Browsing by Subject "Carbon price"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Carbon Considerations and Pricing in Global Asset Classes
    (2023-04-28) Tran, Ben; Nair, Nidhi; Schofield, Hannah; McCarthy, Sean; Verma, Snehal
    Angeleno Group (AG) is a venture capital and growth equity firm interested in pricing carbon costs into their asset class valuations. AG hopes to understand the financial impacts of carbon because companies with higher levels of carbon exposure are expected to be riskier, which should be reflected in higher returns. In this analysis of a portfolio of the S&P 500 from 2013 to 2022, performance is evaluated by considering how a hypothetical carbon cost based on the constituents’ absolute emissions and carbon intensity changes the portfolio’s volatility, returns, and Sharpe ratio. The carbon impacts are analyzed from the perspective of AG and institutions such as endowments and foundations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Duke Carbon Offsets Initiative: Energy Efficiency Carbon Offsets
    (2013-04-26) Chauhan, Sugandha; Lu, Aaron; Chen, Yunzhong
    Duke University aims to achieve carbon neutrality by 2024 by a combination of efforts to reduce on campus energy consumption and off campus carbon offset generation. One of the offset options that DCOI is evaluating is energy efficiency retrofits in residential buildings leading to indirect emission reductions. The problem we have attempted to address in our project is how Duke University can identify potential carbon offset opportunities in terms of improving energy efficiency in homes and businesses and how these offsets can be verified and quantified. In order to determine the potential savings in energy consumption, we evaluated energy data from a similar energy retrofit project conducted by the City of Durham. The pre and post retrofit energy consumption data from these houses was analyzed to determine the energy savings, the resultant carbon emissions reduction and the carbon price. The second step of the project involved studying energy efficiency retrofit projects that have been undertaken in other regions at various levels and sizes. The last question that this project aimed to answer was regarding the suitability of various financing mechanisms for the retrofitting project. In order to address this question a demand assessment survey was designed to determine the willingness of Duke employees to participate in such a program and pay for the retrofits. The results of our analysis showed that average electricity savings of 113.13 KWh per month can be generated through retrofits including air and duct sealing and insulation enhancement. The average cost of retrofit was determined to be $1/sq feet of heated area. Using this investment cost and annual savings, the carbon price was determined to be 133.37 $/metric ton of CO2 equivalent reduction. Sensitivity analysis conducted for this carbon price showed that the factors that had the largest impact on carbon price are the initial investment and annual energy savings. The final set of recommendations provided to DCOI are based upon the results obtained from the City of Durham data analysis and the comparative programs and carbon price study along with the essential project requirements for meeting the Verified Carbon Standard carbon offset program criteria.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Reducing US Greenhouse Gas Emissions through a Replacement of Coal with Natural Gas in Power Generation
    (2010-04-29T21:52:36Z) Crowe, Parker D
    Currently, coal provides about 50% of U.S. electricity supply and releases 80% of electricity sector carbon dioxide (Annual Energy Outlook Early Release Overview, 2009). A conceptual instantaneous switch to modern natural gas plants of the same capacity would reduce these carbon dioxide emissions by 74% or 1.5 annual gigatons at the cost of $300 billion in construction capital and an increase in electricity rates of approximately 15%. This analysis is accomplished primarily through a comparison of derived marginal cost functions for gas and coal generation under the assumption that fuel choice for baseload power is driven primarily by the lowest available cost of operation. The use of comparative supply curves demonstrates the extent of the cost disadvantage of gas to coal and allows analysis of possible future scenarios through manipulation of model inputs of fuel and emissions costs. In order for gas power to become less expensive than that from coal, either the price of gas must fall or the price of coal must rise. Two likely future developments might cause both of these changes to occur. Newly expected natural gas supply from unconventional sources and international trade of liquefied methane will put downward pressure on gas prices. Perhaps at the same time, a U.S. federal climate law could introduce a price on carbon emissions which would disproportionately raise the price of coal power. This analysis shows that either situation will promote gas power if of great enough magnitude. The likelihood of a transition away from coal remains questionable but coal is no longer the obvious fuel choice in new baseload power plant construction.