Skip to content
EEEP
Menu
  • 2012
    • Volume 1
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
  • 2013
    • Volume 2
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2014
    • Volume 3
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2015
    • Volume 4
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2016
    • Volume 5
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2017
    • Volume 6
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2018
    • Volume 7
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2019
    • Volume 8
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2020
    • Volume 9
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2021
    • Volume 10
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
    • Volume 9
      • Number 2
  • 2022
    • Volume 10
      • Number 2
    • Volume 11
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2023
    • Volume 11
      • Number 2
    • Volume 12
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2024
    • Volume 13
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2025
    • Volume 14
      • Number 1
  • 2026
    • Volume 15
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
Menu

EEEP » 2014 » Volume 3 » Number 2 » Optionality and Policymaking in Re-Transforming the British Power Market

Optionality and Policymaking in Re-Transforming the British Power Market

Posted on February 4, 2026February 9, 2026 by admin

Conventional models to support policymaking for the energy sector have been largely based on deterministic or static settings that focus on planning welfare- maximising investment pathways. But, in a liberalised market, since investments are made by competitive, profit-maximising companies, the increased intervention of government policy in the trading arrangements creates uncertain responses to incentives. Industry may perceive policy risks to be high, and major companies may choose to act more cautiously than governments expect. This presents a modelling challenge, and we propose an extension to the use of real options in this context. We model several features of the low-carbon investment context, viz., irreversibility, delay, and competition, which impinge upon the radical policy imperatives for structural change in electricity markets to meet ambitious sustainability targets.

Authors: Michail Chronopoulos, Derek Bunn, and Afzal Siddiqui
DOI: 10.5547/2160-5890.3.2.mchr
Keywords: Low-CO2 technologies, Policy risk, Real options
🔐 Download PDF🔐 Executive Summary PDF

Account

  • Log in

Tags

Air pollution carbon emissions Carbon tax China Climate change climate change policy Climate policy Coal computable general equilibrium Cost of Debt Decentralized energy governance difference-­in-­differences Electricity generation Electricity market design Electricity markets Electric Utilities Energy Energy efficiency Energy Policy Energy R&D Energy security Energy transition environmental regulation Europe evaluation Geopolitics Introduction Investment Long-term contracts Middle East Natural gas Network cost allocation Network expansion planning nuclear power generation Oil prices Regulation Renewable energy Renewables Resilience Resource adequacy Scenarios Sub-Saharan Africa Sustainability sustainable development willingness-to-pay

Archives

  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
© 2026 EEEP | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme