The Myth of Competition in Electricity Markets
Competition is often heralded as the ultimate solution to the challenges faced by electricity markets. The common narrative suggests that an increase in competition will lead to lower prices, enhanced investment, and improved supply security. Politicians embrace this tale, especially during periods of rising electricity prices. They propose that by empowering regulators and competition authorities to address barriers to competition, the problem can be swiftly resolved. But is this perspective misguided?
The Illusion of Retail Competition
Encouraging retail competition tends to be a high priority among policymakers. However, consumers are notoriously slow to switch electricity retailers, even when potential savings could amount to hundreds of dollars annually. This hesitance is frequently cited as a barrier to effective competition, prompting governments and regulators to promote price comparison websites and other initiatives to incentivize consumer mobility.
The Standalone vs. Gentailer Dilemma
Standalone retailers—a term for companies that sell electricity but don’t generate it—often find themselves at a disadvantage compared to “gentailers,” firms that combine both generation and retail. These standalone retailers argue that they lack fair access to generation from their gentailer competitors. There’s a growing call among these retailers for interventions, such as breaking up gentailers or requiring them to supply electricity on equitable terms.
However, misidentifying the underlying causes of sluggish competition could lead to misguided solutions. The problem may not be as simple as encouraging more customer switching or removing entry barriers for retailers; in fact, it could be the opposite.
The Case for Gentailing
For major gentailers—like New Zealand’s Mercury, Meridian, Contact, and Genesis—to face meaningful competition, the industry might require either more gentailers or new mechanisms that replicate gentailing’s benefits. These benefits are twofold:
-
Risk Management: Gentailers effectively mitigate the significant risks associated with purchasing and selling in volatile wholesale markets, which can fluctuate dramatically. This risk management facilitates better investment in generation capacity.
-
Cost Efficiency: Gentailers can attach a single profit margin to generation costs when setting retail prices. In contrast, the separation of generators and retailers leads to multiple profit margins, which can drive consumer prices higher.
Thus, attempts to separate generation from retail could ultimately undermine the goal of achieving lower prices and increased investment.
Age-Old Challenges: Contracting and Competition
The challenge lies in why separate generators and retailers struggle to harness those gentailing advantages through long-term contracts. The crux of the issue is revenue security—generators invest heavily upfront and need sustained revenue over time to recoup costs. Standalone retailers cannot necessarily provide this security. Their ability to rapidly shift between providers, especially when wholesale prices drop, creates a “hit-and-run” scenario that deters investment.
Consequently, generation investors often opt not to enter into long-term contracts with standalone retailers, leading to a cycle of inadequate investment and weak competition.
Rethinking Market Dynamics
To create real competitive pressure against gentailers, we must rethink the market dynamics that currently allow for instability. One potential solution is to make it more challenging for customers to switch retailers when wholesale prices dip below those outlined in long-term contracts. This could be achieved by encouraging retail customers to commit to long-term agreements.
Price comparison websites, despite their good intentions, may inadvertently lead consumers in the opposite direction, making it easier for them to churn instead of fostering a stable competitive environment.
Sustainable Market Practices
Further, new retailers could be mandated to possess either their own generation capacity—essentially becoming gentailers themselves—or secure long-term contracts with existing generators. Counterintuitively, this may facilitate market entry by ensuring that new retailers aren’t immediately threatened by hit-and-run competition.
With reduced volatility in customer retention, generators would be more inclined to enter into long-term contracts with these retailers, knowing they won’t face sudden fluctuations in demand as competitors emerge.
Addressing Uncertainties
Opponents may argue that current standalone retailers would pursue long-term contracts if they could. However, the unpredictable nature of the market makes this challenging. By eliminating uncertainties in long-term contractual commitments for retailers, both generators and retailers could find a more amenable operating environment.
This shift could lead to a more sustainable form of competition that not only pressures gentailers effectively but also benefits consumers through innovative, long-term services and offerings.
In summary, fostering the right kind of competition while mitigating the adverse effects of hit-and-run dynamics could help transform the landscape of the electricity market. Instead of merely promoting unrestricted competition, focusing on structural changes will ultimately support robust investment and consumer benefits in the long run.