Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorNeuhoff, Karstenen_GB
dc.date.accessioned2004-06-16T16:05:11Z
dc.date.available2004-06-16T16:05:11Z
dc.date.created2002-05en_GB
dc.date.issued2004-06-16T16:05:11Z
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/312
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/312
dc.description.abstractHow to treat transmission constraints in electricity markets that are not based on a pool but on bilateral trading? Three approaches are currently discussed: First, the system operator resolves constraints and socialises costs; second, physical transmission contracts; third, locational charging with the option of financial hedging. Socialisation of costs for constraint resolution results in inefficient dispatch and incorrect incentives for investment in generation. Physical contracts and locational charging designs have identical properties in a very simplified model world, but differ if transaction costs, illiquid markets and uncertainty about demand are considered. Physical transmission contracts are best designed as zonal access rights, but have to be centrally administered to be efficient. Only locational charging can cope with uncertainty and volatility of electricity demand efficiently and non-discriminatory.en_GB
dc.format.extent899374 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_GB
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_GB
dc.publisherFaculty of Economics
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCambridge Working Papers in Economics
dc.rightsAll Rights Reserveden
dc.rights.urihttps://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved/en
dc.subject.classificationClassification-JEL: D43, D61, L50, L94en_GB
dc.subject.otherElectricity Networks, Constraint Management, Market Design, Bilateral Tradingen_GB
dc.titleOptimal congestion treatment for bilateral electricity tradingen_GB
dc.typeWorking Paperen
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.5001


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record