Analysis of Generation Investment Under Different Market Designs

In this paper a stochastic dynamic optimization model is used to analyze the effect of different market designs on generation investment and demand. The expansion decisions of profit-maximizing investors are simulated under four different market designs: energy only, capacity payment, capacity obligation, and capacity subscription. The results show that the overall social welfare is reduced compared to a centralized social welfare optimization for the first three policies. In particular, an energy only market with a low price cap leads to insufficient generation investments. Capacity payments and obligations give additional investment incentives and more generating capacity, but also result in a considerable transfer of wealth from consumers to producers due to the capacity payments. In contrast, the capacity subscription policy increases the social welfare, and both producers and consumers benefit. This is possible because capacity subscription explicitly utilizes differences in consumers' preferences for uninterrupted supply. This advantage must be weighed against the cost of implementation, which is not included in the model.

[1]  Hugh Rudnick,et al.  Reliability in the new market structure (Part 1) , 1999 .

[2]  Gerard Doorman,et al.  Peaking Capacity in Restructured Power Systems , 2000 .

[3]  Ming-Che Hu,et al.  A Dynamic Analysis of a Demand Curve-Based Capacity Market Proposal: The PJM Reliability Pricing Model , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[4]  Mark Sanford,et al.  Utilizing System Dynamics Modeling to Examine Impact of Deregulation on Generation Capacity Growth , 2005, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[5]  I. Pérez-Arriaga,et al.  A Market Approach to Long-Term Security of Supply , 2002, IEEE Power Engineering Review.

[6]  Eduardo S. Schwartz,et al.  Investment Under Uncertainty. , 1994 .

[7]  A. Botterud,et al.  Optimal investments in power generation under centralized and decentralized decision making , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[8]  P. Cramton,et al.  A capacity market that makes sense , 2005, IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005.

[9]  S. Stoft Power System Economics: Designing Markets for Electricity , 2002 .

[10]  Magnus Korpås,et al.  A stochastic dynamic model for optimal timing of investments in new generation capacity in restructured power systems , 2007 .

[11]  G. Doorman,et al.  Capacity subscription: solving the peak demand challenge in electricity markets , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[12]  James Bushnell Electricity Resource Adequacy: Matching Policies and Goals , 2005 .

[13]  Benjamin F. Hobbs,et al.  Installed Capacity Requirements and Price Caps: Oil on the Water, or Fuel on the Fire? , 2001 .

[14]  Robert Wilson,et al.  Priority Service: Pricing, Investment, and Market Organization , 1987 .

[15]  A.D. Papalexopoulos Supplying the generation to meet the demand , 2004, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine.