IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2010-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gas Balancing Rules Must Take into Account the Trade-off between Offering Pipeline Transport and Pipeline Flexibility in Liberalized Gas Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Nico Keyaerts
  • Michelle Hallack
  • Jean-Michel Glachant
  • William D'haeseleer

Abstract

This paper analyses the value and cost of line-pack flexibility in liberalized gas markets through the examination of the techno-economic characteristics of gas transport pipelines and the trade-offs between the different ways to use the infrastructure: transport and flexibility. Line-pack flexibility is becoming increasingly important as a tool to balance gas supply and demand over different periods. In the European liberalized market context, a monopolist unbundled network operator offers regulated transport services and flexibility (balancing) services according to the network code and the balancing rules. Therefore, gas policy makers should understand the role and consequences of line-pack regulation. The analysis shows that the line-pack flexibility service has an important economic value for the shippers and the TSO. Furthermore, the analysis identifies distorting effects in the gas market due to inadequate regulation of line-pack flexibility: by disregarding the fixed cost of the flexibility in the balancing rules, the overall efficiency of the gas system is decreased. Because a full market based approach to line-pack pricing is unlikely, a framework is presented to calculate a cost reflective price for pipeline flexibility based on the trade-offs and opportunity costs between the right to use the linepack flexibility and the provision of transport services.

Suggested Citation

  • Nico Keyaerts & Michelle Hallack & Jean-Michel Glachant & William D'haeseleer, 2010. "Gas Balancing Rules Must Take into Account the Trade-off between Offering Pipeline Transport and Pipeline Flexibility in Liberalized Gas Markets," RSCAS Working Papers 2010/71, European University Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2010/71
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/14620/RSCAS_2010_71.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wallsten, Scott, 2005. "Returning to Victorian Competition, Ownership, and Regulation: An Empirical Study of European Telecommunications at the Turn of the Twentieth Century," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(03), pages 693-722, September.
    2. Josef C. Brada, 1996. "Privatization Is Transition--Or Is It?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 67-86, Spring.
    3. Bruno Biais & Enrico Perotti, 2002. "Machiavellian Privatization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 240-258, March.
    4. Perotti, Enrico C, 1995. "Credible Privatization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 847-859, September.
    5. Megginson, William Leon, 2005. "The Financial Economics of Privatization," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195150629.
    6. Jeffry M. Netter & William L. Megginson, 2001. "From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 321-389, June.
    7. Kay, J A & Thompson, D J, 1986. "Privatisation: A Policy in Search of a Rationale," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(381), pages 18-32, March.
    8. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gas flexibility; gas balancing rules; EU gas market;

    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:rsc:rsceui:2010/71. 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: (RSCAS web unit). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.