Energy - Hifluence · On top of that, the ETRM software landscape continues to be marked by acquisitions focused on servicing an increasing portion of the energy value chain and the

Energy trading industry: Recent trends / How they affect ETRM 1

STUDY CASE

EnergyTRADING INDUSTRY:

Recent Trends / How they affect ETRM

Nick Van Langendock

GRAPH 1: De-linking of oil and gas prices, p.7

GRAPH 2: Renewable power generation overview, p.9

GRAPH 3: Impact of solar production on German midday peak, p.10

GRAPH 4: Forward power prices GE and UK since 2006, p.10

GRAPH 5: Average demand vs average intra-day power in GE 2006-2012, p.11

GRAPH 6: European Union regulations, p.15


STUDY CASE

Table of Content

Executive summary

Introduction

Newcomers in trading space

Correlations between commodities

The renewable power boom

The road to standardization

Tsunami of regulations

ETRM - marked by acquisition

The CIO speaks

References

About Hifluence

About the author

3

4

5

6

8

11

12

16

17

18

19

19


STUDY CASE

New types of traders continue to enter the market - from hedge funds over investment banks to proprietary trading firms and family offices, pension and endowment funds, sovereign wealth funds, individual investors, etc. This has increased trading volumes in the market and has driven the growth of new instruments, exchanges, electronic trading and exchange cleared trading. Especially the share of exchange cleared trading has increased dramatically, opening new trading strategies and reducing the barriers and cost of entering new markets.

Moreover, the current financial crisis has diminished the liquidity around commodities markets, which has led to increasing volatility and fear of counterparty risk. Standardized contracts and processes, real time transactions, accurate market data access and configurable risk toolkits combined with direct markets and exchange clearing should help commodity market participants to overcome economic challenges. The challenges for the markets and operations are huge.

Next to this, commodity correlations keep changing. Since the end of 2009, the natural gas prices have remained fairly static whilst oil prices have continued climbing. The production of natural gas from shale formations has rejuvenated the natural gas industry in the United States, shifting the US utilities from coal into gas. American coal miners had to look for new markets, increasing the world supply. Lastly, the emissions trading scheme (ETS) is not working as it was intended to at the time of inception: the oversupply of the system has caused the EUA price to fall to €6/ton. At the same time, coal consumption has increased.

Not only emissions, but the renewable energy policy of the European governments in general has deeply changed the structure of the power markets, both physical and financial. Power price peaks have decreased between 2006 and 2012 and are shifted to 7 pm, even though peak demand still occurs around midday.

Subsequently, the tsunami of regulations in both the US and Europe come with a high price. Adapting energy trading and risk management (ETRM) systems to meet these regulations presents a number of major challenges. Both business and software vendors have spent the past two years preparing processes and software to handle the new regulations, but actually implementing those upgrades and ensuring that they are functioning properly is a stressful process for energy firms and their IT staffs. After all, if a company fails to comply with regulations to the satisfaction of regulators, the liability for that failure lies with the company itself.

Not surprisingly, these energy trading firms are sprinting to comply with the new rules. The key chal-lenge that many CIO’s are facing in this context today, is the integration of multiple ETRM systems across various trading desks, business units and affiliates. Estimates indicate that these preparations are likely to take up 10% to 15% of the total IT budget, with investments focused on both people and technology.

On top of that, the ETRM software landscape continues to be marked by acquisitions focused on servicing an increasing portion of the energy value chain and the non-commodity markets as well. Vendors are expanding product capabilities to better service existing customers and acquire new clients in existing market segments. Next to this, they seek new market opportunities in non-energy segments like grains or metals. This continuous movement for new markets may have a significant impact on the existing, traditional customers.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

STUDY CASE


STUDY CASE

INTRODUCTION2

Interesting times lay ahead for anyone involved in the energytrading markets. This document aims to provide an overview of the most significant industry trends and their technological impact,specifically for nontraders like IT staff in energy firms.

