Refine
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Keywords
- Computational Equilibrium Models; Electricity Markets; Investment Incentives; Distribution Network Expansion Planning; Storage Investment and Operation; Renewable Energy Production; (Self-) Consumption (1)
- Electric fuels, Hydrogen Utilization, Hydrogen Import, LOHC, Mobility (1)
- Electricity Markets, Network Expansion, Generation Expansion, Investment Incentives, Computational Equilibrium Models (1)
- Electricity Markets, Network Expansion, Generation Expansion, Investment Incentives, Market Design, Congestion Management, Computational Equilibrium Models (1)
- Electricity Markets, Redispatch, Congestion Management, Computational Equilibrium Models (1)
- Sector Coupling, Eletricity Markets, Electric fuels, Hydrogen Utilization, LOHC, Mobility (1)
In this paper we propose an equilibrium model that allows to analyze subsidization schemes to affect locational choices for generation investment in electricity markets. Our framework takes into account generation investment decided by private investors and redispatch as well as network expansion decided by a regulated transmission system operator. In order to take into account the different objectives and decision variables of those agents, our approach uses a bi-level structure. We focus on the case of regionally differentiated network fees which have to be paid by generators (a so called g-component). The resulting investment and production decisions are compared to the outcome of an equilibrium model in the absence of such regionally differentiated investment incentives and to an overall optimal (first-best) benchmark. To illustrate possible economic effects, we calibrate our framework with data from the German electricity market. Our results reveal that while regionally differentiated network fees do have a significant impact on locational choice of generation capacities, we do not find significant effects on either welfare or
network expansion.
In this paper we propose a bi-level equilibrium model that allows to analyze the impact of different regulatory frameworks on storage and network investment in distribution networks. In our model, a regulated distribution system operator decides on network investment and operation while he anticipates the decisions of private agents on storage investment and operation. Since, especially in distribution networks, voltage stability and network losses have a decisive influence on network expansion and operation, we use a linearized AC power flow formulation to adequately account for these aspects. As adjustments of the current regulatory framework, we consider curtailment of renewable production, the introduction of a network fee based on the maximum renewable feed-in, and a subsidy scheme for storage investment. The performance of the different alternative frameworks is compared to the performance under rules that are commonly applied in various countries today, as well as to a system-optimal (first-best) benchmark. To illustrate the economic effects, we calibrate our model with data from the field project Smart Grid Solar. Our results reveal that curtailment and a redesign of network fees both have the potential to significantly reduce total system costs. On the contrary, investment subsidization of storage capacity has only a limited impact as long as the distribution system operator is not allowed to intervene in storage operation.
Electric fuels (e-fuels) enable CO2-neutral mobility and are therefore an alternative to battery-powered electric vehicles. This paper compares the cost-effectiveness of Fischer-Tropsch diesel, methanol and Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers. The production costs of those fuels are to a large part driven by the energy-intensive electrolytic hydrogen production. In this paper, we apply a multi-level electricity market model to calculate future hourly electricity prices for various electricity market designs in Germany for the year 2035. We then assess the economic efficiency of the different fuels under various future market conditions. In particular, we use the electricity price vectors derived from an electricity market model calibrated for 2035 as an input for a mathematical model of the entire process chain from hydrogen production and chemical bonding to the energetic utilization of the fuels in a vehicle. Within this model, we perform a sensitivity analysis, which quantifies the impact of various parameters on the fuel production cost. Most importantly, we consider prices resulting from own model calculations for different energy market designs, the investment cost for the electrolysis systems and the carbon dioxide purchase price. The results suggest that the use of hydrogen, which is temporarily bound to Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carriers, is a favorable alternative to the more widely discussed synthetic diesel and methanol.
In this paper we analyze a uniform price electricity spot market that is followed by redispatch in the case of network congestion. We assume that the transmission system operator is incentivized to minimize redispatch cost and compare a cost-based redispatch (CBR) to a market-based redispatch (MBR) mechanism. For networks with at least three nodes we show that in contrast to CBR, in the case of MBR the redispatch cost minimizing allocation may not be short-run efficient. As we demonstrate, in case of MBR the possibility of the transmission system operator to reduce redispatch cost at the expense of a reduced welfare may be driven by the electricity supply side or the electricity demand side. If, however, the transmission system operator is obliged to implement the welfare maximizing (instead of the redispatch cost minimizing) dispatch by regulation, this will result in an efficient dispatch also in case of MBR.
In this paper we propose an equilibrium model in order to analyze the impact of electricity market design on generation and transmission expansion in liberalized electricity markets. In a multi-level structure, our framework takes into account that generation investment and operation is decided by private investors, while network expansion and redispatch is decided by a regulated transmission system operator — as well as the different objectives of firms (profit maximization) and the regulator (welfare maximization). In order to illustrate the possibilities to quantify long term economic effects with our framework, we calibrate our model for the German electricity market. We consider various moderate adjustments of the market design: (i) the division of the market area into two price zones, (ii) the efficient curtailment of renewable production and (iii) a cost-benefit-driven balance between network expansion and network management measures. We then analyze the impact of these market designs on generation and transmission investment in case those design elements are anticipated upon network development planning. The resulting investment and production decisions are compared to a benchmark that reflects the current German electricity market design and to an overall optimal first-best benchmark. Our results reveal that price zones do have a significant impact on locational choice of generators and result in a reduced need for network expansion, but lead to only moderate annual welfare gains of approximately 0.9% of annual total system costs. Anticipation of optimal curtailment of renewables and a cost-benefit-driven use of redispatch operations upon network expansion planning, however, implies a welfare gain of over 4.9% of annual total system costs per year as compared to the existing market design, which equals 85% of the maximum possible welfare gain of the first-best benchmark.
The use of electric fuels (e-fuels) enables CO2-neutral mobility and opens therefore an alternative to fossil-fuel-fired engines or battery-powered electric motors. This paper compares the cost-effectiveness of Fischer-Tropsch diesel, methanol, and hydrogen stored as cryogenic liquid (LH2) or in form of liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHCs). The production cost of those fuels are to a large extent driven by the energy-intensive electrolytic water splitting. The option of producing e-fuels in Germany competes with international locations with excellent conditions for renewable energy harvesting and thus very low levelized cost of electricity. We developed a mathematical model that covers the entire process chain. Starting with the production of the required resources such as fresh water, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, electrical and thermal energy, the subsequent chemical synthesis, the transport to filling stations in Germany and finally the energetic utilization of the fuels in the vehicle. We found that the choice of production site can have a major impact on the mobility cost using the respective fuels. Especially in case of diesel production, the levelized cost of electricity driven by the full load hours of the applied renewable energy source have a huge impact. An LOHC-based system is shown to be less dependent on the kind of electricity source compared to other technologies due to its comparatively low electricity consumption and the low cost for the hydrogenation units. The length of the transportation route and the price of the filling station infrastructure, on the other hand, clearly increase mobility cost for LOHC and LH2.
