If barriers between two power markets are eliminated, what might happen to competition and prices? And who benefits? In the case of the Belgian and Dutch markets, market coupling would permit more efficient use of transmission by improving access to the Belgian market, by counting only net flows against interface limits, and by eliminating mismatches in timing of interface auctions and energy spot markets. We estimate the benefits associated with the first two of these impacts using a transmission-constrained Cournot model. Social surplus improvements on the order of 108 €/year are projected, unless market coupling encourages the largest producer in the region to switch from price-taking in Belgium to a Cournot strategy due to a perceived diminished threat of regulatory intervention. Whether Dutch consumers would benefit also depends on that company’s behavior. The results illustrate how large-scale oligopoly models can be used to assess changes in market designs.
AllazB.VilaJ-L. (1993). “Cournot Competition, Forward Markets and Efficiency.” Journal of Economic Theory59(1): 1-16.
2.
AmundsenE.S.BergmanL.AnderssonB. (2001). “Demand Variation and Market Power in the Norwegian-Swedish Power Market,” Foundation for Research in Economics and Business Administration, Bergen, Norway.
3.
AudouinR.ChaniotisD.TsamasphyrouP.CoulondreJ.-M. (2002). “Coordinated Auctioning of Cross-Border Capacity: A Comparison,” in Proceedings, 14th PSCC, Seville, June.
4.
BaraleF. (2003). “Why Does an Efficient Electricity Market Require Coordination Mechanisms Between Power Generation, Transmission, Distribution and Supply Activities?,” Research Symposium on European Electricity Markets, The Hague, September.
5.
BerryC. A. (1999). “Analyzing Strategic Bidding Behavior in Transmission Networks,” Utilities Policy8(3): 139-158.
6.
BorensteinS.BushnellJ.StoftS. (2000). “The Competitive Effects of Transmission Capacity in a Deregulated Electricity Industry.” Rand Journal of Economics31(2): 294-325.
7.
BoucherJ.SmeersY. (2001). “Alternative Models of Restructured Electricity Systems, 1: No Market Power.” Operations Research49: 821-838.
8.
BoucherJ.SmeersY. (2002). “Toward a Common European Electricity Market: Paths in the Right Direction, Still Far From an Effective Design.” Journal of Network Industries3(4): 375-424.
9.
BowerJ. (2004). “Electricity Infrastructure and Security of Supply: Should EU Governments Invest in Transmission Capacity?” Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Oxford, UK.
10.
BrandtsJ.Pezanis-ChristouP.SchramA. (2003). “Competition with Forward Contracts: A Laboratory Analysis Motivated by Electricity Market Design,” UFAE and IAE Working Papers 581.03, http://ideas.repec.org/p/aub/autbar/581.03.html.
11.
Brattle Group (2002). Differences in the Price of Electricity to Industrial Users in the Netherlands and Neighboring Countries: Underlying Determinants, London, U.K., March.
12.
BushnellJ.MansurE.T.SaraviaC. (2004). “Market Structure and Competition: A CrossMarket Analysis of U.S. Electricity Deregulation,” CSEM WP 126, Univ. Calif., Berkeley.
13.
CardellJ.HittC.C.HoganW.W. (1997). “Market Power and Strategic Interaction in Electricity Networks.” Resource &Energy Economics19(1-2): 109-137.
14.
CunninghamL.B.BaldickR.BaughmanM.L. (2002). “An Empirical Study of Applied Game Theory: Transmission Constrained Cournot Behavior.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems17(1), 166-172.
15.
Van DammeE. (2005). “Liberalizing the Dutch Electricity Market: 1998-2004,” The Energy Journal, European Energy LiberalizationSpecial Issue, 155-179.
16.
DaxheletO.SmeersY. (2001). “Variational Inequality Models of Restructured Electric Systems.” in FerrisM.C.MangasarianO.L.PangJ.-S., Applications and Algorithms of Complementarity, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
17.
DayC.J.HobbsB.F.PangJ.-S. (2002). “Oligopolistic Competition in Power Networks: A Conjectured Supply Function Approach.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems17(3): 597-607.
18.
DirkseS.P.FerrisM.C. (1995). “The PATH Solver: A Non-Monotone Stabilization Scheme for Mixed Complementarity Problems.” Optimization Methods and Software5, 123-156.
19.
EuroPEX (2003). “Using Implicit Auctions to Manage Cross-Border Congestion: ‘Decentralised Market Coupling’,” 10th Meeting of the European Electricity Regulatory Forum, July8.
20.
GiesbertzP., (2004). Onderzoek Ontwikkeling Liquiditeit Electriciteitsmarkt 2003-2004, Office of Energy Regulation (dTE), The Hague, March.
21.
GlachantJ.-M.Finonand D., eds. (2003), Competition in European Electricity Markets: A CrossCountry Comparison, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
22.
GreenR. (1999). “The Electricity Contract Market in England and Wales.” Journal of Industrial Economics47(1): 107-124.
