Journal of Regulatory Economics

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 159–179 | Cite as

Withholding investments in energy only markets: can contracts make a difference?

Original Article

Abstract

Although there are mechanisms to control market power in the spot market, withholding investments can still increase profits and hamper adequate capacity expansion. We examine the effect on investment of one suggested approach to reducing market power, contracting longer term. We construct a stylized model of an energy-only market where two firms, each specializing in one technology, invest in a first stage, contract part of their production in the second stage and sell the rest in the spot market in the third stage. We compare this model to one of an energy-only market having two stages, investment and a spot market. We find cases where the contracts change neither capacity nor peak prices, where the foreclosing effect of one player blocking the other from contracts markets increases investments and reduces prices, and where the opportunity to foreclose the market can incentivize one firm to lower its investment and increase its pricing power to the detriment of consumers. The model relies on the simplest possible assumptions of imperfect competition (subgame perfect equilibria with Cournot agents). We illustrate the different outcomes in a numerical example with two load steps (peak and off-peak) where we change one parameter, the height of the off-peak time segment. We find cases with increased and decreased capacity as well as no change in capacity. Since there is no general characterization of the consequences of contracts in this simple example, there can be no characterization in more complicated models that contain the market structures included here, and regulators or competition authorities cannot rely on contracts to induce sufficient capacity expansion by reducing market power. One other market mechanism that has been proposed to induce investment, a capacity auction with predetermined capacity requirements, is a potential alternative to limit market power that deserves further exploration to determine the extent to which it can provide an adequate incentive to invest in the presence of market power.

Keywords

Contracts Energy only markets Profits Withholding investments 

JEL Classification

D43 L13 L51 L94 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allaz B., Vila J.-L. (1993) Cournot competition, forward markets and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory 59: 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bushnell J. B. (2007) Oligopoly equilibria in electricity contract markets. Journal of Regulatory Economics 32: 225–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bushnell J. B., Mansur E. T., Saravia C. (2008) Vertical arrangements, market structure, and : an analysis of restructured U.S. electricity markets. American Economic Review 98(1): 237–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cramton P., Stoft S. (2008) Forward reliability markets: Less risk, less market power, more efficiency. Utilities Policy 16(3): 194–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Hautecloque A. (2009) Legal uncertainty and competition policy in European deregulated electricity markets: the case of long-term exclusive supply contracts. World Competition 32(1): 91–112Google Scholar
  6. de Hautecloque, A., & Glachant J.-M. (2008). Long-term energy supply contracts in European competition policy: Fuzzy not crazy. Working Paper 0816. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.Google Scholar
  7. Green R. (1992) Contract and the pool: The British electricity market. Department of Applied Economics, University of Cambridge, MimeoGoogle Scholar
  8. Green R., Newbery D. M. (1992) Competition in the British electricity spot market. Journal of Political Economy 100: 929–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harvey S.M., Hogan W.W. (2000) California electricity prices and forward market hedging. Harvard University, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Joskow P. (2007) Competitive electricity markets and investments in new generating capacity. In: Dieter H. (ed) The New energy paradigm. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Joskow, P. (2008). Investment in new base load generating capacity. Presentation, EIA 30th Anniversary Conference. Washington.Google Scholar
  12. Hobbs, B. (2010). Private communication.Google Scholar
  13. Murphy F. H., Smeers Y. (2005) Generation capacity expansion in imperfectly competitive restructured electricity markets. Operations Research 53(4): 646–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Murphy F. H., Smeers Y. (2010a) On the impact of forward markets on investments in oligopolistic markets with reference to electricity. Operations Research 58(3): 515–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Murphy, F. H., & Smeers Y. (2010b). Withholding investments in energy only markets: Can contracts make a difference? Mimeo. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/73743. Accessed 27 July 2010.
  16. Newbery D. (1998) Competition, contracts, and entry in the electricity spot market. RAND Journal of Economics 29(4): 726–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rey, P., & Tirole, J. (2006). A Primer on foreclosure. In M. Armstrong & R. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of industrial organization III. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  18. Stoft S. (2002) Power systems economics: Designing markets for electricity. IEEE Press, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  19. Wolak F. (2000) An empirical analysis of the impact of hedge contracts on bidding behavior in a competitive electricity market. International Economic Journal 14(2): 1–39Google Scholar
  20. Wolfram C. D. (1999) Measuring duopoly power in British electricity spot market. American Economic Review 89: 805–826CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Temple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Université Catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations