nep-ppm New Economics Papers
on Project, Program and Portfolio Management
Issue of 2014‒07‒28
four papers chosen by
Arvi Kuura
Tartu Ülikool

  1. Ex-post evaluation of the additionality of Clean Development Mechanism afforestation projects in Tanzania, Uganda and Moldova By Mark Purdon; Razack Lokina
  2. The Future Costs of Nuclear Power Using Multiple Expert Elicitations: Effects of RD&D and Elicitation Design By Diaz Anadon, Laura; Nemet, Gregory; Verdolini, Elena
  3. Proposed Coal Power Plants and Coal-To-Liquids Plants: Which Ones Survive and Why? By Dean Fantazzini; Mario Maggi
  4. Collinsville solar thermal project: Yield forecasting - Draft report By William Paul Bell; Phil Wild; John Foster

  1. By: Mark Purdon; Razack Lokina
    Abstract: This study presents findings from a systematic comparative research effort to investigation the additionality claims of CDM afforestation projects in Tanzania, Uganda and Moldova.Using what we refer to as an ex-post comparative baseline approach that accounts for how project financing and background economic conditions evolve over a CDM project’s implementation and crediting periods, we demonstrate that the projects in Uganda and Moldova are very likely to be fully additional while only approximately one-quarter of carbon credits resulting from the Tanzania project are genuine. The conditions of additionality can change significantly over the course of a CDM project in a way that undermines project environmental integrity because the CDM rules do not accommodate changing baseline conditions. Rather, current CDM rules allow initial baseline conditions to be frozen over a project’s crediting period. We recommend that a reformed CDM, REDD, NAMA or other new market mechanism adopt some of the elements of our approach including use of comparative performance benchmarks, an additionality risk management tool and engaging donors in the development of “ODA-baselines” for climate mitigation projects which combine carbon finance and development assistance.
    Date: 2014–02
  2. By: Diaz Anadon, Laura; Nemet, Gregory; Verdolini, Elena
    Abstract: Characterization of the anticipated performance of energy technologies to inform policy decisions increasingly relies on expert elicitation. Knowledge about how elicitation design factors impact the probabilistic estimates emerging from these studies is, however, scarce. We focus on nuclear power, a large-scale low-carbon power option, for which future cost estimates are important for the design of energy policies and climate change mitigation efforts. We use data from three elicitations in the USA and in Europe and assess the role of government research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) investments on expected nuclear costs in 2030. We show that controlling for expert, technology, and design characteristics increases experts' implied public RD&D elasticity of expected costs by 25%. Public sector and industry experts' cost expectations are 14% and 32% higher, respectively than academics. US experts are more optimistic than their EU counterparts, with median expected costs 22% lower. On average, a doubling of public RD&D is expected to result in an 8% cost reduction, but the uncertainty is large. The difference between the 90th and 10th percentile estimates is on average 58% of the experts' median estimates. Public RD&D investments do not affect uncertainty ranges, but US experts are less confident about costs than Europeans.
    Date: 2013
  3. By: Dean Fantazzini (Moscow School of Economics, Moscow State University, Russia); Mario Maggi (Department of Economics and Management, University of Pavia)
    Abstract: The increase of oil and natural gas prices since the year 2000 stimulated the planning and construction of new coal-fired electricity generating plants and coal-to-liquids plants in the US. However, a large number of these projects have been canceled or abandoned since 2007. Using a set of 145 proposed coal power plants and 25 coal-to- liquids plants, we examine the main determinants that influence the decision to abandon a project or to proceed with it. In case of coal power plants, the number of searches performed on Google relating to coal power plants and the prices of alternative fuels for electricity generation are the main factors. As for coal-to-liquids plants, the political affiliation of the state governor is the most important factor across several model specifications. An out-of-sample exercise confirms these findings. These results hold also with robustness checks considering alternative Google search keywords and the potential effects of the recession in the years 2008-2009.
    Keywords: Coal, Coal plants, Coal-to-Liquids, Logit, Probit, Training, Validation, Forecasting, Model Confidence Set, Google, Google Trends, Second Great Contraction, Global Financial Crisis
    JEL: C25 C52 C53 L94 Q40 Q41
    Date: 2014–07
  4. By: William Paul Bell (School of Economics, University of Queensland); Phil Wild (School of Economics, University of Queensland); John Foster (School of Economics, University of Queensland)
    Abstract: This report’s primary aim is to provide yield projections for the proposed Linear Fresnel Reflector (LFR) technology plant at Collinsville, Queensland, Australia. However, the techniques developed in this report to overcome inadequate datasets at Collinsville to produce the yield projections are of interest to a wider audience because inadequate datasets for renewable energy projects are commonplace.
    Keywords: Energy Economics, Electricity Markets, Renewable Energy, Solar Thermal
    JEL: Q48 Q41 Q43 L94 C61 Q2
    Date: 2014–07

This nep-ppm issue is ©2014 by Arvi Kuura. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.