The Levelised Cost of Energy is frequently used for assessing the economic competitiveness across different technologies. Unfortunately, there are caveats and a significant problem is that opportunity costs are ignored. This paper therefore addresses how to calculate the Levelised Cost of Energy for Solar Photovoltaics more correctly than today starting from the premise that an energy source has to guarantee an output at a system level. Thus, energy storage systems are required. Furthermore, uncertainty must be handled, and Monte Carlo methods are used here. The lowest Levelised Cost of Energy occurs when the system is designed for continuous operation, as opposed to peak shaving, with 80% of its solution space found between 203 USD/MWh to 252 USD/MWh and an expected value of 226 USD/MWh. This is almost 3 times higher than a narrowly defined Levelised Cost of Energy, which ignores opportunity costs. Hence, it is clear that Solar Photovoltaics can guarantee output within economically feasible limits, albeit currently expensive.
Purpose To provide students, professors, political leaders, members of non‐governmental sector and economists with a review of Drucker's major works on recent changes in politics, government, society and economy. Design/methodology/approach This article briefly illustrates and discusses Drucker's thoughts and analysis presented mainly in the books Post‐Capitalist Society , New Realities and Managing in a Time of Great Change . However, reference is also made to other books and articles written by Drucker, as well as papers and books produced by other authors on his works or on subjects discussed in his works. Findings This article provides Drucker's views on recent changes in politics, government, society and economy, which have brought about new realities and challenges and have fundamentally transformed politics, economy and the society. Thorough considerations of these challenges would not provide fixed solutions but rather support and would enable governments, organizations and society at large to anticipate these transformations. It is believed that Drucker has made sound analyses of which one ought to take notice. Practical implications This article provides a useful source of information on political and economic changes in this turbulent world and recommendations on how to anticipate these changes. Originality/value It is believed that this paper contains an original review of Drucker's politically oriented writings. The findings and recommendations in this article can be useful for scholars, students, politicians, economists, leaders of civil society organizations and businesses to better understand the transformations taking place in society and hence enable leaders to make better decisions.
Abstract The Deep-Sea Fleet consumes about 300 million tonnes of Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) annually and emits 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, green ammonia is seen as the most promising zero-emission substitute. Yet, if green ammonia was to replace HFO, an equivalent to 2.7 times the total EU electricity production in 2022 would be required to produce this fuel. Therefore, the shipping industry investigates whether nuclear power can provide a viable, safe, and cost-effective solution to this challenge. Some navies have successfully used small Light Water Reactors for decades, but studies identify many challenges including costs and public acceptance related to use of such reactors in merchant ships. However, one study demonstrates that for an AfraMax size tanker, the life-cycle cost savings are expected to be 65–70 million US dollars by using a denatured Molten Salt Reactor assuming that the publicly available information is realistic. With over 80 different reactor concepts identified by yearend 2022 primarily from IAEA’s Small Modular Reactor Handbook, there is a need to develop criteria that can help the shipping industry robustly identify suitable nuclear reactors. This paper presents and discusses these criteria to enable the next step in the process, the actual selection of reactor technologies for merchant shipping.
There are basically three avenues for dealing with risk and uncertainty in project planning as – 1) forecast its impact before making a decision, 2) maneuver or adapt to uncertainty and risks that materializes and thus making it irrelevant, or 3) accept it. To discuss this the very definitions of uncertainty and risk are revisited because there is great confusion about uncertainty and its cousin risk – also in the literature. Once a proper distinction between these two concepts are established, the paper will show that if project planning is contemplated as ‘planning for coordination’ we can augment it with agility to handle surprises, which is in contradistinction with the ‘planning the future’ approach which is path dependent and fails to handle surprises.