Increased Trading Volume of Electricity Options

Over the past 6 years, there has been a surge in trading volume of electricity options. Drivers for the increase can be primarily attributed to the increased presence of speculative trading firms within the electricity market attempting to manage and capitalise on the volatility within the market. Options are also becoming an increasingly popular tool in the electricity space given the increase in Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) being underwritten by these products. In doing so, companies are hedging against potential downside movements in the market to become more risk averse.

This trend highlights a strategic shift towards using financial instruments to manage electricity positions and mitigate risks associated with these long-term contracts. However, the volume traded in May 2024 for FY25 options expiry indicates a deceleration in trading volumes.

Interestingly, the dynamics of the options market are similar in the larger states of the NEM: Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria. However, this contrasts significantly with South Australia, where the volume of options traded is much more in line with the volume of Futures traded. Overall, the futures and options market in South Australia is highly illiquid, with trading volumes declining over recent years. With the recent Q1 in SA being under RRO conditions and therefore fully contracted, the likely need to have exposed positions underpinned in the state has reduced and with it the appetite for speculators in the market. This contrasts with the other NEM states whose interconnector flows allow for cross-border spreads to be contracted and the opportunity for speculators to take advantage of these financial products without the requirement to physically settle their positions.

Electricity options are primarily traded in financial year (FY) and calendar year (CAL) strips, expiring in May (for FY) and November (for CAL) each year. Significant spikes can be observed in the following graphs for Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria. The first four graphs illustrate a rising trend in trade volume over time, followed by a noticeable decline in the most recent expiry in May. The subsequent four graphs (graphs 5-8) overlay the FY24 quarter’s price and volume, highlighting the timing of expiries and their potential impact on prices.

With the CAL products coming towards expiry in November and high prices remaining in the ASX Swap market, this will likely lead to many of these products being exercised at expiry due to the strike price likely being below the current forward price. This can lead to increased volatility on the ASX over these periods and significant volume being traded. What will add a level of interest in this particular expiry period will be the low generation availability in NSW at the time of expiry. With many units already on outage schedules, any unplanned outages on the system could further exacerbate the price and add a level of fear and uncertainty to the market.

Graph 1 – NSW Trade Volume

Graph 2 – QLD Trade Volume


Graph 3 – SA Trade Volume

Graph 4 – VIC Trade Volume

Graph 5 – NSW FY24 Trade Volume & Price

Graph 6 – QLD FY24 Trade Volume & Price

Graph 7 – SA FY24 Trade Volume & Price

Graph 8 – VIC FY24 Trade Volume & Price

Are there seasonal trends in the FCAS market?

Edge have investigated seasonal trends from FCAS cumulative costs, specifically with regards to lower FCAS. Raise FCAS charges are paid by the causer (generator), and lower FCAS charges are paid for by the consumer.

Firstly, considering the raw data, we can observe that there does appear to have been some increase in total FCAS charges by year, however specifically, we can see that these mostly come in large spikes in one state’s FCAS charges in a specific month, as opposed to all states growing proportionally.

Excluding the monthly breakdown, the data shows FCAS charges growing from 2018 to 2022, with a reduction in 2023. Notably, the summer of 2024 and the December 2023 period were under the RRO in SA, and the summer was notably mild compared to forecasted conditions, which may have impacted FCAS pricing during that period.

An analysis of the monthly data reveals state-specific seasonal trends, occasionally disrupted by anomalies or significant events. Analysing the monthly patterns for each state reveals the following seasonal effects:

In New South Wales, FCAS charges are typically lower in the winter, increasing from August to January before declining.

In Queensland, FCAS charges primarily occur from August to November, though Queensland remains highly reactive, with spikes in March and May reflecting this behaviour.

South Australia reflects behaviours from both New South Wales and Queensland, where FCAS charges rise post-winter and through spring, with significant spikes in 2020 and 2019 elevating the averages for February and November, respectively.

Tasmania has no obvious seasonal effects observed with prices remaining relatively consistent throughout the year.

Victoria mimics behaviours similar to New South Wales, with low FCAS charges in winter, increasing from August to January before declining.

Depending on the state, strategies could be developed to proactively lower FCAS charges, particularly in response to sudden frequency deviations over short periods. Energy users can deploy onsite batteries or demand side response abilities, that discharge during periods of high FCAS pricing to provide spontaneous services.

The highest payout services are predominantly Lower slow 60sec and Lower fast 6sec, which require batteries capable of responding within the specified 60-second and 6-second windows. While there is a very fast FCAS market (1-second raise / lower), this market is currently used less compared to the standard 6/60-seconds markets.

