Skip to main content
Log in

Multi-Dimensional Procurement Auctions for Power Reserves: Robust Incentive-Compatible Scoring and Settlement Rules

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

Abstract

System operators in the electricity industry purchase reserve capacity in a procurement auction in which suppliers offer two-part bids, one part for making capacity available and another part for supplying incremental energy when called. Key ingredients of an efficient auction design are the scoring rule for comparing bids, and the settlement rule for paying accepted bids. We use the principle of incentive compatibility to establish that very simple rules suffice. In particular, the scoring rule uses only the capacity part of the bid, and energy supplies are paid the spot price. This is the design adopted in California.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushnell, J., and S. Oren. 1995. “Internal Auctions for the Efficient Sourcing of Intermediate Products.” Journal of Operations Management 12: 311–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • California Trust for Power Industry Restructuring 1997. “Phase II Filing.” Submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

  • Che, Y. 1993. “Design Competition Through Multidimensional Auctions.” Rand Journal of Economics 24: 668–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao, H. 1983. “Peak-Load Pricing and Capacity Planning with Demand and Supply Uncertainty.” Bell Journal of Economics 14: 170–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crew, M., C. Fernando, and P. Kleindorfer. 1995. “The Theory of Peak-Load Pricing: A Survey.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 8: 215–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribik, P. 1995. “Learning from California's QF Auction.” Public Utilities Fortnightly, April 15.

  • Hobbs, B., M. Rothkopf, L. Hyde, and R. O'Neill, “Evaluation of a Truthful Revelation Auction in the Context of Energy Markets with Nonconcave Benefits.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 18: 5–32.

  • Vickrey, W. 1961. “Counterspeculation, Auctions, and Competitive Sealed Tenders.” Journal of Finance 16: 8–37.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chao, HP., Wilson, R. Multi-Dimensional Procurement Auctions for Power Reserves: Robust Incentive-Compatible Scoring and Settlement Rules. Journal of Regulatory Economics 22, 161–183 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020535511537

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020535511537

Keywords

Navigation