Modernising Russian Heating Sector Opportunities and Needs for Development

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Modernising Russian Heating Sector Opportunities and Needs for Development Modernising Russian Heating Sector Opportunities and needs for development Esa Hyvärinen Vice President Corporate Relations Fortum Corporation 1 Background • Fortum – has made a large and long-term investments in the Russian energy market – has a long and good track record of successful operations in competitive energy markets – has good knowledge of operating in different countries, regulatory environments, and on efficient energy production technologies, in particular in hydro, nuclear and combined heat and power (CHP) • Russian electricity market reform has been a success, which needs to be completed by addressing other relevant energy markets – interplay of different but interlinked parts of the energy market (electricity, capacity, heat, fuels, distribution, retail sales, etc.) is becoming an issue requiring additional attention in order to achieve all targets set for the market reform • Modernisation of the heating sector is an opportunity, which is becoming a necessity – to keep up the heating infrastructure – to achieve targets for energy efficiency – to solve issues related to electricity market reform and the role of CHP in particular • Any market reform is nevertheless never complete but requires constant development – based on its competencies and expertise, Fortum is willing to proactively promote further developments of the Russian energy market – this presentation concentrates on the heat sector 2 Our geographical presence today Nr 1 Heat Key figures 2012 Nordic countries Sales EUR 6.2 bn Operating profit EUR 1.9 bn Nr 1 Distribution Power generation 51.6 TWh Balance sheet EUR 25 bn Heat sales 14.5 TWh Personnel 10,400 Nr 2 Power Distribution customers 1.6 million generation Electricity customers 1.2 million Nr 2 Electricity sales Russia OAO Fortum Power generation 19.2 TWh Great Britain Heat sales 26.4 TWh Power generation 1.1 TWh TGC-1 (~25%) Heat sales 1.8 TWh Power generation ~7 TWh Heat sales ~8 TWh Poland Baltic countries Power generation 0.8 TWh Power generation 0.4 TWh Heat sales 4.3 TWh Heat sales 0.9 TWh 3 Fortum mid-sized European power generation player; Global #4 in heat Power generation Heat production Customers Largest producers in Europe and Russia, 2010 Largest global producers, 2010 Electricity customers in EU, 2010 TWh TWh millions EDF *) IES Enel E.ON Gazprom EDF Enel Dalkia E.ON RWE Fortum RWE ***) GDF SUEZ Vattenfall Iberdrola Gazprom **) SUEK Rosenergoatom Onexim CEZ Vattenfall Bashkirenergo DEI Inter RAO UES Irkutskenergo Centrica Iberdrola RAO ES East EDP NNEGC Energoat. Inter RAO UES Vattenfall RusHydro TGC-2 GDF SUEZ Fortum Tatenergo SSE CEZ Lukoil EnBW EnBW Kievenergo PGE *) IES Minsk Energo Gas Natural Irkutskenergo Dong Energy Fenosa Statkraft KDHC, Korea Tauron PGE PGNiG Fortum SSE TGC-14 Dong Energy DEI ELCEN, Rom. Hafslund 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 10 20 30 40 * incl. TGC-5, TGC-6, TGC-7, TGC-9, ** incl. TGC-12, TGC-13, *** incl. International Power Source: Company information, Fortum analyses, 2010 figures pro forma, heat production of Beijing DH not available. 4 Structure of Russian generation – significant share of gas- fired condensing power plants Generation structure in the first price Current generation structure in the zone (Europe-Urals) USA GW 7% 15% 28% 18% 28% 5% 12% 17% 29% 32% 5% 2% 2% 12% 7% 7% 12% 13% 16% 21% 9% • Today, a significant share of electricity in Russia is produced at gas-fired plants with the efficiency of ~35-40% (steam-power cycle). At that, given the current commissioning plans, by 2020, the share of inefficient condensing power plants in the energy balance will remain significant. • Meanwhile, in countries where gas is widely used in electricity production, gas turbines and combined cycle gas turbines have superseded old gas-fired steam power plants. • Full-scale conversion of existing CHP plants to CCGT technology would satisfy the electricity demand and enable us to discontinue inefficient gas-fired condensing power plants. Sources: UES Development Scenarios – 2030, Energy Information Agency Necessary actions to be taken to modernise the Russian heat sector 1. Supportive market structure for CHP production 3. Enabling and motivating customers to monitor and reduce their heat consumption and cost Supplier 2. Stimuli for investments in district heating networks Customers 4. Efficiency gains will outweigh the increase of unit prices 6 Supportive market structure for combined power and heat production • Phasing out cross-subsidies – cross-subsidies between electricity and heat production; • all costs relevant for heat production are not visible