The value of unused interregional transmission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims at assessing the actual use of interregional transmission lines and the opportunity cost of unused capacity. The 13 electric power lines connecting the province of Quebec (Canada) to its neighbours (New Brunswick, New England, New York, Ontario) are analysed for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008. Design/methodology/approach Hourly electricity transmission data from the Quebec Open Access Same‐Time Information System (OASIS) are analysed and matched with hourly market prices in New Brunswick, New England, New York and Ontario, for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008. Findings Capacity factors of about 50 per cent are found for these lines. Although increasing from 2006 to 2008, this finding shows that interregional lines are far from being heavily congested. Furthermore, about 25 TWh of additional profitable exports could have taken place every year, given the market conditions and the availability of transmission lines. These exports represented an opportunity cost of about $1 billion per year. Research limitations/implications Other network constraints and transaction costs could explain why these profitable transactions have not taken place. However, the lack of available energy most likely explains why exports were limited. The opportunity cost could also be overestimated by not taking into account the price impact of additional exports. Practical implications Price regulation in Quebec (with priority given to local loads) should be reviewed to maximize economic efficiency and environmental benefits in the Northeast region. Originality/value This is the first analysis of the use of interregional electricity transmission lines. It provides a preliminary estimate of the economic cost of not further integrating different neighbouring regions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".