Measuring a dominant firm's market power in a restructured electricity market, a case study of Colorado

Utilities Policy

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 243-257

  Sweetser, Al ^a  

^a 7926 Carrleigh Parkway   (United States)

Author keywords

Deregulation; Electric restructuring; Market power

Indexed keywords

ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY; ENERGY MARKET; MARKET CONDITIONS;

COLORADO; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0345188718     PISSN: 09571787     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0957-1787(98)00013-7     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Averch Harvey, Johnson Leland L. Behavior of the firm under regulatory constraint. American Economic Review. 52(5):1962;1052-1069.
2. Baumol William J. Contestable markets: an uprising in the theory of industry structure. American Economic Review. 72(1):1982;1-15.
3. Borenstein Severin, Bushnell James An empirical analysis of the potential for market power in California's electricity industry. Utilities Policy. 5(3)(4):1997;219-236.
4. Borenstein, S., Bushnell, J., Kahn, E., Stoft, S., 1995. Market power in California electricity markets. Working paper. Berkeley, CA: University of California Energy Institute.
5. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 1996a. Inventory of power plants in the U.S. as of January 1, 1996. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy.
6. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 1996b. The changing structure of the electric power industry, an update. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy.
7. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 1997. Electricity prices in competitive environment: marginal cost pricing of generation services and financial status of electric utilities. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy.
8. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), 1996. Elfin Electric Utility Production Simulation and Integrated Planning System, Generation Model User's Guide, Version 3.0. Oakland, CA: Environmental Defense Fund.
9. Joskow, P.L., 1995. Horizontal market power in wholesale power markets. Working paper. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Electricity Policy Group.
10. Leibenstein Harvey Allocative efficiency vs. 'x-efficiency'. American Economic Review. 56:1962;392-415.
11. McGraw-Hill Energy and Business Newsletters, 1997. New Moody's survey shows many changes in estimated stranded costs and prices. Electric Utility Week, January 27, 11-14.
12. Newbery David M. Power markets and market power. The Energy Journal. 16(3):1995;39-66.
13. Newbery, D.M., Pollitt, M.G., 1997. The restructuring and privatisation of the CEGB - Was it worth it? Working paper. Cambridge, UK: Department of Applied Economics and Faculty of Economics.
14. Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo), 1997. 1996 Final Integrated Resource Plan. Denver, CO: Public Service Company of Colorado.
15. Resource Data International (RDI), 1997. Power markets in the U.S. Boulder, CO: Resource Data International.
16. Werden Gregory J. Identifying market power in generation. Public Utilities Fortnightly. 134(4):1996;16-21.
17. Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC), 1997a. 10-Year coordinated plan summary, 1997-2006. Salt Lake City, UT: Western Systems Coordinating Council.
18. Western Systems Coordinating Council (WSCC), 1997b. Summary of estimated loads and resources. Salt Lake City, UT: Western Systems Coordinating Council.
19. Wolak, F.A., Patrick, R.H., 1997. The impact of market rules and market structure on the price determination process in the England and Wales electricity market. Working Paper. Berkeley, CA: University of California Energy Institute.