IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipe/ipetds/0126.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Timing of Development and the Optimal Production Scale: a Real Option Approach to Oilfield E&P

Author

Listed:
  • Katia Rocha
  • Marco Antonio Guimarães Dias
  • José Paulo Teixeira

Abstract

Petroleum exploration in Brazil is performed throughout a bidding process coordinated by the National Petroleum Agency (NPA), where the exploration and production (E&P) firms need to evaluate concessions performing financial and economic analyses routinely. Since oil is a public resource with economic and strategic value for the country, the governmental agency should have control over the financial and economic pricing techniques. The E&P firm holds the investment opportunity to develop a delineated oilfield. The oilfield development investment plan shall be presented to NPA until a specific date or the oilfield rights returns back to NPA. The oilfield can be developed up to a specific time through three mutually exclusive alternatives representing the oilfield production and exploration scale. The developed oilfield is proportional to the price of oil, which evolves according to a stochastic differential equation. The E&P firm considers three mutually exclusive alternatives of scale to exploit the oilfield, with different investment costs. The investment opportunity is analogous to an American call option with finite time to maturity and payoff equal to that of the developed oilfield (underlying asset) minus the development cost of the optimal alternative (exercise price). We obtain the investment opportunity value and the optimal development rule for the oilfield, i.e., the optimal development timing and the optimal production scale as function of the current oil price and the economic uncertainty of the market. A exploração de campos de petróleo no Brasil é realizada mediante um processo de licitação de blocos pela Agência Nacional de Petróleo (ANP), nos quais os concessionários utilizam diversas técnicas financeiras e econômicas para o apreçamento dos ativos em questão. Sendo esses recursos bens públicos e de fundamental valor econômico e estratégico para o país, cabe à agência governamental ter o domínio e controle necessários para compreender a análise de viabilidade econômica de seus ativos públicos, visando a uma eficiência maior e melhor nesse processo. A firma de exploração e produção (E&P), ganhadora do processo de concessão, detém a opção de desenvolver um campo de petróleo já delimitado. O plano de desenvolvimento do campo deve ser apresentado à ANP até uma data específica, ou os direitos de exploração retornam à agência. A firma de E&P considera três alternativas mutuamente exclusivas de diferentes custos de investimento para explorar o campo, que representam a escala de produção desse campo. O valor do campo desenvolvido é proporcional ao preço do óleo que evolui segundo uma equação diferencial estocástica. A oportunidade de investimento no desenvolvimento do campo é análoga a uma opção americana finita cujo payoff é o valor do campo desenvolvido (valor do ativo), subtraído do custo da alternativa ótima de desenvolvimento (preço de exercício). Obtemos o valor da oportunidade de investimento e a regra ótima de desenvolvimento do campo, ou seja, o momento ótimo de desenvolvimento e a escala ótima de produção como função do preço corrente do óleo e de sua incerteza de mercado.

