Abstract
In the face of the new reform of China’s “unified electricity market”, the frequency regulation ancillary service market in each region of China is still divided between using the MCP and PAB pricing mechanisms. The purpose of this paper is to explore the different impact the laws of the above two pricing mechanisms have on the frequency regulation market and to provide relevant suggestions for this electricity market reform. This paper simulates the competitive activities of the frequency regulation market based on the multi-agent simulation model, conducts a comparative experiment by changing the pricing mechanism to a single variable based on the rules of the Sichuan frequency regulation market in China, and concludes that MCP can make the market fast and stable, and that its market settlement price is low, which is suitable for the “unified electricity market”. Although PAB makes the market settlement price high, it can ensure the retention of high-performance units in the market, and the stable settlement price makes this model able to accurately reflect the “price signal”, making it suitable for late adoption in the “unified electricity market”.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
