A competitive market with correct price signals will increase investments in new infrastructures.

Key word:  "correct".  By definition, if there is not an end result that is appropriate / desired, it is somehow that the regulatory environment inhibiting the market from receiving the "correct" price signals, thus what we require is ever more liberalization.

This is, as you are aware so closely (can't recall who originated/fought for), this was a key element for the gasoline fee in EA2020.  Put in one cent/month, every month, for at least a decade.  This would, therefore, send the clear price signal that, all things being equal, there would be a guaranteed cost growth for petroleum based liquid fuels which would help provide decision makers (at all levels) a "correct" price signal for making investment decisions.

To me, this is something that should be pursued with carbon fees as well ... putting in an inexorable growth that will help fund more energy efficiency, renewable energy, pollution reduction, and global warming mitigation while providing a "correct" price signal that tomorrow CO2 emissions will be more expensive than today, thus providing the price signal to fight to reduce them.  

Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart. NOW!!!