
- •Abstract
- •Foreword
- •Acknowledgements
- •Executive summary
- •Many models of multilateral power trade
- •Minimum requirements
- •Proposed trade models for ASEAN
- •Findings and recommendations
- •Highlights
- •Overview of study
- •Categories of multilateral power trade
- •International experiences in multilateral power trading
- •Minimum requirements for establishing multilateral power trading
- •Political requirements
- •Technical requirements
- •Institutional requirements
- •Building upon existing efforts
- •LTMS–PIP
- •Proposed trade models for ASEAN
- •Harmonised bilateral trading
- •Secondary trading model
- •Primary trading model
- •Conclusion
- •1. Introduction
- •Models of cross-border power trade
- •ASEAN principles for developing multilateral power trade
- •Overview of ASEAN’s energy sector
- •References
- •2. AMS perspectives
- •APG region: North
- •Cambodia
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Myanmar
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Thailand
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Viet Nam
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •APG region: South
- •Indonesia (Sumatra)
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Malaysia (Peninsular)
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Singapore
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Malaysia (Sarawak and Sabah)
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •APG region: East
- •Brunei Darussalam
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •Indonesia (West Kalimantan)
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •The Philippines
- •Planned development, including cross-border integration
- •References
- •3. Regional perspectives
- •Existing regional integration efforts among AMS
- •LTMS–PIP
- •BIMP–EAGA interconnectivity project
- •Building off existing efforts: The GMS grid codes
- •References
- •4. International case studies
- •Primary power trading arrangements
- •Power pooling in PJM’s eastern territory
- •The measurable value of markets in the PJM region
- •ISO New England
- •Market overview
- •Market structure
- •Nord Pool
- •Governing agreements and regulation
- •Market overview
- •Market structure
- •Policy and regulation
- •Secondary power trading arrangements
- •SAPP
- •SIEPAC
- •Market overview
- •Nascent power trading arrangements
- •SARI/EI
- •Market overview
- •Market structure
- •Key findings: Lessons for ASEAN
- •Drivers and benefits
- •Design options and minimum requirements
- •The need for enabling institutions
- •Financial implications of regional institutions
- •References
- •5. Establishing multilateral power trade in an ASEAN context
- •Minimum requirements for establishing multilateral power trade
- •Harmonised technical standards (grid codes)
- •Summary of minimum level of grid code harmonisation
- •Building off existing efforts: The GMS grid codes
- •External (third-party) access to domestic grids
- •Wheeling charge methodology
- •Data and information sharing requirements
- •Dispute resolution mechanism
- •Other minimum requirements
- •Funding implications of stepwise implementation
- •Role of institutions
- •Overview of existing ASEAN regional institutions
- •ASEAN Secretariat
- •HAPUA
- •AERN
- •Mechanism for settling transactions
- •Potential role of a CCP
- •Optional requirement: Trading currency or currencies
- •Potential options for regional institutions in ASEAN
- •References
- •6. Models for establishing multilateral power trade in ASEAN
- •Overview of proposed models
- •Establishing harmonised bilateral trade with wheeling
- •Overview of trade model
- •Additional requirements and analytical gaps
- •Potential role of institutions
- •Example transaction
- •Establishing a secondary trading model
- •Overview of trade model
- •Additional requirements and analytical gaps
- •Potential role of institutions
- •Example transaction
- •Establishing a primary trading model
- •Overview of trade model
- •Additional requirements and analytical gaps
- •Potential role of institutions
- •Example transaction
- •7. Implications for ASEAN stakeholders
- •Utilities
- •Regulators
- •Investors
- •Consumers
- •Acronyms and abbreviations
- •Table of contents
- •List of figures
- •List of tables

Establishing Multilateral Power Trade in ASEAN |
International case studies |
Market participants range across the entire length of the power sector value chain, from generators to retailers (Table 7). As of September 2018, there were 514 active participants in ISO New England.9
Table 7. Institutions and market participants
Area of focus
Energy policy
Regulation
Planning
Market and system operations
Market participants
Customers
Relevant institutions
Federal and state governments
Federal: FERC
States: Public utility commissions
Regional NEPOOL (for market rules)
Federal: NERC
Regional: NEPOOL, ISO New England
ISO New England
Generators, traders, importers/exporters, transmission owners, distribution companies and retailers
Served by retailers, except in Vermont
Nord Pool
The Nordic power market is widely viewed as one of the most successful power markets in the world. Today it exists as part of the integrated European market coupling effort.
