Central- versus Self-Dispatch in Electricity Markets

Victor Ahlqvist, P. Holmberg, Thomas P. Tangerås
{"title":"Central- versus Self-Dispatch in Electricity Markets","authors":"Victor Ahlqvist, P. Holmberg, Thomas P. Tangerås","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3302569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In centralized markets, producers submit detailed cost data to the day-ahead market, and the market operator decides how much should be produced in each plant. This differs from decentralized markets that rely on self-commitment and where producers send less detailed cost information to the operator of the day-ahead market. Ideally centralized electricity markets would be more effective, as they consider more detailed information, such as start-up costs and no-load costs. On the other hand, the bidding format is rather simplified and does not allow producers to express all details in their costs. Moreover, due to uplift payments, producers have incentives to exaggerate their costs. As of today, US has centralized wholesale electricity markets, while most of Europe has decentralized wholesale electricity markets. The main problem with centralized markets in US is that they do not provide intra-day prices which can be used to continuously up-date the dispatch when the forecast for renewable output changes. Intra-day markets are more flexible and better adapted to deal with renewable power in decentralized markets. Iterative intra-day trading in a decentralized market can also be used to sort out coordination problems related to non-convexities in the production. The downside of this is that increased possibilities to coordinate increase the risk of getting collusive outcomes. Decentralized day-ahead markets in Europe can mainly be improved by considering network constraints in more detail.","PeriodicalId":204209,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Energy Politics (Topic)","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Energy Politics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3302569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

In centralized markets, producers submit detailed cost data to the day-ahead market, and the market operator decides how much should be produced in each plant. This differs from decentralized markets that rely on self-commitment and where producers send less detailed cost information to the operator of the day-ahead market. Ideally centralized electricity markets would be more effective, as they consider more detailed information, such as start-up costs and no-load costs. On the other hand, the bidding format is rather simplified and does not allow producers to express all details in their costs. Moreover, due to uplift payments, producers have incentives to exaggerate their costs. As of today, US has centralized wholesale electricity markets, while most of Europe has decentralized wholesale electricity markets. The main problem with centralized markets in US is that they do not provide intra-day prices which can be used to continuously up-date the dispatch when the forecast for renewable output changes. Intra-day markets are more flexible and better adapted to deal with renewable power in decentralized markets. Iterative intra-day trading in a decentralized market can also be used to sort out coordination problems related to non-convexities in the production. The downside of this is that increased possibilities to coordinate increase the risk of getting collusive outcomes. Decentralized day-ahead markets in Europe can mainly be improved by considering network constraints in more detail.
电力市场的中央调度与自我调度
在集中式市场中,生产者向前一天的市场提交详细的成本数据,市场经营者决定每个工厂应该生产多少。这与依赖于自我承诺的分散式市场不同,在分散式市场中,生产者向前一天市场的运营商发送的详细成本信息较少。理想的集中式电力市场会更有效,因为它们会考虑更详细的信息,比如启动成本和空载成本。另一方面,投标格式相当简化,不允许生产者表达其成本的所有细节。此外,由于提高支付,生产商有动机夸大他们的成本。到目前为止,美国的电力批发市场是集中式的,而欧洲大部分地区的电力批发市场是分散式的。美国集中式市场的主要问题是,当可再生能源产量预测发生变化时,它们不提供可用于持续更新调度的日内价格。日内交易市场更灵活,更适合于在分散的市场中处理可再生能源。在去中心化的市场中,迭代的日内交易也可以用来解决与生产中的非凸性相关的协调问题。这样做的缺点是,协调的可能性增加了,获得串通结果的风险也增加了。欧洲去中心化的提前日市场主要可以通过更详细地考虑网络约束来改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信