Commodity prices ended 2012 close to where they began, but major global events created significant upward and downward price movements in the course of the year. The first half of 2012 brought declines in most commodity prices, especially energy, as European sovereign debt troubles intensified and emerging economies, especially China, slowed.

Crude oil prices were driven up after an EU embargo on Iranian oil imports went into effect in July, and violence and political instability continued in sever-al oil-producing countries in the Middle East. In addition, renewed monetary policy easing by the central banks of the EU and the United States as well as weakness of the US dollar put upward pressure on industrial commodities.

The 2013 commodity market outlook is subject to a number of risks. In re-gards to crude oil, global supply risks remain from ongoing political unrest in the Middle East. A major supply cutoff could limit supplies and result in prices spiking above US$150/bbl.

Moreover, the impact on supply and demand dynamics and macroeconomics in the energy industry has been and will continue to be significant. Long supply cycle times were caught by a strong increase on the demand side. Big invest-ments since have had little increase of supply.

Lastly, the environment has become a political and public interest issue which brings added cost, complexity and time to the already long supply cycle times and energy market in general. The role of renewable energy and its impact on the commodity markets is huge.

NEWCOMERS IN TRADING SPACE3

Over the past 10 years, a number of new types of traders have entered the market. From hedge funds over investment banks to proprietary trading firms and family offices, pension and endowment funds, sovereign wealth funds, individual investors, etc. These new participants have increased trading volu-mes in the market, which has driven the growth of new instruments, exchanges; electronic trading and exchange cleared trading. Especially the share of exchange cleared trading has increased dramatica-my, opening new trading strategies and reducing the barriers and cost of entering new markets.

EMERGENCE OF DERIVATIVE EXCHANGESFrom a historic point of view, commodity traders and their clients have always tried to seek protection against future events. Bilateral trades (futures) to insure against these events evolved into informal marketplaces where standardized contracts could be traded. In the second part of the 20th century, futures were supplemented by options - buying a certain quantity at a certain price in the future, is an option, not an obligation. And options became more sophisticated - you could take out an option to buy (call) or to sell (put). These futures and options markets developed into exchanges where the very instruments themselves could be traded.

TRENDSToday, electronic trading is done by machines. A large and growing proportion of trades is done via sophisticated algorithms with machines entering the orders. Especially regulators are concerned at effects of this trend which leads to high frequency trading. Some even blame the recent crisis to this trend.

As mentioned above, exchange cleared trading opened new trading strategies and reduced the barriers and cost of entering new markets. It also opened market transparency and introduced new counterparties for traditional traders.

Lastly, the accelerated impact on IT improvements has been enormous. Both at exchange and trader side the speed of transaction has increased significantly, coming from 10 seconds per transaction in 2000 up to 0.00009 seconds per transaction in 2010.

Today, electronic trading is done by machines. A large and growing proportion of trades is

done via sophisticated algorithms withmachines entering the orders.

“


STUDY CASE

WHERE DO EXCHANGES GO FROM HERE? The financial crash of 2007/8 has given Exchanges a major opportunity to increase their business cap-turing a huge amount of trading previously done over-the-counter.

Next to this, EU regulators, attracted by the market transparency that is brought by exchange cleared trading, strive to promote independent but electronically connected clearing houses.

And lastly, the biggest upset might come from doing OTC trades through the exchanges.The trading industry is strongly against it, stating that this would kill the market. Nevertheless, some exchanges would like to bring OTC trades on-exchange as it offers the advantages of central clearing. In any case, upcoming regulations in the US and EU move in the direction that OTC products have to be cleared centrally. Some say, it is only a matter of time before OTC trades become exchange traded as well.

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN COMMODITIES4

More and more investors are seeking exposure to commodities and forecasts predict that when glo-bal economy picks up, this would lead to an increasing interest in commodities for investment purpo-ses which will help broaden the market. On the other hand, for banks, commodities are just another component in the portfolio. Tightness on the commodity markets might create potential impact on price risks as banks may close commodity positions to raise cash for other losing positions. These events heavily impact the correlations and relations between commodities. Below an overview:

OIL AND GASOil and gas, typically seen as linked commodities, are both substitutes in the end consumption: power production, industry, vehicles, heating, etc. In other words, an increase in one’s price leads to increase in the other’s demand. They are also often co-produced.