in heat tariffs • part of the costs of heat production is carried by CHP electricity (capacity and energy) • costs of CHP electricity becomes artificially high • result is that CHP electricity, in total, is less competitive than condensing power production – cross-subsidies between industrial, public buildings and household customers; • encourages industrial customers to build their own heat only boilers • Costs of CHP should be divided based on heat and electricity output (based on primary fuel consumption) and all costs related to heat production should be visible in heat prices • As long as electricity (capacity and energy) continues carrying costs of heat production, capacity payments for CHP electricity should compensate that discrepancy • The outcome where electricity is produced by condensing and heat by heat only boilers leads to lower energy efficiency compared to a more extensive use of CHP 7 Stimuli for investments in district heating networks • Networks require big and immediate investments – heat network losses 20 - 30 % (world class 7 – 10 %) plus considerable water losses – short, less than 15 years, technical life-time (world class 30 – 40 years) – big annual replacement need ~ 10 % of pipelines • Distribution tariffs should cover all investments costs – also capital costs must be covered – justified heat losses based on normatives, real losses substantially higher – unclear cost coverage for necessary investments in in-house substations and metering devises • Clarification of roles and responsibilities of owners and operators in district heating networks necessary for a successful and comprehensive network development – measuring the heat flows must be improved – encouragement of joint ventures and other ownership arrangements as appropriate – concessions based on long-term agreements 8 Enabling and motivating consumers to monitor and reduce their heat consumption and cost • Instalment of in-house substations and automatic temperature adjustments to be encouraged / enforced – based on recommendation, implementation is unclear – a precondition for invoicing based on consumption – necessary for efficiency improvements – tariffs for consumers without metering to be temporarily increased to encourage a rapid installation on metering and adjusting devises, or – tariffs should cover instalment of necessary in-house equipment (and make district heating operators responsible for installation) • Possibility to adjust heating would also improve living comfort 9 Efficiency gains will outweigh the increase of unit prices • Savings in heat consumption can only be motivated if heating costs are directly related to the amount of heat consumed – this requires metering and equipment to adjust heat consumption and invoicing based on actual heat consumption • Increased unit prices are necessary – for attracting investments – for motivating district heating operators and consumers to improve their efficiency • Experience shows that efficiency gains will outweigh the increase of unit prices • Efficiency gains originate from every step throughout the district heating chain – increased share of combined heat and power (CHP) production – better technical quality and operations of the network (trunk and distribution pipelines) – metering and possibility of consumers to adjust temperature and hence heat consumption – invoicing based on real consumption • Requires a comprehensive modernisation of the heating sector – e.g. metering or invoicing based on real consumption do not bring any benefits, if consumers cannot adjust their heat consumption – e.g. application of outdated technologies in heat transmission / distribution and consumption decreases the attractiveness of CHP production – district heating prices should be set freely by the heat suppliers based on costs of alternative heating methods i.e. on competition in the heat market (as is the case in Finland and Sweden for example) 10 Improved total efficiency will outweigh the increase of unit costs Losses in Chelyabinsk DH system are almost 3 times bigger than in Espoo Chelyabinsk Up to 60% losses from production, distribution and in end Heating degree days customers facilities in Russia ~ 4,800 Losses 10% Losses 15% Losses 15% Losses 20% Fuel 1 163 000 MWh Heat consumption (106 000 000m3) Heat transport trunks Distribution network 600 000 MWh Heat Output 890 000 MWh 760 000 MWh 0,31 MWh/m2/a 1 050 000 MWh 2 000 000 m2 Fuel Heat consumption 344 000 MWh (31 353 396 m3) 280 000 MWh Heat transport trunks and distribution network 0,14 MWh/m2/a Heat Output 307 000 MWh 295 000 MWh 2 000 000 m2 320 000 MWh Losses 7% Losses 4% + 4% Losses 5% Espoo Losses in Espoo 20% Heating degree days ~3,900 11 Average heating bill as % of GDP per capita in Russia compared to other countries where Fortum is present Pricing Where are heat prices Unit cost of DH for average Average consumption likely to be most politically customer (€/MWh) assumption
