IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v109y2022ics0140988322001050.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electricity market design and implementation in the presence of asymmetrically informed strategic producers and consumers: A surrogate optimization-based mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Rayati, Mohammad
  • Teneketzis, Demosthenis

Abstract

We consider electricity networks where the agents (producers and consumers) are strategic and possess asymmetric information about the networks’ status. The network model accounts for power losses, line congestion, and financial transmission rights (FTRs). We propose a mechanism (a set of rules for energy production and consumption) that takes into account the network model, the agents’ strategic behavior and their informational asymmetries, and has the following properties at all Nash equilibria of the game induced by it: (i) it is budget balanced (the sum of taxes received by the agents and the sum of subsidies paid to the agents is equal to zero); (ii) it implements the optimal power flow (OPF) dispatch (equivalently it implements the social welfare maximizing dispatch); (iii) it is price efficient (the price received per unit of energy production is equal to the price paid per unit of energy consumption, and they are both equal to the price corresponding to the OPF dispatch); (iv) it is individually rational (the strategic agents voluntarily participate in the mechanism). We also propose a tâtonnement-process (an algorithm), based on a best-estimate method, and prove that it converges to a Nash equilibrium of the game induced by the proposed mechanism. The allocations (energy production and consumption) resulting at each step of the tâtonnement-process are a feasible solution of the OPF problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Rayati, Mohammad & Teneketzis, Demosthenis, 2022. "Electricity market design and implementation in the presence of asymmetrically informed strategic producers and consumers: A surrogate optimization-based mechanism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:109:y:2022:i:c:s0140988322001050
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105929
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988322001050
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eneco.2022.105929?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Groves, Theodore & Ledyard, John O, 1977. "Optimal Allocation of Public Goods: A Solution to the "Free Rider" Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 783-809, May.
    2. Walker, Mark, 1981. "A Simple Incentive Compatible Scheme for Attaining Lindahl Allocations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(1), pages 65-71, January.
    3. Lyons, Karen & Fraser, Hamish & Parmesano, Hethie, 2000. "An Introduction to Financial Transmission Rights," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 13(10), pages 31-37, December.
    4. Paul Joskow & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Merchant Transmission Investment," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 233-264, June.
    5. repec:reg:rpubli:73 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Jaime F. Zender & James J.D. Wang, 2002. "Auctioning divisible goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 673-705.
    7. Paul L. Joskow, 2001. "California's Electricity Crisis," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 17(3), pages 365-388.
    8. repec:bla:econom:v:40:y:1973:i:160:p:402-09 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Reichelstein, Stefan & Reiter, Stanley, 1988. "Game Forms with Minimal Message Spaces," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 661-692, May.
    10. Silva, Carlos & Wollenberg, Bruce & Zheng, Charles Zhoucheng, 2001. "Application of Mechanism Design to Electric Power Markets," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12686, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Jordan, J. S., 1986. "Instability in the implementation of Walrasian allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 301-328, August.
    12. Egging-Bratseth, Ruud & Baltensperger, Tobias & Tomasgard, Asgeir, 2020. "Solving oligopolistic equilibrium problems with convex optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(1), pages 44-52.
    13. Paul L. Joskow & Edward Kohn, 2002. "A Quantitative Analysis of Pricing Behavior in California's Wholesale Electricity Market During Summer 2000," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 1-35.
    14. Pope, Rulon D, 1980. "The Generalized Envelope Theorem and Price Uncertainty," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 21(1), pages 75-86, February.
    15. Paul Joskow & Edward Kahn, 2002. "A quantitative analysis of pricing behaviour in California's wholesale electricity market during summer 2000: the final word," Working Papers EP02, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    16. Blaise Allaz & Jean-Luc Vila, 1993. "Cournot Competition, Forward Markets and Efficiency," Post-Print hal-00511806, HAL.
    17. L. Hurwicz, 1979. "Outcome Functions Yielding Walrasian and Lindahl Allocations at Nash Equilibrium Points," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(2), pages 217-225.
    18. Hogan, William W, 2002. "Electricity Market Restructuring: Reforms of Reforms," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 103-132, January.