The historical overview of oil and natural gas prices below shows that these two commodities were closely related to each other, until mid 2009. As of that moment, there has been a significant chan-ge in the relationship. While natural gas prices remained fairly static, oil prices continued climbing. Research indicates that the most important de-linking factors are (and will continue to be) deregulati-on, higher efficiency of combined cycle gas turbine plants (CCGT) versus oil fired plants, new sources (shale gas, oil sands), LNG penetration, higher speculation for oil than for natural gas, etc.


STUDY CASE

GAS AND COALShale gas refers to natural gas that is trapped within shale formations. Shales are fine-grained se-dimentary rocks that can be rich sources of petroleum and natural gas. Over the past decade, the combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing has allowed access to large volumes of

shale gas that were previously uneconomical to produce. The production of natural gas from shale formations has rejuvenated the natural gas

industry in the United States shifting the US utilities from coal into gas. Therefore, American coal miners had to look for new markets, increasing the world supply. This happened at the time when Chinese coal demand decreased due to dampened economic growth. This scenario caused the coal price to move below $100/ton.

EMISSIONS & COALThe emissions trading scheme (ETS) is not working as it was supposed at the time of inception: the oversupply of the system has made the EUA price to fall to €6/ton. At the same time, coal consump-tion increased. As a result, the obtained switch generation fuel is not happening.

GRAPH 1: De-linking of oil and gas prices


STUDY CASE

THE RENEWABLE POWER BOOM5

The bright future for renewable energy, which has long been predicted, is under way. In fact, renewable electricity has come to dominate the debate over and the development of the European electricity market.

Between 2000 and 2010, capacities of wind and solar installations have grown faster than any other power plant technology across the world – with about 430.000 MW total installed capacities. Since 2006, approx. 100 GW of renewable generation has been added to the electricity networks of western European countries, par-ticularly in Germany, Spain and Italy. In European countries, there has been a massive increase of wind farm installations as well as a solar boom. Renewable generation accounts currently for 35% of the total installed capacity in Europe. Next to this, also biomass generation is growing at incredible rates as presented in the recent figures shown below.

The European Network of Transmission System Operators for Elec-tricity (ENTSO-E) is forecasting that a further 150 GW of renewable will be added by 2020, accounting for half of the total capacity base. In parallel with this boom of renewable electricity, the eco-nomic crisis has arrived with many countries experiencing a sharp decline in electricity demand.

GRAPH 2: Renewable power generation overview


STUDY CASE

Simultaneously with this steep rise of renewable energy, the economic crisis has kicked in with many countries experiencing a sharp decline in electricitydemand, leading to several fascinating trends:

IN GERMANY THE ADDED PEAK SOLAR PRODUCTION HAS TRANSFORMED THE MIDDAY PEAK FOR THERMAL INTO A VALLEY

DECREASE OF THE FORWARD PRICE VOLATILITY IN THE PERIOD 2006-2012

1|

2|

GRAPH 3: Impact of solar production on German midday peak

GRAPH 4:Forward Power Prices GE and UK since 2006

Implication for trading electricity in the new renewable world - Elisa Scarpa


STUDY CASE

DECREASE OF THE FORWARD PRICE VOLATILITY IN THE PERIOD 2006-2012 2|

GRAPH 5:Forward Power Prices GE and UK since 2006

In other words, the renewable energy policy of the European governments has deeply changed the structure of the power markets, both physical and financial. These trends obviously increase the complexity. Some even say that the most significant effect of renewable energy on the electric-ity markets is the role of the weather. Today, operators have to pay attention not only to tempera-tures, as in the past, but also to wind speed and solar irradiation. Given that, the intraday volatility and the intraweek optimization are changing due to the difficulties to predict correctly these vari-ables. Volatility and opportunities are shifting from the back end to the front of the forward curve. Thus, intra-day markets are becoming more relevant in order to balance positions and to increase trading returns.


