Carbon Capture Report and Combined Heat and Power Report · combustio legislative ... LP MEA PSR SCR ST ...

Annex C

Carbon Capture Report and

Combined Heat and Power

Report

Annex C1

CCR Report

Carb

Kead

Technic

PrepareJames BRonnie GJohn Ros

CheckePaul Kier

ApprovAndrew 

Date Is26/10/2

Rev: 1.0Inform

bon Ca

dby 2

cal Report

ed and Issowers, TechGlen, Process, Thermal

ed by: ran, Proces

ved by: Underwood

ssued: 015 

0 ation Clas

aptur

CCGT

t No: TR‐G

sued by:hnology Engss Engineer Developme

s Engineerin

d, Project D

ssification

e Rea

T

GEN‐AM‐K

gineer r ent 

ng Manage

Design Lead

n: Confident

adines

KEAD2‐00

r  

tial

ss Rep

3 

port foor

engineepage 2 

Docum

Cop1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

Docum

Rev0.1 1.0 

Key W

ering centreof 38 

ment Dis

py DistJim LAlasStevJohnRonnPaulAndrMarJohnEngi

ment Ch

vision Da15/26/

Words: CCG

e 

stributio

tribution Lawrie, Projdair MacSwven Brookern Ross, Thernie Glen, Pr Kieran, Prorew Underwk Birley, Hen Downes, Dneering Cen

ange His

ate /10/2015 /10/2015 

GT, CCS

n

ject Develoween, Head r, Project Dermal Develorocess Enginocess Enginewood, Projead of ProjeDirector of Entre Docum

story

AuthorJames BowJames Bow

pment Manof Gas Devesign Develoopment neer eering Manect Design Lct EngineerEngineeringment Library

wers wers 

nager elopmentsopment Ma

nager Lead ring g y 

Section ALL 5.3 

TR‐G

anager 

ChangFirst IssEdited sCOMAH  

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ge Descripsue section regaH regulation

AD2‐003 

tion

arding ns 

engineepage 3 

Summ

This  paSectionCombinof up toof  Keadconditioassump

An assea  pipeliproject

AdequaCO2 cap

The CCGbe direc

Followigeneratovercomsuch a wtrip. 

Based  ubarriersregulato

KeadbyCCR staand per

1 As defin2013 

ering centreof 38 

mary

aper  has  be 36C of thened Cycle Go 810MW adby  Generaons1 are mptions as to 

essment of ine would . 

ate space apture plant.

GT design wcted to a CO

ng  the  rettor would bme the presway to ens

upon  of  ths  to  retrofory conditio

y Generatioatus within riodically ev

ned in regulat

e 

een  preparee Electricity as Turbine at Keadby ination  Ltd  aet  in  relatitechnology

CO2 pipelinbe  feasible

nd utilities    

will incorpoO2 capture p

rofit  of  CCbe minimisessure lossesure the HRS

e  conclusiofitting  CCS ons. 

n Ltd will  rthree monvery two ye

tion 2(2) of the

ed  in  relatiAct 1989 to(CCGT) pown North Linas  a  CCR  aion  to  the y and future

e routing fre.    Potentia

are availab

rate extractplant should

S  the  impaed by installs associatedSG ductwor

ons  of  this to  Keadby

review and ths of  the ars thereaft

e Carbon Capt

ion  to  Keado vary an ewer plant (Kcolnshire. ssessment combustio

e legislative 

rom Keadbyal  CO2  sinks

ble on  the 

tion design d CCS be re

acts  on  theling a boostd with the Crk could no

study  thery  2  in  futu

report on station starter. 

ture Readines

dby Generaexisting conKeadby 2) wThis reportin  order  t

on  plant  at requireme

y 2 to potens  have  also

Keadby 2 s

features totrofitted in 

e  gas  turbiter fan dowCO2 captureot be over p

re  are  no  kure,  with  t

the effectivrting the su

ss (Electricity 

TR‐G

ation  Ltd.’s sent to con

with a gross  has been po  demonstKeadby  2 nts. 

ntial CO2 sino  been  iden

site  to acco

o enable stefuture. 

ne  and  hewnstream ofe plant.  Thipressurised 

known  techthe  approp

ve maintenupply of ele

Generating St

GEN‐AM‐KEA

s  applicationstruct and generated prepared otrate  that  tbased  on 

nks has shontified  for  a

ommodate a

eam and flu

at  recoveryf the CCGT s would be in the even

hnical  or  ecpriate  mar

nance of  thectricity to 

tations) Regul

AD2‐003 

n  under operate capacity n behalf the  CCR current 

own that a  future 

a  future 

ue gas to 

y  steam plant to done in nt of fan 

conomic ket  and 

e plants the grid 

lations 

engineepage 4 

Conte

Abbrev

1.  Int

2.  Tra

3.  Su

4.  Te

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

5.  CC

5.1. 

5.2. 

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

ering centreof 38 

ents

iations .......

troduction .

ansportatio

itable CO2 S

chnical Fea

Oxyfuel .

Pre‐Com

Post‐Com

CGT Design C

Power Pl

Space Re

2.1.  CO2 C

2.2.  Gas T

2.3.  Boile

2.4.  Steam

2.5.  Wate

2.6.  Cooli

2.7.  Raw 

2.8.  Wast

2.9.  Comp

2.10.  Ele

2.11.  Pla

2.12.  Co

e 

..................

..................

on ...............

Storage Site

sibility of R

..................

mbustion CO

mbustion CO

Considerati

lant Locatio

equirement

Capture Pla

Turbine ......

er and Auxil

m Turbine a

er ‐ Steam ‐ 

ing Water S

Water Pre‐

te Water Tr

pressed Air

ectrical .......

ant Pipe Rac

ntrol and In

..................

..................

..................

es ...............

etrofitting .

..................

O2 Capture ..

O2 capture .

ons ............

on ...............

s ................

nt ..............

..................

iaries .........

and Auxiliar

Condensat

System ........

treatment P

eatment Pla

System .....

..................

cks and Duc

nstrumenta

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

ries .............

te Cycle ......

...................

Plant ..........

ant .............

...................

...................

cting ...........

tion ...........

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

TR‐G

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

GEN‐AM‐KEA

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

AD2‐003 

........... 6 

........... 7 

........... 8 

........... 9 

......... 10 

......... 10 

......... 10 

......... 10 

......... 12 

......... 12 

......... 12 

......... 12 

......... 12 

......... 13 

......... 13 

......... 14 

......... 14 

......... 14 

......... 14 

......... 15 

......... 15 

......... 15 

......... 15 

engineepage 5 

5.2

5.2

5.3. 

5.3

5.3

5.4. 

6.  Su

7.  CC

7.1. 

7.2. 

7.3. 

7.3

7.3

7.3

7.4. 

7.5. 

7.6. 

8.  Co

9.  Re

Append

Append

Append

ering centreof 38 

2.13.  Ad

2.14.  Sto

Safety ...

3.1.  CO2 P

3.2.  CO2 C

Fire Figh

itability of A

CS Retrofit E

Introduc

Assumpt

The mod

3.1.  Risk .

3.2.  Capit

3.3.  Oper

Valuatio

Results ..

Economi

onclusions ..

eferences ...

dix I – CO2 P

dix II – CO2 C

dix III ‐ CO2 C

e 

dditional veh

orage and h

..................

Pipeline .....

Capture Pla

ting and Fir

Associated 

Economic As

tion ...........

tions and Pa

delling appr

..................

tal Costs .....

rating Costs

n Method ..

..................

ic Assessme

..................

..................

Pipeline Cor

Capture Pla

Capture Pla

hicle movem

handling of s

..................

..................

nt ..............

re Protectio

Infrastructu

ssessment .

..................

arameters ..

oach ..........

..................

..................

 ..................

..................

..................

ent Conclusi

..................

..................

ridor 

nt Location

ant Process 

ment ..........

solvent and

...................

...................

...................

on System ...

ure .............

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

ions ...........

...................

...................

n 

Description

...................

d CO2 ..........

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

n 

TR‐G

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

...................

GEN‐AM‐KEA

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

..................

