1 / 12

Regulating New Interconnector Investment Emmanouela Angelidaki Ofgem 16 th June 2010

Regulating New Interconnector Investment Emmanouela Angelidaki Ofgem 16 th June 2010. Overview. Background on Ofgem consultation and options proposed Consultation responses Response to Options 1-4 Developing an enduring regime Next steps. EWIS (European Wind Integration Study).

arama
Download Presentation

Regulating New Interconnector Investment Emmanouela Angelidaki Ofgem 16 th June 2010

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. Regulating New Interconnector Investment Emmanouela Angelidaki Ofgem 16th June 2010

  2. Overview • Background on Ofgem consultation and options proposed • Consultation responses • Response to Options 1-4 • Developing an enduring regime • Next steps

  3. EWIS (European Wind Integration Study) Up to 9GW of capacity by 2020 High wind penetration scenario (2015): Cross border links where expansion would provide economic benefit

  4. Options for regulating new Interconnectors Merchant…………to revenue controlled approach

  5. Options for regulating new Interconnectors • Uncapped (“merchant approach”): returns determined by auction proceeds..Exemption is required • Regulated cap (Britned case) : cap on returns or revenues from auctions; excess revenues must be invested in increased capacity or returned to customers • Regulated cap and floor : returns within a range depend on auction revenues ; above or below they are returned to or supplemented from customers • Regulated Revenues (“regulated approach”): Equivalent to including IC in the transmission tariff mechanism. Assessment of required revenues and any auction revenues above/below is returned/supplemented from customers

  6. The Consultation closed on 30 March 2010 and we received 20 responses :

  7. Consultation Response Option 1: Uncapped Merchant Approach • Many see benefits of risks and rewards being covered by the investor • Some highlight option 1 as providing the most efficient levels of interconnection • Some see pure merchant approach as increasingly infeasible due to need for exemptions • Others don‘t recognise this as a problem • Some highlight merchant investment as the way to provide timely investment • Others argue the opposite due to exemption requirements etc.

  8. Consultation Response Option 2: • Few have this as a preference • Several believe that this option (and option 3) distort incentives to invest in IC, and if not correctly applied can result in inefficient use of IC capacity • Some note that this deviation from the pure merchant approach causes delays in investment and often results in collapse of investment plans

  9. Consultation Response Option 3: • Several saw this as an option to maintain merchant investment in IC whilst harmonising to some extent with EU • ... but only if it could be compliant with EU legislation • Several believe that this option (& option 2) distorts incentives to invest in IC, and if not correctly applied can result in inefficient use of IC capacity .. • “Addition of a floor is an unacceptable risk for consumers, particularly as the risks associated with IC are not something that is well understood – makes setting of floor complicated“

  10. Consultation Response Option 4: • Makes GB fully in line with Europe • Efficiencies result from harmonisation of legislation (in terms of time taken for investments, considering cross-MS nature of IC investment) • Others considered the introduction of TSOs slows the investment process • Some concern that the regulated approach generates an inefficient number of ICs (i.e. Uncongested lines), and results in high costs to consumers • GB IC different from elsewhere: DC, subsea / offshore, long distances – therefore needs diff erent approach re. incentives

  11. Consultation Response Enduring regime for new interconnector investment • Some support for mixture of different approaches • But not imposed retrospectively on established projects • Implement an aligned structure for both Britned & IFA • Others consider that mixture of different approaches has less advantages; should be limited to existing ICs and a unified approach should be applied to all new ICs to provide correct investment signals • Important for NRAs to coordinate in two sides of the border & agree on the access rules • Some emphasize the difficulty to see how merchant ICs will compete with regulated ICs…..

  12. Next Steps • We need to explore further Options 3&4: eg. how cap and collar should be applied , consistency with the CMGs and GB legal Framework • We intend to collaborate with CREG on Project Nemo (GB-Belgium Interconnector).. • Ongoing discussions with all stakeholders • Report back to IG on progress

More Related