216 / 288
216 |
Ten-Year Network Development Plan 2017 Main Report
Information on border price for Finland, Poland and FYROM were missing from the
COMEXT data base and were derived from other countries border price information
(see footnotes). The results should be interpreted accordingly.
PRICE SPREADS PER ROUTE FOR THE IMPORT PRICE SPREAD
CONFIGURATION
ROUTE TO
FROM
Price Spread (€/MWh)
Bulgaria
Romanian transit system
3.20
Czech Republic
Czech transit systems
2.40
Estonia
Russia
3.00
Finland
1)
Russia
4.90
FYROM
2)
Bulgarian transit system
3.20
Greece
Bulgarian transit system
0.20
Hungary
Ukraine
3.00
Latvia
Estonian transit system
6.70
Lithuania
Belarus
4.90
Poland
3)
Belarus, Yamal-Europe pipeline, Ukraine 4.90
Romania
Ukraine
4.40
Slovakia
Ukraine
2.90
1)
Information not directly available in the COMEXT database: use of average price for Baltic states
2)
Information not directly available in the COMEXT database: use of Bulgarian price
3)
Information not directly available in the COMEXT database: use of Lithuanian price
The modelling follows the assumption that a price spread resulting from monopolis-
tic supply behaviour stops once a certain level of alternative supply can be
purchased, creating a breaking point in the monopolistic supply behaviour. While
the supplier was previously incentivised to maximise its turnaround by applying a
price spread, reaching this level will change this strategy towards focusing on keep-
ing the market share instead. Therefore the previous pricing policy with the price
spread on certain routes needs to be abandoned
1)
.
Figure 6.29 represents the spread in countries marginal prices compared to the
German reference price, as resulting from optimising the EU supply bill considering
the above border price assumptions as well as a perfect market functioning assump-
tion. The results relate to the diversification potential of the different countries. This
does not represent any forecast on prices. In Figure 6.29, the difference in colour
between countries indicate infrastructure limitations.
The results for 2017 show already that the low infrastructure level enables overcom-
ing some of the import price spreads. In the EU Green Revolution scenario all
impacts from the price spread in the EU have disappeared, except for Finland which
remains isolated.
In the Baltic States, the access to LNG through the Klaipėda LNG terminal enables
to overcome monopolistic supply behaviour and have marginal price converging
with well diversified markets. From 2025 these benefits disappear due to the
Klaipėda LNG FSRU not being considered anymore in the low infrastructure level
from 2025, reflecting the expiration of the FSRU leasing agreement.
In 2020 and subsequent years, in the Blue Transition scenario, Poland is suffering
again from a high price due to a considerable increase of its demand (around 25%
between 2017 and 2020).
1) 80% of the modelled flows in the initial situation (2016) are used as the basis of the modelling for the following years
Table 6.5:
Price spreads per route for the Import Price Spread configuration