Recommended publications
  • Specialised Asset Management
    specialised research and investment group Russian Power: The Greatest Sector Reform on Earth www.sprin-g.com November 2010 specialised research and investment group Specialised Research and Investment Group (SPRING) Manage Investments in Russian Utilities: - HH Generation - #1 among EM funds (12 Months Return)* #2 among EM funds (Monthly return)** David Herne - Portfolio Manager Previous positions: Member, Board of Directors - Unified Energy Systems, Federal Grid Company, RusHydro, TGK-1, TGK-2, TGK-4, OGK-3, OGK-5, System Operator, Aeroflot, etc. (2000-2008) Chairman, Committee for Strategy and Reform - Unified Energy Systems (2001-2008) Boston Consulting Group, Credit Suisse First Boston, Brunswick. * Top 10 (by 12 Months Return) Emerging Markets (E. Europe/CIS) funds in the world by BarclayHedge as of 30 September 2010 ** Top 10 (by Monthly Return) Emerging Markets (E. Europe/CIS) funds in the world by BarclayHedge as of 31 August 2010 2 specialised research and investment group Russian power sector reform: Privatization Pre-Reform Post-Reform Government Government 52% 1 RusHydro 1 FSK RAO ES RAO UES 58% 79% hydro generation HV distribution 53% Far East Holding control control Independent energos 53% 1 MRSK Holding 14 TGKs 0% (Bashkir, Novosibirsk, ~72 energos 0% generation (CHP) generation Irkutsk, Tat) 35 federal plants transmission thermal 11 MRSK distribution 51% hydro LV distribution 0% ~72 SupplyCos supply 6 OGKs other 0% generation 45% InterRAO 0% ~100 RepairCos Source: UES, Companies Data, SPRING research 3 specialised research
    [Show full text]
  • a Leading Energy Company in the Nordic Area
    - a leading energy company in the Nordic area Presentation for investors September 2007 Disclaimer This presentation does not constitute an invitation to underwrite, subscribe for, or otherwise acquire or dispose of any Fortum shares. Past performance is no guide to future performance, and persons needing advice should consult an independent financial adviser. 2 • Fortum today • European power markets • Russia • Financials / outlook • Supplementary material 3 Fortum's strategy Fortum focuses on the Nordic and Baltic Rim markets as a platform for profitable growth Become the leading Become the power and heat energy supplier company of choice Benchmark business performance 4 Presence in focus market areas Nordic Generation 53.2 TWh Electricity sales 60.2 TWh Distribution cust. 1.6 mill. Electricity cust. 1.3 mill. NW Russia Heat sales 20.1 TWh (in associated companies) Power generation ~6 TWh Heat production ~7 TWh Baltic countries Heat sales 1.0 TWh Poland Distribution cust. 23,000 Heat sales 3.6 TWh Electricity sales 8 GWh 2006 numbers 5 Fortum Business structure Fortum Markets Fortum's comparable Large operating profit in 2006 NordicNordic customers EUR 1,437 million Fortum wholesalewholesale Small Power marketmarket customers Generation Nord Pool and Markets 0% bilateral Other retail companies Deregulated Distribution 17% Regulated Transmission Power and system Fortum Heat 17% Generation services Distribution 66% 6 Strong financial position ROE (%) EPS, cont. (EUR) Total assets (EUR billion) 20 1.50 1.42 20.0 16.8 17.5 17.3 1.22 18 15.1
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Annual Report of PJSC Inter RAO / Report on Sustainable Development and Environmental Responsibility
    INFORMATION TRANSLATION Draft 2017 Annual Report of PJSC Inter RAO / Report on Sustainable Development and Environmental Responsibility Chairman of the Management Board Boris Kovalchuk Chief Accountant Alla Vainilavichute Contents 1. Strategic Report ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 1.1. At a Glance .................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 1.2. About the Report ........................................................................................................................................................................ 11 Differences from the Development Process of the 2016 Report ............................................................................................................ 11 Scope of Information ............................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Responsibility for the Report Preparation .............................................................................................................................................. 11 Statement on Liability Limitations .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Public Joint-Stock Company Issuer’S Code: 10214-A