23.
HarrisD.MoselleB.LapuertaC. (2003). “The Development of a Spot Market Exchange Infrastructure for Belgium.” The Brattle Group, London, February.
24.
HarveyS.M.and HoganW.W. (2000). “Californian Electricity Prices and Forward Market Hedging.” John F.Mimeo, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
25.
HaubrichH.J.ZimmerC.von SengbuschK.LiF.FritzW.KoppS.SchulzW.MusgensF.PeekM. (2001). “Analysis of Electricity Network Capacities and Identification of Congestion.” Inst. Power Systems and Power Economics, Aachen University of Technology, www.iaew.rwth-aachen.de/publikationen/EC_congestion_final_report_appendix.pdf.
26.
HobbsB.F.HelmanU. (2004). “Complementarity-Based Equilibrium Modeling for Electric Power Markets.” in BunnD., ed., Modeling Prices in Competitive Electricity Markets, J. Wiley, London, Ch. 3.
27.
HobbsB.F.MetzlerC.B.PangJ.-S. (2000). “Strategic Gaming Analysis for Electric Power Networks: An MPEC Approach.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems15(2): 638-645.
28.
HobbsB.F.RijkersF.A.M.WalsA.D. (2004). “Strategic Generation with Conjectured Transmission Price Responses in a Mixed Transmission Pricing System, I: Formulation and II. Application.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems19(2): 707-717, 872-879.
29.
HoganW.W. (1992). “Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission.” Journal of Regulatory Economics4: 211-242.
30.
JamashT.PollittM. (2005). “Electricity Market Reform in the European Union: Review of Progress toward Liberalization &Integration,” The Energy Journal, European Energy LiberalizationSpecial Issue, 11-41.
31.
JoskowP.TiroleJ. (2000). “Transmission Rights and Market Power on Electric Power Networks.” RAND Journal of Economics31(3): 450-487.
32.
KnopsH.P.A.deVriesL.J.HakvoortR.A. (2001). “Congestion Management in the European Electricity System: An Evaluation of the Alternatives.” Journal of Network Industries2: 311-351.
33.
Le CoqC.OrzenH. (2002). “Do Forward Markets Enhance Competition?, Experimental Evidence,” Stockholm School of Economics, August.
34.
Market Surveillance Committee (2002). “Comments on the London Economics Methodology for Assessing the Benefits of Transmission Expansions.” California Independent System Operator, Folsom, Calif., Oct. 7.
35.
MetzlerC.HobbsB.F.PangJ.S. (2003). “Nash-Cournot Equilibria in Power Markets on a Linearized DC Network with Arbitrage: Formulations and Properties.” Networks &Spatial Economics3(2): 123-150.
36.
NeuhoffK. (2003a). “Effect of Integrating Dutch and Belgian Electricity Market on Dutch Prices,” mimeo, Department of Applied Economics, Cambridge University, July 24, www.econ.cam.ac.uk/electricity/research/transmission/index.htm.
37.
NeuhoffK. (2003b). “Combining Energy and Transmission Markets Mitigates Market Power,” CMI Working Paper 17, Dept. of Applied Economics, Cambridge University.
38.
NeuhoffK.BarquinJ.BootsM.G.EhrenmannA.HobbsB.F.RijkersF.A.M. (2005). “Network-Constrained Models of Liberalized Electricity Markets: The Devil is in the Details.” Energy Economics27(3): 495-525.
39.
NewberyD.M.Van DammeE.von der FehrN.-H. (2003). Benelux Market Integration: Market Power Concerns. The Netherlands Market Surveillance Committee, The Hague, Sept. 25.
40.
PetrovK.ScarsiG.C.van der VeenW. (2003). “Modeling Strategic Bidding Behavior in Power Markets,” Research Symposium on European Electricity Markets, The Hague, Sept.
41.
Perez-ArriagaI.J. (2002). “Cross-Border Tarification in the Internal Electricity Market of the European Union.” Proceedings, 14th PSCC, Seville, 2002.
42.
SheffrinA. (2004). “Market Analysis Report for May 2004,” report submitted to the California Independent System Operator Board of Governors, Folsom, California, June18.
43.
SmeersY. (1997). “Computable Equilibrium Models and the Restructuring of the European Electricity and Gas Markets.” The Energy Journal18(4): 1-31.
44.
Van OostvoornF.BattjesC.VoogtM. (2001). “Development of Electricity Prices in NorthWest Europe 2000-2015,” ECN, Amsterdam, Prepared for STATOIL.
45.
VentosaM.BaflloA.RivierM.RamosA. (2005). “Electricity Market Modeling Trends.” Energy Policy33(7): 897-913.
46.
WeiJ.-Y.SmeersY. (1999). “Spatial Oligopolistic Electricity Models with Cournot Generators and Regulated Transmission Prices.” Operations Research47(1): 102-112.
