Beyond capacity: contractual form in electricity reliability obligations
Han Shu, Jacob Mays

TL;DR
This paper analyzes how different resource adequacy contract designs in electricity markets influence investor behavior, resource mix, and market efficiency, proposing policy adjustments to improve market outcomes.
Contribution
It develops a stochastic equilibrium model to compare the effects of various contractual regimes on investment and market structure in electricity markets.
Findings
Alternative contracts can influence investor risk responses
Allowing opt-outs can prevent market inefficiencies
Replacing capacity mechanisms with forward contracts may enhance efficiency
Abstract
Liberalized electricity markets often include resource adequacy mechanisms that require consumers to contract with generation resources well in advance of real-time operations. While administratively defined mechanisms have most commonly taken the form of a capacity obligation, efficient markets would feature a broad array of arrangements adapted to the risk profiles and appetites of market participants. This article considers how the financial hedge embedded in alternative resource adequacy contract designs can induce different responses from risk-averse investors, with consequences for the resource mix and market structure. We construct a stochastic equilibrium model describing a competitive market with incomplete risk trading and compute investment equilibria under different contracting regimes. Two policy recommendations result. First, to avoid creating inefficiency by crowding out…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsElectric Power System Optimization · Smart Grid Energy Management
MethodsOPT
