IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v25y2004i1p5-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two-settlement Systems for Electricity Markets under Network Uncertainty and Market Power

Author

Listed:
  • Rajnish Kamat

    ()

  • Shmuel Oren

    ()

Abstract

We analyze welfare and distributional properties of a two-settlement system consisting of a spot market over a two-node network and a single energy forward contract. We formulate and analyze several models which simulate joint dispatch of energy and transmission resources coordinated by a system operator. The spot market is subject to network uncertainty, which we model as a random capacity derating of an important transmission line. Using a duopoly model, we show that even for small probabilities of congestion (derating), forward trading may be substantially reduced, and the market power mitigating effect of forward markets (as shown in Allaz and Vila 1993) may be nullified to a great extent. There is a spot transmission charge reflecting transportation costs from location of generation to a designated hub whose price is the underlying for the forward contract. This alleviates some of the incentive problems associated with the forward market in which spot-market trading is residual. We find that the reduction in forward trading is due to the segregation of the markets in the constrained state, and the absence of natural incentives for generators to commit to more aggressive behavior in the spot market (the “strategic substitutes” effect). In our analysis, we find that the standard assumption of “no-arbitrage” across forward and spot markets leads to very little contract coverage, even for the case with no congestion. We present an alternative view of the market where limited intertemporal arbitrage enables temporal price discrimination by competing duopolists. In this framework, we assume that all of the demand shows up in the forward market (or that the market is cleared against an accurate forecast of the demand), and the forward price is determined using a “market clearing” condition. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Suggested Citation

  • Rajnish Kamat & Shmuel Oren, 2004. "Two-settlement Systems for Electricity Markets under Network Uncertainty and Market Power," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 5-37, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:regeco:v:25:y:2004:i:1:p:5-37
    DOI: 10.1023/B:REGE.0000008653.08554.81
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/B:REGE.0000008653.08554.81
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Hung-po Chao & Stephen Peck, 1997. "An Institutional Design for an Electricity Contract Market with Central Dispatch," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 85-110.
    2. Wu, D. J. & Kleindorfer, P. R. & Zhang, Jin E., 2002. "Optimal bidding and contracting strategies for capital-intensive goods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(3), pages 657-676, March.
    3. Shmuel S. Oren, 1997. "Economic Inefficiency of Passive Transmission Rights in Congested Electricity Systems with Competitive Generation," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 63-83.
    4. Johnson, Raymond B. & Oren, Shmuel S. & Svoboda, Alva J., 1997. "Equity and efficiency of unit commitment in competitive electricity markets," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 9-19, March.
    5. Bolle, Friedel, 2001. "Competition with supply and demand functions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 253-277, May.
    6. Hogan, William W, 1992. "Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 211-242, September.
    7. Green, Richard J, 1996. "Increasing Competition in the British Electricity Spot Market," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 205-216, June.
    8. Borenstein, Severin & Bushnell, James, 1999. "An Empirical Analysis of the Potential for Market Power in California's Electricity Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 285-323, September.
    9. Bulow, Jeremy I & Geanakoplos, John D & Klemperer, Paul D, 1985. "Multimarket Oligopoly: Strategic Substitutes and Complements," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(3), pages 488-511, June.
    10. Catherine D. Wolfram, 1999. "Measuring Duopoly Power in the British Electricity Spot Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 805-826, September.
    11. Bo Andersson & Lars Bergman, 1995. "Market Structure and the Price of Electricity: An Ex Ante Analysis of the Deregulated Swedish Electricity Market," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 97-110.
    12. SMEERS, Yves, 1997. "Computable equilibrium models and the restructuring of the European electricity and gas markets," CORE Discussion Papers 1997061, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    13. Bolle, Friedel, 1992. "Supply function equilibria and the danger of tacit collusion : The case of spot markets for electricity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 94-102, April.
    14. Yves Smeers, 1997. "Computable Equilibrium Models and the Restructuring of the European Electricity and Gas Markets," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 1-31.
    15. David M. Newbery, 1995. "Power Markets and Market Power," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 39-66.
    16. Harker, Patrick T., 1991. "Generalized Nash games and quasi-variational inequalities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 81-94, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Steven L. Puller, 2007. "Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 75-87, February.
    19. García-Díaz, Antón & Marín Uribe, Pedro Luis, 2000. "Strategic Bidding in Electricity Pools with Short-Lived Bids: An Application to the Spanish Market," CEPR Discussion Papers 2567, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Cardell, Judith B. & Hitt, Carrie Cullen & Hogan, William W., 1997. "Market power and strategic interaction in electricity networks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 109-137, March.
    21. Green, Richard J & Newbery, David M, 1992. "Competition in the British Electricity Spot Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(5), pages 929-953, October.
    22. Green, Richard, 1999. "The Electricity Contract Market in England and Wales," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 107-124, March.
    23. Bergman, Lars & Andersson, Bo, 1995. "Market Structure and the Price of Electricity: An ex ante Analysis of the deregulated Swedish Electricity Market," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 47, Stockholm School of Economics.
    24. Chao, Hung-Po & Peck, Stephen, 1996. "A Market Mechanism for Electric Power Transmission," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 25-59, July.
    25. Steven Stoft, 1999. "Financial Transmission Rights Meet Cournot: How TCCs Curb Market Power," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-23.
    26. Blumstein, Carl & Bushnell, James, 1994. "A guide to the blue book: Issues in California's electric industry restructuring and reform," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 7(7), pages 18-29, September.
    27. Rothkopf, Michael H., 1999. "Daily Repetition: A Neglected Factor in the Analysis of Electricity Auctions," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 60-70, April.
    28. Bushnell, James & Wolfram, Catherine, 2008. "Electricity Markets," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31547, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    29. Severin Borenstein & James B. Bushnell & Frank A. Wolak, 2002. "Measuring Market Inefficiencies in California's Restructured Wholesale Electricity Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1376-1405, December.
    30. Chao, Hung-po & Peck, Stephen & Oren, Shmuel & Wilson, Robert, 2000. "Flow-Based Transmission Rights and Congestion Management," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 38-58, October.
    31. Klemperer, Paul D & Meyer, Margaret A, 1989. "Supply Function Equilibria in Oligopoly under Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1243-1277, November.
    32. Aleksandr Rudkevich & Max Duckworth & Richard Rosen, 1998. "Modeling Electricity Pricing in a Deregulated Generation Industry: The Potential for Oligopoly Pricing in a Poolco," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 19-48.
    33. Budhraja, Vikram & Woolf, Fiona, 1994. "POOLCO: An independent power pool company for an efficient power market," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 7(7), pages 42-47, September.
    34. Powell, Andrew, 1993. "Trading Forward in an Imperfect Market: The Case of Electricity in Britain," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(417), pages 444-453, 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. Miguel Vazquez, 2012. "Analysis of the strategic use of forward contracting in electricity markets," RSCAS Working Papers 2012/13, European University Institute.
    2. van Koten, Silvester & Ortmann, Andreas, 2013. "Structural versus behavioral remedies in the deregulation of electricity markets: An experimental investigation motivated by policy concerns," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 256-265.
    3. Le Coq, Chloe & Orzen, Henrik, 2006. "Do forward markets enhance competition?: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 415-431, November.
    4. Boffa, Federico & Pingali, Viswanath & Vannoni, Davide, 2010. "Increasing market interconnection: An analysis of the Italian electricity spot market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 311-322, May.
    5. SMEERS, Yves, 2005. "How well can one measure market power in restructured electricity systems ?," CORE Discussion Papers 2005050, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Haikel Khalfallah & Vincent Rious, 2013. "A game theoretical analysis of the design options of the real-time electricity market," Post-Print halshs-00816355, HAL.
    7. Dressler, Luisa, 2016. "Support schemes for renewable electricity in the European Union: Producer strategies and competition," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 186-196.
    8. MURPHY, Frederic & SMEERS, Yves, 2005. "Forward markets may not decrease market power when capacities are endogenous," CORE Discussion Papers 2005028, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    9. Sertaç Oruç & Scott Cunningham, 2014. "Transmission Rights to the Electrical Transmission Grid in the Post Liberalization Era," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 5(4), pages 686-705, December.
    10. Boffa, Federico & Pingali, Viswanath & Vannoni, Davide, 2010. "Increasing market interconnection: An analysis of the Italian electricity spot market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 311-322, May.
    11. repec:spr:annopr:v:258:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-016-2222-4 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:kap:regeco:v:25:y:2004:i:1:p:5-37. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.