Fluent Essays

Energy calculation topic report, this is too hard for me, please help me out, and also explain it to me how did you make it. 1. please make sure you check those pics and understand all the requirements and are able to do it. 2. make sure that you know what is LCOE/IRR/Sensitivity analysis/NPV/WACC/Key risks/Energy unit conversion / risks analysis/capacity factor/ also make sure that you have an energy class experience 3. reported not just about writing, more important is the calculation, decision making, and evaluation. 4. an excel document is needed, for supporting this report.. 5. you have to start it right away, if you cant finish it in 12 hours please ignore this. 6. paper should be more than 8 pages 7, READ THROUGHT the requirement in the attachment BEFORE YOU WANT TO DO IT ! its hard as fuck, make sure you can do it confidently. Requirements: 8 pages Table 1 Element Grade 0\% 0\% - 50\% 50\% - 65\% 65\% - 75\% 75\% - 85\% 85\% - 100\% Score Oral Discussion Written Report Quality of Presentation (10 points) No attempt to address the task. Report lacks structure. Report does not adopt consistent formatting, or has more than fifteen spelling, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. Writing is not relevant. Little to no use of charts, tables or dot points to display information. Report has no Cover Letter. Report structure follows a basic structure but is difficult to follow. Report does not adopt consistent formatting, or has less than than fifteen spelling, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. Writing is generally relevant. Modest use of charts, tables or dot points to display information. Report follows a basic but logical structure. Report adopts mostly consistent formatting with less than ten spelling, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. Writing is relevant but not concise. Adequate use of charts, tables and dot points to display information. Report follows a professional structure. Report adopts clear and consistent formatting with less than three spelling, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. Writing is concise and relevant. Good use of charts, tables Report follows a professional structure and is esthetically pleasing. Report adopts clear and consistent formatting with zero spelling, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. Writing is elegant, concise and relevant. Excellent use of charts, tables and dot points to display information. Introduction and Methodology (10 points) No attempt to address the task. Introduction and methodology are inadequate, showing no understanding of contextual factors. Information is incorrect. Introduction and methodology are poor, showing a weak understanding of contextual factors. Information is partially correct, but with several flaws in assumptions and application. Introduction and methodology are adequate, showing a basic understanding of contextual factors. Information is partially correct, but with some flaws in assumptions and application. Introduction and methodology are comprehensive, showing a good understanding of contextual factors and project pressures. Information is correct and exact to the necessary detail. Introduction and methodology are insightful, showing deep understanding of contextual factors and project pressures. Information is correct and exact to the necessary detail and used effectively to emphasise key points. Risk Assessment (10 points) No attempt to address the task. Risk Matrix draws no insight from contextual information, defining a flawed assessment system for risks. Risk Register covers almost no major risks. Less than 20 risks, of which only some are assessed correctly using the Risk Matrix. Controls are not specific or actionable, failing to provide solutions to mitigate risks. Residual risk scoring is not completed. Risk Matrix draws little insight from contextual information, defining a mostly logical assessment system for risks across some risk areas. Risk Register covers some major risks across some business processes and limited only to a few types of risks. Less than 30 risks specified, of which only some are assessed using the Risk Matrix. Controls are not specific or actionable, providing poor solutions to mitigate risks. Residual risk scoring is not logical and lacks consistency. Risk Matrix draws some insight from contextual information, defining a logical assessment system for risks across most risk areas. Risk Register covers all major risks and some minor risks across most business processes and risk types. A minimum of 30 specific risks which are mostly correctly assessed using the Risk Matrix. Most controls are specific and actionable, providing reasonable solutions