Power Plant Conversion Decision Model by Scott Cottier and Andrew Scott
This document provides an overview of a power plant conversion decision model developed by Scott Cottier and Andrew Scott. It covers alternatives, criteria, benefits, costs, risks, and ratings of the decision model, offering insights into factors such as political, social, environmental, and economic impacts. The model evaluates options like doing nothing, converting to natural gas-fired, co-fired, or permanently closing the plant, considering various criteria and priorities.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Power Plant Conversion Decision Model Scott Cottier and Andrew Scott
Alternatives DO NOTHING CONVERT THE PLANT TO NATURAL GAS FIRED CONVERT THE PLANT TO CO-FIRED PERMANENTLY CLOSE THE PLANT.
CRITERIA POLITICAL NEW GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PLANT CLOSURE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ECONOMICAL COSTS OPERATIONAL RESULTS
BENEFITS OPPORTUNITIES Social People Social People Cost of Electricity Air quality Job Creation Community Tax Dollars Community Outreach Brand Image Economic Costs Labor Costs Training Costs Raw Material Costs Operational Results Conversion Costs Efficiency Marketing Flexibility Political Operating Results Tax Benefits Grants/Research Lobbying Governmental Policy Cap and Trade CO2 Emissions Particulate Discharge Electric Costs Air Quality Job Creation Community Tax Dollars Social Responsibilities Brand Image Economic Costs Labor Costs Training Costs Raw Material Costs Operational Results Conversion Costs Efficiency Marketing Flexibility Political Operating Results Tax Benefits Grants/Research Lobbying Governmental Policy Cap and Trade CO2 Emissions Particulate Discharge
COSTS RISKS Social People Social People Job Loss Air Pollution Toxic Disposal By Products Raw Material Job Creation Community Tax Dollars Image Marketing Economic Costs Labor Costs Training Costs Raw Material Costs Operational Results Conversion Costs Efficiency Marketing Flexibility Layoffs Community Tax Revenue Brand Image Economic Costs Labor Costs Training Costs Raw Material Costs Operational Results Availability of Technology Capacity Demand Political Operating Results Lobbying Governmental Policy Cap and Trade CO2 Emissions Particulate Discharge
NORMALIZED PRIORITIES Sub-Networks Close Plant Do Nothing Full Conversion Partial Conversion Benefits .326 Social .136 .216 .269 .225 .289 .118 .098 .304 .479 Economic .625 .199 .114 .336 .349 Political .238 Opportunities .326 Social .297 .187 .133 .319 .361 .118 .098 .271 .512 Economic .539 .104 .106 .438 .356 Political .163 Costs .174 Social .333 .233 .318 .206 .242 .007 .373 .382 .238 Economics .667 Risks .174 Social .105 .677 .168 .096 .098 .428 .125 .219 .228 Economic .258 .200 .512 .119 .169 Political .637
RESULTS Additive negative formula
RESULTS multiplicative formula
FUTURE RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS Political Decisions with respect to CO2, Particulate Discharge and Cap and Trade Future price of natural gas Technology Development MW Capacity of Power Plant