    QUARTERLY REPORT "Interregional Distribution Grid Company of Centre", Public Joint-Stock Company Issuer’s code: 10214-A for Quarter 1, 2016 Location of the issuer: 2nd Yamskaya, 4, Moscow, Russian Federation, 127018 The information containing in this quarterly report is subject to disclosure in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on securities ____________ O.Y. Isaev General Director signature Date: 13 May 2016 Chief Accountant - Head of Financial and Tax Accounting and ____________ L.A. Sklyarova signature Reporting Department Date: 13 May 2016 Contact person: Principal Specialist of Corporate Office of the Department for Corporate Governance and Interaction with Shareholders, Yulia Dmitrievna Naumova Phone: (495) 747-9292 #3286 Fax: (495) 747-9295 E-mail: [email protected] Internet site used by the issuer for the information disclosure, containing in this quarterly report: http://www.e-disclosure.ru/portal/company.aspx?id=7985; http://www.mrsk-1.ru/ru/information/. 1 Table of contents Table of contents .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 Section I. Data on bank accounts, on the auditor, appraiser and financial adviser of the issuer, and also persons, who signed the quarterly report ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Inter RAO Group Today | 11
    10 | PJSC Inter RAO | 2016 Annual Report 3. INTER RAO GROUP TODAY The Group operates in the following segments: A leading electricity export and import operator in Rus- — Electricity and heat generation sia. The Inter RAO Group’s supply geography comprises — Electricity supply and heat supply Finland, Belarus, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Nor- — International electricity trading way, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, South Ossetia, Ka- A diversified energy holding company — Engineering, power equipment export zakhstan, China and Mongolia. managing assets in Russia, as well as — Management of electricity distribution grids outside Russia Effectively manages power supply companies – guaran- in European and CIS countries. teed suppliers in 12 regions of Russia. Since 2010, PJSC Inter RAO has been rated in the List of Strategic Enterprises and Strategic Joint Stock Compa- Owns independent suppliers of electricity to large indus- nies of the Russian Federation1. trial consumers. GENERATING ASSETS SUPPLY ACTIVITIES ELECTRICITY EXPORT in 2016 THERMAL POWER PLANTS 41 17.0bn kWh ELECTRICITY IMPORT HYDROPOWER PLANTS 62 (including 5 low capacity HPPs) 10 in 2016 IN 62 REGIONS OF RUSSIA bn kWh WIND FARMS 3.1 1 According to the Decree of the President of Russia No. 1190 dated 30.09.2010 PJSC Inter RAO was included in the List of Strategic Enterprises and Strategic Joint-Stock Companies (Section 2 of the List of Open Joint Stock Companies with its assets held in federal ownership managed by the Russian Federation in order to ensure strategic 2 interests of State defence and security, moral values, healthcare, rights and legitimate interests protection of the citizens of the Russian Federation).
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Feasibility of Measuring Market Risk by Predicted Beta with Liquidity Adjustment1
    Testing Feasibility of Measuring Market Risk by Predicted Beta with Liquidity Adjustment1 State University – Higher School of Economics Laboratory of Financial Markers Analysis Abstract The present paper assesses the CAPM predicted beta coefficient which is employed by a number of Russian investment companies in the calculation of a discount rate for future cash flows valuation. It is common practice to estimate the target stock price within the DCF method using the single-factor CAPM where the beta coefficient is the only measure of investment risk. A shift from the historical to the predicted beta coefficient is due to low liquidity of the majority of Russian stocks which results in rather low historical beta coefficients obtained by regressing on historical data. The paper assesses a new method of calculating the beta coefficient introduced by Aton Investment Company which dismisses company’s industry-specific characteristics while accentuating company’s size (measured by market capitalization) and liquidity (measured by the free-float coefficient). The sample size is 72 Russian stocks traded on the Russian Trading System (RTS) Stock Exchange. The sample period is from 2007 to the first half of 2008. Key words: CAPM, historical beta, free-float, adjusted beta, predicted beta adjusted for liquidity. 1 A working paper version. Problems in application of CAPM in emerging capital markets The single-factor equilibrium Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) of the rate of return on equity and equity risk premium (ERP) remains the most popular one for setting a discount rate which is further used in calculating the equity (company) fair price within the Discounted Cash Flow method (DCF).