STUDY CASE

THE ROAD TO STANDARDIZATION6

The current financial crisis has diminished the liquidity around commodities markets followed by in-creasing volatility and fear of counterparty risk.

Standardized contracts and processes, real time transactions, accurate market data access and con-figurable risk toolkits combined with direct markets and exchange clearing should help commodity market participants to overcome economic challenges.

This trend of standardization comes with a price. The challenges at both market and operations side are not to be underestimated.

MARKET CHALLENGESThe challenge for the regulatory reporting requirements that come with standardization lies in align-ing multiple juristic dictions and multiple rule sets, data formats, reporting locations and data reposi-tories.

The requirement to put more volume through clearing comes with many challenges as well. Defining and building dedicated interfaces and unique processes is very complex. Moreover, the high costs to start, prevent organisations to move.

Lastly, the market has been characterized for years by a lack of standardization in common processes, formats and interfaces. This implies that each touch point likely requires a dedicated implementation.

OPERATIONSThe impact of standardization on operations is significant. As each new touch point comes with its own rules and procedures, it requires its own project to implement. Moreover, once in production, it will have to be maintained daily by both technical business resources.

In order to efficiently absorb these different processes internally, operations will have to cope with a massive extension of master data e.g. counterparty IDs: EIC codes, LEI codes…

And lastly, with data becoming fragmented across several venues, the reconciliation processes – “have I reported all applicable trades to the right repository?” – are critical. Managing a consistent view of progress gets increasingly difficult, and errors will cause non-compliance.

“The current financial crisis has diminished the liquidity around commodities markets

followed by increasing volatility and fear of counterparty risk.


STUDY CASE

TSUNAMI OF REGULATIONS7

CASE STUDY: DODD-FRANKThe US Dodd-Frank passage is arguably the most significant financial legislation in modern history. To give an idea on its scale: when one compares Dodd-Frank to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, S-Ox seems almost quaint. Dodd-Frank is more than ten times longer, and mandates more than ten times the rulemakings and studies that S-Ox required.

Two years since the Dodd-Frank passage is being implemented, a total of 221 Dodd-Frank rulemak-ing requirement deadlines have passed. This is more than half of the 398 total rulemaking require-ments, and three quarters of the 280 rulemaking requirements with specified deadlines. The implications and implementation issues flowing from the new Dodd-Frank law signal an important shift in how financial markets have been historically regulated and raise serious questions about how such a shift will affect investor choice and protection, U.S. capital formation, innovation, competitive-ness and the economy in the short-term. These changes touch every aspect of the financial markets, from consumer credit to proprietary trading at financial firms, from OTC derivatives markets to secu-ritization markets, and from private fund registration and regulation to corporate governance at public companies.

DODD-FRANK TIME GRAPHNow that US regulators have set the clock ticking on Dodd-Frank, energy firms are sprinting to com-ply with the new rules. But adapting their legacy trading and risk management systems is a significant challenge. The pace of Dodd-Frank implementation is unlikely to quicken and deadlines will continue to be missed as organizations are confronted with spiralling IT and process implementation costs. US energy firms are working hard as they seek to become compliant with new regulations. The first wave of Dodd-Frank rules – including spot-month position limits and swap dealer registration – came into force in October 2012, followed by others that will take effect in the first quarter of 2013. The Dodd-Frank time graph below presents the highlights (non-exhaustive list).


