Promoting energy efficiency investments with risk management decision tools

被引：96

作者：

Jackson, Jerry ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Texas A&M Univ, College Stn, TX 77843 USA

来源：

ENERGY POLICY | 2010年 / 38卷 / 08期

关键词：

Energy efficiency; Risk management; Energy paradox; PERFORMANCE; PROJECTS; FIRMS;

D O I：

10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.006

中图分类号：

F [经济];

学科分类号：

02 ;

摘要：

This paper reviews current capital budgeting practices and their impact on energy efficiency investments. The prevalent use of short payback "rule-of-thumb" requirements to screen efficiency projects for risk is shown to bias investment choices towards "sure bet" investments bypassing many profitable efficiency investment options. A risk management investment strategy is presented as an alternative to risk avoidance practices applied with payback thresholds. The financial industry risk management tool Value-at-Risk is described and extended to provide an Energy-Budgets-at-Risk or EBaR risk management analysis to convey more accurate energy efficiency investment risk information. The paper concludes with recommendations to expand the use of Value-at-Risk-type energy efficiency analysis. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：3865 / 3873

页数：9

共 57 条

[1]

ANDERSON ST, 2002, 0258 RES FUT

[2] The experience curve, option value, and the energy paradox [J].

Ansar, Jasmin ;

Sparks, Roger .

ENERGY POLICY, 2009, 37 (03) :1012-1020

[3] Why the NPV criterion does not maximize NPV [J].

Berkovitch, E ;

Israel, R .

REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 2004, 17 (01) :239-255

[4]

Bernstein PL., 1996, GODS REMARKABLE STOR

[5]

BERRY R, 2009, STRESS TESTING VALUE

[6]

BRESSSAND F, 2007, WASTED ENERGY US CAN

[7]

BRIGHAM EF, 1975, FINANC MANAGE, V5, P17

[8]

Brown MA, 2001, ENERG POLICY, V29, P1179, DOI 10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00066-0

[9]

Chen S., 1994, Accounting and Business Research, V24, P121

[10]

Crouhy Michel., 2006, ESSENTIALS RISK MANA

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 →