Valuation for renewable energy: A comparative review

230 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan (2015, background): “These studies have found that people have a preference for renewable energy (Goett et al., 2000; Menges et al., 2005; Grosche and Schoroder, 2011; for a comprehensive review of recent literature, see Menegaki, 2008; 2012, and Zoric and Hrovatin, 2012).”
The use of real options approach in energy sector investments (2011, background): “Partly, because of the fact of the invest-ment costs often constitute a major barrier to their spread use [1].”
Landscape externalities from onshore wind power (2010, background): “Thus, to get information about whether these impacts are meaningful, and if so, how large they are, non-market valuation techniques can be used (Pearce, 2006; Menegaki, 2008).”
Optimal subsidy estimation method using system dynamics and the real option model: Photovoltaic technology case (2015, background): “Researchers conclude that other methods are better than DCF in terms of robustness and accuracy [24,25].”
Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA (2011, methodology): “2002; Wiser, 2007; Yoo and Kwak, 2009; Zografakis et al., 2010).3 The survey-based CV method is viable to estimate the economic value of non-market goods and services with passive values (e.g. bequests to future generations) such as renewable energy (Menegaki, 2008; Whitehead and Cherry, 2007).”