Multicommodity Equilibrium Models: Accounting for Demand-Side Linkages

  • Steven A. Gabriel
  • Antonio J. Conejo
  • J. David Fuller
  • Benjamin F. Hobbs
  • Carlos Ruiz
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 180)


Several of the models previously introduced in this book have focused on the market for a single commodity with a single price, such as power at a particular location in a particular hour. However, many of this book’s models instead considered several markets simultaneously, recognizing that linkages among them imply that equilibrium prices in one market cannot be calculated without considering how they affect, and are affected by, prices in other markets. In the earlier chapters, linkages among markets were mainly through the supply-side, in which the cost of providing commodity in one market depends in part on prices in other markets. For instance, a power generator with only a small amount of capacity with low running costs might experience a rise in its marginal cost of serving one part of the network if it also sells a lot of power elsewhere, thereby exhausting its cheap capacity. The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the modeling of multiple energy markets in which it is instead the behavior of consumers that links the markets. In particular, the amount that final consumers buy of one commodity affects how much they are willing to pay for other commodities.


Marginal Cost Demand Function Demand Curve Energy Service Inverse Demand Function 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. Celebi and D. Fuller. A model for efficient consumer pricing schemes in electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 22(1):60-67, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. Celebi and D. Fuller. Time of use pricing in electricity markets under different market structures. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, to appear, 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Y. Chen, J. Sijm, B.F. Hobbs, and W. Lise. Implications of CO2 emissions trading for short-run electricity market outcomes in Northwest Europe. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 34(3):251-281, Dec. 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Connolly, H. Lund, B.V. Mathiesen, and M. Leahy. A review of computer tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems. Applied Energy, 87(4):1059–1082, 2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. Cormio, M. Dicorato, A. Minoia, and M. Trovato. A regional energy planning methodology including renewable energy sources and environmental constraints. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 7(2):99–130, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. Faruqui and S. Sergici. Household response to dynamic pricing of electricity - a survey of the experimental evidence. Manuscript, Brattle Group, San Francisco, 2009.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L.G. Fishbone and H. Abilock. MARKAL, A linear-programming model for energy-systems analysis – technical description of the BNL Version. International Journal of Energy Research, 5(4): 353-375, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Gabriel, A. Kydes, and P. Whitman. The National Energy Modeling System: a large-scale energy-economic equilibrium model. Operations Research, 49(1):14-25, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Hashimoto. A spatial Nash equilibrium model. In P. Harker, Editor. Spatial Price Equilibrium: Advances in Theory, Computation, and Application. Springer, Berlin, 1982.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B.F. Hobbs. The “Most Value” criterion: economic evaluation of utility demand-side management programs considering customer value. The Energy Journal, 12(2):67-91, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    B.F. Hobbs. Optimization methods for electric utility resource planning. European J. Operational Research, 83(1):1-20, 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    B.F. Hobbs and S.K. Nelson. A nonlinear bilevel model for analysis of electric utility demand-side planning issues. Annals of Operations Research, 34:255-274, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    W.W. Hogan. Energy policy models for Project Independence, Computers and Operations Research, 2:251-271, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Klingman, N. Phillips, D. Steiger, R. Wirth, and W. Young. The challenges and success factors in implementing an integrated products planning system for Citgo. Interfaces, 16(3):1-19, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    W.W. Leontief. Input-Output Economics. Oxford University Press, New York, 2nd edition, 1986.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.C. Morris, G.A. Goldstein, and V.M. Fthenakis. NEMS and MARKAL-MACRO models for energy-environmental-economic analysis: a comparison of the electricity and carbon reduction projections. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 7(3):207-216, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Loulou and M. Labriet. ETSAP-TIAM: the TIMES integrated assessment model, part I: model structure. Computational Management Science, 5(1-2):7-40, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    F.H. Murphy and S.H. Shaw. The evolution of energy modeling at the Federal Energy Administration and the Energy Information Administration. Interfaces, 25(5):173-193, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.W. Salant. Imperfect competition in the international energy market: a computerized Nash-Cournot model. Operations Research, 30(2):252-280, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    P.A. Samuelson. Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming. The American Economic Review, 42:283-303, 1952.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Turvey and D. Anderson. Electricity Economics.The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1977.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    G. Zwart and M. Mulder. NATGAS: a model of the European natural gas market. CPB Memorandum 144, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven A. Gabriel
    • 1
  • Antonio J. Conejo
    • 2
  • J. David Fuller
    • 3
  • Benjamin F. Hobbs
    • 4
  • Carlos Ruiz
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.University of Castilla – La ManchaCiudad RealSpain
  3. 3.Department of Management SciencesUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  4. 4.Department of Geography and Environmental EngineeringThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  5. 5.European Foundation for New Energy – EDF École Centrale Paris and SupélecChâtenay-MalabryFrance

Personalised recommendations