    19. Tudor Stoenescu & Mingyan Liu & Demosthenis Teneketzis, 2007. "Multirate multicast service provisioning II: a tâtonnement process for rate allocation," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 65(3), pages 389-415, June.
    20. Andreas Ehrenmann & Karsten Neuhoff, 2009. "A Comparison of Electricity Market Designs in Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 274-286, April.
    21. Chao, Hung-Po & Peck, Stephen, 1996. "A Market Mechanism for Electric Power Transmission," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 25-59, July.
    22. Yan Chen, 2002. "A family of supermodular Nash mechanisms implementing Lindahl allocations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(4), pages 773-790.
    23. Kim, Taesung, 1993. "A stable Nash mechanism implementing Lindahl allocations for quasi-linear environments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 359-371.
    24. Severin Borenstein, 2002. "The Trouble With Electricity Markets: Understanding California's Restructuring Disaster," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 191-211, Winter.
    25. Klemperer, Paul D & Meyer, Margaret A, 1989. "Supply Function Equilibria in Oligopoly under Uncertainty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1243-1277, November.
    26. Tudor Stoenescu & Mingyan Liu & Demosthenis Teneketzis, 2007. "Multirate multicast service provisioning I: an algorithm for optimal price splitting along multicast trees," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 65(2), pages 199-228, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. , J. & ,, 2012. "Designing stable mechanisms for economic environments," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    2. Healy, Paul J. & Jain, Ritesh, 2017. "Generalized Groves–Ledyard mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 204-217.
    3. Maskin, Eric & Sjostrom, Tomas, 2002. "Implementation theory," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 5, pages 237-288 Elsevier.
    4. Takuma Wakayama & Takehiko Yamato, 2023. "Comparison of the voluntary contribution and Pareto-efficient mechanisms under voluntary participation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 517-553, June.
    5. Mohammad Rasouli & Demosthenis Teneketzis, 2021. "Economizing the Uneconomic: Markets for Reliable, Sustainable, and Price Efficient Electricity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-38, April.
    6. Hassan Benchekroun & Charles Figuières & Mabel Tidball, 2016. "Implementation of the Lindahl Correspondance via Simple Indirect Mechanisms," AMSE Working Papers 1637, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    7. Charles Figuières & Marc Willinger, 2012. "Regulating ambient pollution when social costs are unknown," Working Papers 12-17, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jun 2012.
    8. Van Essen, Matthew J., 2008. "A Simple Supermodular Mechanism that Implements Lindahl Allocations," MPRA Paper 12781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Matt Essen, 2014. "A Clarke tax tâtonnement that converges to the Lindahl allocation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(2), pages 309-327, August.
    10. Van Essen, Matthew & Walker, Mark, 2017. "A simple market-like allocation mechanism for public goods," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 6-19.
    11. David P. Brown & David E. M. Sappington, 2022. "Vertical integration and capacity investment in the electricity sector," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 193-226, February.
    12. Matt Van Essen, 2012. "Information complexity, punishment, and stability in two Nash efficient Lindahl mechanisms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(1), pages 15-40, March.
    13. Van Essen, Matthew & Lazzati, Natalia & Walker, Mark, 2012. "Out-of-equilibrium performance of three Lindahl mechanisms: Experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 366-381.
    14. Sébastien ROUILLON, 2009. "A new mechanism to implement the Lindahl equilibriums (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-09, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    15. Reiss, Peter C. & White, Matthew W., 2003. "Demand and Pricing in Electricity Markets: Evidence from San Diego During California's Energy Crisis," Research Papers 1829, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    16. Tin Cheuk Leung & Kwok Ping Ping & Kevin K. Tsui, 2019. "What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-32, August.
    17. Newbery, David M. & Greve, Thomas, 2017. "The strategic robustness of oligopoly electricity market models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 124-132.
    18. Sébastien Rouillon, 2013. "Anonymous implementation of the Lindahl correspondence: possibility and impossibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(4), pages 1179-1203, April.
    19. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    20. Richard O’Neill & Emily Fisher & Benjamin Hobbs & Ross Baldick, 2008. "Towards a complete real-time electricity market design," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 220-250, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity market; Financial transmission right (FTR); Optimal power flow (OPF); Mechanism design; Local public goods; Tâtonnement-process;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:109:y:2022:i:c:s0140988322001050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.