Benchmarking Electricity Liberalisation in Europe

In this paper, we discuss the choice and use of benchmarks in each of five areas relevant to an assessment of the progress of EU electricity sector liberalisation. These areas are market design, market power, EU enlargement, regulation, and sustainability. Our aim is to discuss the most important benchmarks for each area, and to do so in the context of that area. Where a benchmark can be used as a signal that things are going well (or badly) we will discuss the values associated with a good (or bad) signal. This paper forms part of the final report of the EU funded Sustainable Energy Specific Support Assessment project (SESSA, see www.sessa.eu.com)

Reference Models and Incentive Regulation of Electricity Distribution Networks: An Evaluation of Sweden’s Network Performance Assessment Model (NPAM)

The world-wide electricity sector reforms have led to a search for alternative and innovative approaches to regulation to promote efficiency improvement in the natural monopoly electricity networks. A number of countries have used incentive regulation models based on efficiency benchmarking of the electricity network utilities. While most regulators have opted adopted parametric and non-parametric frontier-based methods of benchmarking some have used engineering designed ‘reference firm’ or ‘norm’ models for the purpose. This paper examines the incentive properties and other related aspects of the norm model NPAM used in regulation of distribution networks in Sweden and compares these with those of frontier-based benchmarking methods. We identify a number of important differences between the two approaches to regulation benchmarking that are not readily apparent and discuss their ramifications for the regulatory objectives and process

Benchmarking and Regulation of Electricity Transmission and Distribution Utilities: Lessons from International Experience

Since the early 1980's, many countries have implemented electricity sector reform, many of which have bundled generation, transmission, distribution and supply activities, and have introduced competition in generation and supply. An increasing number of countries are also adopting incentive regulation to promote efficiency improvement in the natural monopoly activities - transmission and distribution. Incentive regulation almost invariably involves benchmarking or comparison of actual vs. some reference performance. This paper reviews the main approaches to incentive regulation and discusses various benchmarking methods. We also present the finding of a survey of the use of benchmarking methods in the OECD and few other countries. Our survey finds a variety of methods used by the electricity regulators although with a notable preference for the non-parametric methods. We then draw conclusions based on the finding of the survey highlighting the main outstanding issues and lessons for best practice implementation of benchmarking in electricity regulation

Incentive Regulation in Theory and Practice: Electricity Distribution and Transmission Networks

Modern theoretical principles to govern the design of incentive regulation mechanisms are reviewed and discussed. General issues associated with applying these principles in practice are identified. Examples of the actual application of incentive regulation mechanisms to the regulation of prices and service quality for 'unbundled' transmission and distribution networks are presented and discussed. Evidence regarding the performance of incentive regulation in practice for electric distribution and transmission networks is reviewed. Issues for future research are identified.

The Ten-Year Rule: Allocation of Emission Allowances in the EU Emission Trading System

In its guidance on National Allocation Plans (NAPs), the European Commission has discouraged Member States from adopting allocation methodologies that would provide incentives to firms affecting their compliance behavior. The purpose is to promote economic efficiency and to prevent strategic behavior that deviates from individual and collective cost-minimization. For example, some methodologies would reward one type of compliance investment over another. To discourage such actions, the EU Emission Trading System guidelines prohibit ex post redistribution of emission allowances within an allocation period based on behavior in that period. Similarly, the Commission has indicated that decisions about the initial distribution of allowances in the second phase (2008-2012) must depend on measures prior to 2005 so as not to give companies an incentive to adjust their behavior to receive a larger allowance allocation. However, two other aspects of the NAPs—the treatment of closures and new entrants—may also affect firm behavior. An undercurrent in these guidelines is the question of whether Member States should allow incumbent emitters to hold infinitely lived, once-and-for-all property rights to a share of the emission allowances in the future. This paper develops an approach for balancing efficiency considerations with perceived issues of fairness. We propose a ten-year rule to guide policy regarding closure of existing sources and the status of new sources and to guide the initial distribution of emission allowances in general. A ten-year rule would address issues of fairness and capture an important part of the potential gains that could be achieved through an efficient initial distribution of allowances.emission trading, allowance allocations, closures, new entrants, tradable permits, air pollution, cost-effectiveness, greenhouse gases, climate change, global warming, carbon dioxide

Shaping the Global Arena: Preparing the EU Emissions Trading Scheme for the post-2012 Period. CEPS Task Force Reports No. 61, 6 March 2007

Having been underway for more than two years, the review of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is entering a decisive phase with the European Commission’s recent announcement that it will table formal proposals in the second half of 2007. Based on an assessment of the EU ETS, this new CEPS Task Force Report tests the performance of four different design models (a cap-and-trade system based on free allocation, benchmarks, auctioning and a credit-and-baseline system) against 10 criteria under three headings: environmental effectiveness, economic efficiency and the contribution of the ETS to achieving long-term climate change policy objectives. Based on this assessment, the report makes a number of recommendations in the area of allocation, creation of investment incentives and the merits of including new sectors and new gases. The report also addresses the particular challenge of completing the EU ETS review before a global post-2012 agreement can be reached, i.e. the EU ETS will be reviewed against an unknown global context

Iowa Department of Commerce, Iowa Utilities Board Division Performance Report, FY 2004

Agency Performance Repor

Iowa Department of Commerce, Iowa Utilities Board Division Performance Report, FY 2008

Agency Performance Repor

How Emission Certificate Allocations Distort Fossil Investments: The German Example

Despite political activities to foster a low-carbon energy transition, Germany currently sees a considerable number of new coal power plants being added to its power mix. There are several possible drivers for this "dash for coal", but it is widely accepted that windfall profits gained through free allocation of ETS certificates play an important role. Yet the quantification of allocation-related investment distortions has been limited to back-of-the envelope calculations and stylized models so far. We close this gap with a numerical model integrating both Germany's particular allocation rules and its specific power generation structure. We find that technology specific new entrant provisions have substantially increased incentives to invest in hard coal plants compared to natural gas at the time of the ETS onset. Expected windfall profits compensated more than half the total capital costs of a hard coal plant. Moreover, a shorter period of free allocations would not have turned investors' favours towards the cleaner natural gas technology because of preexisting economic advantages for coal. In contrast, full auctioning of permits or a single best available technology benchmark would have made natural gas the predominant technology of choice.Emissions trading, Allocation rules, Power markets, Investments

Using benchmarking for the primary allocation of EU allowances - an application to the German power sector

Basing allocation of allowances for existing installations under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme on specific emission values (benchmarks) rather than on historic emissions may have several advantages. Benchmarking may recognize early action, provide higher incentives for replacing old installations and result in fewer distortions in case of updating, facilitate EU-wide harmonization of allocation rules or allow for simplified and more efficient closure rules. Applying an optimization model for the German power sector, we analyze the distributional effects of various allocation regimes across and within different generation technologies. Results illustrate that regimes with a single uniform benchmark for all fuels or with a single benchmark for coal- and lignite-fired plants imply substantial distributional effects. In particular, lignite- and old coal-fired plants would be made worse off. Under a regime with fuel-specific benchmarks for gas, coal, and lignite 50 % of the gas-fired plants and 4 % of the lignite and coal-fired plants would face an allowance deficit of at least 10 %, while primarily modern lignite-fired plants would benefit. Capping the surplus and shortage of allowances would further moderate the distributional effects, but may tarnish incentives for efficiency improvements and recognition of early action. --