Hedging and tail risk in electricity markets

IF 13.6 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Farhad Billimoria, Jacob Mays, Rahmat Poudineh
{"title":"Hedging and tail risk in electricity markets","authors":"Farhad Billimoria, Jacob Mays, Rahmat Poudineh","doi":"10.1016/j.eneco.2024.108132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the persistent concerns in scarcity-based electricity market designs is that markets for long-term contracts are highly illiquid or ‘missing’. In the context of decarbonisation, a key question arises as to whether this phenomenon will persist or improve as markets transition to greater proportions of zero-marginal cost renewables and storage. Using a stochastic equilibrium model and insights from insurance theory, we consider long-term hedging in the context of credit and financing constraints. For electricity markets dominated by thermal generation, the deliverability of long-term hedges can be significantly impacted by the volatility of thermal fuels and the co-dependence between them under extreme conditions. Our results demonstrate the importance of fuel hedging as an underlying driver of the cost and deliverability of electricity hedging. Where the underlying fuel exposure cannot be contracted, generators may need to price contracts at multiples of the expected value of spot prices. The results provide guidance for discourse on policy and market design in relation to tail risk. One interpretation of the results in this paper is that the lack of contracting for tail risks given a volatile raw commodity is not a market failure per se, but a rational response of market participants due in part to the expense of hedging generation when fuel exposures are unable to be hedged. Counterintuitively, in the context of the energy transition, our results show that, ceteris paribus, increasing the penetration of low carbon resources like wind, solar, and energy storage can add diversity to the risk exposures of the underlying hedge contract.","PeriodicalId":11665,"journal":{"name":"Energy Economics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2024.108132","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One of the persistent concerns in scarcity-based electricity market designs is that markets for long-term contracts are highly illiquid or ‘missing’. In the context of decarbonisation, a key question arises as to whether this phenomenon will persist or improve as markets transition to greater proportions of zero-marginal cost renewables and storage. Using a stochastic equilibrium model and insights from insurance theory, we consider long-term hedging in the context of credit and financing constraints. For electricity markets dominated by thermal generation, the deliverability of long-term hedges can be significantly impacted by the volatility of thermal fuels and the co-dependence between them under extreme conditions. Our results demonstrate the importance of fuel hedging as an underlying driver of the cost and deliverability of electricity hedging. Where the underlying fuel exposure cannot be contracted, generators may need to price contracts at multiples of the expected value of spot prices. The results provide guidance for discourse on policy and market design in relation to tail risk. One interpretation of the results in this paper is that the lack of contracting for tail risks given a volatile raw commodity is not a market failure per se, but a rational response of market participants due in part to the expense of hedging generation when fuel exposures are unable to be hedged. Counterintuitively, in the context of the energy transition, our results show that, ceteris paribus, increasing the penetration of low carbon resources like wind, solar, and energy storage can add diversity to the risk exposures of the underlying hedge contract.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy Economics
Energy Economics ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
18.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
524
期刊介绍: Energy Economics is a field journal that focuses on energy economics and energy finance. It covers various themes including the exploitation, conversion, and use of energy, markets for energy commodities and derivatives, regulation and taxation, forecasting, environment and climate, international trade, development, and monetary policy. The journal welcomes contributions that utilize diverse methods such as experiments, surveys, econometrics, decomposition, simulation models, equilibrium models, optimization models, and analytical models. It publishes a combination of papers employing different methods to explore a wide range of topics. The journal's replication policy encourages the submission of replication studies, wherein researchers reproduce and extend the key results of original studies while explaining any differences. Energy Economics is indexed and abstracted in several databases including Environmental Abstracts, Fuel and Energy Abstracts, Social Sciences Citation Index, GEOBASE, Social & Behavioral Sciences, Journal of Economic Literature, INSPEC, and more.
×
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