Scenario Comparison Analysis
DOWNSIDE · BASE CASE · UPSIDE — Side-by-side KPI comparison with variance analysis · All values recalculate from live assumptions
DOWNSIDE
Selling Price₹7,000/t
Yr1 Utilisation55%
Steady Util80%
RM Cost₹3,000/t
Project IRR46.5%
NPV @14%₹14.2 Cr
BASE CASE
Selling Price₹8,000/t
Yr1 Utilisation75%
Steady Util95%
RM Cost₹2,500/t
Project IRR108.9%
NPV @14%₹39.1 Cr
UPSIDE
Selling Price₹9,000/t
Yr1 Utilisation85%
Steady Util100%
RM Cost₹2,200/t
Project IRR184.5%
NPV @14%₹61.1 Cr
Full KPI Comparison — All Scenarios with Variance Analysis
Delta % shown relative to Base Case · Green = favourable · Red = adverse
Year 2 Financial Performance — Scenario Comparison
Revenue · EBITDA · PAT · FCF · ₹ Crores
Downside Risk Assessment
- ▸IRR drops to 46.5% — still above 10% floor
- ▸NPV: ₹14.2 Cr — positive, project viable
- ▸Mitigate via offtake contracts and RM cost hedging
- ▸DSCR: 3.53x — above lender covenant
Base Case — Bankable
- ▸IRR: 108.9% — strong return on capital
- ▸NPV: ₹39.1 Cr — significant value creation
- ▸Conservative assumptions — no carbon credits, no solar
- ▸DSCR: 9.58x — comfortably above 1.5x
Upside Scenario
- ▸IRR: 184.5% — highly attractive
- ▸NPV: ₹61.1 Cr — exceptional value
- ▸Achievable with NTPC/TPP offtake + feedstock management
- ▸Carbon credits (₹3–5 Cr/yr) remain additional upside