Using Market Simulations for Economic Assessment of Transmission Upgrades: Application of the California ISO Approach

Restructured Electric Power Systems: Analysis of Electricity Markets with Equilibrium Models

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 241-270

  Awad, Mohamed Labib ^a   Casey, Keith E ^b,i   Geevarghese, Anna S ^c   Miller, Jeffrey C ^d   Rahimi, A Farrokh ^e   Sheffrin, Anjali Y ^b   Zhang, Mingxia ^b   Toolson, Eric ^f   Drayton, Glenn ^g   Hobbs, Benjamin F ^h   Wolak, Frank A ^c,j,k  

^a CAIRO UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CAISO   (United States)

^e Open Access Technology International Inc   (United States)

^f Plexos Solutions   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

^h JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

ⁱ Department of Market Monitoring ^*  (United States)

^j HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Market simulations for economic assessment of transmission upgrades application of California ISO approach; Palo Verde Devers NO. 2 Study Market Model: PLEXOS; Recent applications of team to renewables

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859174405     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9780470608555.ch7     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. National Transmission Grid Study . U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, May 2002 .
2. Baldick R, Kahn E . Transmission planning issues in a competitive economic environment . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1993 ; 8 ( 4 ): 1497-1503 .
3. Buygi MO, Balzer G, Shanechi HM, Shahidehpour M . Market-based transmission expansion planning . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2004 ; 19 ( 4 ): 2060-2067 .
4. de la Torre T, Feltes JW, San Roman TG, Merrill HM. Deregulation, privatization, and competition: transmission planning under uncertainty . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 1999 ; 14 ( 2 ): 460-465
5. Fang R, Hill DJ . A new strategy for transmission expansion in competitive electricity markets . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2003 ; 18 ( 1 ): 374-380 .
6. Hirst E. U.S. transmission capacity: a review of transmission plans . The Electricity Journal 2004 ; 17 ( 7 ): 65-79 .
7. Hirst E, Kirby B . Expanding transmission capacity: a proposed planning process . The Electricity Journal 2002 ; 15 ( 8 ): 54-59 .
8. Shahidehpour M. Investing in expansion, the many issues that cloud transmission planning . IEEE Power & Energy Mag 2004 ; 2 ( 1 ): 14-18 .
9. Thomas RJ, Whitehead JT, Outhred H, Mount TD . Transmission system planning-the old world meets the new . Proceedings of the IEEE 2005 ; 93 ( 11 ): 2026-2035 .
10. Wolak FA, Barber B, Bushnell J, Hobbs BF . Comments on the London Economics methodology for assessing the benefi ts of transmission expansions . Opinion of the California ISO Market Surveillance Committee, Oct. 7, 2002, www.caiso.com/docs/09003a6080/1b/4f/09003a60801b4fa9.pdf
11. Consortium of Electric Reliability Technology Solutions . Economic evaluation of transmission interconnection in a restructured market . Prepared for the California Energy Commission, 2004 .
12. U.S. Department of Energy . Transmission Bottleneck Project Report . Washington, DC, March 2003 .
13. California ISO, Transmission Economic Assessment Methodology (TEAM), Folsom, CA, June 2004 . www.caiso.com/docs/2003/03/18/2003031815303519270.html
14. Sheffrin AY. Wires in the air: fi ve key principles for proving economic need . The Electricity Journal 2005 ; 18 ( 2 ): 62-77 .
15. Awad M, et al. The California ISO Transmission Economic Assessment Methodology (TEAM): Principles and application to path 26 . In: Proc. 2006 IEEE PES General Meeting, Montreal, Canada, June 2006 .
16. California Public Utilities Commission . Order instituting rulemaking on policies and practices for the Commission ' s transmission assessment process . R.04-01-026. San Francisco, USA, 2003 .
