自然资源价值评估:多重不确定条件下边际油田开发项目的实物期权分析

IF 1.4 4区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM
T. Acheampong
{"title":"自然资源价值评估:多重不确定条件下边际油田开发项目的实物期权分析","authors":"T. Acheampong","doi":"10.2118/204232-pa","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper shows the applicability and the value of real options analysis (ROA) in valuing a marginal undeveloped discovery in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) under multiple project uncertainties, namely geology, costs, and oil prices. Marginal fields can prove uneconomic when developed under prevailing circumstances such as technical (reservoir size, infrastructure distance and remoteness, crude-oil type) or commercial issues (oil prices, high cost of development, lack of third-party-access arrangements), among others. As such, using traditional discounted-cash-flow (DCF) methodologies such as the net present value (NPV) might not adequately value the embedded options that these uncertainties create, leading to a rejection of the investment decision. Hence, we assess if the valuation differs if valued by the traditional DCF approach compared with ROA. We develop a valuation model for the traditional DCF and real options and specifically model the flexibility in the options to delay, abandon, or expand the field anytime during the relinquishment requirement period considering these multiple uncertainties. The binomial lattice and later the Black and Scholes models are used to model the options because of the flexibility they provide in incorporating early exercise. The results indicate that the DCF values lag those of the option values for the deferral and expansion options. In contrast, the abandonment option exhibited only a marginal change with respect to the DCF value. A significant implication of this finding is that management decision making will be better off considering these embedded options in their field-development and capital-investment choices.","PeriodicalId":22071,"journal":{"name":"Spe Production & Operations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2118/204232-pa","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Valuation of Natural Resources: Real Options Analysis of Marginal Oilfield-Development Projects Under Multiple Uncertainties\",\"authors\":\"T. Acheampong\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/204232-pa\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This paper shows the applicability and the value of real options analysis (ROA) in valuing a marginal undeveloped discovery in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) under multiple project uncertainties, namely geology, costs, and oil prices. Marginal fields can prove uneconomic when developed under prevailing circumstances such as technical (reservoir size, infrastructure distance and remoteness, crude-oil type) or commercial issues (oil prices, high cost of development, lack of third-party-access arrangements), among others. As such, using traditional discounted-cash-flow (DCF) methodologies such as the net present value (NPV) might not adequately value the embedded options that these uncertainties create, leading to a rejection of the investment decision. Hence, we assess if the valuation differs if valued by the traditional DCF approach compared with ROA. We develop a valuation model for the traditional DCF and real options and specifically model the flexibility in the options to delay, abandon, or expand the field anytime during the relinquishment requirement period considering these multiple uncertainties. The binomial lattice and later the Black and Scholes models are used to model the options because of the flexibility they provide in incorporating early exercise. The results indicate that the DCF values lag those of the option values for the deferral and expansion options. In contrast, the abandonment option exhibited only a marginal change with respect to the DCF value. A significant implication of this finding is that management decision making will be better off considering these embedded options in their field-development and capital-investment choices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spe Production & Operations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2118/204232-pa\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spe Production & Operations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/204232-pa\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spe Production & Operations","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/204232-pa","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, PETROLEUM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文展示了实物期权分析(ROA)在多个项目不确定性(即地质、成本和油价)下评估英国大陆架边际未开发发现的适用性和价值。在技术(油藏规模、基础设施距离和偏远程度、原油类型)或商业问题(油价、开发成本高、缺乏第三方准入安排)等普遍情况下开发边际油田可能会被证明是不经济的。因此,使用传统的贴现现金流(DCF)方法,如净现值(NPV),可能无法充分评估这些不确定性产生的嵌入期权,从而导致投资决策被拒绝。因此,我们评估如果用传统的DCF方法与ROA进行估值,估值是否不同。我们为传统的DCF和实物期权开发了一个估值模型,并专门为期权的灵活性建模,以在考虑这些多重不确定性的情况下,在放弃要求期内的任何时候延迟、放弃或扩大该领域。二项式格以及后来的Black和Scholes模型被用于对选项进行建模,因为它们在结合早期锻炼时具有灵活性。结果表明,对于延期和扩展选项,DCF值滞后于选项值。相比之下,放弃选项仅表现出相对于DCF值的边际变化。这一发现的一个重要含义是,管理层在油田开发和资本投资选择中考虑这些嵌入的选项会更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Valuation of Natural Resources: Real Options Analysis of Marginal Oilfield-Development Projects Under Multiple Uncertainties
This paper shows the applicability and the value of real options analysis (ROA) in valuing a marginal undeveloped discovery in the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS) under multiple project uncertainties, namely geology, costs, and oil prices. Marginal fields can prove uneconomic when developed under prevailing circumstances such as technical (reservoir size, infrastructure distance and remoteness, crude-oil type) or commercial issues (oil prices, high cost of development, lack of third-party-access arrangements), among others. As such, using traditional discounted-cash-flow (DCF) methodologies such as the net present value (NPV) might not adequately value the embedded options that these uncertainties create, leading to a rejection of the investment decision. Hence, we assess if the valuation differs if valued by the traditional DCF approach compared with ROA. We develop a valuation model for the traditional DCF and real options and specifically model the flexibility in the options to delay, abandon, or expand the field anytime during the relinquishment requirement period considering these multiple uncertainties. The binomial lattice and later the Black and Scholes models are used to model the options because of the flexibility they provide in incorporating early exercise. The results indicate that the DCF values lag those of the option values for the deferral and expansion options. In contrast, the abandonment option exhibited only a marginal change with respect to the DCF value. A significant implication of this finding is that management decision making will be better off considering these embedded options in their field-development and capital-investment choices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Spe Production & Operations
Spe Production & Operations 工程技术-工程:石油
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
54
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: SPE Production & Operations includes papers on production operations, artificial lift, downhole equipment, formation damage control, multiphase flow, workovers, stimulation, facility design and operations, water treatment, project management, construction methods and equipment, and related PFC systems and emerging technologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信