Queensland Operational Demand Records

In 2024, Queensland has experienced extreme fluctuations of operational demand, reflecting the complexities of the ongoing energy transition. From record high demand peaks in January surpassing 11GW, to unprecedented lows in August below 3GW, the Queensland grid has been stretched in both directions, highlighting the challenges of integrating renewable energy sources into a grid previously dominated by fossil fuel baseload.

On 22 January, Queensland recorded an all-time maximum demand exceeding 11,000MW, smashing the previous record by approximately 800MW. This surge in demand was driven by very hot and humid weather, leading to a substantial increase in cooling loads across the state.

In stark contrast, on 18 August, Queensland registered its lowest operational demand in at least 24 years, dropping to 2,975MW. This significant dip was primarily due to the increased penetration of rooftop solar, which contributed an estimated 3.8 to 3.9GW of electricity during this period. With such a large portion of the state’s power being generated by rooftop solar, electricity prices during daylight hours plummeted.

However, this record low demand driven by solar, resulted in approximately 1.8GW of variable renewable energy (VRE), predominantly from solar, being curtailed during this period. This only left 745MW of utility scale solar feeding into the grid. This level of curtailment underscores the growing challenge of balancing the supply and demand of renewable energy, particularly as rooftop solar continues to expand while storage solutions lag behind.

The previous low demand record was set in October 2023 at just over 3GW. As we approach September and October of this year, there is anticipation that demand could drop even further as traditionally this is the lowest period for demand. However, this will depend on factors such as luminosity, rooftop PV generation, and temperature, potentially leading to reduced electricity prices and increased curtailment.

This situation also raises concerns about the oversupply of solar energy and the urgent need for further investment in grid infrastructure and storage solutions required to manage these fluctuations.

One of the most significant issues facing the broader market is the impact of rooftop solar PV, which operates outside the traditional market, causing electricity prices to crash during sunny hours. This, in turn, pushes out utility scale solar and other sources of generation, presenting a challenging issue going forward of managing different types of renewables and preventing them from significantly cutting into each other resulting in curtailment.

Tightening in the ACCU Market

Person using a laptop with carbon credit and sustainability icons floating above their hands, including CO2, recycling, solar energy, and net zero symbols.

The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) intends to stop the development of the Integrated Farm and Land Management (IFLM) method.

The reasoning is due to difficulties demonstrating the environmental benefits of regeneration activities in areas not previously cleared. Instead, the DCCEEW has proposed a new system to be developed, the Landscape Restoration Method (LRM), which considerably tightens grazing activities compared to the previous Human Induced Regeneration (HIR) method.

As a result, the market responded to the news with increased activity for HIR ACCUs and price firming for both generic and HIR ACCUs. The generic ACCU market has firmed since late last year, increasing from the $31-$32 range to $36.

Depending on the scope of allowed grazing activities under the future IFLM or IRM, the market could significantly move. The IFLM method was initially expected to fill the supply gap created after the retirement of two major methods by the end of 2024.

The ACCU market is currently priced to increase into the future, with a cost of carry of ~7%. This is ultimately driven by demand from safeguard participants and some voluntary demand associated with sustainability targets.

The current baselines decrease by 4.9% each financial year out to 2030, with an emission reduction contribution of 65.7% in 2030. The demand for ACCUs to offset organisations’ emissions is anticipated to surpass ACCU issuance for the first time in 2028. The high demand and low issuance are currently forecasted to continue until 2031, where demand for ACCUs is forecasted to peak at 31 million certificates. This is significantly up from 2022, where demand from scheme participants was less than 1 million. However, facilities that are covered by the Safeguard Mechanism are able to generate SMCs, which are a new type of credit issued as a reward for emitting below one’s limits, which could ease overall demand on ACCUs.

The Australian Government has made ACCUs available to liable entities at $75/cert, increasing with CPI plus 2%, ultimately setting a price cap for them. In future years, when supply and demand become tighter, could we witness an ACCU market consistently trading at or near the cap, similar to the current STC market?

Progress of Snowy 2.0

Active construction site of Snowy 2.0 hydroelectric project with cranes and temporary buildings on a rugged landscape.

Since the beginning of construction, Snowy 2.0, a pumped storage power station, has faced a variety of challenges and issues, including the tunnel boring machine getting stuck late 2022 and the project being well over budget, more than double the previous estimate, and six times the ballpark figure given by Malcolm Turnbull.

Despite these setbacks, rock conditions are currently good, and in a year’s time, the project is forecasted to have created an underground cavern that should be big enough to accommodate a 22-story building. This will house the $12b 2.2GW system with a storage capacity of 350,000MWh (159 hours at full power), which is forecasted to reach full commercial operation by December 2028.