STUDY CASE

• Registration of swap dealers and major swap participants

• Swap dealers and major swap participants must comply with reporting and record-keeping rules, but only for interest rate swaps and credit swaps

• Internal and external business conduct standards apply to both swap dealers and major swap participants, including the appointment of a chief compliance officer

• Spot-month position limits

• Swap dealers and major swap participants must comply with record-keeping and reporting rules for all equity, currency and commodity swaps

• End-users must comply with reporting and record-keeping rules, for swaps in all asset classes, including commodities

OCTOBER - 2012

JANUARY 2013

APRIL 2013

SWAP DATA REPOSITORIES (SDR)Once the Dodd-Frank regulatory framework is fully in place, market participants are expected to pump torrents of data into the SDRs, with the idea that regulators will have the opportunity to examine these vast troves of trading data and better understand what is happening in the OTC derivatives market.

However, the key piece of the puzzle still needs to fall into place: the SDRs. So far, only one of them, Ice Trade Vault, has received provisional registration. Meanwhile, besides Ice, the New York-based Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) has applied to run two SDRs, including one focused on commodities. It is unclear how many SDRs there will be at the end of the day or how the different SDRs will work together. If two parties do a trade, and they report to two different SDRs, and there is no agreement between DTCC and Ice, then how will the reconciliation happen?

One thing that regulators hope to do with all of the data being funnelled into the SDRs is to scrutinise it for evidence of market manipulation. As a precaution, energy firms should start screening their trade data for the same types of red flags and be pro-active on the anti-manipulation front. One of the important elements will be the ability to retrieve trade information very rapidly for the CFTC.

In the meantime, ETRM vendors say that they are still waiting for the SDR operators to provide the link-up tools that would allow them to connect their ETRM software with the SDRs.


STUDY CASE

IMPACT ON ETRMAdapting energy trading and risk management (ETRM) systems to meet the Dodd-Frank implementation time graph presents a number of major challenges. ETRM vendors have spent the past two years updat-ing their software to handle the new regulations, but actually implementing those upgrades and ensuring that they are functioning properly is a stressful process for energy firms and their IT staffs. After all, if a company fails to comply with Dodd-Frank to the satisfaction of regulators, the liability for that failure will rest with that company itself, not with its ETRM vendor.

For starters, a key challenge that many companies are facing is the integration of multiple ETRM systems across various trading desks, business units and affiliates. Some consultants report that a single energy company may have as many as eight or nine different trading systems; sometimes this is due to past mergers and acquisitions, while in other instances it is because different ETRM vendors are best suited to specific commodities. Whatever the reason, companies will need to aggregate data from such disparate systems to ensure they are compliant with Dodd-Frank’s reporting and record-keeping rules, as well as with speculative position limits.

Aggregating data across multiple products and multiple systems is going to be a huge challenge. Many energy firms do not have a single ‘database of record’ that they can use for reporting purposes. That could be problematic. Dodd-Frank requires that market participants report their over-the-counter deriva-tives trades to giant data warehouses called swap data repositories (SDRs). So unless companies desig-nate a specific ETRM system to be their central compliance hub, they run the risk of reporting the same trade to multiple SDRs. They will need to pull all that together and basically look at their portfolio in a holistic manner.Unfortunately, the lack of shared standards and protocols among different ETRM vendors will make that sort of integration a difficult task. The interoperability between these systems does not exist.

Therefore, the most realistic solution for trading organizations is to build a central trading information platform that consolidates all relevant data from multiple sources into a single data warehouse designed to explore, visualize, search, interact, analyze and share torrents of trade data.

European Union regulations – an overview;Dodd Frank isn’t the only regulatory regime for global energy firms. Also in the European Union there are a lot of things happening on the regulatory side, as presented in the two graphs below.