AD2‐003 

......... 15 

......... 16 

......... 16 

......... 16 

......... 16 

......... 17 

......... 18 

......... 19 

......... 19 

......... 19 

......... 20 

......... 20 

......... 20 

......... 21 

......... 22 

......... 23 

......... 23 

......... 25 

......... 26 

engineepage 6 

Abbre

CCGT CCR CCS COMAHDCC DECC EPC FEED GT HRSG HSE IEA IP LP MEA PSR SCR ST TSN 

ering centreof 38 

eviations

‐  C‐  C‐  C

H  ‐  C‐  D‐  D‐  E‐  F‐  G‐  H‐  H‐  In‐  In‐  L‐  M‐  P‐  S‐  S‐  T

e 

s

Combined CyCO2 CaptureCO2 CaptureControl of MDirect ContaDepartmentngineer Proront End EnGas Turbine Heat RecoveHealth and Snternationantermediateow PressurMonoethanoPipelines Safelective Catteam TurbiTransport an

ycle Gas Tu Readiness and Storag

Major Accideact Cooler of Energy &ocure and Cngineering D

ery Steam GSafety Execual Energy Age Pressuree olamine fety Regulattalytic Redune nd Storage N

urbine 

ge ent Hazards

& Climate CConstruct Design 

Generator utive gency 

tions 1996uction 

Network 

s Regulation

Change 

TR‐G

ns 1999 

GEN‐AM‐KEAAD2‐003 

engineepage 7 

1. In

This  paSectionCombinof up toassessmLtd as aand Stofuture l

Keadbyevidenc& Climahas beewill reqany  futrelevanExecutiv

ering centreof 38 

troducti

aper  has  be 36C of thened Cycle Go 810MW ament of thea study to dorage (CCS) egislative re

y  Generatioce for CO2 Cate Change en developequire re‐valiture  investmnt developmve (HSE) gu

e 

on

een  preparee Electricity as Turbine at Keadby  ie modified pdemonstratcapability aequirement

on  Ltd  has Capture Rea(DECC) CCR

ed to provididation  in ament  decisments in tecuidelines at 

ed  in  relatiAct 1989 to(CCGT) pown North Linplant, and he the readiat Keadby 2ts.   

undertakenadiness (CCR Guidancede estimate Front End ion.    Such hnology anthe time. 

ion  to  Keado vary an ewer plant (Kncolnshire. has been pness of the based on c

n  project  sR) feasibilite Note (Ref1s of requireEngineerindetailed  d

nd appropria

dby Generaexisting conKeadby 2) wThis reportrepared on plant for tcurrent assu

specific  stuty as set out1).  A pre‐ced utilities ang activity aesign woulate environ

TR‐G

ation  Ltd.’s sent to con

with a gross t has been  behalf of Khe installatumptions as

dies  to  prot in the Deponceptual pand infrastrus part of thd  also  takemental and

GEN‐AM‐KEA

s  applicationstruct and generated prepared aKeadby Gention of CO2 s to technol

ovide  the  rpartment ofprocess desucture.  Thihe preparate  into  accod Health an

AD2‐003 

n  under operate capacity as a CCR neration Capture logy and 

required f Energy scription s design tions for ount  the d Safety 

engineepage 8 

2. Tr

After thFor the corridorun aloThe  sugAreas oKeadby

A  detaipipelineconducpipelineappropfrom throutes h

The pipand HuThe Natyear.    Tcaptureaccess o

In the ethat pro

ering centreof 38 

ransporta

he CO2 is capurpose ofrs and key fng mainly ggested  rouof Conservay site (Ref2)

iled  risk  ase  routes.   ted  during e routing anriate at thishe HSE (Refhave been i

peline optiomber CCS Ctional Grid There  shoued CO2 emion agreeab

event that toposed is lik

e 

ation

aptured, it wf this study features aloagriculturalutes would ation  and  S.  Both of th

sessment wA  cost  benthe  design

nd cost imps stage of pf3).  Howeveidentified th

ons are assuCross Countpipeline would  thereforssions  fromle terms. . 

the Nationakely to be th

would mosttwo provis

ong them arl  land with be  a  sufficites of  Spehe corridors

would  be  cnefit  analysn  stages  oflications folanning buter, no barrihat would p

umed  to cotry Pipelineould have thre  be  sufficm Keadby 2 

al Grid pipelhe most fea

t likely be tsional pipelire detailed low  levels cient distanecial  Scientis cross majo

carried  out sis  alongsidf  the  CCS r the project such an asiers or enviprevent the 

onnect  to  the project (Rhe capacity cient  capac and  it  is a

line is not basible optio

transportedne corridorin Figure 1 of  residen

nce  away  frfic  Interestor and mino

in  advancee  an  envirproject  woct.  This levessessment wronmentalldevelopme

he proposeRef4), as shoto transpority within  tassumed  th

be developen for the Ke

TR‐G

d to a storagrs are suggein Appendixtial and  indrom  residen within a 1or roads and

e  to  assess onmental  iould  determel is of detawould followy protectedent of a CO2

d  the Natioown  in Figurt 17 millionthe  pipelineat  their op

ed in futureeadby 2. 

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ge site by pested.  The x I.  These cdustrial occntial  areas,10km  radiud rivers. 

the  safetyimpact  assemine  the  oail is not conw current gd areas alon

2 pipeline in

onal Grid Yure 2  in Appn tonnes of e  to  accomerators wil

e, a similar 

AD2‐003 

pipeline.  pipeline corridors cupancy.  ,  Special s of  the 

y  of  CO2 essment optimum nsidered guidance ng these n future. 

orkshire pendix I.  CO2 per 

mmodate l permit 

route to 

engineepage 9 

3. Su

A CO2  ccaptureoperatiyear  lifeBridlingaquifer storagethe NatCO2 stoThe CO

ering centreof 38 

uitable C

capture  plae  approximng at maximetime.   Thegton.   An o5/42 withi

e capacity etional Grid porage, which

2 pipeline ro

e 

O2 Stora

ant,  operatately  6  thomum outpue National Gffshore pipn a Bunter stimated asproject not h has an esoutes to bo

ge Sites

ing  at  90% ousand  tont.  This equGrid pipelineline will  tSandstones 837 milliogo ahead atimated stoth CO2 sink 

  capture,  rnnes  of  COates to an une proposeshen  transpe formationon tonnes oan alternatiorage capack options are

retrofitted  tO2  per  day upper limit s to transpoort  the COin the Sou

of CO2 (40%ive saline aqcity of 3169e shown in 

TR‐G

to  the  Keadwith  the of 33 millioort CO2 to B

2 a  further thern Nort

% pore densquifer, 2/489 million tonFigure 3 in A

GEN‐AM‐KEA

dby  2 CCGTplant  contion tonnes oBarmston, s 60 miles  tth Sea, whicsity) (Ref5). 8 could be unnes of CO2

Appendix I.

AD2‐003 

T would inuously ver a 15 south of to  saline ch has a  Should used for 

2 (Ref5).  . 

engineepage 10

4. Te

Three cas desc

4.1. O

Fuel is frelativepurificathermobespok

4.2. P

Hydrogto contto prodCO  intosolvent 

The maturbinevalue wburner experiecomme

The hydHoweveeasily  iefficienturbine

The Intethe capestimat

4.3. P

Chemicexhaustabsorptrequire

CCGT rethat wo

ering centre0 of 38 

echnical

common apribed below

Oxyfuel

fully combuely high conation.    This odynamic  pe turbine w

Pre‐Comb

en replacesrol flame teuce syntheo H2 over a  absorption

ain  challeng  to  combuswith  a  flamdesign ma

ence gainedercial guaran

drogen planer, superhentegrated cy  would  b.   

ernational Epture plant fte, would be

Post‐Com

cal  absorptit  gas  contation  wouldd for an 810

eferences eould  be  ca

e 

Feasibilit

proaches hw.   

usted in highncentration technologroperties  a

would be req

bustion CO

s natural gaemperaturesis gas (H2, catalytic b

n. 

ge  for  the st hydrogee  speed  apy be  requir in high hydntees may n

nt is expecteeating of thinto  an  exibe  lost  if  t

Energy Agefitted to a 5e available a

bustion C

on  is used ains  very  l  require  la0MW (Gros

exist for thisptured wit

ty of Ret

ave been p

h purity oxyof CO2  is py  is  not  sund  the  turbquired. 

