Upload
devika
View
25
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Congestion Management ERGEG Recommendations for Guidelines Adopted via a Comitology Procedure. Stefanie Neveling (BNetzA) Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010. Contents. Why are new rules on congestion management necessary? ERGEG proposals and Impact Assessment - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Stefanie Neveling (BNetzA)
Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Congestion Management
ERGEG Recommendations for Guidelines Adopted via a Comitology Procedure
2Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Contents
• Why are new rules on congestion management
necessary?
• ERGEG proposals and Impact Assessment
• ERGEG Recommendations and Way Forward
3Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Physical congestion
occurs rarely:
Background
<70% of technical capacity70-80% of technical capacity 80-90% of technical capacity
>90% of technical capacity
Actual flows in 2009
365 days
Source: www.gas-roads.eu
4Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
General Issues
• Scope of guidelines
• Rules apply to cross-border points between adjacent entry-
exit-systems where subject to booking procedures.
• Capacity management clauses in existing contracts shall be
amended in line with the implemented provisions.
• Network users shall be entitled to reduce their capacity bookings
during transitional period.
• NRAs shall ensure that TSOs have incentives to achieve the aim of
Guidelines.
5Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Capacity Maximisation
• TSOs to offer the maximum amount of firm capacity that can be
offered for use without restrictions.
• Technical capacity to be calculated through transparent methodologies,
using best available and cost-efficient procedures
• Dynamic calculation of available capacity – TSOs shall regularly re-
calculate capacity based upon actual technical conditions (e.g.
temperature)
Impacts: How will additional firm capacity impact interruptible contracts?
• Risk of being interrupted may increase, but additional firm capacity
will be available
6Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Oversubscription and Buy-Back
• TSOs to implement mechanisms to offer additional firm short-term
and longer term capacity
• Based on statistic scenarios an extra amount of capacity exceeding
the capacity previously calculated to be offered
• In case of actual physical congestion transmission system
operators shall tender for buying back capacity.
• TSOs to estimate the possibility and the costs of buying back
capacity on the market and to reflect this in the amount of
additional capacity
• The mechanisms and possible transition periods for the
implementation of these mechanisms are subject to review by NRA
7Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Impacts:
• What is the expected impact on availability of capacity?
• Based on over-subscription TSOs should be able to offer
additional long-term capacity
• mechanism does not touch existing contracts
• How often will buy-back take place?
• Based on current utilisation rates actual buy-back is expected to
happen rarely
• As a consequence costs will be rather low
Oversubscription and Buy-Back
8Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Firm day-ahead UIOLI
• Where demand for firm day-ahead capacity exceeds the offer, NRAs
to decide on firm day-ahead UIOLI procedure
• To this end, NRAs may reduce or remove existing re-nomination
rights reflecting
• requirements at specific points
• the share of the booking of particular network users
• the users’ objectively justified needs
• Day-ahead capacity set free by this mechanism to be allocated by
auction only
• The offer and allocation of day-ahead capacity shall be performed in
such a way that buyers can take part in daily gas trading
9Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Impacts:
How are shippers affected by restriction of re-nomination rights?
• Big portfolios can better cope with unexpected events and
therefore may not need full re-nomination rights
• Small portfolios to be protected (e.g. “2+2”)
How are portfolios containing many gas fired power stations
affected?
• In big portfolios with many power stations fluctuations are
neutralised against each other
• Smaller portfolios can explicitly be protected
• Therefore: No interference with electricity markets expected
Firm day-ahead UIOLI
10Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Impacts:
How does a restriction of re-nomination rights impact balancing?
• Portfolio balancing: Expected increase of liquidity of gas
markets will help to avoid imbalances
• System balancing: Where a system is short system balancing
energy can be provided on interruptible capacity
Firm day-ahead UIOLI
11Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Withdrawal of Underutilised Capacity
• The procedure requires:
• shippers request capacity and unable to obtain this capacity on the
primary or secondary market;
• capacity holder systematically underutilizes allocated capacity
• capacity owner has not sold or offered the capacity and is unable to
satisfactorily justify the behaviour
• The capacity holder can
• lose capacity rights for a given period or for the remaining term
• be limited in nomination rights for a given period to the maximum
flows of the previous year.
12Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Recommendations and Way Forward
• ERGEG sees urgent need to improve congestion management in
Europe
• Stakeholder Workshop on 2 February 2010
• Binding rules are needed for the implementation of harmonised access
conditions
• ERGEG invites Commission to consider adoption of binding
guidelines on congestion management via comitology
• ERGEG recommends speedy adoption during the ‘interim period’ –
waiting for the third package entering into force is no option
• Pragmatic approach preferred either under current Regulation or
anticipating the new Regulation
• ERGEG is prepared to contribute to the next steps on this issue
13Madrid Forum, 14 January 2010
Thank You!