis is in five main sections: the projection of the cost to complete nuclear plants under construction, the forecast of future operations and maintenance costs, the forecast of price of fuels, the evaluation of future electricity demand and capacity growth, and calculation of the financial cost-benefit ratio based on the preceding figures. It was found that in the north-east, mid-west and west, because the demand for the power will not be made before the year 2000, finishing the units is not the least-cost supply option. Therefore, most of the units should not be finished unless over 90% completed already, in which case it may be cost-effective to finish them. (author)
[en] Successful real-time electricity pricing depends firstly upon consumers' willingness to subscribe to such terms and, secondly, on their ability to curb consumption levels. The present paper addresses both issues by considering consumers differentiated by their electricity saving costs, half of whom resist saving electricity. We demonstrate that when consumers are free to adopt real-time prices, producers prefer charging inefficient prices and, in so doing, discriminate against that portion of the consumer population which faces no saving costs. We also find that efficient marginal cost pricing is feasible, but is incompatible with mass adoption of real-time prices. - Highlights: • We model consumers switching from uniform to real-time electricity pricing (RTP). • Half the consumer population is pro-RTP and half resists saving electricity. • Efficient RTP is feasible but is incompatible with mass adoption
[en] Transaction costs have negative effects on emissions trading. Recent debates on the Kyoto Protocol have emphasized the potential threat of transaction costs to the implementation of emissions trading for the Protocol and consequently to the successful implementation of the Protocol. One way to suppress transaction costs is to use experience. In line with the EU Green Paper, we propose that an experimental early action before the Kyoto period could be helpful to reduce the transaction costs in emissions trading for the Kyoto compliance. However, because early action will incur additional costs, the final gain due to early action will be the cost-saving net of the costs of early action. This paper explores the relationship between the transaction costs in emissions trading and the early action effort to reduce transaction costs in the case of Kyoto Protocol. We find that in general early action can effectively offset transaction costs and thus are economically efficient. Only in the case of high transaction costs and constantly slow learning process, early action may become inefficient
[en] This article describes a particular branch that evolved in the diffusion of electrical rate systems in twentieth-century Europe and the debate that ensued between the competitive, promotional and cost based approaches. Three major questions are addressed: What factors and historical circumstances favoured the emergence of more or less efficient pricing schemes? Why did some enterprises opt for promotional rates while others defended the cost based alternative? What is the historical origin of marginal cost pricing? It is shown how the volatility of the costs that characterize hydro-electric production made this particular technology very sensitive to a cost approach towards pricing and to a seasonal and time-of-day perspective on rate systems. (author)
[en] This paper suggests that there was a negative bubble in oil prices in 2014/15, which decreased them beyond the level justified by economic fundamentals. This proposition is corroborated by two sets of bubble detection strategies: the first set consists of tests for financial bubbles, while the second set consists of the log-periodic power law (LPPL) model for negative financial bubbles. Despite the methodological differences between these detection methods, they provided the same outcome: the oil price experienced a statistically significant negative financial bubble in the last months of 2014 and at the beginning of 2015. These results also hold after several robustness checks which consider the effect of conditional heteroskedasticity, model set-ups with additional restrictions, longer data samples, tests with lower frequency data and with an alternative proxy variable to measure the fundamental value of oil. - Highlights: •There was a negative bubble in oil prices in 2014/15. •This bubble decreased oil prices beyond the level justified by economic fundamentals. •Several bubble detection methods confirm this evidence.
[en] present data on the overnight costs of more than half of nuclear reactors built worldwide since the beginning of the nuclear age. The authors claim that this consolidated data set offers more accurate insights than previous country-level assessments. Unfortunately, the authors make analytical choices that mask nuclear power's real construction costs, cherry pick data, and include misleading data on early experimental and demonstration reactors. For those reasons, serious students of such issues should look elsewhere for guidance about understanding the true costs of nuclear power. - Highlights: • claim to accurately assess nuclear plant costs over time. • The authors err by relying on overnight costs, which exclude interest. • The authors cherry pick data (e.g, ignoring problems with French nuclear data). • The article's cherry picked data don’t even support the article's own conclusions. • Lovering et al. is not a reliable source for costs of nuclear power.
