IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i3p1764-1773.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of counter-trading on competition in electricity markets

Author

Listed:
  • Dijk, Justin
  • Willems, Bert

Abstract

In a competitive electricity market, nodal pricing is the most efficient way to manage congestion. Counter-trading is inefficient as it gives the wrong long term signals for entry and exit of power plants. However, in a non-competitive market, additional entry will improve the competitiveness of the market, and will increase social benefit by reducing price-cost margins. This paper studies whether the potential pro-competitive entry effects could make counter-trading more efficient than nodal pricing. We find that this is unlikely to be the case, and expect counter-trading to have a negative effect on overall welfare. The potential benefits of additional competition (more competitive prices and lower production cost) do not outweigh the distortions (additional investment cost for the entrant, and socialization of the congestion cost to final consumers).

Suggested Citation

  • Dijk, Justin & Willems, Bert, 2011. "The effect of counter-trading on competition in electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1764-1773, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:3:p:1764-1773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(11)00018-8
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oren, Shmuel S. & Spiller, Pablo T. & Varaiya, Pravin & Wu, Felix, 1995. "Nodal prices and transmission rights: A critical appraisal," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 24-35, April.
    2. Kupper, G. & Willems, Bert, 2007. "Arbitrage in Energy Markets : Competing in the Incumbent's Shadow," Discussion Paper 2007-094, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Bert Willems & Gerd Kupper, 2010. "Arbitrage in Energy Markets: Price Discrimination under Congestion," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 41-66.
    4. Stoft, Steven, 1997. "Transmission pricing zones: simple or complex?," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 24-31.
    5. Swinand, Gregory & Scully, Derek & Ffoulkes, Stuart & Kessler, Brian, 2010. "Modeling EU Electricity Market Competition Using the Residual Supply Index," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(9), pages 41-50, November.
    6. Severin Borenstein & James. Bushnell & Steven Stoft, 2000. "The Competitive Effects of Transmission Capacity in A Deregulated Electricity Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(2), pages 294-325, Summer.
    7. Green, Richard, 2003. "Failing electricity markets: should we shoot the pools?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 155-167, September.
    8. Hogan, William W, 1992. "Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 211-242, September.
    9. M. Bjørndal & K. Jørnsten & V. Pignon, 2003. "Congestion management in the Nordic power market - counter purchases and zonal pricing," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 4(3), pages 271-293, September.
    10. Ventosa, Mariano & Baillo, Alvaro & Ramos, Andres & Rivier, Michel, 2005. "Electricity market modeling trends," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 897-913, May.
    11. Neuhoff, Karsten & Barquin, Julian & Boots, Maroeska G. & Ehrenmann, Andreas & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Rijkers, Fieke A.M. & Vazquez, Miguel, 2005. "Network-constrained Cournot models of liberalized electricity markets: the devil is in the details," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 495-525, May.
    12. Ehrenmann, Andreas & Smeers, Yves, 2005. "Inefficiencies in European congestion management proposals," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 135-152, June.
    13. Richard Green, 2007. "Nodal pricing of electricity: how much does it cost to get it wrong?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 125-149, April.
    14. Richard Gilbert & Karsten Neuhoff & David Newbery, 2004. "Allocating Transmission to Mitigate Market Power in Electricity Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 691-709, Winter.
    15. Lijesen, Mark G., 2007. "The real-time price elasticity of electricity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 249-258, 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. Blázquez De Paz, Mario, 2017. "Production or Transmission Investments? A Comparative Analysis," Working Paper Series 1158, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Georgios Petropoulos & Bert Willems, 2016. "Providing efficient network access to green power generators: A long-term property rights perspective," Working Papers 17317, Bruegel.
    3. Friedrich Kunz, 2013. "Improving Congestion Management: How to Facilitate the Integration of Renewable Generation in Germany," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4).
    4. Han, Jinil & Papavasiliou, Anthony, 2015. "Congestion management through topological corrections: A case study of Central Western Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 470-482.
    5. Holmberg, Pär & Lazarczyk, Ewa, 2012. "Congestion Management in Electricity Networks: Nodal, Zonal and Discriminatory Pricing," Working Paper Series 915, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    6. Bjørndal, Endre & Bjørndal, Mette & Rud, Linda & Alangi, Somayeh Rahimi, 2017. "Market Power Under Nodal and Zonal Congestion Management Techniques," Discussion Papers 2017/14, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    7. repec:eee:energy:v:138:y:2017:i:c:p:1042-1055 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Christine Brandstätt & Gert Brunekreeft & Nele Friedrichsen, 2011. "Improving Investment Coordination in Electricity Networks Through Smart Contracts," Bremen Energy Working Papers 0010, Bremen Energy Research.

    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:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:3:p:1764-1773. 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/enpol .

    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.