PowerPlantPerformance
Table 2: The Impact of Cointegration on Power Plant Value
Total Value Flexibility Value
[m€/yr] [m€/yr]
Without Cointegration 53.9 28.0
With Cointegration 35.9 10.0
•
Seasonal effects and plant degradation
Difference -33% -64%
Theoutsidetemperatureinfluencesthecapacity
Source: KYOSEnergyConsulting
of gas-fired power plants. In the winter, with
colder temperatures, more oxygen results in
islabelledtheoptionvalue,extrinsicvalueorflexibilityvalue. highercapacitiesthaninthesummer.Theimpactof5%more
•
Variable O&M and start costs capacity in favourable periods (winters tend to have larger
Now we make the case gradually more realistic by adding sparkspreads)and5%lesscapacityinlessfavourableperiods
variablecosts.Theydependonthenumberofoperatinghours (summer)leadstoasmallincreaseof €0.2million.Duringthe
(inspections,overhauls)oronthenumberofstarts(extrafuel, lifetimeapowerplantwilllosesomeofitsefficiency.Although
extramaintenance).Withvariablecostsperproductionhour maintenance reduces the consequences, degradation may be
of €1.50/MWh,theplantvaluereducesby €2.9million. expectedespeciallyinthefirstperiodaftercommissioning.An
•
Minimum runtimes and start costs averageefficiencyof58%leadstoadecreaseof €0.5million.
Inpractice,therearenofossil-firedplantsthatareswitched
•
Contractual: take-or-pay obligation for natural gas
onandofffromonehourtothenext.Actualplantoperation Besidesthephysicalconstraintstherecanalsobecontractual
isconstrainedbyminimumtimestobeonoroff,whichweset limitationstofullyexploittheplantflexibility.Adedicatedgas
at24hourseach.Theimpactonplantvalueis €6.5million. contractwithatake-or-payclauserestrictstheflexibilityofthe
Takingintoaccountcostsperstartsof €12,600plus2,000GJ power plant, as the gas cannot be transported elsewhere. In
ofgas,theplantvaluereducesfurtherby €2.0million. ourcase,atake-or-payobligationistranslatedinaminimum
•
Maintenance and trips numberofoperatinghoursof5,000inthefirstyear.Asatake-
Planned maintenance is the time required for inspections or-pay contract is usually aligned with the expected
and planned repairs. For a longer-term analysis it is worth consumption,theimpactislimitedtoadecreaseof€0.7million.
incorporating an inspection scheme with both smaller
inspectionsandmajoroverhauls.Assumingtheplantwillbein Besidesthedescribedlimitations,moreconstraintscouldbe
m
€
aintenancefor20daysperyear,theplantvalueisreducedby applied,forexample,theramprate,althoughthisismorea
2.7million.Unplannedoutages(trips)havemoreeffectsthan limitation for coal plants. Also, the delivery of heat could
simply reducing the generated power production by a single imposemust-runobligationsforspecificplants.Environmental
percentage.Atripcanoccuratthestartofaproductionperiod, constraintslikemaximumNOxemissionswouldalsolimitthe
but also at the end where the financial consequences are flexibility,similarasfortake-or-paycontracts.Tohighlightthe
limited.Furthermore,afteratrip,adecisionneedstobemade effect of cointegration, a comparison is made with the full
iftheplantcanandshouldstartagain.Withanoutagerateof simulationmodel,butthecointegrationswitchedoff.Thelack
6%,inourexampletheplantvalueisreducedby €2.8million. of cointegration causes a value increase from €35.9 to €53.9
million.So,cointegrationreducestheplantvalueto67%ofthe
Figure 2: Build-Up Plant Value
‘normal’ Monte Carlo approach. This reduction is solely
attributabletothepricescenarios,wheresparkspreadsbecome
moreextreme.Thisbecomesanevenlargerproblemwhenthe
valuationhorizonincreases.
Comparing Option Values
The option or flexibility value of a power plant is the
difference between the intrinsic value, derived from a static
curve (hourly, monthly or something else), and the average
valueoverthesimulations.Thisvalueisrealisedbyadapting
the production profile to changed price scenarios: If spreads
turnpositive,theplantisswitchedon.Ifspreadsturnnegative,
theplantisswitchedoff.Withthisbehaviourprofitsareadded
inpositivemarketcircumstances,whilelossesareavoidedby
stopping the production in negative market circumstances.
Source: KYOSEnergyConsulting
New-build plants with relatively high efficiency produce in
52 worldPower2009
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164