APPLYING PORTFOLIO THEORY TO EU ELECTRICITY PLANNING AND POLICY-MAKING

By Shimon Awerbuch, Martin Berger. 2003

234 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0ca88df704e4f08ebb458bcf8c4cc418f3eaa634

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. L. Molyneaux
2. Günther Westner
3. F. Roques
4. R. Gross
5. Raphael Sauter
6. C. Hiroux
7. P. Heptonstall
8. Colin Brown

Citations in the corpus

• Exploiting the oil–GDP effect to support renewables deployment (2006, background): “However, there exists a subtler and yet more powerful security idea: protecting against the risk of fossil fuel price increases (Awerbuch and Berger, 2003; see also Toman, 2002, Leiby, 2002).”
• Indicators for energy security (2009, background): “It can be applied to electricity generating mixes (Awerbuch, 2006; Awerbuch and Berger, 2003) or the wider energy system (Lesbirel, 2004), by not only taking into account the unit generating costs but also the variance in fuel costs and the correlations amongst different fuel costs.”
• Optimal wind power deployment in Europe-A portfolio approach (2010, methodology): “As Awerbuch and Berger (2003) explain, by computer processing the returns, risk (standard deviation of returns) and correlation coefficients data, it is possible to establish a number of portfolios for varying levels of return, each having the least amount of risk achievable from the asset included.”
• Establishing the role that wind generation may have in future generation portfolios (2006, background): “These values and assumptions are in line with the literature [5], [11], [29].”
• The Benefit of Regional Diversification of Cogeneration Investments in Europe: A Mean-Variance Portfolio Analysis (2010, background): “One of the first applications in the context of power generation portfolios is Awerbuch and Berger (2003). They investigate the generation portfolio of the European Union (EU-15) and show with their model the portfolio effects of various generation technologies.”
• Development of Cogeneration in Germany: A Dynamic Portfolio Analysis Based on the New Regulatory Framework (2009, methodology): “In contrast to this article, which reflects especially on the situation within the regulated US utility business, Awerbuch and Berger (2003) apply MVP theory for the first time on generation portfolios in liberalized power markets.”
• Measuring resilience in energy systems: insights from a range of disciplines (2016, methodology): “Mean-variance analysis seeks to use portfolio theory to calculate the potential for reducing risk in a generation portfolio by increasing low-risk or risk-free options [62, 63].”
• Long-term energy services security: What is it and how can it be measured and valued? (2010, background): “See among others: Bazilian and Roques (2008), Awerbuch and Berger (2003), Grubb et al. (2006), and Jansen and Beurskens (2008). countries with large inland coal reserves, such as the US, China and India.”
• Risks, revenues and investment in electricity generation: Why policy needs to look beyond costs (2010, background): “• Projects may add value in addition to their own expected returns if they help to balance risks within a portfolio of generation assets (Awerbuch and Berger, 2003; Wiser et al., 2004).”