Snowy Hydro CEO Dennis Barnes stated they are approximately 51% of the way to completing the project, but there is still a lot to de-risk going forward.

The tunnel boring machine Florence, which got stuck in September 2022 due to unexpected soft ground, was stuck only 140 metres into its 16-kilometre journey. Florence has begun to move again in December 2023, but moving at a rate of 6 metres per day. In order to stay on target, Florence will need to pick up the pace to 12 to 15 metres a day.

According to Barnes, Snowy is considering a fourth boring machine to ensure the project will keep on the revised target, with the decision being made in the following months.

Projects such as Snowy 2.0 providing long-term storage are crucial for the energy transition in the NEM, being able to provide firming capacity during solar and wind droughts, which will inevitably occur. This will allow for the retirement of coal units, as well as allow for a total of 6.6GW of new renewables into the system.

Even with the need for such projects, the project has faced backlash due to the cost blowing out considerably higher than initial estimates, particularly when the additional $8.5 billion of connecting transmission to the north and south is included.

Despite the range of challenges faced by Snowy 2.0, including budget blowouts, difficulties with the tunnel boring machine, and delays, the project is showing progress and plays a key role in achieving Australia’s renewable energy targets.

 

Callide Legal Action and Regulatory Challenges

Safety worker in hard hat pointing at electrical transmission towers under a colorful sunset sky, highlighting energy infrastructure.

Callide is facing increased scrutiny as the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) is taking legal proceedings against Callide Power Trading due to an explosion at Callide C. In May 2021, an explosion at Callide C4 led to the tripping of multiple generators and high-voltage lines in Queensland, leaving nearly half a million homes to lose power.

The AER alleges that Callide Power Trading broke the National Electricity Rules (NER) by not adhering to its own performance standards for Callide C4. According to the allegations, the C4 unit lacked a protection system in place or having sufficient energy supply to suddenly disconnect the unit when the explosion occurred.

Justin Oliver, an AER board member stated that “Failure to comply with these standards can risk power system security, see consumers disconnected from power supply and cause wholesale energy prices to increase during and beyond these events”.

Callide C3 is expected to fully return on March 31st, with C4 following on July 31st. These are revised dates following various delays affecting both units.

In a separate incident, the Federal Court ordered IG Power, who owns 50% of Callide to appoint special administrators with powers to complete a new investigator into the incidents at the power station.

There is currently no date set for the AER’s matter to be heard at Federal Court.

This highlights the immense pressure on the energy industry and regulation to suppress spot prices in the NEM. This pressure has come in various forms including market directions, price caps on underlying fuel sources such as coal and gas, and retailer reliability obligation (RRO) being enacted in SA this summer.

This pressure has been evident in the spot price, as the spot price over the summer has been very soft, particularly in South Australia and Victoria, with prices being far below forecasted and previously traded levels.

This has caused issues for generators leading Engie to announce the early closure of two units in SA, removing 138MW of capacity from July 1, brought forward from an initial closure scheduled for 2028. This is due to financial reasons as losses have been mounting at the plants, unable to make a profit in the spot market.

There is currently a T-3 forecasted in South Australia from December 2025 to February 2026. Following the recent RRO witnessed over the summer in South Australia where spot prices have been low, volatility has been minimal, and there have been few system security issues in the state. Will we see any revisions or changes to RRO in the future?

Davos: Can the Elite Influence the World?

The Davos annual World Economic forum was in attendance a couple of weeks ago and its president Borge Brende didn’t sugar coat the information when he noted it was occurring against one of the most complicated geopolitical backdrops to date. I assume this was the thought process behind the motto of the summit, which was “re-building trust”.

Now don’t get me wrong I am not retracting any of my previous comments about the shear irony of the summit, especially last year where their discussions on environment was starkly contradicted by the number of private jets bringing in the top 1% of the world global elite and the bare snowcapped mountains, signifying what many came to realise, that 2023 was indeed the warmest year on record. But maybe, just maybe the economics of the current global situation may create a sharper focus for those in attendance this year. Money does tend to focus the mind in that way!

With increasing interest rates, commodity prices increasing, disruption from the red sea starting to show small ripple effects and rising global debt, could this group of money makers have enough influence to quell some of the tensions in the Ukraine, Israel or Africa and bring stability back to the global economy at the same time?

With the UN anticipating in excess of 40 foreign ministers attending the summit, as well as over 500 financiers and global executives. These are certainly the players who have the means and imperative to influence world events.

