Alternative models for markets with nonconvexities

dc.contributor.author Fuller, J. David
dc.contributor.author Çelebi, Emre
dc.date.accessioned 2020-12-22T19:59:48Z
dc.date.available 2020-12-22T19:59:48Z
dc.date.issued 2017
dc.description.abstract In many electricity markets, the market operator solves a social welfare maximization (SW) model to determine market prices and generation (and consumption) "dispatch" instructions to firms participating in the market. When generation costs (or consumption benefits) are described as mixed integer programs, linear prices cannot, in general, be found such that all market participants are satisfied that the operator's dispatch instructions maximize profits, i.e., they perceive an opportunity cost. Often, "make whole" payments are made to market participants to bring negative profits up to zero, but not to adjust positive, nonoptimal profits. Make whole payments are added to "uplift" charges to customers for various non market services provided by market participants. In previous research, "uplift" is extended to include the entire opportunity costs, and prices are adjusted to minimize the part of uplift that is due to discrete variables, while keeping the SW quantity instructions. We show that the SW instructions must be modified if the non-dispatchable demand is price sensitive; to allow for this, we define a model that minimizes total opportunity cost (MTOC), and we compare it to three other models - SW, SW with non-negative profit constraints, and a minimum complementarity (MC) model recently proposed by Gabriel et al. We show that the MC model approximates the MTOC model. Two unit commitment problems illustrate the models. In an online appendix, we also present small MTOC and MC two-commodity models for which an SW model cannot be formulated due to nonintegrability of demand. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada CGIAR TUBITAK en_US
dc.identifier.citationcount 13
dc.identifier.doi 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.02.032 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 449 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0377-2217 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1872-6860 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0377-2217
dc.identifier.issn 1872-6860
dc.identifier.issue 2 en_US
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-85017437861 en_US
dc.identifier.scopusquality Q1
dc.identifier.startpage 436 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12469/3624
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.02.032
dc.identifier.volume 261 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000401206300003 en_US
dc.identifier.wosquality Q1
dc.institutionauthor Çelebi, Emre en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Elsevier Science Bv en_US
dc.relation.journal European Journal of Operational Research en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 14
dc.subject OR in energy en_US
dc.subject Near equilibrium en_US
dc.subject Uplift en_US
dc.subject Complementarity en_US
dc.title Alternative models for markets with nonconvexities en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.wos.citedbyCount 13
dspace.entity.type Publication

Files