key: cord-0872293-uyx1pzhl
authors: Sisodia, Gyanendra Singh; Awad, Einas; Alkhoja, Heba; Sergi, Bruno S.
title: Strategic business risk evaluation for sustainable energy investment and stakeholder engagement: A proposal for energy policy development in the Middle East through Khalifa funding and land subsidies
date: 2020-07-22
journal: Bus Strategy Environ
DOI: 10.1002/bse.2543
sha: bc058031e816c436e28055c25c8c60777f13d66b
doc_id: 872293
cord_uid: uyx1pzhl

This article projects business risk through deferent industrial scenarios in concentrated solar investments in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Nationwide, the government seeks a sustainable solution through energy policy development and engagement of the stakeholders for clean energy generation at wider level in the long run. Support has been extended through various support schemes. In the current study, Monte Carlo simulations and net present value (NPV) risk are used to analyse the return on investment. A 5 MW concave solar panel project is evaluated. We have assessed the impact of local factors on profits through NPV. The study proposes that a higher NPV is expected if the concave solar panel project is financed 50% by Khalifa funding. The study also proposes a robust policy and highlights the opportunity of business profitability if the government subsidises land leasing with respect to each scenario. Additionally, the study also proposes a policy to maintain the interests of investors in the UAE.

ments and premiums on electricity sales. In addition, the effect of land subsidies on the abovementioned scenarios was evaluated.

The study contributes to the literature in the following ways.

First, the Khalifa funding has supported the business over the years in UAE. There is no explicit evidence of this support to renewable energy project in the academic literature of energy and business.

Therefore, the extensive-scale application of such supportive funding policy that can create a higher economic impact is represented through the current study. Second, the utilization of desert land in the form of land subsidies for sustainable businesses improves the attractiveness in the UAE for the investor. This proposition has not been made before in the literature, thus contributes to the existing literature. Third, the land subsidies generate significantly higher revenues; thus, the investor can make significantly higher profits (compared with the scene where the land is not subsidized) and pay tax on the sale of electricity, thereby increasing the financial reserve for the government. This revenue through tax might be further utilized to offer subsidies to similar projects, leading to sustainability in the long run. As this thought has not been found in the existing studies, it significantly contributes to the existing knowledge in the economic policies related to the investment in clean energy.

The rest of the paper is organised as follows. Section 2 puts forth the literature in brief, Section 3 presents the data and methodology and Section 4 highlights results and discussions. Finally, Section 5 concludes the study with policy, limitations and future course of action.

The business potential can be realised on the ground with decisive support in the form of investment, funding and innovation due to excessive cost of instalments at the beginning (Held et al., 2019; Yang, He, Xia, & Chen, 2019) . Government at this stage makes supportive policies and schemes to promote CSP development. One such funding and incentives help EU countries to deploy such projects. Overall, the cost of technology will be lesser, and incentive schemes such as feedin tariff and subsidy can provide further development of CSP technology.

To grab an opportunity to develop solar energy in the form of CSP deployment, the country needs to implement smart policies.

These policies are related to technological development and innovation (Peters, Schmidt, Wiederkehr, & Schneider, 2011; Craig, Brent, & Dinter, 2017; Potts, 2019) . The progressive steps include R&D and incentives to the innovators that increase the deployment of projects.

Large-scale deployment may be possible with the help of incentives/subsidy provisions by regulatory bodies offered to the investors. The year 2008 saw a boom for CSE technology construction around the world. 3 The United States, Spain, Australia, Portugal, Egypt, China, UAE, and a few other countries adopted this technology. Green-space, European Solar Thermal Power Industry, and IEA's Solar Paces Programmed on the supply of solar energy resource did a joint initiative of projection work in 2040. The estimated result shows that the capacity for energy production through CSE technology is expected to be increased from 36,853 to 600,000 MW from 2025 to 2040. The share of the CSE project in total energy supply will be accounted for 6% till 2050. With the growing demand for energy around the world and increasing renewable energy share, especially solar energy, will expand the market share.