The covid shock has passed but global growth remains low, some placing it at 2.3-2.7% this year, down from the original WTO 3.3% forecast, but that will not be enough to recover from the body blows issued since 2020. Whilst it was acceptable to still be in a period of licking your wounds last year, the boards of the multi-billion-dollar conglomerates will not allow it to continue.

To add some spice to the mix, the world is acutely aware that with elections in the USA, UK, several in Asia including Bangladesh and Azerbaijan and India, and Uruguay and Mexico amongst many in South America, the risk of political change before the group meets again is extremely high. This has dominated many discussions with the role of AI in misinformation campaigns and possible threats it could pose. However, with economic concerns dominating little to no outcome on this is expected. I wouldn’t however bet against its prevalence increasing in the next few years.

But ultimately it is the concerns around security growth and potential global recessions which still dominate, and no one is in doubt that consensus must be reached on global policy this time, simply said champagne and catchups won’t do it this year.

Many are hoping for a lighter touch on the interest rate hikes we have seen; but most conservative players are aware this will not come quickly. Many anticipating no movement until at least the third quarter of 2024. Yet the messaging was strong, trade and investment was the only option for recovery of the global economy. The WTO  Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, stating “Without a free flow of trade, I don’t think we can recover.” No doubt she sits in the free trade camp then.

But I don’t think any pre-canned, stakeholder buy in statements will be the outcomes that the world needs this year. More so it will be the question of if this group of highly influential and incredibly powerful people can, through their combined influence, affect real change. Can they stimulate growth, control inflation and not rock the boat so much that upcoming elections lead to significant political unrest. That will be for the post-spin hindsight piece, but we have to hope that significant goals are set and met following this round of talks, otherwise the relevance of such a lavish and elite autocracy must be questioned.

End of 2023 Energy and Climate News Wrap

There was lots of news that came out during the Christmas break, so please see our wrap of the end of 2023.

European Grid Resilience: Denmark-UK Link Operational

Further underpinning the resilience of the European grid, the 1,400MW DC link from Denmark to the UK came online on 29th December. However the capacity has been restricted to 800MW in the first instance as the electrification of the grid and hunger for power in the Danish region is not high with strong wind output (54% of the Danish grid) and the link into the power hungry Germany is not yet in place.

NSW’s Energy Manoeuvre: Orderly Exit Mechanism

The NSW minister for Energy and Climate Change, Penny Sharpe, gave herself and anyone in her seat the power other states have in their pocket; at the end of last year, she granted the “Orderly Exit Mechanism” power. Which means that with or without the consent of Origin in negotiations she now has the power to order Eraring to stay on as she backdated the powers to 2021. With the deadline to keep Eraring on or not this could shift the scales of negotiations and may be an indication of the noose Origin held around the NSW government loosing.

Queensland’s Ambitious Climate Target

QLD government strengthened its climate targets with a new target of 75% below to the 2005 baseline by 2035. This is due to be legislated in the new year.

Record Power Demand and Prices in December

Friday, 29th December, was indeed a scorcher, with demand topping over 9,750MW over the evening peak and pricing topping out around the $15,000/MWh price over the evening peak and prices averaging $448.97/MWh for the day. Showing how solar penetration can create huge volatility in prices on high demand days.

Coal Seam Gas Regulation: Draft Framework

The Department of Resources released a paper looking into a risk framework for regulation around Coal Seam Gas subsidence. Feedback has closed but the draft proposed legislation is due early 2024.

Queensland Revives Polluter Pays Legislation

Polluter pays legislation is back in the spotlight, with the Queensland government releasing a consultation paper on “Improving the powers and penalties provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1994”

ARENA’s Industrial Emission Reduction Initiative

ARENA has launched a $40m fund called the “National Industrial Transformation (NIT) program” assisting existing plant and industrial facilities to reduce their scope 1 and scope 2 emissions.

COP28 More of a Fizz Rather than a Bang

Logo for COP 28 UAE event featuring a circular design with intricate yellow patterns on a green background, symbolizing sustainability and environmental themes, displayed over a dark brick wall texture.

With just 2 days of negotiations left at the COP28 summit, it is clear that world leaders are not entering into the summit with the same sweeping mandated as seen in Paris in 2015. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clearer that the Paris 1.5-degree target is unlikely, never mind strengthening the resolve on these targets.

Despite this year, 2023, already being declared the warmest on record by November, and having six record breaking months and two record breaking seasons, world leaders as squabbling over texts which will have little to no impact on emissions or targets.