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Boards of Directors at Russia's Largest
    An Overview of Boards of Directors at Russia’s Largest Public Companies Andrei Rakitin Milena Barsukova Arina Mazunova Translated from Russian August 2020 Key Results According to information disclosed by 109 of Russia’s largest public companies: • “Classic” board compositions of 11, nine, and seven seats prevail • The total number of persons on Boards of the companies under study is not as low as it might seem: 89% of all Directors were elected to only one such Board • Female Directors account for 12% and are more often elected to the audit, nomination, and remuneration committees than to the strategy committee • Among Directors, there are more “humanitarians” than “techies”, while the share of “techies” among chairs is greater than across the whole sample • The average age for Directors is 53, 56 for Chairmen, and 58 for Independent Directors • Generation X is the most visible on Boards, and Generation Y Directors will likely quickly increase their presence if the development of digital technologies continues • The share of Independent Directors barely reaches 30%, and there is an obvious lack of independence on key committees such as audit • Senior Independent Directors were elected at 17% of the companies, while 89% of Chairs are not independent • The average total remuneration paid to the Board of Directors is RUR 69 million, with the difference between the maximum and minimum being 18 times • Twenty-four percent of companies disclosed information on individual payments made to their Directors. According to this, the average total remuneration is approximately RUR 9 million per annum for a Director, RUR 17 million for a Chair, and RUR 11 million for an Independent Director The comparison of 2020 findings with results of a similar study published in 2012 paints an interesting dynamic picture.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report JSC “Quadra – Power Generation”
    Annual Report JSC “Quadra – Power Generation” 2012 Preliminarily approved by the Board of Directors of JSC “Quadra – Power Generation” Minutes #19 / 160 dated 29.04.2013 Approved by resolution of Annual General Shareholders Meeting of JSC “Quadra – Power Generation” “26” June 2013 Minutes #1 / 16 dated 27/06/2013 General Director of JSC “Quadra - Power Generation” V.V. Shelkov Chief Accountant of JSC “Quadra - Power Generation” I.A. Lapitskaya 2 Contents: Disclaimer 5 Address by the Chairperson of the Board of Directors to shareholders 6 Address by the General Director to shareholders 8 Introduction: TGC in the structure of sector 10 SECTION 1. JSC “Quadra – Power Generation” on the electricity and heat market 14 1. 1 Market position 14 1.2 Competitive environment and competitive advantages 16 1.3 Strategic areas of business 18 1.4 Risk map 21 1.5 Macroeconomic situation 27 1.6 JSC “Quadra – Power Generation” – 5 years of stable energy supplies 28 SECTION 2. Corporate governance 33 2.1 Corporate governance principles 33 2.2 General Meeting of Shareholders 34 2.3 Board of Directors 34 2.4 General Director. Management Board. 38 2.5 Committees under the Board of Directors 40 2.6 Internal Audit Commission 40 2.7 Remuneration 42 2.8 Internal control and audit 43 SECTION 3. For shareholders and investors 44 3.1 Joint-stock capital 44 3.2 Securities 44 3.3 Dividend history 48 3.4 Trading in securities 48 3.5 Compliance with the law on insider information 50 SECTION 4. Production activities 51 4.1 Main production indicators 54 4.2 Current sales indicators in terms of market segments 56 4.3 Energy saving and operational efficiency improvement 57 SECTION 5.
    [Show full text]
  • OAO IRKUTSKENERGO Address to Shareholders Performance OAO Irkutskenergo: PRODUCTION
    OAO IRKUTSKENERGO Address to shAreholders PerformAnCe oAo irkUtskenerGo: ProdUCtion ....................... 27 by the ChAirmAn hiGhliGhts ........................... 9 An overview ...................... 15 of the boArd ........................ 5 instAlled CAPACity rePort of direCtors GenerAl informAtion........ 16 of Power PlAnts ................ 28 Address to shAreholders on ComPAny by the GenerAl PerformAnCe .................... 11 ComPAny strUCtUre........... 17 Power GenerAtion ............ 28 direCtor .............................. 7 mAjor events PlAnts And fACilities ......... 18 ProdUCtion And develoPments ............. 12 PerformAnCe ..................... 31 Power GenerAtion ComPAny’s CAPACity of the ComPAny ... 22 ProCUrement ..................... 31 objeCtives, ACtivities, And fUtUre ........................ 13 shAreholder’s eqUity ....... 23 oPerAtionAl qUAlity of the Power system ......... 32 ProdUCtion effiCienCy imProvement ProGrAm ........................... 33 OAO IRKUTSKENERGO heAt And eleCtriCity orGAnizAtionAl investment soCiAl PoliCy ..................... 60 mArket .............................. 35 strUCtUre of CorPorAte ACtivities ........................... 57 mAnAGement ..................... 44 AUditor’s stAtement ......... 62 tAriffs And tAriff PoliCy ............... 37 stAndArdizAtion And streAmlininG enerGy sAles ...................... 38 of bUsiness ProCesses ....... 47 domestiC mArket ............... 40 finAnCiAl mAnAGement ..... 50 eXternAl mArket ............... 41 hUmAn resoUrCes .............. 53 environmentAl
