Critical review of competitiveness indicators for energy projects

Abstract

The decarbonisation of the electricity sector can be a key contributor in the transition to sustainable energy systems. New low-carbon power production technologies are becoming available in the international market, contributing to building diversified portfolios of projects with very different features. Apart from technology-related features, the deployment of a power generation plant also depends on the availability of resources of the country/installation site, socioeconomic implications, environmental impact and integration with the existing power grid. Decision makers should take all these factors into consideration when determining which project is more likely to move forward. Several studies have proposed the use of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to facilitate the decision-making process when selecting viable and sustainable energy projects. However, fewer studies exist that provide a detailed assessment of these KPIs. The scope of this paper is to critically review and investigate a set of multidisciplinary KPIs, allowing a holistic comparison across different types of energy projects. The identified KPIs were classified as physical, economic, environmental and social. They were then analysed to assess their limitations, determine inter-connections and identify the need for additional indicators to capture risks and opportunities within a mixed energy market. This paper can be the basis for the development of an integrated framework, allowing a fairer assessment of competing energy projects by relevant stakeholders.

Overview of the Enablers and Barriers for a Wider Deployment of CSP Tower Technology in Europe

“…The LACE represents the potential cost of providing electricity to the grid through a new power plant project, and it is calculated as the weighted average cost of the marginal cost of electricity dispatch [25]. In order to make the right calculations, LACE takes into account different territorial indicators, such as daily and seasonal variation in demand, the existing grid mix generation, the heat produced, the fuel cost and the ability to dispatch on-demand power [26]. In simple terms, since the avoided cost can be seen as the potential revenues of the candidate project and the LCOE as the cost to produce electricity, if the LACE is higher than the LCOE, the related plant is considered as economically attractive.…”

“…In any case, and for every application, its LCOE must decrease to provide a substantial reason to raise the interest of the investors, and the forecasted cost reduction potential [7] is one of the highest in the renewable energies context. If policies would take into account other parameters (apart from the LCOE) and if the administrative procedures were made simpler to connect this kind of power plant to access the grid, the potential of CSP in the future would be immensely higher than the current one [26,41,76].…”

An online survey to explore the awareness and acceptance of geothermal energy among an educated segment of the population in five European and American countries

“…Although some studied indicated a correlation between knowledge and acceptance, others reveal that the levels of support were independent of levels of awareness (Devine-Wright, 2007). Moreover, acceptance varies for each speci c project and area of implementation, but a good public information campaign can help communities to correctly understand the different challenges of the project (Colla et al 2020). In general, the acceptance of new energy technologies has been investigated by different scienti c disciplines, but a coherent overview is still missing (von Wirth et al 2018).…”

Multi-Objective Optimisation for Power System Planning Integrating Sustainability Indicators

“…Relevant energy performance indicators included embodied energy, gross primary energy requirement, and net delivered electricity, among others, while environmental KPIs included life-cycle CO 2 emissions, global warming potential, reduction of the direct CO 2 emissions, avoided CO 2 emissions, and CO 2,eq payback time. In Reference [39], sustainability indicators for energy production projects were categorised under physical, economic, social, and environmental categories. Social indicators included jobs creation, human health impact, safety risks, and social acceptability, while relevant environmental indicators were GHG emissions, land-use, and resources sustainability.…”