O2 Capture

s as the fuees).  The hydCO, CO2).  Ted  in the p

retrofit of n.   The newpproximatelred  and  thedrogen firinnot be avail

ed to produis steam  is isting  Heat this  steam 

ncy (IEA) es500MW CCGat the Kead

CO2 captur

to  separatlow  concenarge  vesselss) unit. 

s technologh  a  90%  ca

trofitting

roposed for

ygen, previoproduced. uitable  for bine’s  temp

e

el for the gadrogen can This is then presence of 

pre‐combuw  fuel has ly eight  time  gas  turbig has beenable for the

uce large qudifficult wiRecovery cannot  be

stimate anGT.  The aredby Generat

re

te  the CO2

ntrations  (~s/building 

gy at 320tpdapture  plan

g

r abating CO

ously separaThis can beretrofits  toperature  pr

as turbine (dbe producefed to a shsteam.   Th

stion  to CCa  significan

mes higher ne may  reqapplied to e higher eff

uantities of thin the hySteam  Gen  heated  pr

area of 175ea required tion Ltd site

from  the  g~4.0  mol%structures

d, which is nt  retrofit  a

TR‐G

O2 emission

ated from ae stored wio  CCGTs  as rofile  are  v

diluted withed from refift reactor, he CO2  is re

CGTs,  is  thently  lower  vthan methaquire de‐ratolder ‘E’‐Claiciency mac

intermediaydrogen planerator  (HRrior  to  exp

5m x 150m for Keadbye. 

gas  turbine (Ref6))  ofand  multip

approximatat  Keadby 

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ns from CCG

air.  A streamith minimals  the workivery  differe

h nitrogen oforming natwhich convemoved by 

e  ability of volumetric ane,  so  a dting.   Muchass gas turbchines. 

ate pressurent and mayRSG),  so  sigansion  in  a

(Ref1) requy 2, scaled fr

exhaust  gaf  CO2.    Thple  trains 

tely 5% of t2.  This  pla

AD2‐003 

GT plant, 

m with a l  further ng  fluid nt,  so  a 

or steam tural gas verts the physical 

the  gas heating 

different h of  the bines, so 

e steam.   y not be gnificant a  steam 

uired for rom this 

as.    The erefore, may  be 

the CO2 nt  used 

engineepage 11

Fluor’s Massac

The addstabilityto comand  coomainten

Post coto a CCG

ering centre1 of 38 

Econaminechusetts, US

ditional prey of the gaspensate.  Soling watenance turna

ombustion CGT and is th

e 

e  FG  technSA since late

ssure drop s turbine, apace for tier  (feed  andaround taki

CO2 captureherefore th

nology  and e 1980’s (Re

resulting frnd HRSG due‐ins could d  return).   ng around 6

e is considee focus of t

has  been ef6). 

rom the absuctwork intbe made foThese  tie‐6 weeks to 

ered the mthis paper.

operationa

sorber woutegrity.  A bor the stack‐ins  could  bcomplete (R

most approp

TR‐G

al  at  the  B

ld affect thebooster fan k, steam sysbe  achievedRef7). 

priate techn

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ellingham 

e performawould be istems, condd  during  a 

nology for

AD2‐003 

plant  in 

ance and installed densate, normal 

retro‐fit

engineepage 12

5. CC

The  folGuidancGas Com

5.1. P

The suitand tra

The CCGtake theof the c

5.2. S

The  IEAsize  of CCGT p61,500 area ma

A CO2  cwithin layout (Ref16)provide

5.2.1.

The CO

5.2.2.

The  laySectioncapture

The  KetechnolpreventcombusCatalyti

ering centre2 of 38 

CGT Desi

llowing  conce Note  (Ambined Cyc

Power Pla

tability of tnsportation

GT exhaust e exhaust gcompressed

Space Req

A report (Re250m  x  15

plant.   Scalinm2.  Howevay be requi

capture plathe  bounda(allocated  s.   The Keade sufficient s

CO2 Captu

2 capture p

Gas Turbin

yout would  4.3.    The e plant and 

adby  2  CClogies requt degradatistion NOX  aic Reduction

e 

gn Consi

nsiderationsnnex C: Encle Power St

ant Locatio

he locationn routes is d

gas stack isgases into thd CO2 would

quirement

ef8) cited  in50m  (37,50ng this figuver, an Impered. 

ant  consisteary  of  landspace  for  Cdby 2 CCGTspace for th

ure Plant

lant is desc

ne

include  a booster  fawould mitig

CGT  will  beire  levels ofon of  the cabatement n (SCR). 

ideration

s  are  basedvironment tation Using

on

 of the Keadiscussed in

s shown in the CO2 captd either be t

ts

n the DECC 0 m2)  for  pre to the gerial College

ent with  thd  owned  byCombined HT plant  layohe following

ribed in det

booster  fan would ovgate the gas

  specified f NOX belowcapture solvsystem wo

ns

d  on  the  rAgency veg Post‐Com

dby 2 CCGTn Sections 2 

the CCGT pture equipmto the north

C Guidance post  combueneration ce assessme

is plot areay  Keadby GHeat  and  Pout and  theg considerat

tail in Appe

n  downstrevercome  ths turbine pe

with  dry  low that achivents used.ould  be  ret

requiremenrification obustion Sol

T for accessand 3 abov

lant layout ment on theh or east of 

Note (Ref1ustion  captcapacity of ent (Ref9) co

a  requiremeGeneration Power  retroe allotted stions: 

ndix III. 

eam  of  thehe pressureerformance

ow  NOx  buevable with.    In  this catrofitted wi

TR‐G

nts  set  out f CCS Readvent Scrubb

 to suitableve. 

in Appendixe adjacent pthe site. 

) estimatesure  equipmKeadby 2 goncluded 36

ent would Ltd,  as  shoofit  shown pace  for  th

e  CCGT  plandrop  resu impact. 

urners.    Ceh  low NOX base  it  is envthin  the H

GEN‐AM‐KEA

in  the  DEdiness New bing) (Ref1)

e storage re

x II.  Ductinplot.  The ex

s an additioment  for  a gives a plot6% to 50% 

be accommown  in  Appin  separatehe CCS plan

nt,  as  disculting  from 

ertain  CO2 burners  in ovisaged  thaRSG,  e.g.  S

AD2‐003 

ECC  CCR Natural ). 

eservoirs 

g would xit route 

onal plot 500MW  area of less plot 

modated pendix  II e  report nt would 

ussed  in the CO2 

capture order to t a post Selective 

engineepage 13

5.2.3.

A horizthe exteductingoperate

A boostwould m

The HRCCS.  Thgrid  anstorage

The destemperrange.  

5.2.4.

The  issconsidearound turbine

a)  A lois imple

b)  A stis imple

c)   StanCCS com

d)  LP stplant  infrom th

Given twould bbe  insteconompreferre

ering centre3 of 38 

Boiler and

ontal type ension of dg will  be  are independe

ter fan instamitigate the

RSG design whe design wd  catalyst e vessels, do

sign pressurrature  in thIn practice 

Steam Tur

sue  of  theeration.  The40  to  50%. The option

wer‐sized Lemented. 

andard LP cemented. 

ndard LP cymmenceme

team is taknstead of ehe boilers or

he uncertaibe to installalled  at  a mic.   Optioned option. 

e 

d Auxiliaries

HRSG has bucting to byrranged  to ently of the

alled downse impact of 

will allow  fwill leave subed.    The osing equipm

re of steame HRSG spathis will be 

rbine and A

e  steam  te  steam  ex%  of  the  stns are as fo

LP cylinder i

cylinder is i

linder  is  insent based on

en from a sxtracting  frr CHP plant 

inty regardil a standardlater  date n  d)  is  like

s

been propoypass the exallow  bypa CO2 captur

stream (as dincreased p

for retrofittufficient spaplant  layoument and a

turbine staace hosting straightfor

Auxiliaries

turbine  dextraction  reteam  that wllows: 

installed fro

nstalled fro

stalled fromn economic

stand‐alonerom  the CCto be captu

ng future ad LP cylindeor  partiallly  to  result

osed  for  thexhaust stacass  damperre plant in t

discussed inpressure dro

ting of SCR,ace within tut  also  hasssociated p

ages must bg the SCR mrward as the

sign  is  anequired  for would  norm

om the outs

om the outs

m the outsec appraisal o

e auxiliary bCGT  steam ured).   

