Electricity Transmission

  • Michel Rivier
  • Ignacio J. Pérez-Arriaga
  • Luis Olmos
Chapter
Part of the Power Systems book series (POWSYS)

Abstract

In traditional electric utilities, where generation, transmission, distribution, supply and system operation are vertically integrated, the role of transmission tends to go unnoticed. Its remuneration is based on cost of service and its economic impact is limited to a comparatively modest contribution to the total cost of electric power paid by consumers, typically from 5 to 10 % in systems with no major imbalances between generation and demand. Moreover, no access disputes arise because only one player is involved.

Keywords

Europe Income Expense Argentina Volatility 

References

  1. 1.
    Alomoush MI, Shahidehpour SM (2000) Contingency-constrained congestion management with a minimum number of adjustments in preferred schedules. Electr Power Energy Syst 22:276–290Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson KP, McCarthy A (1999) Transmission pricing and expansion methodology: lessons from Argentina. Utilities Policy 8(4):199–211Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Batlle C, Gómez-Elvira R (2011) Forward cross-border transmission capacity allocation: physical versus Financial Transmission Rights. IIT Working Paper, May 2011. www.iit.upcomillas.es/batlle/publications
  4. 4.
    Bialek J (1996) Tracing the flow of electricity. IEE Proc Gener Transm Distrib 143(4):313–320Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boucher J, Smeers Y (2001) Towards a common European electricity market-paths in the right direction… still far from an effective design. Harvard Electricity Policy Group, Web page: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/hepg/Standard_Mkt_dsgn/Smeers_Interconnections1_4jni_3.do1.pdf
  6. 6.
    Brunekreeft G (2003) Market-based investment in electricity transmission networks: controllable flow. CMI electricity Project paper. Applied Economic Departament de Economía Aplicada. Cambridge University. Web page: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/electricity/publications/wp/index.htm
  7. 7.
    Chao HP, Peck S (1996) A market mechanism for electric power transmission. J Regul Econ 10:25–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chao HP, Peck S (2000) Flow-based transmission rights and congestion management. Electr J 13(8):38–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chisari OO, Dal-Bó P, Romero CA (2001) High-voltage electricity network expansions in Argentina: decision mechanisms and willingness-to-pay revelation. Energy Econ 23:696–715Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coxe R, Leonardo M (2010) Survey of non-traditional transmission development. Paper presented at the annual general meeting of the IEEE power and energy society, Minneapolis, Paper 978-1, July 2010Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Dios R, Sanz S, Alonso JF, Soto F (2009) Long-term grid expansion: Spanish Plan 2030. In: CIGRE conference http://www.cigre.org
  12. 12.
    Dismukes DE, Cope RF III, Mesyanzhinov D (1998) Capacity and economies of scale in electric power transmission. Utilities Policy 7(3):155–162Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    EIPC (2010) Eastern interconnection planning collaborative. http://www.eipconline.com/
  14. 14.
    EOR, Ente Operador Regional (2005) Reglamento del Mercado Eléctrico Regional (The Regional Electricity Market Procedures, in Spanish). Libro III del RMER, De la TransmisiónGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ENTSO-E, European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (2010 and 2012) Ten-year network development plan (TYNDP) 2010–2020, Chapter 8. https://www.entsoe.eu/system-development/tyndp/tyndp-2010/. Similarly for TYNDP-2012
  16. 16.
    ETSO, European Transmission System Operators (1999) Evaluation of congestion management methods for cross-border transmission. http://www.etso-net.org/, p 22
  17. 17.
    ETSO, European Transmission System Operators (2006) Transmission risk hedging products. solutions for the market and consequences for the TSOs. ETSO Background Paper, 20 April 2006. http://www.entsoe.eu
  18. 18.
    ETSO, European Transmission System Operators (2008) Overview of transmission tariffs in Europe: Synthesis 2007. ETSO Tariffs task force. http://www.etso-net.org/upload/documents/11.a.%20Final_Synthesis_2007_18-06-08.pdfS, p 27
  19. 19.
    European Commission, COM(2011) 658 final (2011) Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council on guidelines for trans-european energy infrastructureGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    FERC (2010) Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation by Transmission Owning and Operating Public Utilities, Docket No. RM10-23-000, June 17, 2010. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=12372947
  21. 21.
    FERC, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (2011) Order 1000. Transmission planning and cost allocationGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Galiana FD, Ilic M (1998) A mathematical framework for the analysis and management of power transactions under open access. IEEE Trans Power Syst 13(2):681–687Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gilbert R, Neuhoff K, Nwebery D (2004) Allocating transmission to mitigate market power in electricity networks. Rand J Econ 35(4):691–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Helm D (2003) Auctions and energy networks. Utilities Policy 11(1):21–25MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Heyeck M (2007) The next interstate system: 765-kV transmission. Electr Light & Power 85(1):32Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hogan WW (1992) Contract networks for electric power transmission. J Regul Econ 4:211–242Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hogan WW (2002) Financial transmission right formulations, Cambridge. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/hepg, Center for Business and Government, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