GRAPH 6:European Union Regulations


STUDY CASE

The swap market regulations of the EU fall under both the Market in Financial Instruments Directive (“MiFID” -- it comes in both MiFID 1 and MiFID 2) and the European Market Infrastructure Regula-tion (“EMIR”) regulations. MiFID was targeted more directly to the pure financial markets -- interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, etc. -- while EMIR was directed at energy commodity swaps. How-ever, there are overlaps. The combination has subtle differences from Dodd Frank in how they ap-proach clearing and mandatory electronic execution. Next to this, REMIT (Regulation on Wholesale Energy Markets Integrity and Transparency) intends to prevent market abuse (integrity) and focuses on increased cross-border market monitoring (transparency), focused on:

wholesale energy markets contracts and related derivatives for the supply and transportation contractswithfinalconsumers(aboveacertainthreshold)

REMIT obliges market participants to publish pre-trade inside information. This non-public infor-mation needs to be precise and is likely to have significant effect on wholesale market prices. The other important obligation is the provision of post-trade transactional and fundamental data for the purpose of market monitoring. Within REMIT regulations it is prohibited for market participants to buy or sell wholesale energy products on the basis of inside information, and manipulate the market. Own plants and strategies are obviously not considered as inside information.

ACER – Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators – is the EU Energy Regulator. ACER plays an important market monitoring role and publishes the non binding guidance on the application of definitions. ACER’s Recommendations on REMIT Records of Energy Transactions are issued last October 2012. Its purpose was to assist in the definition of the records to be reported to identify “the precise identification of the wholesale energy products bought and sold, the price and quantity agreed, the dates and times of execution, the parties to the transaction and the beneficiaries of the transaction and any other relevant information.” This does not cover swaps markets -- this covers wholesale physical markets.

MIFID IIOverarching framework forfinancial activities/services

Regulation of investment tirmsDefinition of financial products

and servicesRules ans duties of trading platforms

and investment tirmsExemptions for commodity

trading tirms?

CRD IVCapital requirements for

financial firms holding capitalPrudential regulation for

systemic riskExemption for commodity

trading tirms?

EMIRFocuses on credits and

operational riskRegulation of OTC derivatives

Central clearingReporting to regulators Risk mitigation

techniquesRegulation of central clearingparties and trade repositories

REMITMarket integrity rules for physical energy

market productsFundamental / Inside Data Transparency

Regulatory oversight: energy regulators +ACER

Cooperation between regulatorsReporting of all products to regulators

MARMarket integrity rules for physical energy

Inside Data TransparancyRegulatory Oversight: financial regulators+

ESMACooperation between regulators

Reporting to regulators

REGULATION OFINVESTMENT &

BANKING SERVICESREGULATION OF RISK MARKET INTEGRITY AND

TRANSPARENCY


STUDY CASE

The important point to note is that Dodd Frank, REMIT, EMIR, and MiFID all have operational, con-trol, data and reporting requirements that overlap without being completely consistent.

In other words, European energy and utility firms will soon face the challenge of addressing multiple data and control requirements that overlap but that are not identical.

European energy industry expectationsThe continuous growth in regulatory oversight is undeniable, and the fear for over regulating market participants is well-founded, especially for those which do not create a systematic risk. Trading will become more expensive as the cost of compliance continues to increase. 75% of the European energy trading companies believe new market regulations will increase the cost of IT. Estimations indicate that approximately 10% of the IT budget will be needed to reach regulation requirements.

Thirdly, some of the advanced requirements – different reporting channels, clearing obligations and the obligation to obtain MIFID licenses - may have a negative effect on market liquidity and compe-tition.

ETRM - MARKED BY ACQUISITION8

The ETRM software landscape continues to be marked by acquisitions focused on servicing an increasing portion of the energy value chain and the non-commodity markets as well. Vendors are expanding product capabilities in order to better service existing customers and acquire new clients in existing market segments. Next to this, they seek new market opportunities in non-energy segments like grains or metals.

ETRM providers are striving for a holistic view on the commodity market through acquiring new prod-ucts and thus covering a broader range of functionalities. They continue to develop new capabilities in asset management, forecasting, planning and control. Nevertheless, they are still a long way from ERP and a “one fits all” solution.

This endeavor for one single ETRM platform has both advantages and disadvantages:

The fact that energy trading companies can shift the work and effort of integrating the multitude of applications necessary to run the business is definitely a pro..