pplication ter and eithey  resize  tht  in  an  effi

e Keadby 2ck and lead rs  to  be  inthe event of

n Section 4.op due to th

, should  it bthe structursufficient 

pipework. 

be selected module  is  in e SCR tempe

n  economicCO2  captumally  be  u

set and ope

set and ope

et, with somof costs and

oiler or Comcycle  (with 

to CCS to Ker accept anhe  LP  stageiciency  pen

TR‐G

CCGT, whito the CO2 serted  to  af CO2 captu

3 and 5.2.2he CO2 capt

be requiredre to fit an space  avai

in order to the approperature zon

c  decision re  on  a  CCsed  in  the 

erated sub‐

erated sub‐o

me blade rod benefits.  

mbined Heaconsequen

eadby 2, the efficiency e  if  this  is nalty  and  is

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ich would  fcapture plaallow  the  Cre plant ou

2) of the CCGture plant.  

d  for applicammonia ilable  for  a

ensure the priate tempne is extens

requiring CGT would low  press

‐optimally u

optimally a

ows resized 

at and Powential CO2 em

e preferredpenalty shodetermines  not  consi

AD2‐003 

facilitate ant.  The CCGT  to tages.   

GT plant 

cation of njection mmonia 

flue gas perature ive. 

careful require ure  (LP) 

until CCS 

fter CCS 

prior to 

er (CHP) missions 

 options ould CCS d  to  be dered  a 

engineepage 14

5.2.5.

The Keasolvent during d

5.2.6.

The coohave berequireLP  steaflowrataccommnot supto be  aused fo

The  maHowevedemandis also a

The addconstra

5.2.7.

The waonly of supply dno addplant. 

5.2.8.

The amwill genwater tdischargoversizeplant.  Iextent ooff‐site

The  COexpectesufficie

ering centre4 of 38 

Water ‐ St

adby 2 plan  stripper.   detailed de

Cooling W

oling duty feen  consided on top ofam  is  suppes  to  the modated bypplied to thea non‐optimr CCGTs wo

ake‐up  waer,  if LP sted due to tha net produ

ditional makaints. 

Raw Wate

ter supply tfiltering fordemand is nitional prov

Waste Wa

mine scrubbnerate addittreatment pged  via  theed sized in oIf large quaon the type. 

O2  capture ed  maximunt  space  to

e 

team ‐ Cond

nt could suFurther  intsign, for exa

Water System

for the aminered –  see f the base Clied  form  tcondenser.y the existine CO2 captumal  solutionould be insta

ter  requireeam  is suppe reduced Lcer of wate

ke up water

er Pre‐treat

to Keadby 2r cooling wanot anticipavision  for  tr

ater Treatm

ing plant antional efflueplant withine  existing  porder to accntities of ame of solvent

plant  will m  demando accommo

densate Cyc

pply LP stetegration ofample reco

m

ne scrubbeAppendix

CCGT requirethe  CCGT  t.    In  this  cng cooling ture plant orn, modular alled within

ement  for plied  from tLP steam floer, which wo

r demand c

ment Plant

2 is of a suffater supply,ated to incrreatment  is

ment Plant

nd Direct Cents.  Thesen the CO2 cproposed  scommodatemine degrat used) then

require  add  required date additi

cle

eam  from  tf  the watevery of was

r, Direct CoIII.   An  addements, altto  the  CO2

case  the  Ctowers.  In r utilisation low  level  c

n the CO2 ca

the  coolinthe CCGT thow to the sould reduce

could be acc

t

ficient qual, which is perease beyons anticipate

Contact Cooe effluents apture plansewer  outfae additionadation prodn treatment

ditional  treby  the  CCional water

he steam  tr process  sste heat fro

ontact Cooleditional  50%though the 

2  capture  pCO2  capturethe case thof the existcooling  towapture plant

ng  water  shere will beteam turbine make‐up d

commodate

ity that theerformed clnd the curreed with  the

oler for the will be treant and recoall  line.    Thl effluent pducts are prt and dispo

eated  wateCGT  alone. r  treatment

TR‐G

urbine  IP/Lystems  coum the LP co

er and CO2 %  cooling dCCGT requiplant  due  te  plant  coohat LP steamting coolingwers  similart area. 

system  woue a reductione.  The Dirdemand.   

ed within th

raw water lose to the ent site consinstallation

post combated within overed  into he  CCGT  plroduced froroduced (desal of this w

er  ~3  times  The  CCGTt plant capa

GEN‐AM‐KEA

LP crossoveuld be  inveondensate. 

compressioduty  is  likeirement wilto  lower  LPoling  duty m from the g towers war  to  those  t

uld  be  sigon  in CCGTrect Contac

he site wate

treatment source.  Rastraints.  Thn of a CO2 

ustion CO2  a dedicatethe water lant  drainsom the CO2 ependant towaste may 

s  greater  tT  plant  layacity  to  sup

AD2‐003 

r  to  the stigated 

on plant ly  to be l reduce P  steam may  be CCGT is as found typically 

nificant.  T cooling ct Cooler 

er supply 

consists w water herefore capture 

capture ed waste cycle or will  be capture o a large be done 

han  the yout  has pply  this 

engineepage 15

requirecould su

5.2.9.

The  COinstrumequipmCCGT p

5.2.10.

The  macompreapproxisupply located

5.2.11.

The  insexhaust

The nexturbinefor this 

Return captureterms o

5.2.12.

A genersufficieplant.  Aarea. 

5.2.13.

The onltranspoproductper motherefocaptureGiven  tdeliveri

ering centre5 of 38 

ment to theupply this re

Compresse

O2  capture ment  air).    Tment.  Therelant. 

Electrical

ain  electricessors,  solvimately  50 from  the  within the 

Plant Pipe

tallation oft duct to ru

xt most sign, if this werwould exist

of  condene  equipmenof pipe rout

Control an

rously sizednt  for  any Alternativel

Additiona

ly additionaort of  the Cts.   The COonth  for maore  three  de  solvent mthe  site  layes to the ex

e 

e steam cycequirement

ed Air Syste

equipment These will e is limited b

city  consument  pumpsMW.    Thigrid  or  potCO2 captur

e Racks and

f additional n from the 

nificant lengre the choset alongside 

sate  into  tnt with  theing. 

nd Instrume

d control bucontrol  anly, a dedicat

l vehicle mo

al vehicle mCO2 captureO2 capture pake‐up.   Thideliveries  pmay  requireyout  and  roxisting Kead

cle.  Alternat. 

em

will  requirbe  stand‐abenefit of in

mers  of  ths  and  coolins  demand tentially  frore plant are

Ducting

pipe work CCGT stack

gth of pipinen method the route o

he water‐se water‐stea

entation

uilding has nd  instrumeted control 

ovement

ovements de  solvent anplant requirs would beer month  we  a  Hazardooad  infrastdby Power S

atively, the 

re  additionalone  utilitientegrating t

he  CO2  capng water  pwill  be  supom  a  dedia. 

will requirek to the inlet

ng would beof providinof the exhau

steam‐condam‐conden

been showentation  eqroom could

during plannd possibly res approxie assumed would  be ous  Substatructure  anStation, this

CO2 captur

al  compreses  located these with t

pture  planpumps.    Thpplied  fromcated  com

e additionat of the CO2

e the LP steng steam to ust ducting.

ensate  cyclsate  cycle 

n on the CCquipment  rd be located

t operationoff‐site  tramately 70‐9to be delivrequired. ances  Consed  the  expes is not antic

TR‐G

e plant wat

ssed  air  (boadjacent  tothose antic

t  are  the e  total  est

m  a  dedicatbined  heat

l  lengths of

2 capture pl

am extractithe CO2 ca 

le  and  procwould  be 

CGT layout required  fod within the

 would be aansport of a90 tonnes oered  in 30 Delivery  anent  from  therience  of cipated to r

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ter treatme

oth  service o  the  CO2 ipated for t

booster  fatimated  deted  stationt  and  powe

f pipe rack lant.  

ion from thapture plant

cess  integrless  of  an 

and this shor  the  CO2 e CO2 captu

associated wamine degrof aqueoustonne  tanknd  storagehe  local  aureceiving  crepresent a

AD2‐003 

ent plant 

air  and capture the base 

an,  CO2 mand  is n  import er  plant 

and the 

e steam t.  Space 

ation  of issue  in 

hould be capture 

ure plant 

with the radation  solvent kers and   of  CO2 uthority.  chemical n issue. 

engineepage 16

5.2.14.

