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

Market-based Investment in Electricity Transmission Networks: Controllable Flow

This paper discusses unregulated market-based electricity transmissio

Why (and how) to regulate Power Exchanges in the EU market integration context?

Power Exchanges (PXs) are key market institutions in open and market-based electricity industries. This paper aims at contributing to the ongoing debate on why and how to regulate Power Exchanges in the EU market integration context. . The paper starts by stating that two different types of PXs have to be distinguished, i.e. "Merchant" PXs and the "Cost of Service Regulated" PXs. The paper continues by comparing the typical incentives of these two types of PXs to perform the basic PX tasks in an isolated national market and in a market integration context. The paper concludes by deriving from this analytical frame the most relevant regulatory actions..Regulation, Exchanges, Grid access, Power Markets.

Should Merchant Transmission Investment be Subject to a Must-offer Provision?

Merchant electricity transmission investment is a practically relevant example of an unregulated investment with monopoly properties. However, while leaving the investment decision to the market, the regulator may decide to prohibit capacity withholding with a must-offer provision. This paper examines the welfare effects of a must-offer provision prior to the capacity choice, given three reasons for capacity withholding: uncertainty, demand growth and pre-emptive investment. A must-offer provision will decrease welfare in the first two cases, and can enhance welfare only in the last case. In the presence of importer market power, a regulatory test might be needed

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

Market-based Investment in Electricity Transmission Networks: Controllable Flow

This paper discusses unregulated market-based electricity transmission investment by third parties as opposed to regulated investment by designated transmission system operators. The analysis is set against a European and Australian institutional background and focuses on interconnection of different systems. The paper explores four areas: economies of scale, market power, detrimental investment and risks. The analysis argues for restricting market-based investment to controllable flow (DC or FACTS) only. This is in line with what seems to take place in practice in Europe and Australia, it strikes a balance between pros and cons of market-based investment and draws a sharp line between regulated and unregulated investments.electricity, transmission, merchant, investment

Merchant Transmission Investment

We examine the performance attributes of a merchant transmission investment framework that relies on �market driven� transmission investment to provide the infrastructure to support competitive wholesale markets for electricity. Under a stringent set of assumptions, the merchant investment model appears to solve the natural monopoly problem and the associated need for regulating transmission companies traditionally associated with electric transmission networks. We expand the model to incorporate imperfection in wholesale electricity markets, lumpiness in transmission investment opportunities, stochastic attributes of transmission networks and associated property rights definition issues, the effects of the behaviour system operators and transmission owners on transmission capacity and reliability, co-ordination and bargaining considerations, forward contract, commitment and asset specificity issues. This significantly undermines the attractive properties of the merchant investment model. Relying primarily on a market driven investment framework to govern investment is likely to lead to inefficient investment decisions and undermine the performance of competitive markets

Merchant Electricity Transmission Expansion: A European Case Study

We apply a merchant transmission model to the trilateral market coupling (TLC) arrangement among the Netherlands, Belgium and France as a generic example, and note that it can be applied to any general market splitting or coupling of Europe's different national power markets. In this merchant framework; the system operator allocates financial transmission rights (FTRs) to investors in transmission expansion based upon their preferences, and revenue adequacy. The independent system operator (ISO) preserves some proxy FTRs to deal with potential negative externalities due to an expansion project. This scheme proves to be capable in providing incentives for investment in transmission expansion projects within TLC areas.transmission expansion, trilateral market coupling, Europe, financial transmission rights, congestion management

Agglomerative Magnets and Informal Regulatory Networks: Electricity Market Design Convergence in the USA and Continental Europe

The absence of one broadly accepted design template for liberalised electricity markets induces regulatory competition and institutional diversity. Focussing on continental Europe and the USA, this analysis explores how agents and structures accelerate or impede the move to one standard market design in the electricity sector. It reveals that market design convergence in Europe is driven by the 'Florence Consensus,' a tripartite coalition between the European Commission fostering European integration and the internal market, informal regulatory networks between grid operators, standardisation authorities and regulators, who have been coordinating their actions in the 'Florence Forum,' and epistemic communities exemplified in the Florence School of Regulation. In contrast, the United States' Federal Energy Regulatory Commission lacks support among politicians, many states' public utility commissions, the neo-liberal intelligentsia and even industrial lobbying groups to effectively push for a standardised market design. However, design convergence in the USA may be induced by the gradual expansion of multi-state markets operated by regional transmission organisations.Electricity, Deregulation, Regulatory Competition, Policy Diffusion