Abstract
This chapter presents a novel transmission congestion management protocol applicable for both pure-bilateral and hybrid electricity market structures. The mechanism is based on an Interruptible Physical Transmission Contract, which guarantees physical access to the transmission network users and provides financial incentives for the bilateral contract holders to forfeit the physical access to the transmission network. The contract specifies a financial reimbursement payable to the insured if the system operator dispatch results into a curtailment of a bilateral contract involving an injection into and withdrawal of power at a specified set of nodes. The insurer is compensated in the form of an insurance premium for providing the service. The contract is structured such that the reimbursement payable to the insured party equals the actual loss incurred so that the insured party is “made whole” with the insurance payment. Similarly, when the insurer is the System Operator itself, it tries to dispatch the generators such that the aggregate insurance reimbursements payable to the insured parties is minimized. In this way, the transmission contract mechanism ensures that a near optimal curtailment policy coincides with the efficient dispatch in the system.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alaywan Z. and Allen, J., 1998. California Electric Restructuring: A Broad Description of the Development of the California ISO. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 13(4).
Allen E., Ilić M., and Younes Z., 1999. Providing for Transmission in Times of Scarcity: an ISO Cannot Do it All. Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 21, pp 147–163.
Berstekas, D., 1995. Dynamic Programming and Optimal Control- Volume I, Athena Scientific.
Bessembinder, H. and Lemmon, M, 2002. Equilibrium Pricing and Optimal Hedging in Electricity Forward Markets. Journal of Finance, 55(3).
Cameron L., Cramton P., and Wilson R., 1997. Using Auctions to Divest Generation Assets. Electricity Journal, 10(10), pp 22–31.
Chao H., Peck S., Oren S., and Wilson R., 2000. Flow-based Transmission Rights and Congestion Management. Electricity Journal, 13(8), pp 38–58.
Cox, J., Ross S., and Rubinstein M., 1979. Option Pricing: A Simplified Approach. Journal of Financial Economics, 7, pp 229–263.
Cramton P., 1998. Ascending Auctions. European Economic Review, 42(3–5), pp 745–756.
Deng S. and Oren S., 2000. Priority Network Access Pricing for Electric Power. University of California Energy Institute Working Paper. Unpublished.
Gedra T. and Varaiya, P., 1993. Markets and Pricing for Interruptible Electric Power. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 8(1).
Harvey S., Hogan W., and Pope S., 1997. Transmission Capacity Reservations and Transmission Congestion Contracts. Harvard Electricity Policy Group Working Paper. Unpublished.
Hogan W., 2000. Flowgate Rights and Wrongs. Harvard Electricity Policy Group Working Paper. Unpublished.
Hull, J., 1999. Options, Futures, & Other Derivatives. 4th ed. Prentice Hall.
Hull J. and White A., 1994. Numerical Procedures for Implementing Term Structure Models I: Single-Factor Models. Journal of Derivatives, 2(1), pp 7–16.
Ilić M. and Galiana F., 1998. Power Systems Operation Old v. New. In: M. Ilić, F. Galiana, and L. Fink, eds. Power Systems Restructuring: Engineering and Economics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 15–108.
Jaillet P., Ronn E., and Tompaidis S., 1998. Modeling Energy Prices and Pricing and Hedging Energy Derivatives. Unpublished.
Joskow P. and Kahn E., 2001. A Quantitative Analysis of Pricing Behavior in California’s Wholesale Electricity Market during Summer 2000. MIT Center for Environmental and Economic Policy Research Working Paper. Unpublished.
Milgrom P., 2000. Putting Auction Theory to Work: The Simultaneous Ascending Auction. Journal of Political Economy, 108(2).
Raikar S. and Ilić M. Assessment of Transmission Congestion for Major Electricity Markets in the US. In: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Summer Power Meeting, 2001, Vancouver, Canada.
Schwartz E., 1997. The Stochastic Behavior of Commodity Prices: Implications for Valuation and Hedging. Journal of Finance, 52(3), pp 923–973.
Skantze P., Gubina A., and Ilić M., 2000. Bid-based Stochastic Model for Electricity Prices: The Impact of Fundamental Drivers on Market Dynamics. MIT Energy Laboratory Working Paper. Unpublished.
Yoon Y., Raikar S., and Ilić M., 2000. Congestion Management for Large Electric Power Systems. In: 6th International Conference on Probability Methods Applied to Power Systems, Funchal, Portugal.
Yoon Y., 2001. Electric Power Network Economics: Designing Principles for For-profit Independent Transmission Company and Underlying Architecture for Reliability. Thesis (Ph.D.). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wilson R., 1997. Implementation of Priority Insurance in Power Exchange Markets. Energy Journal 18(1), pp 111–125.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Raikar, S., Skantze, P. (2003). Interruptible Physical Transmission Contract for the Deregulated Electric Power Industry. In: Thissen, W.A.H., Herder, P.M. (eds) Critical Infrastructures State of the Art in Research and Application. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 65. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0495-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0495-5_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5105-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-0495-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive