IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2011-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An American Model for the EU Gas Market?

Author

Listed:
  • Sergio Ascari

Abstract

It is generally believed that the American model is not suitable for Europe, yet North America is the only large and working competitive gas market in the world. The paper shows how its model could be adapted as a target for market design within the European institutional framework. It starts from analysis of the main peculiar economic features of the gas transportation industry, which should underpin any efficient model. After the Third Package is properly implemented the EU will share several building blocks of the American model: effective unbundling of transportation and supply; regulated tariffs which, for long distance transportation, are in fact largely related to capacity and distance; investments based mostly on industry’s initiative and resources, and the related decisions are increasingly made after open and public processes. Yet Europe needs to harmonize tariff regulation criteria, which could be achieved through a monitoring process. National separation of main investment decisions should be overcome, possibly by organising a common platform where market forces and public authorities interact with private suppliers to require existing and develop new capacity, whereas industry competitively offers its solutions. Such platform would allow for long term capacity reservation, subject to caps and congestion management provisions. Auctions and possibly market coupling would play an important role in the allocation of short term capacity but a limited one in long term. Market architecture and the organisation of hubs would also be developed mostly by market forces under regulatory oversight. The continental nature of the market suggests a likely concentration of trading in a very limited number of main markets, whereas minor markets would have a limited role and would be connected to major ones, with price differences reflecting transportation costs and market conditions. Excessive interference or pursuit of political goals in less than transparent ways involves the risk of slower liquidity development and higher market fragmentation. With this view as a background, regulatory work aimed at completing the European market should be based on ensuring the viability of interconnections between current markets and on the establishment of common platforms and co-ordinated tariff systems, fostering the conditions for upstream and transportation capacity development.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergio Ascari, 2011. "An American Model for the EU Gas Market?," RSCAS Working Papers 2011/39, European University Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2011/39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/18056/RSCAS_2011_39.pdf?sequence=1
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tanga McDaniel & Karsten Neuhoff, 2002. "Auctions to gas transmission access: The British experience," Working Papers EP06, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    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. Keyaerts, Nico & D'haeseleer, William, 2014. "Forum shopping for ex-post gas-balancing services," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 209-221.
    2. António Brandão & Joana Pinho & Joana Resende & Paula Sarmento & Isabel Soares, 2016. "Welfare effects of unbundling under different regulatory regimes in natural gas markets," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 15(2), pages 99-127, August.
    3. Christian Growitsch & Marcus Stronzik, 2014. "Ownership unbundling of natural gas transmission networks: empirical evidence," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 207-225, October.
    4. Miguel Vazquez & Michelle Hallack & Jean-Michel Glachant, 2012. "Designing the European Gas Market: More Liquid & Less Natural?," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).

    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. Fontini, Fulvio & Paloscia, Lorenzo, 2007. "The impact of the new investments in combined cycle gas turbine power plants on the Italian electricity price," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4671-4676, September.
    2. Gert Brunekreeft & David Newbery, 2006. "Should merchant transmission investment be subject to a must-offer provision?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 233-260, November.
    3. Tanga McDaniel & Andreas Nicklisch, 2004. "Prices as indicators of scarcity - an experimental study of a multistage auction," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2004-30, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    4. McDaniel, T., 2003. "Auctioning access to networks: evidence and expectations," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 33-38, March.
    5. Isa Hafalir & Hadi Yektaş, 2011. "Selling goods of unknown quality: forward versus spot auctions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(3), pages 245-256, September.
    6. Tanga McDaniel & Neuhoff, K., 2002. "Use of Long-term Auctions for Network Investment," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0213, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    7. Nicolas Boccard & Xavier Wauthy, 2006. "Quality Choice, Sales Restriction And The Mode Of Competition," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 74(1), pages 64-84, January.
    8. Machiel Mulder & Gijsbert Zwart, 2006. "Market failures and government policies in gas markets," CPB Memorandum 143, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. David Newbery & Tanga McDaniel, 2002. "Auctions and trading in energy markets - an economic analysis," Working Papers EP15, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hubs; infrastructure; target model; network tariffs; gas market design; capacity allocation;
    All these keywords.

    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:2011/39. 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    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.