Computing optimal subsidies for Iranian renewable energy investments using real options

Document Type: IIEC 2020


1 Department of Electrical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Industrial Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran


For the valuation of the renewable energy investments, providing private investors with a financial incentive to accelerate their investment is a very significant issue. Financial subsidies are known by the majority of the people to be one of the most important drivers in renewable energy expansion and one of the main reasons which result in the development of any industry. In this paper, we present a new approach to compute the optimal subsidies over a specific time period by using the Binomial model for the Valuation of Real Options for Iranian renewable energy investments adjusted with Tax rate. We also apply linear regression method for predicting energy prices in order to allow an investor to exercise the relevant option over the timeline of the project at the optimal price. To evaluate our proposed approach, we apply it using predicted electricity prices for the next 16 years and electricity generation cost for Seid Abad, Damghan solar power plant. Our results in comparison of the base paper show that our proposed approach improves the error of subsidy’s computation by 1.57 percent since we used the predicted energy prices rather than the spot price as used before in real options’ valuation.


Main Subjects

Fazelpour, F. Soltani, N. Soltani, S. Rosen, M,A. (2015). Assessment of wind energy potential and economics in the north-western Iranian cities of Tabriz and Ardabil, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 45, pp. 87–99.


Fleten, S,E. Linnerud, K. Molnár, P. Nygaard, M,T. (2016). Green electricity investment timing in practice: Real options or net present value?, Energy, vol. 116, pp. 498–506.


 Gatzert, N. Kosub, T. (2016). Risks and risk management of renewable energy projects: The case of onshore and offshore wind parks, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 60, pp. 982–998.



Insley, M. (2002). A real options approach to the valuation of a forestry investment, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 471–492.


Longstaff, F. A., & Schwartz, E. S. (2001). Valuing American options by simulation: a simple least-squares approach. The review of financial studies14(1), 113-147.


 Liu, X. Ronn, E,I. (2018). Using the Binomial Model for the Valuation of Real Options in Computing Optimal Subsidies for Chinese Renewable Energy Investments, Available SSRN 3186274.


McDonald, R. Siegel, D. (1986). The value of waiting to invest, Q. J. Econ., vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 707–727.


Page, M. (1998). Investment Basics: XXXVIII. Options pricing using a binomial lattice, Invest. Anal. J., vol. 27, no. 48, pp. 67–69.


Pringles, R., Olsina, F., & Garcés, F. (2014). Designing regulatory frameworks for merchant transmission investments by real options analysis. Energy Policy67, 272-280.


“Real Option.” [Online]. Available:


Ronn, E., & Books, R. (2004). Valuation of Oil Fields as Optimal Exercise of the Extraction Option. Managing Energy Price Risk.


Rouder, J,N. Engelhardt,C,R. McCabe,S. Morey,RD. (2016). Model comparison in ANOVA, Psychon. Bull. Rev., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 1779–1786.


Routledge, B. R., Seppi, D. J., & Spatt, C. S. (2001). The spark spread: Cross-commodity equilibrium restrictions and electricity. mimeo, Carnegi Mellon.


Schwartz, F. A. L. E. S. (2001). Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least—Squares.


Schwartz, E., & Smith, J. E. (2000). Short-term variations and long-term dynamics in commodity prices. Management Science46(7), 893-911.


Schwartz, E. S. (1997). The stochastic behavior of commodity prices: Implications for valuation and hedging. The Journal of finance52(3), 923-973.


Tofigh, A,A. Abedian, M. (2016). Analysis of energy status in Iran for designing sustainable energy roadmap, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 57, pp. 1296–1306.


Yang, M., & Blyth, W. (2007). Modeling investment risks and uncertainties with real options approach. International Energy Agency23.


Zeng, M. Lu, W. Duan, J,H. Li, N (2012). Study on the cost of solar photovoltaic power generation using double-factors learning curve model, Mod Electr Power, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 72–76.


Zhang, M,M. Zhou, D,Q. Zhou, P. Chen, H,T. (2017). Optimal design of subsidy to stimulate renewable energy investments: The case of China, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 71, pp. 873–883.


Zhang, M,M. Zhou, D,Q. Zhou, P. Liu, G,Q. (2016). Optimal feed-in tariff for solar photovoltaic power generation in China: A real options analysis, Energy Policy, vol. 97, pp. 181–192.


Zhang, M. Zhou, D. Zhou, P. (2014). A real option model for renewable energy policy evaluation with application to solar PV power generation in China, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 40, pp. 944–955.



Zhao, Z,Y. Chen, Y,L. Chang, R,D. (2016). How to stimulate renewable energy power generation effectively?–China’s incentive approaches and lessons,” Renew. energy, vol. 92, pp. 147–156.


Zhou, W. Zhu, B. Chen, D. Zhao, F. Fei, W. (2014). How policy choice affects investment in low-carbon technology: The case of CO2 capture in indirect coal liquefaction in China, Energy, vol. 73, pp. 670–679.


Zhu, L. Fan, Y. (2011). A real options–based CCS investment evaluation model: Case study of China’s power generation sector, Appl. Energy, vol. 88, no. 12, pp. 4320–4333.