Globally, CSE technology is expected to increase energy generation close to 11% of total energy till 2050. 4 Table 1 and South Africa are also working on to develop large-scale CSE projects. 6 Usually, a strong government support and intervention are required by the government to involve other stakeholders in industrial projects (Garrone, Grilli, & Mrkajic, 2018; Pan, Chen, Sinha, & Dong, 2020; Quan, Wu, Li, & Ying, 2018; Shao, 2019 ).

The IEA Roadmap for CSE development shows positive influence in the world market. 7 The total power capacity of CSE plant reached at 1 GW in 2010. This target is set to increase at 148 GW until 2020. It shows an estimated share of 1.3% of global energy production through CES plant. This target is further enhanced at 337 GW with an increased share of 3.8% of total energy production around the world.

By 2040, the share of CSE in total installed capacity will be double (715 GW) that will account for 8.3% of total production. The longterm development plan is set to be achieved until 2050 with an estimated installed capacity of 1,089 GW. This represents 11.3% of total global electricity production. To achieve this target, countries have developed some support mechanism. This mechanism includes a favourable investment environment for private investors, government and state policy, tax incentives, premium, research and development, innovation in technology and so forth. One successful example of this is the U.S. Loan Guarantee and Renewable Energy Grant Program, which supplies incentives to private investors in innovation. Research and development effort has been started in Australia, Europe, Russia, the UAE, China, and South Korea. A few incentive policies, such as feed-in tariff or premium is implemented by Spain, Algeria, Israel, South Africa, and Indian states.

The regulatory mechanism must stimulate CSP development.

These mechanisms consist of a private entity, government sector and international bodies. Policy measures are usually enunciated by the government with a given period. This may be on the short-term or long-term basis. The policy includes deployment support, investment support for manufacturing plants and innovation supports in the form of research and development and industrial development assistance (Grau, Huo, & Neuhoff, 2012; Horbach & Rammer, 2018; Pham, 2019; Zafar, Shahbaz, Hou, & Sinha, 2019) . Subsidies feed-in tariff, tax relief and concessions, fixed premiums and so forth measure to increase the deployment of CSP projects. Cooperation support of banks, regional government and central government enhances the chances of installation. of view, the cost structure is still a critical area for concern. The estimated cost reduction of 50% to 60% shows the technological innovation that results potential to project deployment. The growth rate of 15% to 30% indicates CSE installation of 500 GW per year that achieves a 50% cost reduction in the 10-year time period that ranges from 2021 to 2031.

The governments set the feed-in pricing policies, like feed-in tariffs All this contribute to encouraging renewable energy projects around the world (Tomar & Tiwari, 2017) .

Although these policies are promising, the main challenge encompasses the tariff or the premium percentage to the optimal level. 16

Furthermore, tariff systems are a matter of the information associated with the power division. Regulators and policymakers might not have access to the business information they need to create informed decisions. 17

For the current study, feed-in premiums (FIPs) have been gradually adopted in liberalised electricity markets (such as those were opened to private sector involvement). Premiums are usually of two types: a fixed premium set on top of the market price, generally combined with a floor and cap to decrease risks or a floating (sliding) premium where a reference value ('strike price') is set, and the premium is calculated as the difference between the reference value and the reference market price. Caps and floors can be introduced to limit extreme profits or limit risks for investors when the electricity market price rises too high or falls too low. A variation of the FIP is the contract for difference: if the wholesale market price exceeds the strike price, the investors return the difference. 18

Regulatory and pricing policies need to be classified to specific contexts, looking at the technology type, energy demand, system size, business model, energy needs, and other characteristics that frequently vary from project to another.

To achieve equality and fairness between rural and investors, a few countries enforce national uniform tariffs. Tariff caps and standardised tariff calculation policies are elements used to set tariffs.

For tariff caps, operators are free to apply tariff up to the cap, which is set based on the local conditions (e.g., the technology used, area and capacity). Also, in a few cases, tariff caps are applied by financing institutions. Standardised tariff calculation procedures (e.g., a costplus approach) allow regulators to analytically evaluate and approve tariffs, while furthermore providing the basis for brief negotiations (MRC Report, 2018) 19 .

