DO AMERICANS CONSUME TOO LITTLE NATURAL GAS?An Empirical Test of Marginal Cost Pricing. By Lucas W. Davis and Erich Muehlegger. Key words :Efficient pricing,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Monopoly.
Advertisements

Ramsey Pricing. Assumptions Natural monopoly – Cost minimization requires one firm in the market Strong natural monopoly – MC pricing crease deficit MC.
 Introduction  Simple Framework: The Margin Rule  Model with Product Differentiation, Variable Proportions and Bypass  Model with multiple inputs.
By: John T. Wenders Ama Agyeiwaa Ferkah Eco 435. INTRODUCTION  The traditional theory of peak-load pricing argues that peak period users should bear.
Chapter 13 – Taxation and Efficiency
Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture, 5e Chapter 7: Pricing with Market Power Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All.
Regulating a Monopolist Monopolist choose output q m,whereas the efficient output is q w. Regulation will be needed to avoid the former result. However,
Optimal Commodity Taxation
LEON COURVILLE Regulation and Efficiency in the Electric Utility Industry.
CHAPTER 7 ANALYSIS OF A TARIFF.
TARIFF REGULATION IN THE NIGERIAN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY INDUSTRY
Economics of Management Strategy BEE3027 Lecture 4.
Natural Monopoly Natural Monopoly – an industry in which economies of scale are so important that only one firm can survive. In other words, it is more.
Lecture 13-14: Welfare and Social Choice
Regulatory Preferences and Two-Part Tariffs: The Case of Electricity. by Micheal C Naughton. Presented by Julius Kimutai.
Efficient Pricing using Non-linear Prices Assume – Strong natural monopoly => MC=P => deficit – Non-linear prices are at their disposal.
Chapter 2 – Economic Concepts of Regulation Public Utility – for-profit firm whose operations were strictly controlled so as to not jeopardize the public.
Chapter 14 – Efficient and Equitable Taxation
Taxation, income distribution, and efficiency
Departures from perfect competition
Monopoly A monopoly is a single supplier to a market
1 Prof. Dr. Hans-Martin Niemeier Introduction and overview of ongoing research issues GAP Research Workshop Berlin, April Hans-Martin Niemeier.
Monopoly Monopoly and perfect competition. Profit maximization by a monopolist. Inefficiency of a monopoly. Why do monopolies occur? Natural Monopolies.
© 2006 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Limited. All rights reserved.1 Chapter 11: Monopoly Prepared by: Kevin Richter, Douglas College Charlene Richter, British Columbia.
Figure 8.2 How a Competitive Firm Maximizes Profit
The Production Decision of a Monopoly Firm Alternative market structures: perfect competition monopolistic competition oligopoly monopoly.
Chapter 15 Market Interventions McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Course outline I Homogeneous goods Introduction Game theory
Market Interventions chapter 15
Do Americans Consume too little Natural Gas? An empirical test of marginal cost pricing By : Lucas W. Davis & Erich Muehlegger Presented by: Fadhila.
Chapter 29 Price Planning. What is Price? Price – is the value of money placed on a good or a service. The seller’s objective is to set a price high enough.
1 Chapter 11: Monopoly We are now back in partial equilibrium. So far we assumed perfect competition. In this chapter, we study the other extreme, when.
1 Georgian National Energy and Water Supply Regulatory Commission Tariff Regulation Gocha Shonia Department of Methodology and informational provision.
Presented by: Fadhila MICHAEL C. NAUGHTON. Purpose  Develop and demonstrate a method for deriving and testing regulatory preferences within and across.
1 Overview of Allocating Revenue Requirements Based on Shares of Marginal Costs May, 2012.
The Equity and Efficiency of Two-Part Tariffs in U.S. Natural Gas Markets By Severin Borenstein Lucas W. Davis Presented By: SIFAT SHARMEEN.
Evaluating the Welfare Effects of Government Policy: CS & PS
Chapter 10 The Theory of Monopoly
Finishing Up Monopolies: Natural Monopolies.  natural monopoly ◦ one firm can produce a desired output at a lower cost than two or more firms—cost 
Definition of an Externality
Monopoly Gail (Gas Authority of India), which has had a monopoly in the gas transmission sector, is set to see some tough competition in the coming days.
Cost of Service Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker.
Rate and Revenue Considerations When Starting an Energy Efficiency Program APPA’s National Conference June 13 th, 2009 Salt Lake City, Utah Mark Beauchamp,
Are Monopolies Desirable?
Copyright © 2006 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved.13-1 Natural Monopolies And Regulation.
Monopolistic Competition
Chapter 11 APPLIED COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS. Lee, Junqing Department of Economics, Nankai University CONTENTS Economic Efficiency and Welfare Analysis Price.
From an Intervener's Perspective by Matt White.  An intervener is a non-utility that participates in a rate case to advocate its interest  Interveners.
Chapter 17 Monopoly McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
© 2009 Pearson Education Canada 10/1 Chapter 10 Monopoly.
Positive Principles of Taxation
Market Power: Monopoly and Monopsony
MICROECONOMICS: Theory & Applications By Edgar K. Browning & Mark A. Zupan John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10 th Edition, Copyright 2009 PowerPoint prepared by.
Chapter Nine Applying the Competitive Model. © 2009 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. 9-2 Topics  Consumer Welfare.  Producer Welfare. 
$2.50 $2.00 Price Frozen pizzas per week $3.00 $3.50 MB 4 MB 3 MB 2 MB 1
Chapters (8) Perfect Competition (8) Monopoly (8).
ECON 201 WEEK 7 Finishing Up Monopolies: Natural Monopolies.
1.  exists when a single firm is the sole producer of a product for which there are no close substitutes. 2.
Chapter 22: The Competitive Firm Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin 13e.
MONOPOLY ESSENTIALS One firm Unique product: no close substitutes Industry demand equals firm demand Demand slopes down Marginal Revenue is below demand.
F581 Economics. Demand & Supply Question  Impact depends upon the extent of the shift.  If demand shifts, the impact will depend on elasticity of supply.
Lecture 9Slide 1 Topics to be Discussed Monopoly Monopoly Power Sources of Monopoly Power The Social Costs of Monopoly Power.
Chapter 13 – Taxation and Efficiency
Chapter 15 Market Interventions McGraw-Hill/Irwin
Main Topics for Free Responses Since 1995
UNIT 7 MARKET STRUCTURE.
Rate-of-Return Regulation
THE FIRM AND ITS CUSTOMERS: PART 1
THE FIRM AND ITS CUSTOMERS
Are Monopolies Desirable?
Presentation transcript:

DO AMERICANS CONSUME TOO LITTLE NATURAL GAS?An Empirical Test of Marginal Cost Pricing. By Lucas W. Davis and Erich Muehlegger. Key words :Efficient pricing, marginal pricing, natural gas.

Introduction The paper performs an empirical test of marginal cost pricing in the natural gas distribution market in the U.S during period A standard result in regulation is that efficiency requires that P=MC. This eliminates welfare losses e.g in natural monopoly. The paper applies the standard natural monopoly framework to natural gas distribution in US. Unregulated Natural Monopoly>Sub optimal level of output (P>MC) (deadweight Loss) Individually and jointly, for all 50 states the paper rejects the null hypothesis of marginal cost pricing. In practice, most distribution co’s charge prices approx. equal to average cost, Incl. amortization of capital expenditure. Current pricing system yields annual welfare losses of $2.6 billion compared to MC pricing.

Background Natural gas market(US) consists of 3 players: Gas producers. Interstate pipeline Operators. LDCs (local Distribution Cos). LDCs purchase gas at the ‘city gate’ and distribute it through a distribution network to 4 classes of customers: residential, commercial, industrial and electric power. LDC’s costs; Main fixed costs= installation and maintenance of the pipeline network. Others ; installing + maintenace of gas meters, processing bills, and taking customer calls.(these costs depends on total no. of customers) Marginal customer cost-cost of additional customer to the network/substantial. Marginal commodity cost- cost of providing an additional unit of gas/cost of the natural gas(city gate price) Note: the marginal cost of distributing gas through the local network is zero.

Contd. LDC’S are regulated by state utility which set tariff for each class of customers using ROR. ∑Revenue(pi) = sB + expenses where Revenue(pi) =revenues generated from customer class i given the price schedule pi, s = allowed rate of return, and B =rate base, the total value of the firms investment i.e capital investments. Others are Ramsey pricing; P i - MC i / P i = λ /h i Two part tariff pricing= fixed fee + per unit charge. DATA. To perform the test of marginal cost pricing, they assembled a 20-year panel of natural gas sales and prices at the state-level ( ).City gate prices play an important role in determining Marginal pricing of natural gas for LDC’s. Month level abstracts are used to measure dead weight loss.

Results. First, for each state,month, and customer class, calculate “net revenue”NR=TR collected by LDC’s net of commodity cost. Test if NR is a function of natural gas consumption. NR t = α 0 + α 1 q t + u t, t = 1, 2,..., 12 Monthly net revenue from residential sales per customer, NR t, is regressed on monthly gas consumption per customer, q t. - The constant α 0 is the average amount paid in fixed fees - α 1 is the average per unit markup over the city gate price. The test provided strong evidence of departures from marginal cost pricing in all the 50 states. Average mark-up was over 40% per unit of gas. Total Deadweight from non-marginal pricing given that demand elasticity's is inelastic for all three sectors was obtained to be 2.6Bn dollars and it exceeds 1.2bn dollars p.a.

Possible explanations. Profit maximization by LDC’s. One possible explanation for the current price schedules lies in the incentives created by rate-of-return regulation. S>r. Distributional considerations. With low connection fees the existing rates imply that within customer classes high-demand customers pay a large share of fixed costs. Environmental Externalities. e.g. implementation of taxes that equate to marginal damages.

Solutions. Ownership Structure and Efficiency. An alternative approach for lowering per-unit prices is public provision. Energy utilities in the United States operate under one of two types of institutional arrangements: (1) privately-owned companies regulated by state public utility commissions, (2) publicly-owned or “municipally owned” companies that are directly under public control. In both cases, the public sector controls rate setting. Privately-owned companies recoup fixed costs from end users of natural gas. Municipally-owned companies recoup fixed costs through government subsidies, thereby shifting the burden of fixed costs from natural gas consumers to taxpayers. While subsidies increase the welfare of natural gas users, these gains are offset by tax distortions in other parts of the economy.

Concluding remarks. The study rejects marginal cost pricing. Departures from marginal cost pricing are most severe for residential and commercial customers with markups averaging 45% and 42%. For conservative estimates of the price elasticity of demand, these distortions impose large aggregate welfare losses compared to marginal cost pricing. The current system with low fixed fees and high per unit prices implies that there are too many natural gas customers, each consuming too little natural gas. Then public intervention in these markets should proceed with extreme caution because a carbon tax or cap-and-trade program would further reduce consumption below the socially efficient level, exacerbating the welfare losses. Fixed fee should be increased to recoup lost revenue. Differential rate across customers classes.