17. California Energy Commission, 2003 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Nov. 12, 2003.
18. Robinson CF. Comments of the California independent system operator on the proposed opinion on methodology for economic assessment of transmission Projects . Investigation 05-06-041. California Public Utilities Commission, July 10, 2006 .
19. GE Energy, MAPSTM software-for informed economic decisions . 2007, www.gepower.com/ prod_serv/products/utility_software/en/downloads/10320.pdf
20. PLEXOS for Power Systems . Adelaide, Australia, 2007, www.plexossolutions.com, www.plexos. info.
21. Sauma EE, Oren SS . Proactive planning and valuation of transmission investments in restructured electricity markets . Journal of Regulatory Economics 2006 ; 30 ( 3 ): 261-290 .
22. Hobbs BF, Rijkers and FAM . Strategic generation with conjectured transmission price responses in a mixed transmission pricing system-Part I . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2004 ; 19 ( 2 ): 707-717 .
23. Sheffrin AY, Chen J, Hobbs BF. Watching Watts to prevent abuse of power . IEEE Power & Energy Magazine 2004 ; 2 ( 4 ): 58-65 .
24. Borenstein S, Bushnell J, Wolak FA . Measuring market ineffi ciencies in California ' s deregulated electricity industry . American Economic Review 2002 ; 92 ( 5 ): 1376-1405 .
25. Joskow PL, Kahn E . A quantitative analysis of pricing behavior in California ' s wholesale electricity market during summer 2000 . The Energy Journal 2002 ; 23 ( 4 ): 1-35 .
26. Wolfram C. Measuring duopoly power in the British electricity spot market . American Economic Review 1999 ; 89 : 805-826 .
27. London Economics International, LLC, A proposed methodology for evaluating the economic benefi ts in a restructured wholesale electricity market, Prepared for the CAISO, Feb. 28, 2003 .
28. DePillis, Jr. MS . Uses of market simulation by market system operators . In: Proc. 2006 IEEE PES Transmission & Distribution Meeting, Dallas, May 24, 2006 .
29. PJM Interconnection, LLC, Regional transmission expansion plan, 2006 . www.pjm.com/planning/ downloads/200660410-rtep-sec-5.pdf
30. Vaiani A, Bresesti P, Vailati R . A method to assess benefi ts of transmission expansions in the Italian electricity market . In: Proc. 2007. IEEE Gen. Meeting, Tampa, FL, June 24-26, 2007 .
31. Schweppe FC, Caramanis MC, Tabors RD, Bohn RE . Spot pricing of electricity, Appendix A . Boston : Kluwer ; 1988 .
32. CAISO . Board report, economic evaluation of the Palo Verde-Devers Line No. 2-main report and technical appendices . Departments of Market Analysis & Grid Planning, Feb. 2005 . www.caiso.com/ docs/2005/01/19/2005011914572217739.html
33. STEP Planning Process, www1.caiso.com/docs/2004/03/08/2004030814004810105.doc
34. Green RJ, Newbery DM . Competition in the British electricity spot market . Journal of Political Economy 1992 ; 100 ( 5 ): 929-953 .
35. Saracino N. Rebuttal testimony of the California Independent System Operator Corporation . In the Matter of the Application of San Diego Gas & Electric Company for a Certifi cate of Public Convenience and Necessity for the Sunrise Powerlink Transmission Project, Application 06-08-010, California Public Utilities Commission, June 15, 2007 .
36. CAISO . CAISO South regional transmission plan for 2006, Part II: Findings and recommendation on the Tehachapi transmission project. 18 November 2006 .
37. Baldick R. Variation of distribution factors with loading . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2003 ; 18 ( 4 ): 1316-1323 .
38. Hobbs BF, Drayton G, Fisher EB, Lise W . Improved transmission representations in oligopolistic market models: quadratic losses, phase shifters, and DC lines . IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 2008 ; 23 ( 3 ): 1018-1029 .
39. Samuelson PA. Spatial price equilibrium and linear programming . American Economic Review 1952 ; 42 ( 3 ): 284-303 .