Sufficieunloadinormalblanketadded acapablebe undseparat

There wbe locat

5.3. S

5.3.1.

CO2 is nHazardsRegulatcaptureMajor A

The COand woof Dang

During  

5.3.2.

The plamaintenand codof lesso

Whilst accidenstoragethereforeclassiHazardoplant de

ering centre6 of 38 

Storage an

nt  space  iing  facility. ly  purchaseted tank witat  the  solve of holdingertaken  in tors in case 

will be no stted at the b

Safety

CO2 Pipeli

not currents  Regulatiotions 1996 e,  transportAccident Ha

2 pipeline rould be risk gerous Toxic

detailed de

Installation

The prepar

Preparing a

CO2 Captu

nt would bnance.   Thedes of practons learnt fr

CO2  is  not ntal  releasee of captureore  be  the fied  in  futous Substanesign. 

e 

nd handling

s  available  A  typical

ed  as  an  8th a carbonent  sump. g at least 11a covered of any spill

torage of Cboundary of

ne

ly defined aons  2015  (C(PSR).   Thet  or  storageazard Poten

routing and assessed, inc Load.   

esign of the 

n of emerge

ration of a M

appropriate

ure Plant

be set out we design of tice applicarom SSE’s P

currently  c of  large qed CO2  is prinventory 

ture  withinnces Consen

g of solvent

  for  storag  CO2  captu5 wt%  solu filter on th The MEA 0% of the vunloading bage. 

O2 on site. f the site. 

as a dangerCOMAH)  ore HSE also de.   Howevetial. 

design of Cncluding mo

pipeline ro

ncy shut‐do

Major Accid

e emergency

with typical the CO2 cable to instaeterhead CC

classified  auantities oroposed  in in  the  ca

n  the  COMnt.  These re

t and CO2

ge  of  90  ture  solventution  (low he vent.  Thtank wouldvolume of thbay which 

The compr

rous substar  as  a  dangdoes not prer,  the HSE

CO2 captureodelling of 

ute the follo

own valves;

ent Hazard 

y procedure

chemical inapture planallations hanCS Front En

s  hazardouof CO2  couldthe CCS depture  plan

MAH  Regulaequirement

tonnes  of t  is Monoefreeze  grad

he MEA woud also be  lohe tank.  Uncould be se

ression equ

nce under tgerous  fluirovide Land  considers 

e plant woureleases an

owing woul

Prevention

es. 

ndustry sepnt would condling supend Engineer

us, DECC  and  result  in sign.   The ot  and  on‐sations  or  wts would be

TR‐G

CO2  capturthanolaminde)  and  stould be diluteocated  in a nloading of eparately d

ipment wou

the Controld  under  thd Use Plannsupercritica

uld follow Hnd dispersio

ld be consid

n Document

aration for omply with ercritical COing Design (

nd  the HSE a major  aconly stored site  pipewowithin  the e reviewed i

GEN‐AM‐KEA

re  solvent ne  (MEA), wored  in  a  ned and an i  fully bundroad tanke

drained via 

uld be prop

l of Major Ahe  Pipelinesning advice al CO2  as  h

HSE guidancons and asse

dered: 

t 

safety andrelevant st

O2 and take (FEED) stud

  recognise ccident  (Re CO2 on sitork.    CO2 requireme

in detail du

AD2‐003 

and  an which  is nitrogen nhibitor ded area ers could suitable 

posed to 

Accident s  Safety for CO2 having  a 

ce (Ref3) essment 

 ease of andards account dy. 

that  an f1).   No e would may  be ents  for ring CCS 

engineepage 17

The  Coestabliseither apart of that arenamed within  tTherefotype of Should to mana

5.4. F

The CCGinstallewould band  in with the

ering centre7 of 38 

ontrol  of  Mshment whia lower tier this procese  typically as dangerothe  thermaore  the COMsolvent useCOMAH apage the req

Fire Fighti

GT firefightd  in  the  CObe  installedagreemente latest reg

e 

Major  Accidich containor upper tiss  is the COused as COous  substanal  reclaimerMAH  regulaed and quapply to the quirements 

ing and Fi

ting ring maO2  captured  in  the new with  the Hulations. 

ent  Hazards named suier establishO2 capture sO2 capture snces.   Hower,  such  as nations may ntities of deCO2 capturaccordingly

re Protect

ain would b  utilities  arw CO2 captHSE, as app

ds  Regulatioubstances  ihment.  Thesolvent, whsolvents  (e.ever,  somenitrosaminey apply  to  tegradation re plant, Key. 

tion Syste

be extendedrea.    All  firture area  inpropriate.   T

ons  2015  (n sufficiente only addithich  is  likelyg. monoethe of  the deges,  are namhe CO2  capproducts steadby Gene

em

d and an adre  detection accordancThese wou

TR‐G

(COMAH)  ist quantities tional substy to be amihanolaminegradation pmed  as dangpture plant tored on sitration Ltd h

dditional bon  and  prevce with besld be desig

GEN‐AM‐KEA

s  applicabl  to be classtance to be ine based.   e) are not eproducts  regerous  subdepending

te prior to dhas the exp

ooster pumvention  equst  industry gned  in acc

AD2‐003 

e  to  an sified as used as Amines 

explicitly covered stances.  g on  the disposal.  perience 

p house uipment practice ordance 

engineepage 18

6. Su

The suit

The  siteaccess woperati

The rouplant araround across  tcomprethe CO2

order to

. 

ering centre8 of 38 

uitability

tability of th

e  is of a  suways and roon would b

uting of ducrea would rthe CCGT lthe public ession plant

2 capture po optimise t

e 

y of Assoc

he water in

ufficient  sizeoads.  The be negligible

cts, pipes arequire careayout to acroad  situatt and coolinplant wouldthe layout, 

ciated In

frastructure

e  to accomincrease in e. 

nd cables ceful consideccommodatted betweeng towers. be considemitigate an

nfrastruc

e is discusse

mmodate adtraffic for c

connecting eration durite these conen  the main Additionalered togethny safety ris

ture

ed in sectio

dditional offconstructio

the CCGT png plant dennections, wn CCGT pla roads andher with pipks, and min

TR‐G

n 5 above. 

fice buildinn would be

plant area tesign.  Therewith some cnt  and  the walkways 

pe, duct annimise cost. 

GEN‐AM‐KEA

gs,  stores, e significant

to the CO2 e is sufficienconnections CO2  stripparound andd cable rou

AD2‐003 

internal t but for 

capture nt space s routed ping  and d within utings  in 

engineepage 19

7. CC

7.1. I

This secstation,informa

The  capcarried documeto reach

The  Intplant pethe  basperformthere  hestimatdetail a

Informaadjusteprocessstation.accountsorbent

In  addiinfrastrof a CO

7.2. A

The gen

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

ering centre9 of 38 

CS Retrof

Introducti

ction provid,  such  as  thation and co

pital,  operaout by the ent consulteh indicative

ternational erformancese  CCGT  pomance modhave  been ted costs annd accuracy

ation from d  for  inflats will  captu.  This 90% ted for in ret preparatio

ition,  this ucture whic

2 transport 

Assumptio

neral assum

A  modern unabated  Coptimised fA CCS retrodesign withsteam is suNo  consideperformancNo assumpthe present

e 

fit Econo

ion

des an  indiche  one  plaonsidered it

ating  costs Internationed with a we plant costs

Energy  Age impacts, inower  statiodels  and  shno  full  scand performy for the pu