[en] This paper describes an energy-efficient housing stimulus strategy that can: (1) quickly provide large-scale job creation; (2) reduce home energy bills by 30-50% with associated reductions in emissions and energy assistance spending; (3) stabilize home values and reduce foreclosure inventory; (4) help to eliminate childhood lead poisoning; and (5) implement regulatory reforms that highlight market incentives for cost effective energy efficiency and alternative home energy investments. These benefits, far in excess of costs, can be achieved by combining 'lead-safe window replacement' with other weatherization activities and simple regulatory and market reforms. This strategy can help to coordinate American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding for energy efficiency, the $75 billion Making Home Affordable plan to reduce foreclosures, and the recently announced partnership between the Departments of Energy (DOE) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to streamline weatherization efforts and spur job creation. (author)
[en] This article describes a particular branch that evolved in the diffusion of electrical rate systems in twentieth-century Europe and the debate that ensued between the competitive, promotional and cost based approaches. Three major questions are addressed: What factors and historical circumstances favoured the emergence of more or less efficient pricing schemes? Why did some enterprises opt for promotional rates while others defended the cost based alternative? What is the historical origin of marginal cost pricing? It is shown how the volatility of the costs that characterize hydro-electric production made this particular technology very sensitive to a cost approach towards pricing and to a seasonal and time-of-day perspective on rate systems.
[en] This paper provides an economic analysis of possible nuclear new build in the UK. It compares costs and benefits of nuclear new build against conventional gas-fired generation and low carbon technologies (CCS, wind, etc.). A range of scenarios are considered to allow for uncertainty as regards nuclear and other technology costs, gas prices and carbon prices. In the base case, the analysis suggests that there is a small cost penalty for new nuclear generation relative to conventional gas-fired generation, but that this is offset by environmental and security of supply benefits. More generally nuclear new build has a positive net benefit for a range of plausible nuclear costs, gas prices and carbon prices. This supports the UK policy of developing an enabling framework for nuclear new build in a market-based context. To the extent that assumptions in the analysis are not borne out in reality (e.g. as regards nuclear cost), this is a no regrets policy, given that the market would not invest in nuclear if it is prohibitively costly
[en] This study quantifies the effects of aggregating electric load over various combinations (Aggregation Groupings) of the 10 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regions in the contiguous U.S. Generator capacity capital cost savings, load energy shift operating cost savings, reserve requirement cost savings, and transmission costs due to aggregation were calculated for each Aggregation Grouping. Eight scenarios of Aggregation Groupings over the U.S. were formed to estimate overall system cost. Transmission costs outweighed cost savings due to aggregation for all scenarios and nearly all Aggregation Groupings. East–west transmission layouts had the highest overall cost, and interconnecting ERCOT to adjacent FERC Regions resulted in increased costs, both due to limited existing transmission capacity. This study found little economic benefit of aggregating electric load alone (e.g., without aggregating renewable generators simultaneously), except in the West and Northwest U.S. If aggregation of load alone is desired, small, regional consolidations yield the lowest overall cost. This study neither examines nor precludes benefits of interconnecting geographically-dispersed renewable generators with load. It also does not consider effects from sub-hourly load variability, fuel diversity and price uncertainty, energy price differences due to congestion, or uncertainty due to forecasting errors; thus, results are valid only for the assumptions made. - Highlights: ► Effects of aggregating load across various geographic areas of U.S. are quantified. ► Benefits exist for all metrics, but outweighed by additional transmission costs. ► Aggregating electric load alone is not economical, except for West and NW U.S. ► Limited existing transmission capacity yields highest cost for east–west layout. ► Lowest U.S.-wide overall cost when consolidate multiple, small areas.