Authority and Responsibility of the ISO: Objectives, Options and Tradeoffs
Authority and Responsibility of the ISO: Objectives, Options and Tradeoffs
复制标题
ISO 的权力和责任：目标、选择和权衡
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Oren
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Oren
在世界各地的电力行业和社会变革的推动下，对世界各地的电力行业进行了宽泛的运动，这导致了有关自然垄断和规模经济的基本重新审查。通过传统观念合理化的行业中的整合导致了无效的投资政策和高电力价格。工业界是通过在电力市场上释放竞争力的竞争力来通过审慎的投资和技术创新来促进长期效率。为了实现长期目标，必须实现的短期目标。从社会效率的角度来看，这是确保系统可靠性的，这是一个普遍的同意。决策是竞争市场的重要组成部分，因此是AQ加强电力行业的理想目标。 Questons，在短期和长期效率之间的关系以及短期政策选择涉及的权衡方面的关系，这是本文的目标。在可用选项中进行选择的假设和权衡提出了做出此类选择时需要解决的问题。
The widespread movement toward deregulation of the electric power industry around the world and in the US is fueled by technological and social changes that led to a fundamental reexamination of conventional wisdom concerning natural monopolies and economies of scale in this industry. The central planning paradigm and vertical integration in that industry rationalized by the conventional wisdom has led to inefficient investment policies and high electricity prices. The primary objective of deregulation in the electric power industry has been to promote long-term efficiency through prudent investment and technical innovation by unleashing competitive forces in the electricity market. While there is little disagreement with regards to this long-term goal, alternative implementation proposals differ radically with respect to the immediate approach and the short-term objectives that must be pursued for achieving the long-term goal. A major area of dispute is the extent of centralized control and “market management” that is needed to assure system reliability and that is desirable from a social efficiency perspective. There is general agreement that the physical characteristics of electricity impose requirements for real time central coordination in order to assure reliable service. It is also agrred upon that decentralized decision making is an important element of competitive markets and as such is a desiarble goal in aq restructured electricity industry. The dispute center on the “how much” questons, on what is essential and what is optional, on the relationship between short-term and long-term efficiency and on the tradeoffs involved in short-term policy choices. The objective of this paper is to articulate the range of options available, underlying assumption and tradeoffs involved in choosing among the available options raise questions that need to be addressed in making such choices.