Lockwood, T A (2008) A new market risk model for cogeneration project financing—combined heat and power development without a power purchase agreement. PhD thesis, Walden University, USA.
Abstract
Federal legislative changes in 2006 no longer entitle cogeneration project financings by law to receive the benefit of a power purchase agreement underwritten by an investment-grade investor-owned utility. Consequently, this research explored the need for a new market-risk model for future cogeneration and combined heat and power (CHP) project financing. CHP project investment represents a potentially enormous energy efficiency benefit through its application by reducing fossil fuel use up to 55% when compared to traditional energy generation, and concurrently eliminates constituent air emissions up to 50%, including global warming gases. As a supplemental approach to a comprehensive technical analysis, a quantitative multivariate modeling was also used to test the statistical validity and reliability of host facility energy demand and CHP supply ratios in predicting the economic performance of CHP project financing. The resulting analytical models, although not statistically reliable at this time, suggest a radically simplified CHP design method for future profitable CHP investments using four easily attainable energy ratios. This design method shows that financially successful CHP adoption occurs when the average system heat-to-power-ratio supply is less than or equal to the average host-convertible-energy-ratio, and when the average nominally-rated capacity is less than average host facility-load-factor demands. New CHP investments can play a role in solving the world-wide problem of accommodating growing energy demand while preserving our precious and irreplaceable air quality for future generations.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Renda-Tanali, I |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | fossil fuel; market; reliability; air quality; energy efficiency; financing; investment |
| Index terms: | validity, investor, energy efficiency, energy demand, modelling, design method, air quality, fossil fuel, global warming, power purchase agreement, analytical model, financing |
| Subjects: | theoretical framing, sociology, evaluation and assessment methods, design methods, climate science, sustainability and energy, energy systems, economic analysis, analytical methods |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here