Ref2 was sction  and  cuure  90%  of capture ratelevant regon and hand

assessmench permits dand storag

ons and P

mptions and 

810MW  (gCO2  emissifor wholesaofit at suitah 90% captpplied fromeration  of ce of the CCptions regart EMR arran

omic Asse

cation of thnned  for  Kts applicatio

and maintenal Energy Awide range os and perfor

gency  Greenncluding redon.    These owed  goodle  CCS  plan

mance  impaurposes of t

caled to maurrency.      Ithe  CO2  inte is assumulations (fodling). 

t  for  Keaddisposal of e network (

Parameter

parameter

gross)  CCGons),  perfoale market cble scale foure rate  incm the CCGTadditional CGT Base Carding financngements (n

essment

he cost of reKeadby  2.   on to the Ke

enance  cosAgency Greof technologrmance est

nhouse  Gaduced powefigures  havd  agreemennt  demonstcts are conhis assessm

atch the maIt  is  also  thn  the  exhaued to incoror example 

dby  2  is  bCO2 at a po(“TSN”). 

rs

rs used for t

T  power  sorming  accoconditions, or the CCGTcluding all sto the CO2

risks  (i.e. ase or the fcial  supporno resulting

t

etrofitting CThis  studyeadby 2 pro

sts  are  signeenhouse Ggy providerimates.   

s  documener output ove  been  cont.    Since  ttrations  onnsidered  to ment. 

aximum outhe  basis  of ust  gas  emporate all  “ancillary” 

ased  on  aoint of hand

this assessm

station  withording  to  dor operatedT power stasecondary ecapture plabeyond  deull chain CCrt for the CCg cost or ris

TR‐G

CCS to a mohas  review

oject. 

nificantly  dras (Ref2).  Trs and const

nt  also  supf the CCS reompared wthe  publicaCCGT  planhave an a

tput capacitan  assumperging  fromCO2 emissioCO2 emissio

future  sced‐over to an

ment are: 

h  20MW  adesign  withd as a baselation, perfoemissions.   ant; sign)  in  reCS Retrofit cCS retrofit ok discounts

GEN‐AM‐KEA

odern CCGTwed  public 

rawn  from The authortruction com

ports  estimetrofit casewith  in‐houstion  of  thisnt.    Therefoppropriate 

ty of Keadbption  that m  the  CCGTons  requireons associat

enario  of n assumed o

uxiliary  loah  operationoad stationrming accoIn this sce

lation  to  tcases. or support s); 

AD2‐003 

T power domain 

a  study rs of this mpanies 

mates  of relative se  plant s  report ore,  the level of 

by 2 and the  CCS T  power ed to be ted with 

UK  CCS operator 

ad  (with n  either: n; ording to nario LP 

echnical 

through 

engineepage 20

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

7.3. T

Additioapprais

7.3.1.

This assscale foof inves

Any  capCCGT adependDiscountypes o

Risk  facdiscoun

7.3.2.

The  capsupply Total  caproject integrat

ering centre0 of 38 

A  15  year duration ofoperating lCCS capitalfrom KeadbCCS operatto the TSNEnergy TecAll  liabilitiepayment othe CCS RetThe  financunder  the Carbon Flotaken  into directly  coarrangeme

The mode

nal  costs  oal of large c

Risk

sessment aor the powestment in ab

pital  investnd the CCSding  on  thented cash flf uncertaint

ctors  are  ant rate. 

Capital Co

pital  costs under an EPapital  spenmanagem

tion (e.g. ad

e 

operating f EMR contife, and no l and operaby 2 to a coting costs in at the conhnologies Ines  in  respef the tariff.trofit Casesial benefitsEU  Emissioor Price (if account  in

ompared  wnts. 

elling appr

of  CCS  are capital proje

ssumes theer generatiobated gene

ment will  sS elements e  nature  olow techniqties and inv

accounted  f

osts

considered PC (Engineed  include  a

ment,  consdditional CC

period  for tracts. This additional cating costs nnection poclude a tarinnection ponstitute (Reect  of  abat. There are s.  s of CCS opons  Tradingsupplies ofn  this  assewith  the  co

roach

estimated ects.   

e CCS proceon  industryrating asset

still have  ri(e.g. planneof  any  finanques are devestment ris

for  in  this 

for  the CCer Procure aamounts  fotruction  inCGT power s

the  CCGT considers acost is consinclude  theoint at a TSiff (£10 per oint. This reef1).   ed  CO2  areno other p

peration  incg  Scheme,  af gas to CCessment,  anosts  of  CO

using  a  fi

ess has beey, and the cts. 

isks due  toed outagesncial  suppoeployed  in tsks. 

assessmen

CS Retrofit and Construor  “owner  cnsurance, station una

and  CCS  oa CCS “retridered for Ce CCS captuN mentionetonne of COlies on tari

e  handed‐oprovisions  f

clude  savingand may  aS are exemnd  indicativO2  under  w

nancial  inv

n satisfactoapital mark

  the  techn).  It may alort  under the  investm

nt  using  a 

cases  are  suct) contraccosts”,  incluand  costs vailability).

TR‐G

peration,  cofit” at  theCCGT life exure plant, aed in the intO2 abated) fff estimate

over  to  thefor the cost

gs  in  the  colso  include 

mpted). Thesve  CCS  retrwider  mark

vestment m

orily demonkets are fam

ical performso be subjeUK  regulat

ment model 

10%  pre‐ta

structured ct with an euding  plannrelating  t

GEN‐AM‐KEA

consistent we start of  thxtension woand a   CO2 troduction. for CO2 trans produced

e  TSN  operts of CO2 ab

osts of Allo  savings  inse benefits rofit  costs ket  and  reg

model  desig

nstrated at miliar with t

mance of bect to markory  arrangto recognis

ax  real  per

around equequipment sning,  procuto  power 

AD2‐003 

with  the he CCGT orks; pipeline 

nsferred d for the 

rator  on bated  in 

owances the UK are not may  be gulatory 

gned  for 

suitable the risks 

both  the ket risks, ements. se these 

annum 

uipment supplier. rement,  station 

engineepage 21

The foll

Capture

Compre

Onshor

Capital Using  testimat

7.3.3.

Operatiancillarycost  forprocesscosts.   

The foll

Direct C

Variable

Routine

Capture

Onshor

CO2 Sto

In  addiopportucaptureperformresultinprices. 

ering centre1 of 38 

owing capit

e Plant   

essor Plant  

re Pipeline 

costs are sthis methodtes.  

Operating

ional  costs y electricityr  lost elects,  and  add

owing oper

Consumable

e Maintena

e Maintenan

e Salaries/A

re Pipeline M

orage Tariff 

tion,  thereunity  cost  oe plant.   A tmance modng in an ann

e 

tal estimate

spread overd,  there  is 

g Costs

consideredy consumptricity  sales itional  ove

rating costs

e Cost 

ance Cost 

nce 

Admin/Insur

Maintenanc

e  is  a  variaof power  etotal 140MWels and thenual variable

es are expre

£281M 

£25M 

£27.5M 

r three yearno  need  t

d  included  tion of the cdue  to  sterheads,  inc

 estimates a

  £1/

  £21

  £3.1

rance  £2.7

ce  £23

  £10

ble  cost  dexports  lostWe  is assume  Internatioe cost  due 

essed in Ap

rs and operto  add  inte

the  cost ofcapture andeam  supplycluding  CCS

are express

/MWh (elec

18/operatin

1M per ann

7M per ann

31k per ann

0/tonne 

ue  to  electt  if  the CCGmed for theonal Energy to annual lo

ril 2015 mo

rating costserest  during

f  solvent  red compressi  from  the S‐specific  m

sed in April 

trical expor

g hour 

num 

num 

um 

tricity  demGT power  sese elemenAgency Grost export a

TR‐G

ney: 

s commenceg  construct

placement,on processpower  statmaintenance

2015 mone

rt) 

and  of  thetation provnts based upeen House at prevailing

GEN‐AM‐KEA

e after thistion  to  the

,  cost of adses,  an opption  to  the e  and    ins

ey: 

e  CCS  procvides  steampon  in‐hou Gas reportg electricity

AD2‐003 

s period. e  capital 

dditional ortunity capture surances 

cess  and m  to  the se plant t  (Ref2), y market 

engineepage 22

7.4. V

Three c

1) Baseat  dwhi

2) CCSCCSreduauxBase

3) CCSCCSreduCCGbase

CCS Retdoes  noptimaor the i

CCS Retof the Cthe plan

The  Bastation,Retrofitmarket market in  a  sceoperati

Marketrespondoperatigenerat“markeinflexibfirst  CCsegmen

ering centre2 of 38 

Valuation

cases are co

e Case: A nedesign  perfch derives m

S Retrofit CaS  chain  opeuced by 160iliary  load. e Case. 