With the head of this year’s COP, Sultan Al Jaber, the head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) in the position many thought would create a conflict of interest, he is indeed between a rock and a hard place. With over 80 countries, many at the forefront of climate change pushing for an end to the use of fossil fuels, a topic every previous COP has been careful to avoid, the Sultan is now being lobbied from both sides, with OPEC now pressuring members and the chair to reject any deal which targets fossil fuels directly.

Reuters, who broke the news shared a letter from December 6th sent by OPEC Secretary-General Haitham al-Ghais “It seems that the undue and disproportionate pressure against fossil fuels may reach a tipping point with irreversible consequences, as the draft decision still contains options on fossil fuels phase out … I avail of this opportunity to respectfully urge all esteemed OPEC Member Countries and Non-OPEC Countries participating in the CoC and their distinguished delegations in the COP 28 negotiations to proactively reject any text or formula that targets energy i.e. fossil fuels rather than emissions”.

The Sultan is therefore walking a very fine line, as evident by his calling of the majlis, elders conference, on Sunday. In there, the main focus was two pronged, one the aforementioned fossil fuels phase out or abatement, and the second on financing.

Climate adaptation funds is not a new concept, it was raised pre-the-Paris agreement, and every year since. However, despite UN reports released in November, Adaptation Gap Report 2023, showing 2021 funding fell 15% year on year to a cumulative $24.6bn, but more than $200 – 350bn is needed, and 2023 is likely to only be around the $100bn mark. The idea of now increasing the burden on fossil fuels emissions to be phased out and not abated will leave many countries, especially in the African continent behind. As emerging and expensive technologies, which will allow other countries to continue producing, will not be available to them.

I once again argue, with politicians and special interests lobbying, the value of the COP is diminishing. Energy policy should not be in the hands of those who are worrying about re-election in 1, 2 or 4 years but those who understand the science, industries and financing of the projects required to make the change. We cannot just turn off coal, the Eraring “closure” has shown us that in bright bold lights (or blackouts), so there has to be balance. But that cannot be done by those who are not in that world or influenced by only one side of an argument.

However, with Azerbaijan the COP29 hosts, a country with at least 7bn barrels of commercial oil, and 1.3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and one of the world’s largest gas fields I am sure will fly the flag for phase out of fossil fuels and strong targets for all nations attending.

With Statements due in the next 48 hours, I may be proven incorrect, and the Sultan is absolutely making the right noises, “I want everyone to come prepared with solutions … I want everyone to come ready to be flexible and to accept compromise. I told everyone not to come with any prepared statements, and no prescribed positions. I really want everyone to rise above self-interests and to start thinking of the common good.” But as always, the proof is in the packages which come out of the talks and with only two days to go and no consensus the clock is absolutely counting down.

Threats to Gas Supply Deal

Aerial view of an LNG tanker docked at a coastal industrial facility with distinctive spherical storage tanks and infrastructure for natural gas.

Chris Bowen, the Energy and Climate Change minister, announced a plan to address looming supply issues for east coast homes and businesses by securing commitment from two big gas exporters (APLNG and Senex) to divert 300 petajoules of gas into the east coast domestic market by 2023. This amount is equivalent to about half of the annual East Coast domestic market demand or two years’ worth of industrial usage.

However, this new deal is already under threat from the Greens, who plan to challenge the government’s industry code of conduct in parliament. Should the coalition support the Greens’ motion, the deal could fall through, increasing the risk of gas supply shortages in the future.

The deal gives exemptions to APLNG and Senex from the $12/GJ price cap under the code of conduct. Chris Bowen stated that “This supply is critical for households, industry and gas power generation as the Bass Strait fields deplete”.

The gas price cap was introduced by the government last year, which triggered a freeze in new supply investments. After negotiations, the government revised the code of conduct, allowing exemptions for gas developers who committed to selling into the domestic market. Bowen has criticised the Greens for potentially disrupting the deal, highlighting the critical role gas will play in the energy transition and for grid reliability.

In related news, Australia’s annual climate change statement projects emissions to be 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, slightly below Labor’s election commitment of 43%.

Additionally, Chris Bowen has declined to specify the potential financial impact on taxpayers from the newly expanded Capacity Investment Scheme. The scheme involves the Australian government underwriting 32GW of new power generation through two auctions per year.

While industry experts anticipate this could cost billions annually, Bowen stated, “It is quite standard budget treatment to say we will not indicate our pricing expectations as we’re about to enter an auction”. He assured that the government’s strategy aims to maximise taxpayer benefits and maintain competitive bidding.

The scheme does not intend to “subsidising negative pricing”. Instead, it requires project proponents to state their minimum required profit and a maximum price point for sharing profits with the government. The government will retain control over bid acceptance and the total amount of gigawatts allocated.