Tariff constructions should also be planned to allow for flexible financing or payment models, such as pay-as-you-go, power purchase agreements, business-to-business partnerships, lease or fee for service and community partnerships (Walters et al., 2015) . 

The renewable energy generation is usually competitive ( 

To address the research question, we have used various assumption in the local context. We highlighted several scenarios of using concave solar panels to produce energy. IRENA Report 20 (2018) estimates that the cost of electricity generation through solar in 2017 is $0.08 to produce a 1 kWh. Therefore, the cost of producing from 5 MW per

year would be $3,504,000 (5X365X24X1000X0.08). Nevertheless, the same IRENA Report and ABD Report (2020) 21 also confirms that the price continues to fall; Observing the general trend, we estimated that the rate falls by 12.5% in 2020, and therefore, the cost of $3,066,000 per year was assumed. A list of cost and revenue variables have been considered for each scenario such as installation cost, operation and maintenance, government formalities, labour, and technology import.

It was assumed that for all the scenarios, the total cost would be similar, except for the scenario where the financing needs to be paid back along with the interest rates. The installation cost is assumed to be same throughout all scenarios and will be paid in the year zero of the project, while labour cost is expected to vary by 10% increase every fifth year through the project's lifetime. Similarly, we assumed operation and maintenance cost would have an increase of 5% every fifth year, while government formalities cost will have an increase of 25% and its cost distributed on the 20 years of the project. Technology import cost is expected to be borne by an investor in the year zero.

All the above-listed variables may vary throughout for market and economic reasons. Therefore, we assumed three market possibilities that can affect the estimated values. In the light of this, optimistic (20% higher than most likely values) and pessimistic (20% lesser than the most likely values) cases are assumed. 22 Table 2 shows the main values assigned to this project:

For the representation of high costs, a sensitivity of ±20% risk is added to the possible values using a triangulation distribution (triangu- The following model has been used in the study with extended financial risk factors

where I represents an initial investment and R1, R2, R3, … R20 represent cash flows for years 1 to 20, respectively, over the 20 years of project life, whereas i indicates discount rate.

Additionally, we have incorporated the ±20% risk associated with the essential variables (mentioned in scenarios and results) for the calculation of NPVs of the project.

Given that the NPV is a reliable tool presented in the literature for the valuation of projects, several energy projects, as mentioned in Section 2.5, have applied the NPV model to model the business risk.

The following factors make the NPV tool attractive to be used in the current study: (1) The industrial projects, such as the implementation of an energy harvesting unit, require high cost, and these projects last 

Under the current UAE regulatory framework, the United Arab Emirates supports renewable energy generation. The project life is assumed to be 20 years for all the scenarios. In the first scenario, we assumed that the total required cost for the project is financed from the bank (100% bank loan) with an interest rate of 10%. Thus, we considered that the owner's equity is zero, and the sale of electricity is tax-free.

Under the business as a usual framework, the investors of CSP may generate a significant return on investments.

Any intermittent project related to energy generation that have environmental priorities comes with higher cost of installation. Along with the higher cost, most of such projects are irreversible and therefore need protection and generous support through the government.

It is assumed that the support of local banks, along with other funding bodies, is critical for the establishment of such projects. Scenario 2 assumes that the project owner finances 50% of the project cost, and the other 50% is aided by Khalifa funding. In this scenario, we assumed a 0% interest and 0% tax rate. It is also expected that the profit will boost by the support of Khalifa funding.

Khalifa funding in UAE can lead to higher returns on investment as compared with the business as usual scenario.

Banks are believed to be the pillars of economic development.

Therefore, in order to be profitable and sustainable in the long run, the bank charges the interest rates, which is seen as a cost to the business. Nevertheless, most of the big business still rely on banks for development and expansion. The policy development through bank support to such investor is likely to boost economic performance.

