Advertisement

Journal of Regulatory Economics

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 61–79 | Cite as

Electric grid investment under a contract network regime

  • James B. Bushnell
  • Steven E. Stoft
Symposium on Transmission Access

Abstract

This paper analyzes the incentives for electric grid investment that result from various proposed transmission network property regimes. In particular, we focus on “transmission congestion contracts” within a contract network regime such as proposed by William Hogan. We formalize a rule for awarding these new property rights to investors and show that, under certain conditions, this contract network approach can effectively deter detrimental investments, some of which are encouraged under other regimes. However, when these conditions are not met, market participants may still find it profitable to undertake network alterations which are detrimental to the network as a whole.

Keywords

Public Finance Industrial Organization Market Participant Network Approach Network Property 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baldick, R., and E. Kahn. 1993. “Transmission Planning Issues in a Competitive Economic Environment.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 8(4): 1497–1503.Google Scholar
  2. Borenstein, S., J. Bushnell, E. Kahn, and S. Stoft. 1995. “Market Power in California Electricity Markets.” Unversity of California Energy Institute Working Paper, PWP-036. December.Google Scholar
  3. Blumstein, C. and J. Bushnell. 1994. “A Guide to the Blue Book: Issues in California's Electric Industry Restructuring and Reform.” The Electricity Journal 7(No. 7, August): 18–29.Google Scholar
  4. Bushnell, J. and S. Stoft. 1995. “Transmission and Generation Investment in a Competitive Electric Power Industry.” University of California Energy Institute Working Paper, PWP-030. May.Google Scholar
  5. California Public Utilities Commission. 1994.” Order Instituting Rulemaking on the Commission's Proposed Policies Governing Restructuring California's Electric Service Industry and Reforming Regulation. R.94-04-031.Google Scholar
  6. Chao, H.P., and S. Peck. 1996. “A Market Mechanism for Electric Power Transmission.” Journal of Regulatory Economics. This issue.Google Scholar
  7. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1995. “Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-discriminatory Transmission Service by Public Utilities.” Dkt. No. RM95-8-000, March 29, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. Garber, D., W. Hogan, and L. Ruff. 1994. “Poolco: An Independent Power Pool Company for an Efficient Power Market.” The Electricity Journal 7(no. 7, August): 48–60.Google Scholar
  9. Hogan, W. 1992. “Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 4(3): 211–242.Google Scholar
  10. Hogan, W. 1990. “Contract Networks for Electric Power Transmission: Technical Reference.” Energy and Environmental Policy Center, Harvard University, Discussion Paper E-90-17. (September)Google Scholar
  11. Hogan, W. 1993. “Electric Transmission: A New Model for Old Principles.” The Electricity Journal 6(no. 3, March)Google Scholar
  12. Hogan, W. Personal Communication, October, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. Mistr, A., and E. Munsey. 1992. “It's Time for Fundamental Reform of Transmission Pricing.” Public Utilities Fortnightly 130(1):13–16.Google Scholar
  14. Newbery, D.M., and R. Green. 1996. Regulation, Public Ownership and Privatisation of the English Electricity Industry. In International Comparisons of Electricity Regulation, edited by R. Gilbert and E. Kahn. New York: Cambridge Univesrity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Oren, S., P. Spiller, P. Varaiya, and F. Wu. 1995. “Nodal Prices and Transmission Rights: A Critical Appraisal.” The Electricity Journal 8(no.3, March): 24–35.Google Scholar
  16. Outhred, H. 1993. “Principles of a Market-Based Electricity Industry and Possible Steps Toward Implementation in Australia.” IEE 2nd International Conference on Advances in Power System Control, Operation and Management, Hong Kong, December 7–10.Google Scholar
  17. Perez-Arriaga, I.J., F.J. Rubio, J.F. Puerta, J. Arceluz, and J. Marin. 1995. “Marginal Pricing of Transmission Services: An Analysis of Cost Recovery.” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 10(1): 546–553.Google Scholar
  18. Schweppe, F., M. Caramanis, R. Tabors, and R. Bohn. 1988. Spot Pricing of Electricity. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Walton, S. 1993. “Establishing Firm Transmission Rights Using a Rated System Path Model, The Electricity Journal, 6(8): 20–33.Google Scholar
  20. Wu, F., and P. Varaiya. 1995. “Coordinated Multilateral Trades for Electric Power Networks: Theory and Implementation.” University of California Energy Institute Working Paper, PWP-031. June.Google Scholar
  21. Wu, F., P. Varaiya, P. Spiller, and S. Oren. 1996. “Folk Theorems on Transmission Access: Proofs and Counter Examples.” Journal of Regulatory Economics. This issue.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • James B. Bushnell
    • 1
  • Steven E. Stoft
    • 1
  1. 1.University of California Energy InstituteBerkeley

Personalised recommendations