  28. 28.
    Hogan WW (2011) Transmission benefits and cost allocation. White paper. www.hks.harvard.edu/hepg/Papers/2011/Hogan_Trans_Cost_053111.pdf
  29. 29.
    IAEW, Institute of Power Systems and Power Economics and CONSENTEC (2001) Analysis of electricity network capacities and identification of congestion. Aachen, Consulting fur Energiewirtschaft und -technik. Report for the European Commission, Directorate-General Energy and TransportGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Joskow PL (2005) Making transmission owners accountable. Panel on investments in transmission. In: The economics of electricity markets conference, ToulouseGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Joskow PL (2006) Patterns of transmission investment. In: Lévêque F (ed) Competitive electricity markets and sustainability. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, pp 131–187Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Joskow P, Tirole J (2002) Transmission investment: alternative institutional frameworks. Panel presentation at the wholesale markets for electricity conference, Toulouse, Francia, 22–23 Nov 2002Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Junqueira M, daCosta LC, Barroso LA, Oliveira GC, Thome LM, Pereira MV (2007) An Aumann–Shapley approach to allocate transmission services cost among network users in electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 22(4):1532–1546Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kavicky JA, Shahidehpour SM (1997) Determination of generator siting and contract options based on interutility tie line flow impacts. IEEE Trans Power Syst 12(4):1649–1653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kench BT (2004) Let’s get physical! or financial? A study of electricity transmission rights. J Regul Econ 25(2):186–214Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kirschen D, Allan R (1997) Contributions of individual generators to loads and flows. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 12(1):52–60Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kumar A, Srivastava SC, Singh SN (2004) A zonal congestion management approach using real and reactive power rescheduling. IEEE Trans Power Syst 19(1):554–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Latorre G et al (2003) Classification of publications and models on transmission expansion planning. IEEE Trans Power Syst 18(2):938–946Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Littlechild SC, Skerk CJ (2004a) Regulation of transmission expansion in Argentina part I: state ownership, reform and the fourth line. CMI electricity Project paper. Applied Economic Departament de Economía Aplicada, Cambridge University. http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/electricity/publications/w
  40. 40.
    Littlechild SC, Skerk CJ (2004b) Regulation of transmission expansion in Argentina part II: developments since the fourth line. CMI electricity Project paper. Applied Economic Departament de Economía Aplicada, Cambridge University. http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/electricity/publications/wp/
  41. 41.
    Lusztig C, Feldberg P, Orans R, Olsonet A (2006) A survey of transmission tariffs in NorthAmerica. Energy 31 (6–7):1017–1039Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    McDaniel T (2003) Auctioning access to networks: evidence and expectations. Utilities Policy 11(1):33–38Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Méndez R, Rudnick H (2004) Congestion management and transmission rights in centralized electric markets. IEEE Trans Power Syst 19(2):889–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2011) The future of the electric grid. http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/studies/the-electric-grid-2011.shtml
  45. 45.
    Newbery DM (2003) Network capacity auctions: promise and problems. Utilities Policy 11(1):26–32Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    OFGEM, Office of the Gas and Electricity Markets, (2012) Project TransmiT. http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Networks/Trans/PT/Pages/ProjectTransmiT.aspx
  47. 47.
