IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bef/lsbest/016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investments in Electricity Generation Capacity under Different Market Structures with Price Responsive Demand

Author

Listed:
  • Anette Boom

    ()

Abstract

Investments in Generation Capacities by a social planner, by a monopolist and by two competing firms are compared when electricity demand is uncertain but price responsive. A unit price auction determines the electricity price when firms compete. Firms know the level of demand when they bid their capacities. With simultaneous capacity choices total capacities are always larger than with a monopoly if a subgame perfect equilibrium in pure strategies exists. With sequential capacity choices existence is always ensured and the aggregate capacity is smaller in the duopoly than with a monopolist if capacity costs are very low. Capacities always fall short of the socially efficient level.

Suggested Citation

  • Anette Boom, "undated". "Investments in Electricity Generation Capacity under Different Market Structures with Price Responsive Demand," Papers 016, Departmental Working Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:bef:lsbest:016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/%7Elsbester/papers/strom4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul L. Joskow, 2001. "California's Electricity Crisis," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 365-388.
    2. Castro-Rodriguez, Fidel & Marín, Pedro L. & Siotis, Georges, 2009. "Capacity choices in liberalised electricity markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2574-2581, July.
    3. Robert Wilson, 2002. "Architecture of Power Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 1299-1340, July.
    4. Reynolds, Stanley S. & Wilson, Bart J., 2000. "Bertrand-Edgeworth Competition, Demand Uncertainty, and Asymmetric Outcomes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 122-141, May.
    5. 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.
    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. 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.
    8. Joskow, Paul L & Tirole, Jean, 1999. "Transmission Rights and Market Power on Electric Power Networks I: Financial Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 2093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Klemperer, Paul D & Meyer, Margaret A, 1989. "Supply Function Equilibria in Oligopoly under Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1243-1277, November.
    10. Severin Borenstein & James Bushnell & Christopher R. Knittel & Catherine Wolfram, 2001. "Trading Inefficiencies in California's Electricity Markets," NBER Working Papers 8620, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Leautier, Thomas-Olivier, 2001. "Transmission Constraints and Imperfect Markets for Power," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 27-54, January.
    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. Boom, Anette & Buehler, Stefan, 2014. "Restructuring the Electricity Industry: Vertical Structure and the Risk of Rent Extraction," Working Papers 02-2014, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    2. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock, 2007. "Tacit collusion and capacity withholding in repeated uniform price auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(4), pages 1044-1069, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bef:lsbest:016. 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: (XXX). General contact details of provider: .

    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.