Suggested Citation

  • Katia Rocha & Marco Antonio Guimarães Dias & José Paulo Teixeira, 2015. "The Timing of Development and the Optimal Production Scale: a Real Option Approach to Oilfield E&P," Discussion Papers 0126, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
  • Handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:0126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/TDs/ingles/dp_126.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Majd, Saman & Pindyck, Robert S., 1987. "Time to build, option value, and investment decisions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 7-27, March.
    2. Octavio A. F. Tourinho., 1979. "The Option Value of Reserves of Natural Resources," Research Program in Finance Working Papers 94, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Robert C. Merton, 2005. "Theory of rational option pricing," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Sudipto Bhattacharya & George M Constantinides (ed.), Theory Of Valuation, chapter 8, pages 229-288, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. James L. Paddock & Daniel R. Siegel & James L. Smith, 1988. "Option Valuation of Claims on Real Assets: The Case of Offshore Petroleum Leases," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(3), pages 479-508.
    5. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    6. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    7. Paul G. Bradley, 1998. "On the Use of Modern Asset Pricing for Comparing Alternative Royalty Systems for Petroleum Development Projects," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 47-81.
    8. Brennan, Michael J. & Schwartz, Eduardo S., 1978. "Finite Difference Methods and Jump Processes Arising in the Pricing of Contingent Claims: A Synthesis," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 461-474, September.
    9. Malcolm P. Baker & E. Scott Mayfield & John E. Parsons, 1998. "Alternative Models of Uncertain Commodity Prices for Use with Modern Asset Pricing Methods," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 115-148.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lander, Diane M. & Pinches, George E., 1998. "Challenges to the Practical Implementation of Modeling and Valuing Real Options," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(3, Part 2), pages 537-567.
    2. Philipp N. Baecker, 2007. "Real Options and Intellectual Property," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-48264-2, February.
    3. Collan, Mikael, 2004. "Giga-Investments: Modelling the Valuation of Very Large Industrial Real Investments," MPRA Paper 4328, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Marco Antonio Guimaraes Dias & Jose Paulo Teixeira, 2010. "Continuous-Time Option Games: Review of Models and Extensions," Multinational Finance Journal, Multinational Finance Journal, vol. 14(3-4), pages 219-254, September.
    5. Chen, Yu-Fu & Zoega, Gylfi, 2010. "An essay on the generational effect of employment protection," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 349-359, May.
    6. Suresh M. Sundaresan, 2000. "Continuous‐Time Methods in Finance: A Review and an Assessment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1569-1622, August.
    7. Martins, José & Marques, Rui Cunha & Cruz, Carlos Oliveira, 2014. "Maximizing the value for money of PPP arrangements through flexibility: An application to airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 72-80.
    8. Carlos de Lamare Bastian-Pinto & Alexandre Paula Silva Ramos & Luiz de Magalhães Ozorio & Luiz Eduardo Teixeira Brandão, 2015. "Uncertainty and Flexibility in the Brazilian Beef Livestock Sector: the Value of the Confinement Option," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 12(6), pages 100-120, November.
    9. Moyen, Nathalie & Slade, Margaret & Uppal, Raman, 1996. "Valuing risk and flexibility : A comparison of methods," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1-2), pages 63-74.
    10. Schachter, J.A. & Mancarella, P., 2016. "A critical review of Real Options thinking for valuing investment flexibility in Smart Grids and low carbon energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 261-271.
    11. Michele Moretto & Chiara D’Alpaos, 2004. "The Value of Flexibility in the Italian Water Service Sector: A Real Option Analysis," Working Papers 2004.140, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Lambrecht, Bart M., 2017. "Real options in finance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 166-171.
    13. Fleten, Stein-Erik & Linnerud, Kristin & Molnár, Peter & Tandberg Nygaard, Maria, 2016. "Green electricity investment timing in practice: Real options or net present value?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(P1), pages 498-506.
    14. Carlos Andrés Zapata Quimbayo, 2020. "OPCIONES REALES Una guía teórico-práctica para la valoración de inversiones bajo incertidumbre mediante modelos en tiempo discreto y simulación de Monte Carlo," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 138, February.
    15. Fernandes, Bartolomeu & Cunha, Jorge & Ferreira, Paula, 2011. "The use of real options approach in energy sector investments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(9), pages 4491-4497.
    16. Beatriz Mota Aragón, 2011. "Capital Investments and Real Options: New Proposals," Revista de Administración, Finanzas y Economía (Journal of Management, Finance and Economics), Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Ciudad de México, vol. 5(1), pages 65-76.
    17. Kim, Amy M. & Li, Huanan, 2020. "Incorporating the impacts of climate change in transportation infrastructure decision models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 271-287.
    18. Guedes, José & Santos, Pedro, 2016. "Valuing an offshore oil exploration and production project through real options analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 377-386.
    19. Panagiotidis, Theodore & Printzis, Panagiotis, 2020. "What is the investment loss due to uncertainty?," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    20. Santos, Lúcia & Soares, Isabel & Mendes, Carla & Ferreira, Paula, 2014. "Real Options versus Traditional Methods to assess Renewable Energy Projects," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 588-594.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ipe:ipetds:0126. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Fabio Schiavinatto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipeaabr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.