    [Show full text]
  • QUARTERLY REPORT JSC Interregional Distribution Grid
    QUARTERLY REPORT JSC Interregional Distribution Grid Companies Holding Issuer Code: 55385-Е Quarter 3 of 2012 Registered address of the issuer: Russia, 107996, Moscow, Ulansky pereulok, 26 The information contained in this Quarterly Report is subject to disclosure in accordance with the securities laws of the Russian Federation Executive Director of JSC IDGC Holding ____________ A. Ye. Murov signature Details of the agreement whereby the powers of the issuer’s sole executive body were transferred: Agreement No. 1007 of July 10, 2012, valid until July 9, 2013 Power of Attorney of September 12, 2012, valid until September 11, 2013 Date: November 14, 2012 Chief Accountant ____________ G. I. Zhabbarova signature Date: November 12, 2012 Contact person: Kseniya Valerievna Khokholkova, Head of the Information Disclosure Unit of the Department for Corporate Governance and Shareholder Relations Telephone: (495) 995-5333 #5595 Fax: (495) 620-1755 E-mail: [email protected] The information contained in this Quarterly Report is available on the Internet at www.holding-mrsk.ru / http://www.e-disclosure.ru/portal/company.aspx?id=13806 1 Contents Contents................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 5 I. Brief Information Concerning Individual Members of
    [Show full text]
  • INTER RAO Share Placement Price – 0.0535 RUB
    Additional share issue Fundamentals Basic results of Private placement : INTER RAO share placement price – 0.0535 RUB Number of shares issued – 13,800,000,000,000 common shares Total number of shares placed with the participants of private placement – 6,822,972,629,771 shares. A total of 49.4% of newly issued shares were placed Number of shares placed with Inter RAO Capital – 2,917,890,939,501 (including shares for deal with Norilsk Nickel, stock option program and future deals) Final volume of Inter RAO’s authorized capital after private placement - 9,716,000,000,000 ordinary shares (increase by a factor of 3.36) Value of the share capital of the Company - 272.997 billion RUB* Total value of assets acquired by Inter RAO within the private placement: • Shares of utility companies - 283.2 bn RUB** • Cash – 81.8 bn RUB Share of government and state-owned companies in the authorized capital of Inter RAO amounts to 60%; Registration of additional share placement report by Federal Service for Financial Markets is planned for June 2011 Newly issued shares should start trading in June 2011 and merge into main symbol in October 2011 (MICEX) * Par value of 1 share - 0.02809767 RUB ** Value of assets based on independent appraisers. It does not include assets that might be received by INTER RAO’ s subsidiaries (closed subscription participants) after May, 17 2 Ownership structure Equity structure before Equity structure to May 17, 2011 Target equity structure after deals placement Minority finalization shareholders Federal Property Federal Property
    [Show full text]
  • E P R G W O R K in G P a P
    Market power issues in the reformed Russian electricity supply industry EPRG Working Paper 1333 Cambridge Working Paper in Economics 1358 Nadia Chernenko Abstract The paper examines long-run and short-run levels of market power in the liberalised Russian electricity market. We observe that despite potential for market power abuse, actual exercise of market power as measured by price-cost markups remained low. We attribute the result to the bid-at-cost rule implemented as a part of a special unit commitment procedure on the day-ahead market. We first look at the restructured industry and discuss the mergers and acquisitions and their impact on competition in long term. The M&A were undertaken in different market zones and thus did not seem to increase concentration (HHI remains almost unchanged) although with future zone integration competition in long run is put at risk. We then examine short-run level of market power by estimating hourly price-cost mark-ups and assessing their dynamics in 2010 and 2011, a year preceeding and following the G PAPER market liberalisation respectively. Using time series models (AR models) N we reject hypothesis of actual market power abuse. Further, using a Tobit regression we find that the liberalisation decreased the mark-ups by about 1.66 percetage points. .Keywords Russian electricity market, liberalisation, market power, concentration, price-cost mark-ups JEL Classification L11, L13, L94 Contact [email protected] Publication June 2013 EPRG WORKI Financial Support Trinity College Eastern European Research Bursary www.eprg.group.cam.ac.uk EPRG 1333 Market power issues in the reformed Russian electricity supply industry Nadia Chernenko October 2013 Abstract.
    [Show full text]