On the other hand, very few companies, if any, successfully implement the single source solution. On the contrary, as these projects seem to be destined for disaster, there are severe risks associated with a single vendor supporting a majority of systems. Customers realize that no vendor provides best fit for all needs. Modular business oriented ETRM landscapes are most likely to create added value. A trend reflected in the strategies across the trading space (discussed in the last paragraph).

1|

2|


STUDY CASE

THE CIO SPEAKS9

A recent survey amongst a large group of CIO’s in trading companies revealed the following high prior-ities for the coming year:

regulatory reporting: 54% improved collateral management for OTC trades: 23% increased clearing: 13% other: 10%

Not surprisingly, more than half of the respondents are sprinting to comply with the new rules. The key challenge that many CIO’s are facing in this context today, is the integration of multiple ETRM systems across various trading desks, business units and affiliates. Estimates indicate that these preparations are likely to take up 10% to 15% of the total IT budget with investments focused on both people and technology.

In fact, in terms of technology, a growing number of CIO’s is questioning whether trading organizations make enough use of the best available tools and techniques – in-memory, big data, online visualization - to tackle these challenges and help foster innovation. In these fast moving commodity markets with increasing regulatory requirements and continuous pressure on business performance decision makers are demanding for a common platform that helps them visualize the impact of all variables, constraints and decisions together, in real-time.

Furthermore, they foresee significant investments of time, money and effort in the relationship be-tween business and IT. Technology alone will not do the trick. On the contrary, centralizing knowhow and creating synergies between departments is crucial for a successful implementation of regulatory or any other requirements.


STUDY CASE

REFERENCES10

1. Commodity Market Outlook, World Bank Development Prospect 2013

2. Trends in Energy Trading and Risk Management, CommodityPoint

3. Energy Commodities Correlations, Ioannis Psarros, Cross Commodity Trading Forum Amsterdam

4. Annual Energy Outlook 2012, EIA

5. Implication for trading electricity in the new renewable world, Elisa Scarpa

6. EU Financial Market Regulation and impact for Energy Trading, Jan Van Aken

7. The Technology Impact of Dodd Frank, RiskNet

8. Dodd-Frank isn’t the only regulatory regime for Global Energy Firms, Thomas Lord, energybiz

9. Exchanges - the end of life as they knew it?, Lynton Jones

10. Spills on Other Commodities, Baffes John. 2007

11. World Energy Outlook 2012, International Energy Agency. 2012


STUDY CASE

ABOUT HIFLUENCE

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

11

12

Hifluence focuses on challenges in business intelligence & analytics. We firmly believe in the potential of BI & analytics for making your company a better company. More competitive, innovative, produc-tive and profitable. Act informed: Hifluence helps you with essential insights, well-founded decisions and adequate actions based on data from internal and external sources.

Hifluence listens, evaluates, measures, advises, coaches, proposes strategies and concepts, supplies technologies and creates solutions for business users. Trend-setting technologies from such providers as SAP and IBM form the robust backbone. Years of experience have crystallised best practices, which represent the guiding principles in tailor-made projects and business solutions for specific target groups. Hifluence promotes a holistic vision of business intelligence & analytics and is an advocate of an agile project approach

Nick Van Langendonck advises companies with business activities in cross-commodity trading.Energy companies, utilities and industrial firms often struggle with the decision-making processes specific to trading in energy and commodities. In rapidly chang-ing markets with many variable risk factors, they have to make critical choices at the last minute. Profitability, cost efficiency and transparency are crucial. The exchange of information between all business functions involved must be correct, unambiguous and fast. IT systems can play a key role.

Nick helps companies to bridge the gap between the trading business and IT. He combines understanding of the trading processes and regulations with knowledge of technological solutions such as packages for energy trad-ing & risk management (ETRM), business intelligence (BI) and corporate performance management (CPM).


STUDY CASE

© 2013, Nick Van [email protected]

Documents

Energy - Hifluence · On top of that, the ETRM software landscape continues to be marked by acquisitions focused on servicing an increasing portion of the energy value chain and the