Model-Based Comparisons of Pool and Bilateral Markets for Electricity

John Bower, Derek W. Bunn

The Energy Journal · 2000 · 262 citations · 18 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Electricity markets worldwide employ pool-based auctions or bilateral trading, yet it remains unclear whether these mechanisms produce different prices, a question that arose after England and Wales transitioned from a pool system in 1998. This study uses a computationally intensive simulation to isolate and systematically test how alternative trading arrangements affect electricity prices in England and Wales. An agent‑based simulation of the wholesale market was developed to evaluate the impact of daily pool auctions versus hourly bilateral trading under Pay SMP and Pay Bid settlement rules. The simulation shows that daily bidding with Pay SMP settlement yields the lowest prices, whereas hourly bidding with Pay Bid settlement results in the highest prices.

Abstract

A variety of market mechanisms have been proposed and implemented around the world in order to create competitive electricity pools and exchanges. However, it is an open question whether pool-based daily auctions or continuous bilateral trading deliver different prices under conditions of market power. In this paper we present a computationally intensive simulation model of the wholesale electricity market in England and Wales to isolate and systematically test the potential impact of alternative trading arrangements on electricity prices. After eight years of trading under a pool-based system, proposals were initiated in 1998 to change the market in England and Wales to bilateral trading. This paper uses an agent-based simulation to evaluate two important aspects of that proposal. The results show that daily bidding with Pay SMP settlement, as in the original Pool day-ahead market, produces the lowest prices while hourly bidding with Pay Bid settlement, as proposed for the bilateral model, produces the highest prices.

References

18