Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of a Truthful Revelation Auction in the Context of Energy Markets with Nonconcave Benefits

  • Published:
Journal of Regulatory Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We describe a Vickrey-Clarke-Groves auction for supply and demand bidding in the face of market power and nonconcave benefits in which bidders are motivated to bid truthfully, and evaluate its use for power and gas pipeline capacity auctions. The auction efficiently allocate resources if firms maximize profit. Simulations, including an application to the PJM power market, illustrate the procedure. However, the auction has several undesirable properties. It risks being revenue deficient, can be gamed by cooperating suppliers and consumers, and is subject to the information revelation and bid-taker cheating concerns that make single item Vickrey auctions rare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ausubel, L. M., P. Cramton, R. P. McAfee, and J. McMillan. 1997. “Synergies in Wireless Telephony: Evidence from the Broadband PCS Auctions.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 6: 497–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushnell, J. B., and S. S. Oren. 1994. “Bidder Cost Revelation in Electric Power Auctions.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 6(1): 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, E. 1971. “Multipart Pricing of Public Goods.” Public Choice 2(1): 19–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmaghraby, W., and S. S. Oren, 1999. “The Efficiency of Multi-unit Electricity Auctions.” Energy Journal 20(4): 89–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelbrecht-Wiggans, R. 1980. “Auctions and Bidding Models.” Management Science 26(1): 119–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelbrecht-Wiggans, R., and C. M. Kahn. 1991. “Protecting the Winner: Second-Price versus Oral Auctions.” Economics Letters 35: 243–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1998. Technical Conference, “In the Matter of Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America,” Docket No. RP 97-431, May 19–20.

  • Graham, D., and R. Marshall. 1987. “Collusive Bidder Behavior at Single-Object Second-Price and English Auctions,” Journal of Political Economy 95: 1217–1239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, T. 1973. “Incentives in Teams.” Econometrica 41: 617–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harstad, R. M., M. H. Rothkopf, and K. Wahrer. 1996. “Efficiency in Auctions When Bidders Have Private Information About Competitors.” In Advances in Applied Micro-Economics, Vol. 6, edited by M. Baye. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., S. S. Oren, and A. J. Svoboda. 1997. “Equity and Efficiency of Unit Commitment in Competitive Electricity Markets.” Utilities Policy 6(1): 9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., and A. J. Svoboda. 1996. “Incentive Effects of Power Exchange Auction Proposals.” Mimeo, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., A. J. Svoboda, C. Greif, A. Vojdani, and F. Zhuang. 1998. “Positioning for a Competitive Electric Industry with PG&E's Hydro-Thermal Optimization.” Interfaces 28(1): 53–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishna, V., and M. Perry. 1998. Efficient Mechanism Design. Mimeo, Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie-Mason, J. K. 1994. A Spatial `Smart Market’ for Electric Power and Transmission. Mimeo, Dept. of Economics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mas-Colell, A., M. Whinston, and J. R. Green. 1995. Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press, New York, Ch. 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAfee, R. P., and J. McMillan. 1987. “Auctions and Bidding.” Journal of Economic Literature 25: 699–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, B. 1997. Power Auctions and Intertemporal Produciton Costs: Dealing with Unit Commitment. Mimeo, University of California Energy Institute, Berkeley, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myerson, R. B., and M. A. Satterthwaite. 1983. “Efficient Mechanisms for Bilateral Trading.” Journal of Economic Theory 29: 265–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, M. S. 1985. “Collusion and the Choice of Auction.” Rand Journal of Economics 16: 141–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H. 1994. “Models of Auctions and Competitive Bidding.” In Handbooks in Operations Research, Vol. 6: Operations Research and the Public Sector, edited by S. M Pollack, M. H. Rothkopf and A. Barnett. New York: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H. 1999. “Daily Repetition: A Neglected Factor in the Analysis of Electricity Auctions.” The Electricity Journal 12(3): 60–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H., and R. M. Harstad. 1994. “Modeling Competitive Bidding: A Critical Essay.” Management Science 40: 364–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H., and R. M. Harstad. 1995. “Two Models of Bid-Taker Cheating in Vickrey Auctions.” Journal of Business 68: 257–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H., A. Pekec, and R. M. Harstad. 1998. “Computationally Manageable Combinational Auctions.” Management Science 44(8): 1131–1147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothkopf, M. H., T. J. Teisberg, and E. P. Kahn. 1990. “Why are Vickrey Auctions Rare?” Journal of Political Economy 98(1): 94–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickrey, W. 1961. “Counterspeculation, Auctions, andCompetitive SealedTenders.” Journal of Finance 16: 8–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. B. 1993. “Strategic Analysis of Auctions.” In The Handbook of Game Theory, edited by R. Auman and S. Hart. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hobbs, B.F., Rothkopf, M.H., Hyde, L.C. et al. Evaluation of a Truthful Revelation Auction in the Context of Energy Markets with Nonconcave Benefits. Journal of Regulatory Economics 18, 5–32 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008151712010

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008151712010

Keywords

Navigation