1 / 15

FCM – And Broader – Market Reforms

FCM – And Broader – Market Reforms. Pete Fuller NEPOOL Markets/Reliability Committee January 29, 2013. Today’s Discussion. Opportunity to offer perspective on ISO’s ‘Performance Incentives’ proposal Provide additional context for market reform efforts. Qualifier.

fredricka
Télécharger la présentation

FCM – And Broader – Market Reforms

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. FCM – And Broader – Market Reforms Pete Fuller NEPOOL Markets/Reliability Committee January 29, 2013

  2. Today’s Discussion • Opportunity to offer perspective on ISO’s ‘Performance Incentives’ proposal • Provide additional context for market reform efforts

  3. Qualifier • NRG’s position is that, as currently structured and administered, FCM is deeply flawed: • Mitigation of existing resources should provide an opportunity for the marginal capacity resource to recover all of its annual fixed costs • A demand curve that recognizes the incremental value of additional capacity is essential, especially in the absence of a supply curve based on long-run costs • Reliability reviews of existing resource offers (delist bids) should be eliminated; all constraints that are to be enforced through planning or operability criteria should be specified in the auction requirements

  4. The Building Blocks • Energy • Ancillary Services • Capacity

  5. Real-Time Energy – the Foundation • ISO whitepaper acknowledges the problems with pricing and incentives in the RT Energy market • Mechanisms to reveal scarcity prices are lacking • RT Energy prices need to reflect the full cost of meeting demand and reserves at any given moment • This signal is critical to both supply and demand participants • RT price exposure is the driver for efficient hedging behavior • DA Energy Market – hedge on a daily basis through a centralized financial mechanism • Bilateral contracts also provide a hedging vehicle

  6. Ancillary Services • Provide access for ISO to get the flexibility and responsiveness needed to balance and manage load dynamics and contingencies • Not all resources need to have high ramp rates, short start times, etc, but it is important that some do • LFRM, augmented by real-time reserves co-optimized with energy (plus regulation) provide the operating flexibility to maintain real-time reliability • ‘Performance Incentives’ has similar characteristics – is FCM a capacity product or an ancillary service?

  7. Capacity • Capacity is supposed to be the ‘swing bus’ through which resources can recover fixed costs not covered by energy or ancillary service margins • Required because energy and AS markets are capped, and price formation is incomplete (as noted in ISO white paper) • Capacity market prices also should be relatively stable year to year to give investors a reasonably reliable expectation of cash flow, coverage ratios, etc – the markets should invite investment • Mitigation policy and the lack of a demand curve frustrate these objectives, and PI will further undercut these goals

  8. ISO’s ‘Performance Incentives’ • Whitepaper provides an insightful and accurate critique of current energy markets • But, the whitepaper proposes that the shortcomings of the energy market should be addressed with changes to the capacity market • Issues that PI is intended to address: • Resource Performance and Flexibility (these are energy and AS issues) • Increased Reliance on Natural Gas (PI is a heat rate/start time incentive; link to fuel firmness is not clear) • Integration of Variable Resources (AS issue)

  9. Why ‘mimic’ an efficient energy market? • The whitepaper suggests creating a proxy, in the capacity market, for an ‘efficient energy market’ • The penalty aspect of PI has no analog in an efficient energy market • The proposed metric for performance is largely out of the control of suppliers (and may create inefficient incentives to self-schedule) • An efficient energy market has both buyers and sellers; PI would show real-time scarcity prices only to sellers • The place to address shortcomings in the energy market is in the energy market

  10. What is the FCM ‘Product’? • Capacity is the capability to produce energy • The primary obligation of a capacity resource is to offer its capability to the E&AS markets every day, to the extent it is physically available • FCM Shortage Events are a randomly-distributed demand for energy and ancillary services • Under the current FCM, fulfilling the offer requirements – under the control of the resource – renders a resource ‘available’ • ‘Scarcity conditions’ under PI are likewise a randomly-distributed demand • But ‘performance’ is largely out of the control of the resource owner

  11. The PI ‘Product’ • Under PI, the traditional linkage between capacity and long-run availability is totally severed • Whether explicit or not, the strong incentive in PI is to deliver a very low heat rate or quick-start capability • Incentives for lower heat rates exist in the energy market and in the natural evolution of technology • Incentives, and explicit requirements, for quick-start capability exist in the LFRM and real-time reserve markets • Would FCM with PI effectively replace LFRM? And what would the impact on the energy markets be?

  12. A Tangent to Consider LFRM • Consider the characteristics that make LFRM effective: • Voluntary participation • Portfolio obligation • Offer caps; no further mitigation • Penalties can exceed revenues, but risk management is fairly straightforward • Performance obligation (reserve, activate) is entirely within control of resource owner • Cover transactions are available on a daily basis • New audit rules will base ratings on average historic performance

  13. An Alternative to PI • Fix the energy market problems in the energy market • Increase RCPFs to allow the system to re-dispatch for reserve scarcity • Reflect reliability commitments in energy prices • Eliminate, or put a price on, all ‘unpriced operator actions’ • Real-time prices that reflect scarcity have the same ‘upside’ effect on suppliers as ISO’s PI proposal • The ‘penalty’ for unavailability/non-performance is buying back the DA obligation in real-time • Making scarcity pricing visible to buyers increases efficiency of incentives

  14. An Alternative, continued • Make the capacity product a capacity product • Measure performance that is within the control of the resource owner • Eg, availability of the full capability in the daily markets • Perhaps correlated with focal points of resource adequacy: high load hours (EFORd), or high price hours (EFORp) • Could be constructed to reward resources that exceed a set target or the average performance, and penalize those that under-deliver

  15. Thanks for your consideration.

More Related