Business can utilize the support of angel investors and venture capitalists too. For the study, we assumed banks as a choice of borrowing for business. In the third scenario, we assumed that the project is 50% financed by Khalifa funding, along with 50% Bank loans and a 10% interest rate. Once the market is mature, it is assumed that there is no reason for the government to charge less interest on bank loans.

However, since the initial cost of investment is high, support from Khalifa fund may boost the initial investment. Therefore, 10% of the loan interest seems realistic to be assumed in Scenario 3.

Under the assumption that the energy project is funded 50% by a bank (with 10% interest rate) and 50%

through Khalifa fund, the return on investment is relatively higher than the business as usual scenario in UAE.

Another way by which hosting countries can attract foreign direct investment and boost local investment is through paying premiums on the sales of energy per unit. This policy not only encourages the energy generation through sources but also prioritize the clean energy supply to the grid, thereby offering investors an extra financial advantage. Scenario 4 considers that 50% of the required project cost is covered by Khalifa funding, while the other 50% is accounted for by the bank at 10% interest rate. Since the project is expected to be aligned with the government's sustainable goals, the proposal for higher expansion of such business is assisted. In the first phase, the European government focused on feed in tariffs to generate higher investments from the consumer side. Thus, consumers were able to generate energy and consume it at the same time, also referred to as prosumers. Prosumers were incentivised by premium rates to produce clean energy. In the context, we assumed that the European model could be successful in the initial phase. Thus, for generating the clean energy and selling it to the government directly, the scenario assumes the receipt of an additional 5% of sales value as a premium.

Hypothesis 4. Through 50% bank borrowing at the rate of 10% interest rate and 50% Khalifa funding support with 5% premium payment on electricity sales, investment in CSP project can guarantee a higher return in comparison with business as usual scenario in UAE.

Scenarios 5A to 5D represent the policy instrument that can have a higher economic impact. Most of the land in UAE and Gulf is not arable, thus, except for the major cities where infrastructure development is the critical agenda, the country side land cannot be significantly utilized and just stay unused for over the years. Given that the potential to harness the solar energy is higher in UAE and Gulf due to supportive geographical condition, a part of this land can be utilized by offering it to solar investors at highly subsidized rates. This policy instrument will also economically develop the area due to plant set-up without financially burdening the government. In these scenarios, 5A-5D, it is assumed that the regulators offer 100% subsidized lands to the investors. This scenario not only adds the value to investment attractiveness in the country but also has global implications. If the policy leads to significant economic advantage, it can be followed by neighbouring countries.

Under an assumption in the scenarios from 5A to 5D, the land leasing at higher subsidized rates in the UAE for energy investment project, Scenarios 1-4 generate additional higher profits when compared with the scenarios where the land is not subsidized.

We proposed four scenarios using NPV risk method to analyse the project profit possibilities through Monte Carlo simulation with 5,000

iterations. The 5,000 iterations have been implemented previously by Sisodia and Soares (2016) . The major variables we considered in the scenarios are sales, labour/staff expense, renting land, operation and maintenance, installation cost and technology import cost. However, a higher cost on additional variables that reflect throughout the life of the project is expected as well. Therefore, we have considered a miscellaneous cost of 20% to account for this uncertainty.

In this scenario, we assumed that the project would be 100% financed by the bank at 10% interest rate. The baseline NPV was 3.657 million dollars; the most significant variable in this scenario is sale. The maximum NPV through high sales can reach up to 4.239 million dollars.

However, the worst case with 20% less of sale, the NPV can reduce to 3.074 million dollars.

Renting land and labour represents the second and third impor- Reduction in operation and maintenance, installation cost and technology import variables can also substantially improve the NPV risk by 3.766, 3.724, and 3.716, respectively.

Overall, the average NPV is positive; therefore, based on the NPV risk method, this scenario can be taken into consideration. Figure 1 represents Scenario 1.

Scenario 2 assumed that the project would be 50% financed by the owner and 50% by Khalifa fund with no premiums. We predicted that the NPV would increase approximately by 50%.