S Retrofit CaS  chain  opeuced  by  16GT auxiliary eload opera

trofit Case ot  alter  thl plan for ompact of an

trofit Case CCS capturenned opera

se  Case  an, there is not Case 2 moloss must loss is estimenario wheon. 

  loss  is estds  to balanon.  If  thertion, market  loss”  for le and CCS CS  retrofit: nt of inflexib

e 

n Method

onsidered: 

ew entrant formance.   maximum e

ase 1:   A neerating  at  d0MW due toOtherwise,

ase 2:   A neerating  at  d60MW  due load.    In thation instea

1 considerse  original peration.  Tny financial 

2 considerse process, antion of the 

nd  CCS  Retro “market looves away ftherefore bmated to bere  the  add

imated on nce  the houre  is  a  sizet  rewards CCS  will  texpands. Tit would  bble CCS‐fitte

CCGT powePlanned  o

expected va

ew entrant design  perfo the electr, planned o

ew entrant design  perfto  the  elehis case, mad of the op

s  the cost oinvestmentThis case doarrangeme

s the cost ond in the coCCGT powe

rofit  Case  1oss” to set ofrom the opbe  includede £112M ndition of CC

the basis  turly and  seaeable  segmfor  flexibilitherefore  tThe above ebe  greater  ied generati

er station wutput  is  opalue from th

CCGT powformance. rical losses moutput  is  al

CCGT powformance. ectrical  lossaximum exptimised out

of CCS  retrt  case  for oes not conents to supp

of CCS retroontext of finer station.

1  use  the  ooff against ptimum oped  in  this caset present CS  changes 

that GB maasonal profment  of  inity may  inctend  to  incestimate ofif  Keadby  2ng capacity

with a grossptimised  tohe asset. 

er station w Maximummentioned ligned with

er station w Maximumses mentionxport  is  incetput in the 

ofit  in a scethe  CCGT sider the pport the CCS

ofit with monancial supp

optimum  othe CCS inveration of tse  for sub‐ovalue over Keadby 2  i

arket pricesfile of demaflexible  surease.   On crease  if  CCf £112M  is 2 was  assuy.   

TR‐G

capacity of  support  a

with CCS re  electrical above in ad  the optim

with CCS re  electrical ned  above entivised, reBase Case. 

enario whepower  statracticalitiesS investmen

ore regard tport arrange

operation  ovestment inhe CCGT pooptimal CCGthe 15 yearinto  an  infl

s will evolveand.   This wpply  and  sreasonableCS  retrofittbased on Kmed  to  be

GEN‐AM‐KEA

f 810MW opn  investme

etrofit, withexport  capddition to thmised outpu

etrofit, withexport  capin  additionesulting  in 

ere CCS  invetion,  includs of flexible nt. 

to the practements wh

of  the  CCGTn these caseower statioGT operatior period of lexible  “bas

e  to ensurewill  rewardscarcity  of e assumptioted  generatKeadby 2 bee  joining  a 

AD2‐003 

perating ent  case 

 the full pacity  is he CCGT ut  in  the 

 the full pacity  is n  to  the planned 

estment ding  the capture 

ticalities ich alter 

T  power es.    CCS n, and a on.   The analysis se  load” 

e  supply flexible flexible ons,  the tors  are eing the sizeable 

engineepage 23

7.5. R

The add

Ref3  cotype of 

These  rwhich e

These  rcertaint

7.6. E

Retrofitat Kead

CCS  retfollowincase wo

With  tharrangeabatemwill nee

ering centre3 of 38 

Results

ditional cost

(i) Net(exp

(ii) Thelevetota

(iii) Theleve

ontains mostudy. 

results  comestimated C

results  are ty to suppo

Economic

tting of CCSdby 2.   

trofit  to  Keng a satisfacould depend

his proviso, ements willment cost oved to be mo

e 

t of CCS is r

t Present Vapressed in £

CCS Ret

CCS Ret

e  same  Netelised £/MWal export);  

CCS Ret

CCS Ret

e  same  Netelised estim

CCS Ret

CCS Ret

re  informat

mpare  well CCS costs of 

high  level rt an invest

c Assessme

S would add

eadby  2  mctory conclud on how m

investors wl  secure  a ver the life oore than £60

reported in 

alue of  the £ at April 20

trofit Case 1

trofit Case 2

t  Present  VWh CO2‐ab

trofit Case 1

trofit Case 2

t  Present  Vmate £/tonn

trofit Case 1

trofit Case 2

tion on  the

with  recen £60/tonne

estimates, tment case.

ent Concl

d significant

may  achieveusion of themuch CCS‐fit

would needcost  of  COof the inves0/tonne for

three form

 whole‐lifec015); 

1: £463M 

2: £977M 

Value  estimated expor

1:£39.40/M

2:£32.30/M

Value  estime CO2 abate

1: £79.80/to

2: £65.40/to

e method u

nt  CCS  ecoe to £80/ton

  and  not  d 

usions

t cost to the

e  an  econoe CCS Demotted genera

d confidencO2  emission stment.  Thr economic 

s:   

cycle additi

mate  of  addrt  from  the 

MWh 

MWh 

mate  of  added; 

onne 

onne 

used  to  cal

onomic  assenne of CO2 c

developed  t

e operation

omically  viaonstration Pating capacit

ce  that  the above  theis study sugviability of C

TR‐G

ional costs 

ditional  cospower stat

ditional  cos

culate  leve

essments  (captured.   

to  the  leve

 of a new C

able  carbonProgrammety already e

wider mare  total  addiggests that CCS investm

GEN‐AM‐KEA

of  the CCS

sts,  expresstion  (about

sts,  express

elised  costs 

Ref13  and 

el  of  detail 

CCGT power

n  capture e, but the ecexists at the

rket and  regitional  costCO2 emissioment. 

AD2‐003 

S retrofit 

sed  as  a t 90% of 

sed  as  a 

for  this 

Ref14), 

or  cost 

r station 

solution conomic e time.   

gulatory t  of  CCS on costs 

engineepage 24

Failing covered

With  aretrofitt

ering centre4 of 38 

this,  CCS  id over the li

ppropriate ted to Kead

e 

nvestment ife of the in

CO2  cost dby 2. 

would  reqnvestment.

or  financia

quire  secure

al  support 

e  financial 

CCS  techn 

TR‐G

support  to

nology  coul

GEN‐AM‐KEA

o  ensure  co

ld  theoretic

AD2‐003 

osts  are 

cally  be 

engineepage 25

8. Co

This  reretrofittconditio

An assea  pipeliproject

Adequaplant.  T

Water  smake‐u

No elecplant w

The souturbine

The CCG

Followigeneratovercom

An  ecoregulato

In summ

(1)

(2)

ering centre5 of 38 

onclusion

eport  has ting  CCS  tons. 

essment of ine would . 

ate  space  isThe CCGT p

Piping, cab

Additional 

Additional 

The  retrofiwithin the 

supplies  to up water de

ctrical modiwould be sup

urce of stea or from se

GT design w

Steam extrfuture stea

Provision o

ng  the  rettor would me the pres

onomic  assory conditio

mary: 

Suitable sto

It  is  techni

regulatory 

e 

ns

demonstrao  Keadby 

CO2 pipelinbe  feasible

s  available lant layout 

ling, and du

water treat

control roo

it  of  a  SelHRSG, if req

Keadby 2 mand follow

fications topplied indep

m supply toparate boile

will also inco

raction desim requirem

on the HRSG

rofit  of  CCbe minimisssure losses

sessment  hons the retr

orage sites a

cally and e

conditions)

ted  the  te2  in  futur

e routing fre.    Potentia

on  the  Keawill provide

ucting conne

tment plant

m equipme

ective  Cataquired. 

