Risk vs. Reward: A Methodology to Assess Investment in Marine Energy

The majority of WEC (wave energy converter) projects are expensive and pose a large risk to a developer. Currently no developers have been successful in commercialising a WEC. So far, many wave energy feasibility studies have only considered the LCOE (levelised cost of electricity), assessing investment in marine energy technologies from a purely financial point of view. No previous studies have, however, explicitly accounted for development risk as well as the LCOE to determine the feasibility of a project. This paper proposes a new methodology that can be used to account for both risk and the LCOE to give a clearer picture of the feasibility of a WEC development. By combining the LCOE and risk score for a particular development, the “value for risk” can be calculated, presented here as the “RR ratio” (“Risk/Reward ratio”). A number of case studies were chosen to test the model, investigating the RR ratio for a number of different WEC technologies and ranking them to suggest an optimal development path for the industry. Results showed that projects that combine many innovative technologies provide the best “value for risk”. These devices overall had the highest risk, suggesting that multiple developers are likely required to collaborate in order to reduce the risk down to acceptable levels for each.

[1]  Henry Jeffrey,et al.  Techno-Economic Related Metrics for a Wave Energy Converters Feasibility Assessment , 2016 .

[2]  Karyn Morrissey,et al.  Quantifying the uncertainty of wave energy conversion device cost for policy appraisal: An Irish case study , 2015 .

[3]  Markus Voelter,et al.  State of the Art , 1997, Pediatric Research.

[4]  R. Yemm,et al.  Pelamis: experience from concept to connection , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[5]  Pedro Pires,et al.  Tank testing of an inherently phase-controlled wave energy converter , 2016 .

[6]  S. Astariz,et al.  Wave energy vs. other energy sources: A reassessment of the economics , 2016 .

[7]  J. Weber WEC Technology Readiness and Performance Matrix – finding the best research technology development trajectory , 2012 .

[8]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Dominant Designs and the Survival of Firms , 1995 .

[9]  Markus Mueller,et al.  Learning curves for emerging energy technologies , 2009 .

[10]  Michael O'Connor,et al.  Techno-economic performance of the Pelamis P1 and Wavestar at different ratings and various locations in Europe , 2013 .

[11]  A. Terry Bahill,et al.  Metrics and Case Studies for Evaluating Engineering Designs , 1997 .

[12]  Richard Stevens,et al.  Systems engineering : coping with complexity , 1998 .

[13]  Julia Fernandez Chozas,et al.  User guide – COE Calculation Tool for Wave Energy Converters , 2014 .

[14]  Charlie Wilson Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies , 2012 .

[15]  Inigo J. Losada,et al.  Uncertainty analysis of wave energy farms financial indicators , 2014 .

[16]  Andreas Uihlein,et al.  2014 JRC Ocean Energy Status Report , 2015 .

[17]  Andrew John MacGillivray,et al.  Economically sustainable development of wave and tidal stream energy technologies , 2016 .

[18]  T. Lewis,et al.  Weather window analysis of Irish west coast wave data with relevance to operations & maintenance of marine renewables , 2013 .

[19]  W. L. Dunn,et al.  Exploring Monte Carlo Methods , 2011 .

[20]  武彦 福島 持続可能性(Sustainability)の要件 , 2006 .

[21]  John Casani,et al.  A New Spin , 2004 .