IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bei/00bewp/0002.html

Social Cost Benefit Analysis of Interconnector Investment: A Critical Appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Michiel de Nooij

Abstract

Some, like the European commission, claim that Europe needs more transmission capacity and interconnectors. This paper studies interconnector investment decisions from the perspective of a social cost benefit analysis (maximising total welfare in a country). For two European decisions to build an interconnector (NorNed and the East West Interconnector) the analysis underlying the decisions is discussed in detail, and will be compared with lessons from theory and decisions made in other jurisdictions (Nordel, California and Australia). The key findings are that (i) it is unclear how much demand for transmission capacity and interconnectors there actually is, and thus how large the benefits of investing will be. (ii) Both studies analyzed are not correct. Main criticism includes that they do not take the reaction of producers to new interconnection capacity into account; ignore part of the potential benefits of more competition; and make a strange assumption with respect to discounting. (iii) Decisions in Europe are taken very differently, leading to situations in which approval of an investment might depend on who has to approve. (iv) Therefore, it is unlikely that interconnector and transmission investment decisions in Europe currently are maximizing social welfare. Some lessons for future cost benefit analysis are drawn.

Suggested Citation

  • Michiel de Nooij, 2010. "Social Cost Benefit Analysis of Interconnector Investment: A Critical Appraisal," Bremen Energy Working Papers 0002, Bremen Energy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:bei:00bewp:0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511001418
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    2. Thomas-Olivier Léautier & Véronique Thelen, 2009. "Optimal expansion of the power transmission grid: why not?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 127-153, October.
    3. Stephen H. Sosnick, 1958. "A Critique of Concepts of Workable Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 72(3), pages 380-423.
    4. Malaguzzi Valeri, Laura, 2009. "Welfare and competition effects of electricity interconnection between Ireland and Great Britain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4679-4688, November.
    5. Tanaka, Makoto, 2009. "Transmission-constrained oligopoly in the Japanese electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 690-701, September.
    6. Turvey, R., 2000. "Infrastructure access pricing and lumpy investments," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 207-218, December.
    7. 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. de Nooij, Michiel, 2011. "Social cost-benefit analysis of electricity interconnector investment: A critical appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3096-3105, June.
    2. McInerney, Celine & Bunn, Derek, 2013. "Valuation anomalies for interconnector transmission rights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 565-578.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Nooij, Michiel, 2011. "Social cost-benefit analysis of electricity interconnector investment: A critical appraisal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3096-3105, June.
    2. Jacques Pelkmans & Lionel Kapff, 2010. "Interconnector Investment for a Well-functioning Internal Market. What EU regime of regulatory incentives?," Bruges European Economic Research Papers 18, European Economic Studies Department, College of Europe.
    3. Stephen Littlechild, 2012. "Merchant and regulated transmission: theory, evidence and policy," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 308-335, December.
    4. Anette Boom, 2012. "Vertikale Entflechtung in der Stromwirtschaft," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(1), pages 57-71.
    5. Nardi, Paolo, 2012. "Transmission network unbundling and grid investments: Evidence from the UCTE countries," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 50-58.
    6. Lisandra Flach & Fabian Gräf, 2020. "The impact of trade agreements on world export prices," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 168-208, February.
    7. Fernández-Val, Iván & Weidner, Martin, 2016. "Individual and time effects in nonlinear panel models with large N, T," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 291-312.
    8. Jang, Heesun & Du, Xiaodong, 2013. "Price- and Policy-Induced Innovations: The Case of U.S. Biofuel," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-13.
    9. Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2015. "Do Private Equity Owned Firms Have Better Management Practices?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 442-446, May.
    10. Rik Rozendaal, 2025. "Market Power, Innovation, and the Green Transition," CESifo Working Paper Series 11938, CESifo.
    11. Herrmann, Roland & Schröck, Rebecca, 2011. "Determinanten des Innovationserfolgs: eine Analyse mit Scannerdaten für den deutschen Joghurtmarkt," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 60(03), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Liliana Meza-González & Jaime Marie Sepulveda, 2019. "The impact of competition with China in the US market on innovation in Mexican manufacturing firms," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Patrick Legros & Andrew F. Newman & Eugenio Proto, 2014. "Smithian Growth through Creative Organization," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 796-811, December.
    15. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    16. Marwil J. Dávila-Fernández, 2019. "Manufacture Content and Financialisation: An Empirical Assessment," Department of Economics University of Siena 811, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    17. Raymond De Bondt & Jan Vandekerckhove, 2012. "Reflections on the Relation Between Competition and Innovation," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 7-19, March.
    18. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    19. Sánchez-Valadez, Manuel, 2012. "Decisiones financieras, competencia en el mercado y desempeño de las empresas: Evidencia empírica para Iberoamérica/Financial Decisions, Market Competition and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence for," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 30, pages 359(36)-359, Abril.
    20. Aurelien Portuese, 2020. "Beyond antitrust populism: Towards robust antitrust," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 237-258, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • H54 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Infrastructures

    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:bei:00bewp:0002. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anna Pechan (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://bremen-energy-research.de/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.