MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032733342 · doi:10.3390/en13112764

Economic Assessment of Distributed Generation Technologies: A Feasibility Study and Comparison with the Literature

2020· article· en· W3032733342 on OpenAlexaff
Ameena Saad Al‐Sumaiti, Abdollah Kavousi‐Fard, M.M.A. Salama, Motahareh Pourbehzadi, Srikanth Reddy Konda, Muhammad Babar Rasheed

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersKhalifa University of Science, Technology and Research
KeywordsInternal rate of returnEnvironmental economicsReturn on investmentRenewable energyDepreciation (economics)Investment (military)EconomicsElectricity generationRate of returnCapital costCash flowBusinessProduction (economics)FinanceEngineeringPower (physics)MicroeconomicsProfit (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the negative climate impact of fossil fuel power generation and the requirement of global policy to shift towards a green mix of energy production, the investment in renewable energy is an opportunity in developing countries. However, poor economy associated with limited income, funds availability, and regulations governing project funding and development are key factors that challenge investors in the energy sector. Given the various power generation resources, including renewables, it is necessary to evaluate the possible power generation investment options from an economic perspective. To realize this objective, solar PV, wind and diesel power generations are economically compared, considering the incremental rate of return and incremental benefit to cost ratio techniques. The alternative investment options of distributed generation technologies are evaluated for Maharashtra, India under different depreciation methods, and the effect of the latter on selecting the best investment candidate is investigated. The paper also conducts sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of capital cost, operation and maintenance cost, and fuel cost variations on the selection decision considering a comparison of the different general projects’ cash flow structures discussed in the literature. The economic aspects of selecting a project among possible alternatives for an investment in the power sector are analyzed, and the presented review provides comprehensive comparisons with respect to the literature approaches. The results reveal that, in the benchmark case study, the PV project is rejected and disregarded from further comparisons with other candidate projects since its equity internal rate of return (10.25%) is less than the minimum accepted rate of return, leaving the selection between wind and diesel energy projects. The study reveals that the incremental rates of return under such a comparison are 37.88%, 45.94% and 37.50% when MACRS, declining balance and straight line depreciations techniques are applied, respectively. Thus, the wind energy project is the favored option in this case. For the economic assessment of other case studies, the application of both sensitivity analysis on the capital cost and operation and maintenance cost and literature approaches to structure the projects reveal that wind energy for Maharashtra, India is a more attractive and feasible option compared to other distribution generation projects, while diesel is only considered to be a good option when its fuel cost is reduced by 5%. Finally, the paper highlights policy implications that can influence the decision to move towards investment in distributed generation technologies as a future research direction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207