After we computed the results with the Monte Carlo simulation with 5,000 iterations, we received 6.536 million dollars NPV as a baseline. Sales are computed as the most significant variable with higher and lower NPV ranging between 7.131 to 5.916 million dollars.

Renting land represents the second critical variables; the higher values of renting land is found to reduce the NPV by 6.214 million dollars, while lower values of renting land (by lesser 20%) enhance the NPV by 6.861 million dollars. The third significant observed variable was labour cost that reduced the NPV by 6.216 (at 20% higher cost) and shot up the NPV (at 20% lower cost) by 6.850 million dollars.

Reduction in operation and maintenance improves the NPV by 6.658 million dollars. Installation cost and technology import were seen to be insignificant in this scenario.

Overall, the average NPV is positive, and it showed better NPV than the first scenario. Therefore, this scenario can be taken up with the NPV rule. Figure 2 represents the results of Scenario 2. 

This section shows the results of Scenario 3. We assumed that the project would be 50% financed by the bank at 10% interest rate and 50% by Khalifa. We hypothesised that the effect of Khalifa funding on the project with no premium could pose a higher profit through the NPV method.

With 5 It is noticed that the 10% interest rate further lowers the NPV, thus creating a new debt on the investor. Figure 3 represents the NPV variation in Scenario 3.

In this scenario, we assumed that the project is 50% financed by the bank at 10% interest rate and 50% by Khalifa funding plus a 5% premium on electricity sales. We assumed that the effect of premium could balance the loss that the interest rate posed in Scenario 3.

With baseline NPV of 5.588 million dollars, sales were the most critical variable. The higher sales result in generating higher NPV by 6.324 million dollars, while in the worst situation, the lower sales generate NPV by 4.851 million dollars, leading to a broad risk margin.

Renting of the land in this scenario with higher cost reduced the NPV by 5.252 million dollars, while lower renting land value improves the NPV by 5.912 million dollars. Similarly, labour and staffing cost ranged between 5.2 and 5.9 million dollars, with maximum and minimum costs.

On the one hand, reduction in operation and maintenance improves the NPV by 5.738 million dollars; on the other hand, installation cost and technology import are represented as less significant.

The higher observable positive effect of 5% premium rate on the NPV compared with the third scenario, indicates the higher profitability with NPV risk. Figure 4 represents the results of Scenario 4.

We assumed that the land would be subsidised for this project as it supports the sustainable goals of the UAE government to encourage and support investors. We assumed that the outcome would be more attractive for both investors and the UAE government. So, we used the NPV risk method on the same scenarios to show how it will affect the NPV. Therefore, the cost of renting land is eliminated in the current assumption. The results obtained out of four scenarios and related scenarios, 5A-5D, are summarised in Table 3 .

Through the presentation of the results of each scenario in Table 3 , it was evident that land subsidisation is a robust policy tool.

The NPV of the scenarios (5A-5D) varies from $8.69 million to $11.06 million, whereas in the scenarios (1-4), where land subsidies are not considered, the NPV varies from $3.65 to $6.53 million, which is significantly low compared with 5A-5D. Thus, it is indicated through results that land subsidies can play a critical role in attracting investors, and since the profits are significantly high, an ample of ally. Additionally, with technological advancements, the production cost of concentrated solar panels has dropped significantly over a period of time, which has eventually reduced the levelized cost of electricity generation through the mentioned technology. Thus, globally, the importing of panels at cheaper rates can provide additional financial leverage to the companies to invest in their local countries, as long as their local government supports the clean energy business by not elevating the taxes on electricity generation and its sales.

A new proposal was identified during this study to understand the impact of eliminating the cost of renting land on the NPV of the project, assuming that the land will be offered on 100% subsidy by the country. It was estimated that 100% of land subsidy has a significant positive impact on the NPV of the project in all scenarios. Thus, the provision of subsidised land has a more significant economic impact, as shown in Table 3 . This policy provision also indicates an opportunity for the government to tax the investor at a higher rate; thus, the economic benefit increases not only leaving the scope for investors to make significantly high profits but also have higher financial reserve through reasonable taxation.