    Olmos L (2006) Regulatory design of the transmission activity in regional electricity markets. Ph D dissertation, Universidad Pontificia ComillasGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Olmos L, Pérez-Arriaga IJ (2007) Comparison of several inter-TSO compensation methods in the context of the internal electricity market of the European Union, Energy Policy. vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 2379–2389, April 2007Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Olmos L, Pérez-Arriaga IJ (2009) A comprehensive approach for computation and implementation of efficient electricity transmission network charges. Energy Policy 37(12):5285–5295Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Oren SS, Ross AM (2002) Economic congestion relief across multiple regions requires tradable physical flow-gate rights. IEEE Trans Power Syst 17(1):159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Rubio-Odériz F, Puerta Gutiérrez JF, Arcéluz Ogando J, Marín J (1994) Marginal pricing of transmission services: An analysis of cost recovery, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems. vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 65–72, February 1995Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ (2002) Cross-border tarification in the internal electricity market of the European Union. In: Proceedings of the power systems computation conference (PSCC), SevilleGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Olmos L (2003) Network cost allocation in the internal electricity market of the EU: two main approaches for Inter-TSO payments calculation. Working paper, Universidad Pontificia ComillasGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Olmos L (2006) Compatibility of investment signals in distribution, transmission and generation. In: Lévêque F (ed) Competitive electricity markets and sustainability. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, pp 230–288Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Smeers Y (2003) Guidelines on tariff setting. In: Lévêque F (ed) Chapter 7 in the book ‘Transport pricing of electricity networks’. Kluwer Academic Publishers, BostonGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Rubio FJ, Puerta JF, Arceluz J, Marín J (1995) Marginal pricing of transmission services: an analysis of cost recovery. IEEE Trans Power Syst 10(1):546–553Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Olmos-Camacho L, Rubio-Odériz FJ (2002) Report on cost components of cross border exchanges of electricity. Prepared for the Directorate General for Energy and Transport/European Commission, Madrid. Available at ec.europa.euGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Gómez T, Olmos L, Rivier M (2011) Transmission and distribution networks for a sustainable electricity supply. In: Galarraga I, GonzáLlez-Eguino M, Markandya A (eds) Chapter 7 in the book ‘Handbook of sustainable energy’. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    PJM Interconnection (2010) A survey of transmission cost allocation issues, methods and practices, Valley ForgeGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rau NS (2000) Transmission loss and congestion cost allocation: an approach based on responsibility. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15(4):1401–1409Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    RealiseGrid project (2010) Working Package D3.3.1. Possible criteria to assess technical-economic and strategic benefits of specific transmission projects. http://realisegrid.rse-web.it/default.asp
  62. 62.
    Rivier M, Pérez-Arriaga IJ (1993) Computation and decomposition of spot prices for transmission pricing. In: Proceedings of the power systems computation conference (PSCC), AvignonGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rivier M, Pérez-Arriaga IJ, Luengo G (1990) JUANAC: a model for computation of spot prices in interconnected power systems. In: Proceedings of the 10th PSCC conference, Graz, 19–24 Aug 1990Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rubio-Odériz F (1999) Metodología de asignación de costes de la red de transporte en un contexto de regulación abierta a la competencia (Methods for transmission cost allocation under a regulatory context of open competition, in Spanish). Doctoral thesis Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid (Spain)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rubio FJ, Pérez-Arriaga IJ (2000) Marginal pricing of transmission services: a comparative analysis of network cost allocation methods. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 15(1):448–454Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ruff LE (2000) Flowgates vs. FTRs and options vs. Obligations. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/hepg
  67. 67.
    Ruff LE (2001) Flowgates, contingency-constrained dispatch and transmission rights. Electr J 14(1):34–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Schweppe FC, Caramanis M, Tabors RD, Bohn RE (1988) Spot pricing of electricity. Kluver Academic Publishers, BostonGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Stoft S (1999) Financial transmission rights meet cournot: how TCCs curb market power. Energy J 20(1):1–23Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Tabors R, Caramanis M (2000) Real flow, a preliminary proposal for a flow-based congestion management system, Cambridge, MA. http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/hepg/flowgate/Real%20Flow.pdf
  71. 71.
    Tao S, Gross G (2002) A congestion management allocation mechanism for multiple transaction networks. IEEE Trans Power Syst 17(3):826–833Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Vazquez C, Olmos L, Perez-Arriaga IJ (2002) On the selection of the slack bus in mechanisms for transmission network cost allocation that are based on network utilization. In: Proceedings of the power systems computation conference (PSCC), SevilleGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Wood AJ, Wollenberg BF (1996) Power generation, operation, and control, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michel Rivier
    • 1
  • Ignacio J. Pérez-Arriaga
    • 1
  • Luis Olmos
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Pontificia ComillasInstituto de Investigación TecnológicaMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations