Malaysia’s electricity market structure in transition
Introduction
One of the world's first electricity supply industry reform started in Chile in 1987 and followed by the United Kingdom in 1989, where the main drivers for its reform is political ideology favouring market-driven approaches under a third consecutive conservative government (Newbery, 2005). In the early 1990s, many European countries and the United States joined the trend of reforming their electricity supply industry with similar market-driven approaches (Joskow, 2008). United Kingdom market reform has been a reference for point for other countries to pursue electricity industry reform in their respective country. The key strategies taken by some countries to transform their electricity sectors are summarised in Table 1(Sioshansi, 2006a), (Sioshansi, 2006b), (Sioshansi, 2008). Countries transitioned from one strategy to another until targets were realized and goals were achieved. Every country has its unique approach and impact depending on its economic, political, and social conditions.
Section snippets
Malaysian Electricity Industry
The Malaysian electricity industry has gone through many phases of reform to reach the current status. These phases of reform had increased the efficiency of utility operation and improved the quality of supply provided to the end customers. However, more initiatives are needed to optimize the true potential of reform. Malaysia's first step to reform was through privatization. Privatization is an action to move away from the ownership of government and its bureaucracy. Malaysia has also
Privatization in Malaysia
Privatization in Malaysia began in July 1990 when National Electricity Board (NEB) was corporatized and renamed Tenaga Nasional Berhad. In 1992, Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) became fully privatized when it offered its share on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE). The success of TNB's privatization is considered a success story of privatization in Malaysia. It paved the way for the government to award licences to build, operate and own (BOO) power plants to the private sector in 1993.
Malaysia electricity supply industry (MESI) reform initiatives
After privatization in November 1998, the Malaysian government stepped up on the reform by forming independent GSO Taskforce, which was assigned to set up an independent grid system operator and market operator. It was a government initiative to advance reform the Malaysian Electricity Industry. One of the main aims was to encourage competitiveness in generation dispatch. The task force had to review, design and draft all related rules, codes, procedures, and agreement necessary to
Energy market structure
A typical high-level market structure is defined through the period it is operating. For example, is it years, month, days, hour, and minutes? Each market mechanism is designed based on this time requirement. Most of the market structure comprises these components (Al-SunaidyGreen, 2006), (Jin, 2018), (Oleinikova, 2015), (Khadam., 2016):
- ●
Capacity Market. A market mechanism that ensures long term grid reliability by procuring appropriate power supply resources needed to meet the predicted peak
Single-buyer model
At present, the Malaysian Electricity Industry adapts the single-buyer model where there is a single entity within the electricity industry that will buy the total electricity needed by the nation and the grid system operator will manage the distribution of the energy through the transmission network. Both single buyer and grid system operator are ring-fenced entities within TNB (Malaysian electricity utility). Most of the power plant portfolio in Malaysia is either IPP or TNB owned plant. The
Discussion
The single-buyer model, which Malaysia adopted, has been keeping the electricity tariff stable through the implementation of incentive-based regulation (IBR) and the imbalance cost pass-through (ICPT) mechanism, which was introduced via MESI reform initiatives. Reform had taken place since 1992, with the privatization and the latest which is MESI reform initiative which can be seen as a strategy taken by the government of Malaysia to prepare the Malaysian electricity industry for transitioning
Conclusion
From the analysis, we can conclude that establishing a competitive market could improve the cost-effectiveness of the Malaysian electricity industry. The analysis clearly shows 59% system cost reduction for a pool plus fixed-contract structure, compared to a single-buyer structure. Competition between the market players is expected to reduce the market-clearing price. It could also enable the Malaysian government to reduce fuel subsidies and other mechanisms used to maintain the electricity
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References (38)
Ex-post critical evaluations of energy policies in Malaysia from 1970 to 2010: a historical institutionalism perspective
Energies Journal
(2015)Electricity deregulation in OECD countries
Energy J.
(2006)- et al.
Electricity deregulation in OECD countries
Energy J.
(2006) Electricity market deregulation in Singapore- Initial assessment of wholesale price
Energy Policy Journal
(2018)Electricity supply industry reform in Malaysia: current state and way forward
Internal Journal of Recent Technology Engineering
(2019)Classification of Electricity Market Models Worldwide
(2005)Bidding Strategies in Day-Ahead Energy Markets: System Marginal Pricing vs. Pay as Bid
(2010)Electric Power Market Models in Developing Countries
(2002)Electricity market evolution in Europe
Scientific Bulletin of Electrical Engineering
(2009)Economic Planning Unit (Malaysia)
(1996)