to mitigate risks. Residual risk scoring is logical but not always consistent. Risk Matrix draws good insight from contextual information, defining a logical assessment system for risks across most risk areas. Risk Register is comprehensive covering major and minor risks across all business processes and risk types. A minimum of 40 specific risks which are mostly correctly assessed using the Risk Matrix. Controls are specific and actionable, providing reasonable solutions to mitigate risks. Residual risk scoring is logical. Risk Matrix is based on a clear and deep insight from contextual information, defining a logical assessment system for risks across all risk areas. Risk Register is comprehensive covering major and minor risks across all business processes and risk types. A minimum of 50 specific risks which are all correctly assessed using the Risk Matrix. Controls are specific, actionable and comprehensive, providing elegant solutions to mitigate risks. Residual risk scoring is logical and consistent. Financial Analysis (10 points) No attempt to address the task. Incorrect application of information on capital requirements. Little to research to support assumptions, or unreasonable assumptions used. Fiainacial incorrectly applied or significant economic factors ignored entirely. Outcomes (NPV, IRR, decision) incomplete or wildly incorrect. Partially correct application of information on capital requirements. Research partly supports assumptions for one or both cases, but is not comprehensive or is incorrect.Financial analysis incorrectly applied but significant economic factors considered. Outcomes (NPV, IRR, decision) incorrect but with some justification. Correct application of information on capital requirements. Research mostly supports assumptions. Financial analysis mostly applied correctly, with minor errors in formulas. Outcomes (NPV, IRR, decision) reasonable or believable, supporting a clear decision, with some justification. Correct application of information on capital requirements. Research supports all assumptions for both cases, where adopted values are reasonable and realistic. Financial analysis applied correctly, with no errors in formulas. Outcomes (NPV, IRR, decision) reasonable, supporting a clear decision with clear justification. Correct application of information on capital requirements, with critique on of level of realism. Research supports all assumptions for both cases, where adopted values are reasonable and realistic. Financial analysis applied correctly, with no errors in formulas. Sensitivity analysis applied correctly. Outcomes (NPV, IRR, decision) reasonable, supporting a clear decision with clear justification. Notes on next steps included with key points of risk identified. Synthesis (10 points) No attempt to address the task. Conclusions are not at all tied to outcomes of the financial and ESG analyses. Demonstrates no understanding of the issues and requirements of the reader. Conclusions vaguely relate to the financial and ESG analyses, but provide no depth on nuances of analysis. Future implications of Net Zero Emissions poilcy settings are unclear. Demonstrates a flawed understanding of the issues and requirements of the reader. Conclusions relate to the financial and ESG analyses with simple insights drawn. Statements on future implications of Net Zero Emissions poilcy settings but justifications less clear. Demonstrates an adequate understanding of the issues and requirements of the reader. Conclusions relate well to the financial and ESG analyses, with nuances and major risks addressed. Statements on future implications of Net Zero Emissions policy settings. Demonstrate a good understanding of the issues and requirements of the reader. Conclusions are entirely aligned to the ESG and financial analyses. Nuances and major risks are addressed. Clear and justifiable statements on future implications of Net Zero Emissions policy settings. Demonstrates a deep understanding of the issues and requirements of the reader. Total (Out of 55 Points) Comments: CB_DATA_ Crystal Ball Data ERROR:#NAME? Workbook Variables Last Var Column 0 Name: Value: Worksheet Data Last Data Column Used 2 Sheet Ref ERROR:#REF! ERROR:#REF! Sheet Guid f76f669b-f480-4b78-865d-be1b96689201 fe6ebf6c-4927-4d19-9592-97680211f9c4 Deleted sheet count Last row used 28 31 Data blocks CB_Block_0 CB_Block_7.0.0.0:1 … CB_DATA_ Crystal Ball Data ERROR:#NAME? Workbook Variables Last Var Column 0 Name: Value: Worksheet Data Last Data Column Used 2 Sheet Ref ERROR:#REF! ERROR:#REF! Sheet Guid f76f669b-f480-4b78-865d-be1b96689201 fe6ebf6c-4927-4d19-9592-97680211f9c4 Deleted sheet count Last row used 28 31 Data blocks CB_Block_0 CB_Block_7.0.0.0:1 …