Search

Begin New Search Topic Markets Author Conall Heussaff

1. The changing dynamics of European electricity markets and the supply-demand mismatch risk

Author:
Conall Heussaff and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Meeting Europe’s 2030 climate targets will require massive clean-electricity investment. To facilitate these investments, state-backed de-risking schemes such as contracts for difference (CfDs) are needed. Their role in supporting renewables has been consolidated by the European Union’s recently agreed electricity market design reform. Under such state-backed schemes, the distribution of costs between the market and the state will depend on the balance of supply and demand. Lower demand will decrease spot-market prices, reducing market costs but increasing the cost to CfD-issuing states. If electrification of European energy demand does not keep pace with the electricity supply expansion, tens of billions of euros annually could be channelled through state contracts, generating costs that must ultimately be recovered from consumers. A cost-efficient, managed transition will require European coordination of electricity supply, demand and network investments. Clean electricity supply and demand should be synchronised through a combination of state interventions and market mechanisms. Undersupply of clean power will mean a failure to meet climate targets, but oversupply can be costly too. To manage the costs of renewable de-risking schemes and to accelerate energy-system decarbonisation, flexible electricity systems should be promoted, policies to encourage electrification could be implemented and cost-recovery arising from state-backed renewable support schemes should be fair.
Topic:
Climate Change, Markets, Electricity, Energy, and Supply and Demand
Political Geography:
Europe

2. Phased European Union electricity market reform

Author:
Georg Zachmann and Conall Heussaff
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
In an environment of record-breaking electricity prices driven by a gas supply shock and below-average electricity generation, reforming the design of the European electricity market is seen as a means to delink consumer costs from volatility in short-term power markets. Electricity markets should meet three objectives: fairness, optimal investment and optimal operation. The current market design has achieved these objectives to varying degrees. Faced with the unprecedented shock, the electricity system has operated well, but electricity markets have struggled to achieve fair outcomes and investments have not been driven by market-based cashflows. Further complicating market reform, the power system is being changed radically by decarbonisation. The electricity system is becoming more decentralised and digitalised, with an active demand side. These transformations will have consequences for the optimal electricity market design in the later stages of the energy transition. Reform proposals have focused on increasing the share of long-term contracts in the remuneration of generation technologies. Different long-term contracting regimes have structural implications for the functioning of electricity markets, especially in relation to the roles of the state and the market, and the responsibilities of national governments and European Union institutions. A phased approach should be taken to EU electricity market design reform. In the near-term, reform should seek to protect consumers and drive investment. An assessment should also be made of what market design will best meet the fairness, investment and operational objectives in a decarbonised system, and what the conceptual role of electricity markets should be during the transition. This process should start as soon as possible so well thought-through proposals are available when the next European Commission takes office.
Topic:
Markets, Reform, European Union, Electricity, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Europe

3. An assessment of Europe’s options for addressing the crisis in energy markets

Author:
Conall Heussaff, Simone Tagliapietra, Georg Zachmann, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, wholesale prices for electricity and gas in the European Union have risen five to fifteen-fold, with severe impacts for households and businesses. The crisis is also creating liquidity problems for energy companies, with contagion risks for the financial sector. In response, European governments have taken a range of actions. Some have introduced measures at retail level, while others have introduced windfall-profit taxes on energy companies. Some countries have provided emergency liquidity to energy companies facing soaring collateral costs. Some energy companies have even been nationalised. Emergency-intervention proposals should be evaluated against three principles. First, energy supply must meet demand at prices that do not cause major damage to the European economy. Second, the most vulnerable consumers must be protected. Third, measures should be consistent with the case for investment in a sustainable energy system, in order to safeguard Europe’s ability to decouple structurally from fossil-fuel imports. Gas price caps have been proposed as an emergency measure in different forms: a cap on Russian gas only, a cap on gas used in electricity generation, a cap on all wholesale gas. All entail significant risks. The first might lead to a full stop of Russian gas into the EU. The second might increase gas demand from the electricity sector. The third might raise gas demand and also undermine Europe’s ability to attract much-needed gas supplies. Instead of capping gas prices, the EU should engage collectively with external gas suppliers and negotiate new long-term contracts with provisions to limit price volatility. A September 2022 European Commission proposal involving electricity demand reduction, a revenue cap on inframarginal generation, solidarity payments from fossil-fuel companies and consumer support measures, is broadly positive, notably because it emphasises demand reduction. However, it is not sufficient. A more comprehensive plan needs to ensure that all countries bring forward every available supply-side flexibility, make real efforts to reduce gas and electricity demand, keep their energy markets open and pool demand to get a better deal from external gas suppliers. In the longer term, measures to split the markets for energy generated from renewables and fossil fuels should be examined.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Energy Sector, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Europe