Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorEmhjellen, Kjetil
dc.contributor.authorEmhjellen, Magne
dc.contributor.authorOsmundsen, Petter
dc.date.accessioned2007-03-09T10:33:01Z
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-19T12:52:31Z
dc.date.available2007-03-09T10:33:01Z
dc.date.available2017-04-19T12:52:31Z
dc.date.issued2002
dc.identifier.citationEnergy policy 30(2002), No. 2, p. 91-96
dc.identifier.issn0301-4215
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2438543
dc.description.abstractWhen evaluating new investment projects, oil companies traditionally use the discounted cashflow method. This method requires expected cashflows in the numerator and a risk-adjusted required rate of return in the denominator in order to calculate net present value. The capital expenditure (CAPEX) of a project is one of the major cashflows used to calculate net present value. Usually the CAPEX is given by a single cost figure, with some indication of its probability distribution. In the oil industry and many other industries, it is a common practice to report a CAPEX that is the estimated 50/50 (median) CAPEX instead of the estimated expected (expected value) CAPEX. In this article, we demonstrate how the practice of using a 50/50 (median) CAPEX, when the cost distributions are asymmetric, causes project valuation errors and therefore may lead to wrong investment decisions with acceptance of projects that have negative net present values.
dc.format.extent195852 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.subjectInvesteringer
dc.subjectKostnader
dc.subjectKostnadsanalyser
dc.subjectPetroleumsøkonomi
dc.titleInvestment cost estimates and investment decisions
dc.typeJournal article
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.subject.nsi212
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00065-9


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel