IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Development and application of a cost-benefit framework for energy reliability: Using probabilistic methods in network planning and regulation to enhance social welfare: The N-1 rule

  • de Nooij, Michiel
  • Baarsma, Barbara
  • Bloemhof, Gabriël
  • Slootweg, Han
  • Dijk, Harold

Although electricity is crucial to many activities in developed societies, guaranteeing a maximum reliability of supply to end-users is extremely costly. This situation gives rise to a trade-off between the costs and benefits of reliability. The Dutch government has responded to this trade-off by changing the rule stipulating that electricity networks must be able to maintain supply even if one component fails (known as the N-1 rule), even in maintenance situations. This rule was changed by adding the phrase "unless the costs exceed the benefits." We have developed a cost-benefit framework for the implementation and application of this new rule. The framework requires input on failure probability, the cost of supply interruptions to end-users and the cost of investments. A case study of the Dutch grid shows that the method is indeed practicable and that it is highly unlikely that N-1 during maintenance will enhance welfare in the Netherlands. Therefore, including the limitation "unless the costs exceed the benefits" in the rule has been a sensible policy for the Netherlands, and would also be a sensible policy for other countries.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Economics.

Volume (Year): 32 (2010)
Issue (Month): 6 (November)
Pages: 1277-1282

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:32:y:2010:i:6:p:1277-1282
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:32:y:2010:i:6:p:1277-1282. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.