Ex-ante dynamic network tariffs for transmission cost recovery

This paper proposes a novel tariff scheme and a new optimization framework in order to address the recovery of fixed investment costs in transmission network planning, particularly against rising demand elasticity. At the moment, ex-post network tariffs are utilized in addition to congestion revenues to fully recover network costs, which often leads to over/under fixed cost recovery, thus increasing the investment risk. Furthermore, in the case of agents with elastic market curves, ex-post tariffs can cause several inefficiencies, such as mistrustful bidding to exploit ex-post schemes, imperfect information in applied costs and cleared quantities, and negative surplus for marginal generators and consumers. These problems are exacerbated by the increasing price-elasticity of demand, caused for example by the diffusion of demand response technologies. To address these issues, we design a dynamic ex-ante tariff scheme that explicitly accounts for the effect of tariffs in the longterm network planning problem and in the underlying market clearing process. Using linearization techniques and a novel reformulation of the congestion rent, the long-term network planning problem is reformulated as a single mixed-integer linear problem which returns the combined optimal values of network expansion and associated tariffs, while accounting for price-elastic agents and lumpy investments. The advantages of the proposed approach in terms of cost recovery, market equilibrium and increased social welfare are discussed qualitatively and are validated in numerical case studies

Optimal Price Regulation for Natural and Legal Monopolies

Optimal price regulation for natural and legal monopolies is an impossible task. The still difficult .task of good price regulation can be systematized by considering separately price level and price structure of the regulated firm. Various methods of price level and price structure regulation are evaluated and then considered for the regulation of electricity transmission, both in the context of an independent transmission company and of vertical integration between transmission and most of the generation capacity. The regulatory approach suggested uses price caps defined on two-part tariffs. This way, flexibility for short-term capacity utilization can be combined with incentives for investments in new transmission capacity.

Regulatory tradeoffs in designing concession contracts for infrastructure networks

Network activities typically involve collecting a good or service (such as electric utilities, phone services, and rail transportation) from many producers or distributing them to many users. Producers and users are often widely scattered, geographically. Close financial integration of networks is justified on the basis of economies of scope and scale and the benefits from pooling and coordinating. In many countries, network operators are completely integrated publicly-owned firms (private firms being deemed insufficiently efficient or equitable). Challengers of this practice contend that the inefficiency resulting from lack of competition outweighs the gain from economic integration. With reform, some competitive mechanisms can be introduced even when monopoly seems the best option for delivering a service. But conflicts between policymakers'objectives -including efficiency, equity, speed, speed of reform, and signaling- influence the design of concession contracts for infrastructure network services (including communications and transportation services). Competition begins with the unbundling of various stages of delivery. Then competitive bidding is popular, with the public authority keeping property rights on productive assets but conceding their operation to a private firm. The winner gets the right to maximize profits, within limits (having to provide universal services, for example, and avoid price discrimination). In liberalizing the delivery of a service, policymakers must consider not only efficiency but also social and fiscal feasibility. The authors discuss how relevant information asymmetry is in contract design and the award and regulatory processes. They also discuss how to design pricing to accommodate the obligation to provide universal service. To illustrate, they describe Argentina's experiment in liberalization, which is increasingly viewed as a model for changing private sector and government involvement in infrastructure services. Beginning in 1989, Argentina began privatizing utilities and transport services, because the government had decided that it could no longer afford to subsidize those services or finance the investments needed for their effective operation. To introduce competition, the government unbundled services and introduced competitive bidding. It also created sector-specific regulatory agencies to protect consumers from private monopolies and to protect the private concessionaires from government micromanagement. Making concession-based reform and contracted-based regulation of private monopolists sustainable will require strengthening regulatory agencies, clarifying their terms of reference and accountability, and better separating the responsibilities of sector ministers and regulators.Health Economics&Finance,Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Theory&Research,Labor Policies,International Terrorism&Counterterrorism,Environmental Economics&Policies,Health Economics&Finance,Education for the Knowledge Economy,Knowledge Economy,Economic Theory&Research

A Dynamic Model of Final Service Competition in fixed Electronic Communications under a Capacity Interconnection Regime

Recientemente el regulador español ha implementado un nuevo modelo de interconexión en redes fijas de telecomunicaciones basado en la compra de capacidad que podrá ser utilizado en combinación con el modelo habitual de interconexión por tiempo. Se propone un modelo dinámico de competencia en duopolio en el cual el entrante puede comprar ex ante un cierto nivel de capacidad al incumbente paraluego ambos operadores competir en precios. Se introduce la posibilidad de que el entrante pueda asignar eficientemente el tráfico entre distintas franjas horarias. Los resultados muestran que el uso simultáneo de ambos modelos genera una competencia más agresiva en precios y puede llegar a producir significativas ganancias de eficiencia (asignativa y otras internas a la firma). De cualquier forma, el entrante necesita alcanzar una masa crítica antes de que el nuevo modelo pueda representar una alternativa para él. Además, una vez alcanzado este nivel, su conveniencia para el entrante dependerá de determinadas condiciones.The Spanish regulatory authority recently implemented a new interconnection regime based on capacity (and not per time) payments in fixed telecommunications. We propose a dynamic duopolistic model of final service competition in which the entrant first acquires a certain capacity at the local loop (at a fixed payment) from the incumbent and then both operators compete in prices for the final services. We introduce the entrant’s possibility to assign efficiently the traffic he offer between different hours along the day as well as the possibility for him to use the capacity based model as well as the per-unit-oftime interconnection regime vis à vis the incumbent. The results show that, the simultaneous use of both interconnection models (instead of only the one based on time) leads always to tougher competition (more aggressive pricing) in the final service market and efficiency (internal to the firm and allocative) gains. Nevertheless, the entrant needs a minimum scale before this new model can be a viable alternative. In addition, once reached this scale, its convenience for the entrant will depend on certain conditions.Interconnection per time, Interconnection by capacity, Dynamics of the competition, Regulation, Network dimension.

