Portfolio selection for energy projects under the Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM)
Olena Pechak, PhD candidateGeorge Mavrotas, Asst. Professor
School of Chemical Engineering
National Technical University of Athens, Greece
1ο ΠΑΝΕΛΛΗΝΙΟ ΦΟΙΤΗΤΙΚΟ ΣΥΝΕΔΡΙΟ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗΣ ΕΤΑΙΡΕΙΑΣ ΕΠΙΧΕΙΡΗΣΙΑΚΩΝ ΕΡΕΥΝΩΝ (Ε.Ε.Ε.Ε.)
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 2
Structure of the presentation
Introduction CDM projects Project selection problem Description of the method
Two step method Incorporate uncertainty
Monte Carlo simulation in GAMS Results and conclusions
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 3
IntroductionClimate change is a complicated problem created by humanity. In
order to face it, UNFCCC was adopted. It coordinates activities for mitigation and adaptation to climate change.
Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC provides three types of flexible mechanisms to reduce GHG emissions:
joint implementation (JI), clean development mechanism (CDM) and international emission trading (IET).
RES activities within CDM: 65% of all projects in CDM pipeline 46% of emission cuts
858 wind energy projects (17.4% of total in Jan. 2010) 284 of which (with installed capacity - 12.55 GW) are
already registered.
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 4
Introduction: Main features of CDM
Cooperation between developing and developed countries
The projects activity provides GHG emission reductions compared with BAU scenario,
During the operation of the project achieved reductions are translated into Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), backed by the 1 t CO2-eq
CERs may be sold in carbon market. The price for them is variable
Project duration is variable and is chosen before the registration of the project
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 5
Introduction: Wind energyInfluencing factors on
popularity of wind energy:
growing energy demand,
increased concerns for environmental and climate issues,
improvements of technology itself.
3 key regions:Europe,North America, andAsia (with China and India as main players)
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 6
Project selection problem
Selection of project portfolio with constraints like: Policy Budget Geographical distribution Technical constraints and MW of installed capacity Logical constraints
In addition we have: Set of hypothetic projects Variable CER prices
Solving software: GAMS CPLEX 12.2
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 7
Project selection problemInput 100 CDM projects across 4 regions (China 50, India
30, Latin America 10, Mediterranean 10) Budget constraint is 2.8 billion $, the sum of
candidates - 4.2 billion $ regional constraints (at least 3 projects from Latin
America and Mediterranean, India must have no less than half of China)
MW constraints - not more than 75% of MW in China logical constraints (mutually exclusive projects) technology constraints (sum of off shore MW across
all countries less than 2 GW)
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 8
Project selection problemIn calculations we: maximize total NPV (with discount rate =8%) consider only the CER price as uncertainty factor perform Monte Carlo simulation and optimization
for normal distribution around 20$ (μ=20, σ=3.3)
for uniform distribution in [10, 30]
The process of solving the problem is divided into 2 big steps.
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 9
Description of the method
Step I An Integer Programming (IP) model is developed with
binary decision variables that express the existence of each project in the selected portfolio. objective function - cumulative NPV
constraints: policy, logical and budget Due to the uncertainty related to the future price of
Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) a Monte Carlo simulation-optimization process is designed. Projects from resulting portfolios form subsets: Green set – projects are present in all portfolios Red set – none of projects is selected in any
portfolio Grey set – projects, present in some portfolios
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 10
Description of the method
Step II
Only projects from “grey” set are under consideration A new IP is formulated only with the “grey” projects
and uses the frequency obtained from the Monte Carlo simulation as their objective function coefficients.
The constraints are the same as before appropriately modified to take into account the sure adaptation of the “green” projects. The final output is the set of projects (portfolio) with the best performance under the given uncertainty conditions.
Graphical representation of Monte Carlo simulation and optimization
A B
μ
CER price(i)
CER price(i)
Solution of IP
i =1…1000
NPV
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-1.500.000
-1.122.000
-744.000
-366.000
12.000
390.000
768.000
1.146.000
1.524.000
1.902.000
2.280.000
2.658.000
3.036.000
3.414.000
3.792.000
4.170.000
4.548.000
Obj function (z)
unif
orm
norm
al
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 12
Results
The normal and uniform distributions of projects’ NPV during the Step I
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 13
ResultsResults of the Step I in both cases are similar. The differences
are observed only in frequencies of the projects from the “Grey” set.
Totals: Green set – 58 Red set – 23 Grey set – 19
GREEN set
1,3,4,6,8,9,10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,21,23,24,25,26,28,30,37,40,42,44,46,47,49,50,52,53,55,56,57,58,61,63,65,66,71,72,74,75,77,78,79,81,82,83,86,87,88,90,91,92,93,94,97
RED set
2,5,12,19,20,22,27,31,33,35,36,41,45,48,54,59,68,73,89,95,96,99,100
GREY set
7,29,32,34,38,39,43,51,60,62,64,67,69,70,76,80,84, 85,98
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 14
ResultsLet’ s see the Grey sets more carefully.
# 7 29 32 34 38 39 43 51 60
Normal 36 969 317 988 796 552 294 192 796Uniform 28 787 566 868 626 233 416 463 405
# 62 64 67 69 70 76 80 84 85 98
N 149 677 770 404 988 860 988 988 988 57
U 344 557 611 488 868 516 868 868 868 62
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 15
Results: final selectionResults of the Step II.Case of Normal distribution of CER prices:
Case of Uniform distribution of CER prices:
Projects Total MW Budget
1,3,4,6,8,9,10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,21,23, 24,25,26,28,29,30,32,34,37,39,40,42,44, 46, 47,49,50,51,52,53,55,56,57,58,60,61,63,64, 65,66,67,69,70,71,72,74,75,76,77,78,79,80, 81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,90,91,92,93,94,97,98
73 2612 2.789Billion $
Projects Total MW Budget
1,3,4,6,8,9,10,11,13,14,15,16,17,18,21,23, 24,25,26,28,29,30,32,34,37,40,42,43,44, 46, 47,49,50,51,52,53,55,56,57,58,60,61,63,64, 65,66,67,69,70,71,72,74,75,76,77,78,79,80, 81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,90,91,92,93,94,97,98
73 2631 2.799 Billion $
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 16
Conclusions about the method
Integer Programming can be effectively used for a portfolio selection problem
The objective function can be selected in order to reflect the decision making preferences
The combination of Monte Carlo and optimization is used successfully for dealing with uncertainty
The two step approach is a useful decision aid tool that (a) classifies the projects and (b) uses the information from the first step to drive the second optimization and result in the final choice
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 17
Conclusions about the problem The resulting sets of projects from the Monte Carlo
simulation are the same for normal and uniform distribution.
The difference between uniform and normal distribution is observed in frequencies of “grey” projects. It also influences the ranking of the grey projects between each other.
19 ambiguous projects (grey set) from all kinds
Normal and uniform distribution give almost the same final choice
In final selection there are: China – 33 projects (#39 and #43 are very similar), Latin America – 8 projects, Mediterranean – 8 projects, India – 24 projects.
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 18
Future research
Incorporate multiple criteria MCDA and then IP
Multiobjective IP
Group decision making IP for optimization
Multiple portfolios, one for each DM
Same approach (green, red, grey set) Step1: Green set the principle of unanimity
Step2: Grey set the principle of majority
E.E.E.E., 25 – 27 Νοεμβρίου 2010 19
Thank you!
Top Related