The Convergence of Market Designs for Adequate Generating Capacity
This paper compares market designs intended to solve the resource adequacy (RA) problem, and finds that, in spite of rivalrous claims, the most advanced designs have nearly converged. The original dichotomy between approaches based on long-term energy contracts and those based on short-term capacity markets spawned two design tracks. Long-term contracts led to call-option obligations which provide market-power control and the ability to strengthen performance incentives, but this approach fails to replace the missing money at the root of the adequacy problem. Hogan’s energy-only market fills this gap. On the other track, the short-term capacity markets (ICAP) spawned long-term capacity market designs. In 2004, ISO New England proposed a short-term market with hedged performance incentives essentially based on high spot prices. In 2005 we developed for New England a forward capacity market with load obligated to purchase a target level of capacity covered by an energy call option. The two tracks have now converged on two conclusions: (1) High real-time energy prices should provide performance incentives. (2) High energy prices should be hedged with call options. We argue that two more conclusions are needed: (3) Capacity targets rather than high and volatile spot prices should guide investment, and (4) long-term physically based options should be purchased in a forward market for capacity. The result will be that adequacy is maintained, performance incentives are restored, market power and risks are reduced from present levels, and prices are hedged down to a level below the present price cap.
|Date of creation:||2006|
|Date of revision:||2006|
|Publication status:||Published in Working Paper, University of Maryland, April 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Economics Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7211|
Phone: (202) 318-0520
Fax: (202) 318-0520
Web page: http://www.cramton.umd.edu
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Peter Cramton & Steven Stoft, 2005.
"A Capacity Market that Makes Sense,"
Papers of Peter Cramton
05licap, University of Maryland, Department of Economics - Peter Cramton, revised 2005.
- Joskow, P. & Tirole, J., 2004.
"Reliability and Competitive Electricity Markets,"
Cambridge Working Papers in Economics
0450, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Paul Joskow & Jean Tirole, 2004. "Reliability and Competitive Electricity Markets," Working Papers 0408, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
- Joskow, Paul & Tirole, Jean, 2004. "Reliability and Competitive Electricity Markets," IDEI Working Papers 310, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- Joskow, Paul L & Tirole, Jean, 2007. "Reliability and Competitive Electricity Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 6121, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Paul L. Joskow & Jean Tirole, 2004. "Reliability and Competitive Electricity Markets," NBER Working Papers 10472, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bushnell, James, 2005. "Electricity Resource Adequacy: Matching Policies and Goals," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(8), pages 11-21, October.
- Oren, Shmuel S., 2005. "Generation Adequacy via Call Options Obligations: Safe Passage to the Promised Land," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(9), pages 28-42, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pcc:pccumd:06mdfra. 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: (Peter Cramton)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.