Electricity transmission: an overview of the current debate

Electricity transmission has emerged as critical for successfully liberalising powermarkets. This paper surveys the issues currently under discussion and provides a framework for the remaining papers in this issue. We conclude that signalling the efficient location of generation investment might require even a competitive LMP system to be complemented with deep connection charges. Although a Europe-wide LMP system is desirable, it appears politically problematic, so an integrated system of market coupling, possibly evolving by voluntary participation, should have high priority. Merchant investors may be able to increase interconnector capacity, although this is not unproblematic and raises new regulatory issues. A key issue that needs further research is how to better incentivize TSOs, especially with respect to cross-border issues

Smart Regulation for Smart Grids

Climate change and security of supply policies are driving us towards a decarbonization of the electricity system. It is in this context that smart grids are being discussed. Electricity grids, and hence their regulatory frameworks, have a key role to play in facilitating this transformation of the electricity system. In this paper, we analyze what is expected from grids and what are the regulatory tools that could be used to align the incentives of grid companies and grid users with what is expected from them. We look at three empirical cases to see which regulatory tools have already been applied and find that smart grids need a coherent regulatory framework addressing grid services, grid technology innovation and grid user participation to the ongoing grid innovation. The paper concludes with what appears to be a smart regulation for smart grids.Regulation, innovation, electricity, grids, transmission, distribution

Competition on European energy markets: between policy ambitions and practical restrictions

This Document describes the background and the rationale of the European Union for pursuing liberalised energy markets, explains why this policy goal is not achieved yet, and discusses recent developments and some of the future challenges faced by political decision makers. Read also the accompanying press release .Five years after launching the process of electricity liberalisation, dominance of large utilities, lack of international transmission capacity, and national energy policies hinder the creation of competitive energy markets in Europe. Consequently, the expected downward convergence of electricity prices for EU business and EU consumers has only partly been realised. Established utility companies still have a strong position on some national electricity markets. By means of (inter)national mergers, they increase their market shares at the European level. As a consequence, the price of electricity remains at a higher level than the costs of generating the electricity. In addition, producers lack strong incentives to decrease costs and to develop new techniques of generation owing to missing fierce competitive market forces. The document shows that liberalising electricity markets increases competition provided that adequate institutional arrangements have been made. This requires, in general terms, combating dominant positions of producers by splitting up large established utility companies and implementing adequate surveillance on mergers, increasing capacities of interconnectors among the several member states, establishing spot markets at an international level, and encouraging encouraging transparency of national policies regarding production, transmission and trade.

Electricity transmission: an overview of the current debate

Electricity transmission has emerged as critical for successfully liberalising power markets. This paper surveys the issues currently under discussion and provides a framework for the remaining papers in this issue. We conclude that signalling the efficient location of generation investment might require even a competitive LMP system to be complemented with deep connection charges. Although a Europe-wide LMP system is desirable, it appears politically problematic, so an integrated system of market coupling, possibly evolving by voluntary participation, should have high priority. Merchant investors may be able to increase interconnector capacity, although this is not unproblematic and raises new regulatory issues. A key issue that needs further research is how to better incentivize TSOs, especially with respect to cross-border issues.Electricity, Transmission, Regulation, Prices, Merchant Investment

Restructuring Russia's Electricity Sector: Towards Effective Competition or Faux Liberalisation?

Russia in 2003 embarked on the restructuring of its electricity sector. The reform is intended to introduce competition into electricity production and supply, leaving dispatch, transmission and distribution as regulated natural monopolies with non-discriminatory third-party access to the networks. The ultimate aim of the reform is to create conditions that will encourage both investment in new capacity and greater efficiency of both production and consumption. The overall approach embodied in the reform is promising. However, there remains a serious risk that its aims could be subverted by special-interest lobbying during the lengthy implementation phase. If the reform is to succeed, the marketised segments of the sector must be characterised by real competition based on economically meaningful prices. There are two dangers here. The first is that private-sector interests will secure strategic holdings that allow them to exercise market power or even local monopoly power. The second is that, even after the wholesale market is liberalised, the state will retain considerable capacity to hold down electricity prices, if it so chooses, and it could do so in ways that unduly distort the signals the market is sending and deter the very investment that the reform is meant to attract