Through the simulations, it is found that government support is critical in harnessing renewable energy projects. Despite the tremendous geographical potential to generate clean energy, clean energy is not significantly produced to be consumed locally at the domestic and industrial levels. Thus, it will not only encourage the utilisation of available land with high potential of clean energy generation but in turn also enhance the level of employability and economic development. Significant utilisation of land not only increases the chance of higher production of energy for local consumption but the extra generated energy can be transmitted to neighbouring countries as well, which can be a source of earning as well for the nation. The higher energy generation may also lead to lower electricity prices, and thus, it can boost the investors' interest in other industrial sectors too.

Overall, the policies can be framed in the local context; however, it can also be primarily generalised to the global context depending on the availability of resources, government willingness to harness the potential and the participation by the stakeholders/investors.

The study also incorporates several limitations. (1) Given the nature of the study, a set of variables have been used, and their values, based on the logical framework and underlying literature, were assumed to represent the realistic situation in future. Nevertheless, in practice, when the project is implemented, the values may significantly affect due to factors such as regulators import policies affecting the total shipping cost, technology supply, labour policies, other operational costs and so forth. (2) The methodology that we used has a limitation as well. First, unlike the real options approach, the NPV method does not provide the flexibility in decision making for projects that need an expansion or needs to be delayed. Nevertheless, the objective of the study is to evaluate new project, so NPV method is robust as well in the current context. Second, in calculations, we used linear assumptions over different periods at several stages, which may vary in a realistic situation. Third, the study was conducted in 2019, and the current change in the business scenario due to Covid-19 pandemic is not accounted for in the project, whereas, in the real situation, the project may have significantly less chance to be implemented in 2020. Fourth, the decision parameter of NPV is that if the value is higher than zero, the investor must accept the project. However, all the assumed scenarios in the study have values higher than zero; therefore, the subjectivity of the authors engaged in presenting the results of the study. (3) Fines and penalties associated with the mishandling of the operational and labour process are not incorporated in the project, which is another limitation.

In future studies, we propose more investigation concerning different stakeholders involved in the generation and consumption of clean energy. Additionally, since the availability of land is not a limitation, we recommend the government to frame a policy to offer highly subsidised land for such businesses that might encourage the local and foreign investors to invest in hefty projects within the country.

We are thankful and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement, support and guidance from all the teaching staff of the College of Business Administration, which helped us in completing our project work. No funding is received to execute this study. Although a due care is taken while writing a paper, methodology, and cost estimation, it is possible to have errors in the paper that can be revised during future projects.

Gyanendra Singh Sisodia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8977-8895

Bruno S. Sergi https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5050-5651

Economic evaluation of hybrid renewable energy systems for electricity generation in Nigeria: A discounted cash flow analysis

Cross-country electricity trade, renewable energy and European transmission infrastructure policy

Environmental policies and productivity growth: Evidence across industries and firms

Efficient feed-in-tariff policies for renewable energy technologies

Energy efficiency and financial literacy

Life cycle analysis with multi-criteria decision making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies

Renewable generation across Italian regions: Spillover effects and effectiveness of European regional fund

An integrated framework for the financial analysis of sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment

The role of cross-border power transmission in a renewable-rich power system-A model analysis for northwestern Europe

International competition and trade conflict in a dual photovoltaic supply chain system

Are policy incentives for solar power effective? Evidence from residential installations in the Northeast

Concentrated solar power (CSP) innovation analysis in South Africa

Determining the number of iterations for Monte Carlo simulations of weapon effectiveness (No. NPS-MAE-04-005)

Benefit evaluation of investment in CCS retrofitting of coal-fired power plants and PV power plants in China based on real options

Irreversible investment in wind turbines: Life-extension versus repowering

Green electricity investment timing in practice: Real options or net present value? Energy

Forecasting the impact of renewable energies in competition with non-renewable sources

The role of institutional pressures in the introduction of energy-efficiency innovations

Measuring and modeling energy resilience

Survey of photovoltaic industry and policy in Germany and China

The German energy transition: Modeling competition and substitution between nuclear power and renewable energy technologies