Table 8. |
Statistical information about the Nordic region, 2018 |
|
|
|
|
Population |
|
27 million |
|
|
|
Electricity consumption |
393 TWh |
|
|
|
|
Traded volumes (Nord Pool, Nordics only) |
367 TWh |
|
|
|
|
Source: Nordic Council of Ministers (2018), Nordic Energy Statistics 2018; Nord Pool (2018), 2018 Annual Report.
Nord Pool is one of several exchanges currently active in the European market coupling. As a result, in total Nord Pool has approximately 380 members from 20 countries. Membership is varied, including large utilities, municipalities, end consumers, producers, retailers, brokers, start-ups and small businesses.
Nord Pool’s buy-side volume for the Nordic markets only was 367 TWh in 2018, which means that the market share in the Nordic area, compared with consumption, was approximately 90% in 2018. The rest of the trading is done bilaterally outside Nord Pool. The day-ahead market is the most liquid, with approximately 500 TWh traded. The day-ahead market is complemented by a financial forward market in the Nordics which is run by Nasdaq OMX Commodities. Consumers and producers use the financial market for risk mitigation if they do not wish to be exposed to the day-ahead price volatility.
9 A handful of these participants are involved only in regulatory and management aspects, such as state public utility commissions. To give a sense of the number of external participants in the market, 39 are Canadian, including entities such as Hydro Quebec, Brookfield, Emera and numerous Ontario-based companies. The membership list is available at www.iso- ne.com/participate/participant-asset-listings/directory.
58

Establishing Multilateral Power Trade in ASEAN |
International case studies |
Governing agreements and regulation
One reason the Nord Pool market has succeeded in organising a single market across a number of (often quite varied) countries is because it is regulated based on principles, not detailed rules. The Nord Pool market licence is just five pages and lists only a set of principal requirements and framework for the operation. Detailed rules do, of course, exist, but under a principles-based approach, market rules may be adjusted to reflect changing circumstances or new ideas, so long as those adjustments are consistent with the governing principles.
For example, one key requirement in the Nord Pool exchange rules is that every market participant at Nord Pool post collaterals to be allowed to trade. This protects both the power exchange and the market participants from counterparty risk in the markets. The size of the required collateral, however, is determined by the market participants’ trading behaviour, and thus it changes over time.
Nord Pool has been granted a cross-border trading licence from the Norges Vassdrags – og Energidirektorat (NVE), the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate. In addition, each of the Nord Pool countries (as with all other EU countries) mandates TPA (that is, all market participants are granted equal access to the grid so long as they comply with the appropriate set of rules and technical requirements). Practically speaking, this means that the TSOs cannot block market participants from connecting to the grid, and therefore must allow them to participate in cross-border power trading.
The European network codes play a central role in the rules governing power trading. The network codes set requirements for nearly all aspects of the European power system, and as such act as the target model for the European power markets. This includes regulations that directly impact cross-border power trade, such as capacity allocation and congestion management (CACM) and rules on transparency (Figure 37).
Figure 37. Nord Pool rules and regulations related to power trading
Rules related to Nord Pool and its members |
Rules related to the wholesale market |
Marketplace licence
Norwegian Ministry of |
Cross |
|
|
|
Oil and Energy |
|
|
|
|
NVE |
border- |
|
|
|
licencetrading |
codesNetworkCACM |
|
Transparencyregulation |
|
Nord Pool AS |
REMIT |
|||
|
|
|
|
Trading rules
Market conduct rules
Wholesale market participant (Nord Pool member)
Note: REMIT= Regulation on wholesale Energy Market Integrity and Transparency; CACM = Capacity Allocation and Congestion Management Source: Nord Pool.
59