IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v237y2014i2p389-403.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electricity swing option pricing by stochastic bilevel optimization: A survey and new approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Kovacevic, Raimund M.
  • Pflug, Georg Ch.

Abstract

We demonstrate how the problem of determining the ask price for electricity swing options can be considered as a stochastic bilevel program with asymmetric information. Unlike as for financial options, there is no way for basing the pricing method on no-arbitrage arguments. Two main situations are analyzed: if the seller has strong market power he/she might be able to maximize his/her utility, while in fully competitive situations he/she will just look for a price which makes profit and has acceptable risk. In both cases the seller has to consider the decision problem of a potential buyer – the valuation problem of determining a fair value for a specific option contract – and anticipate the buyer’s optimal reaction to any proposed strike price. We also discuss some methods for finding numerical solutions of stochastic bilevel problems with a special emphasis on using duality gap penalizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kovacevic, Raimund M. & Pflug, Georg Ch., 2014. "Electricity swing option pricing by stochastic bilevel optimization: A survey and new approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 389-403.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:237:y:2014:i:2:p:389-403
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.12.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221713010138
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Calvete, Herminia I. & Gale, Carmen & Mateo, Pedro M., 2008. "A new approach for solving linear bilevel problems using genetic algorithms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 14-28, July.
    2. Dempe, Stephan & Kalashnikov, Vyacheslav V. & Pérez-Valdés, Gerardo A. & Kalashnykova, Nataliya I., 2011. "Natural gas bilevel cash-out problem: Convergence of a penalty function method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(3), pages 532-538, December.
    3. Hendrik Bessembinder & Michael L. Lemmon, 2002. "Equilibrium Pricing and Optimal Hedging in Electricity Forward Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1347-1382, June.
    4. Möst, Dominik & Keles, Dogan, 2010. "A survey of stochastic modelling approaches for liberalised electricity markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 543-556, December.
    5. Thompson, Andrew C., 1995. "Valuation of Path-Dependent Contingent Claims with Multiple Exercise Decisions over Time: The Case of Take-or-Pay," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(02), pages 271-293, June.
    6. repec:spr:compst:v:71:y:2010:i:1:p:1-45 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Patrick Jaillet & Ehud I. Ronn & Stathis Tompaidis, 2004. "Valuation of Commodity-Based Swing Options," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(7), pages 909-921, July.
    8. Ibáñez, Alfredo & Zapatero, Fernando, 2004. "Monte Carlo Valuation of American Options through Computation of the Optimal Exercise Frontier," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(02), pages 253-275, June.
    9. N. Meinshausen & B. M. Hambly, 2004. "Monte Carlo Methods For The Valuation Of Multiple-Exercise Options," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 557-583.
    10. Hans FÃllmer & Peter Leukert, 1999. "Quantile hedging," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 251-273.
    11. Longstaff, Francis A & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 2001. "Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least-Squares Approach," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt43n1k4jb, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    12. Longstaff, Francis A & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 2001. "Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least-Squares Approach," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 113-147.
    13. Kalashnikov, Vyacheslav V. & Pérez-Valdés, Gerardo A. & Tomasgard, Asgeir & Kalashnykova, Nataliya I., 2010. "Natural gas cash-out problem: Bilevel stochastic optimization approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(1), pages 18-33, October.
    14. Yao, Jian & Oren, Shmuel S. & Adler, Ilan, 2007. "Two-settlement electricity markets with price caps and Cournot generation firms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1279-1296, September.
    15. Fleten, Stein-Erik & Kristoffersen, Trine Krogh, 2007. "Stochastic programming for optimizing bidding strategies of a Nordic hydropower producer," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 916-928, September.
    16. Dali Zhang & Huifu Xu & Yue Wu, 2010. "A two stage stochastic equilibrium model for electricity markets with two way contracts," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 71(1), pages 1-45, February.
    17. Pflug, Georg C. & Broussev, Nikola, 2009. "Electricity swing options: Behavioral models and pricing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1041-1050, September.
    18. Rocha, Paula & Kuhn, Daniel, 2012. "Multistage stochastic portfolio optimisation in deregulated electricity markets using linear decision rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 397-408.
    19. Christopher Dance & Alexei Gaivoronski, 2012. "Stochastic optimization for real time service capacity allocation under random service demand," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 193(1), pages 221-253, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andreani, R. & Júdice, J.J. & Martínez, J.M. & Martini, T., 2016. "Feasibility problems with complementarity constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 41-54.

    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:eee:ejores:v:237:y:2014:i:2:p:389-403. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.