A multi-criteria approach to rank renewables for the Algerian electricity system

Energy transition in Germany and regional spill-overs: The diffusion of renewable energy in firms

Achieving renewable energy, climate, and air quality policy goals: Rural residential investment in solar panel

Real options analysis for renewable energy investment decisions in developing countries

A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development

Probabilistic evaluation of solar photovoltaic systems using Bayesian networks: A discounted cash flow assessment

Do lower electricity storage costs reduce greenhouse gas emissions

Compound real options valuation of renewable energy projects: The case of a wind farm in Serbia

Improving the economic performance of remanufacturing systems through flexible design strategies: A case study based on remanufacturing laptop computers for the Cambodian market

Multi criteria decision analysis for offshore wind energy potential in Egypt

Sustainability initiatives in emerging economies: A socio-cultural perspective

Biomass logistics: A review of important features, optimization modeling and the new trends

The impact of feedin and capacity policies on electricity generation from renewable energy sources in Spain

Role of government

Deterministic approach for active distribution networks planning with high penetration of wind and solar power

Multicriteria decision making for resource management in renewable energy assisted microgrids. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

An overview of feed-in tariffs, premiums and tenders to promote electricity from biogas in the EU-28

Are firms with state ownership greener? An institutional complexity view

Novel hybrid CSP-biomass CHP for flexible generation: Thermo-economic analysis and profitability assessment

Real options valuation of photovoltaic power investments in existing buildings

Shedding light on solar technologies-A techno-economic assessment and its policy implications

Does financial development matter for innovation in renewable energy?

Fostering innovation in renewable energy technologies: Choice of policy instruments and effectiveness

Concentrating solar power in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa: Achieving its potential

An exploratory study of the South African concentrated solar power sector using the technological innovation systems framework (Doctoral dissertation

Firm sustainable development and stakeholder engagement: The role of government support. Business Strategy and the Environment

Assessment of early degradation and performance loss in five co-located solar photovoltaic module technologies installed in Ghana using performance ratio time-series regression

Stochastic, adaptive, and dynamic control of energy storage systems integrated with renewable energy sources for power loss minimization

The critical role of anchor customers in rural microgrids: Impact of load factor on energy cost

A critical review on the utilization of storage and demand response for the implementation of renewable energy microgrids

Scenario analysis of implementing a power-to-gas and biomass gasification system in an integrated steel plant: A techno-economic and environmental study

What can the Philippines learn from Thailands ENCON fund in overcoming the barriers to developing renewable energy resources

Assessment of renewable energy systems combining techno-economic optimization with energy scenario analysis

Financing renewable energy in Africa-Key challenge of the sustainable development goals

Sustainable consumption in China: New trends and research interests

Political risk and valuation of renewable energy investments in developing countries

Panel data analysis for renewable energy investment determinants in Europe

Modeling business risk: The effect of regulatory revision on renewable energy investment-The Iberian case

The effect of sample size on European Union's renewable energy investment drivers

Distribution networks' energy losses versus hosting capacity of wind power in the presence of demand flexibility

Does ecosystem valuation contribute to ecosystem decision making? Evidence from hydropower licensing

Techno-economic evaluation of grid connected PV system for households with feed in tariff and time of day tariff regulation in New Delhi-A sustainable approach

Global potential of concentrating solar power

The risk of policy tipping and stranded carbon assets

Engaging the private sector in expanding access to electricity

Competition or complementarity? The hydropower and thermal power nexus in China

Green technology innovation: Anatomy of exploration processes from a learning perspective

Different types of environmental regulations and heterogeneous influence on "green" productivity: Evidence from China

Effect of government subsidies on renewable energy investments: The threshold effect

Analysis of feed-in tariff policies for solar photovoltaic in China

From nonrenewable to renewable energy and its impact on economic growth: The role of research & development expenditures in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries

Strategic business risk evaluation for sustainable energy investment and stakeholder engagement: A proposal for energy policy development in the Middle East through Khalifa funding and land subsidies