have been wing the re

o the CCGT pendent fro

o the CO2 cers or a Com

orporate the

gn featuresments of the

G outlet duc

S  the  impased  by  instas associated

has  demonrofitting of C

are availabl

conomically

 to retrofit 

echnical  fere,  given  t

rom Keadbyal  CO2  sinks

adby  2  sitee adequate

ecting a fut

t capacity.

ent and faci

alytic  Redu

deemed  sutrofit of CC

would be rom the CCG

apture planmbined Hea

e following

s in the Lowe CO2 captu

ct to install a

acts  on  thealling  a  blod with the C

nstrated  thCCS to Kead

le. 

y  feasible  (

the plant n

easibility  anhe  approp

y 2 to potens  have  also

e  to  accommspace for t

ture CO2 cap

lities, if req

ction  syste

ufficient  to S. 

equired as T. 

nt may eitheat and Powe

: 

w Pressure sre plant, if t

a new duct 

e  gas  turbiower  downCO2 capture 

hat  with  tdby 2 would

(with appro

ecessary to

TR‐G

nd  economriate  mark

ntial CO2 sino  been  iden

modate  a  fhe followin

pture plant 

uired. 

em,  includin

accommod

the power 

er come froer plant. 

steam systethis option 

to the CO2 

ne  and  hestream  of plant. 

he  appropd be feasible

opriate mar

o capture CO

GEN‐AM‐KEA

mic  conditiket  and  reg

nks has shontified  for  a

future CO2 ng: 

to the CCG

ng  space  p

date  the ad

to the CO2 

om the CCG

em to allowis chosen. 

capture pla

at  recoverythe  CCGT 

priate  marke in future. 

rket conditi

O2; and 

AD2‐003 

ons  for gulatory 

own that a  future 

capture 

T. 

provided 

dditional 

capture 

T steam 

w for the 

ant 

y  steam plant  to 

ket  and 

ons and 

engineepage 26

(3)

(4)

KeadbyCCR staand per

9. Re

Ref1: Dconsent

Ref2:  EReport,

Ref3: Whazard.

Ref4: Warea/Pr

Ref5: MNorth S

Ref6: IEPH4/33

Ref7: E2007.

Ref8:  IEReport,

Ref9: Nfootprin

Ref10: Develop

ering centre6 of 38 

It  is  techni

conditions)

There is su

of  the  sect

that suitab

all of the CO

y Generatioatus within riodically ev

eference

DECC, Carbot applicatio

ERM,  Keadb, February 2

Website last htm

Website last rojects/York

M Bentham,Sea case stu

EA, Improve3, Novembe

PRI, CO2 Ca

EA, CO2  cap, 2006.

N  Florin  andnt for some

Element Enpment Scen

e 

cally and e

) to transpo

fficient land

tion 36C ap

le space is s

O2 that wou

n Ltd will  rthree monvery two ye

es

on Capture Rns, URN 09

by  2  CCGT2013.

accessed o

accessed okshire‐and‐H

, An assessudy, Tyndall

ement in Por 2004. 

pture Retro

pture  as  a 

d P  Fennelle types of CO

nergy and Pönarios in the

conomically

ort such cap

d available 

pplication a

set aside fo

uld otherwi

review and ths of  the ars thereaft

Readiness –D/810, Nov

:  Section  3

on 06/05/20

on 06/05/20Humber‐CC

ment of caCentre for 

ower Gener

ofit Issues: I

factor  in p

, AssessmeO2 capture p

öyry (for thee UK, April 2

y  feasible  (

tured CO2 t

to allow a 

nd on  the 

r the equip

se be emitt

report on station starter. 

– A guidancvember 200

36  and  Dee

015: http://

015:  http://CS/

arbon sequeClimate Ch

ration with 

GCC techni

power plant

ent of  the  vplant, Impe

e Energy Te2015. 

(with appro

to the ident

condition t

associated 

ment neces

ted from the

the effectivrting the su

e note for S09.

emed  Plann

www.hse.g

/www2.nat

estration poange Resea

Post‐Comb

cal Discussi

t  investmen

validity of  ‐erial College

echnologies

TR‐G

opriate mar

ified storag

o be impos

deemed p

ssary to cap

e plant.  

ve maintenupply of ele

Section 36 E

ning  Conse

ov.uk/carbo

ionalgrid.co

otential  in  tarch, Januar

bustion Cap

ion, Gasifica

nt decisions

‐ Approxime, October 2

 Institute), 

GEN‐AM‐KEA

rket and  reg

ge sites. 

sed on the g

lanning per

pture and co

nance of  thectricity to 

Electricity A

nts:  EIA  Sc

oncapture/

om/UK/In‐y

the UK – Sry 2006.

ture of CO2

ation Techn

s, Greenho

ate minimu2010.

CCS Sector 

AD2‐003 

gulatory 

granting 

rmission 

ompress 

e plants the grid 

Act 1989 

creening 

/major‐

your‐

outhern 

2, report 

nologies, 

use Gas 

um  land 

engineepage 27

Ref11: 2012. 

Ref12: Whttps://ECC_Ele

Ref13: Carbon 

Ref14: Octobe

Ref15: Cross C2014. 

Ref16: Genera

ering centre7 of 38 

Parsons Bri

Website las/www.gov.uectricity_Ge

JACOBS  (foCapture Re

URS (for SSr 2013.

National Gountry Pipe

Ramboll  Enting Station

e 

nckerhoff (f

st accessed uk/governmeneration_C

or Wainstoeadiness Re

E Seabank L

Grid,  Proposeline) Devel

nviron  (for n – Combine

for the IEAG

on 26/08/2ment/uploadCosts_for_p

nes  Energyport Adden

Land Invest

sed  Schemeopment Co

SSE Genered Heat and

GHG), CO2 C

2015: ds/system/publication_

y),  Traffordndum, Octo

ment Ltd), 

e  Report  Ronsent Orde

ration  Ltd), d Power Ass

Capture at G

uploads/att_‐_24_07_1

Power  Secber 2014. 

Seabank 3 C

ef  7.8,  Theer, Applicati

Keadby  2 sessment, U

TR‐G

Gas Fired Po

tachment_d3.pdf 

ction  36  Va

Carbon Cap

e  Yorkshire on Referen

Combined UK12‐21748

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ower Plants

data/file/22

ariation  ‐  U

pture Ready

and Humbnce EN07000

Cycle Gas 8, Septemb

AD2‐003 

s, July 

23940/D

Updated 

y Report, 

ber  (CCS 01, June 

Turbine er 2015.

engineepage 28

Appe

Potentito 21kmFigure unavoidbeen id

Option

Option

Figure 2up to ththat  prproject 

Key fea

Figure 3or 2/48

ering centre8 of 38 

ndix I: CO

ally feasiblem  from  the1.    Key  feadable  safetydentified tha

1: Exit Kea

Along 10km

buildings w

From 10km

A645, railw

Special Are

Interest are

south of th

2: Exit Kea

Along 10km

buildings w

zone). 

From 10km

Street (Gilb

No Special 

Scientific In

2 shows thehe UK coastroposed  by(Ref4). 

atures along

A detailed d

presented 

Special Are

Interest an

could minim

3 shows the8 (Ref5). 

e 

O2 Pipeli

e CO2 pipele Keadby 2 atures  alony obstaclesat would pr

dby 2 site i

m length: Ke

within a 1 km

m to 21km le

way line (sou

eas of Conse

e located ar

e potential 

dby 2 site i

m length: Ke

within a 1 km

m to 21km le

berdyke), M

Areas of Co

nterest (Ref

e CO2 pipelt at Barmstoy  the  Natio

g corridor fr

description 

in a publica

eas of Conse

d archaeolo

mise routing

e CO2 pipeli

ine Corri

ine corridosite,  two pg  the  pipe or environevent the d

n a North E

eadby wind 

m zone.  Roa

ength: Dutc

uth of Goole

ervation, Sp

round Humb

pipeline ro

n a Norther

eadby wind 

m zone.  Roa

ength: Main

M62, Eastring

onservation

f2). 

ine corridoon, south ofonal  Grid  Y

rom 21km t

of the Nati

lly available

ervation, Sp

ogy sites ex

g through t

ne route fro

dor

rs have beepotential opeline  optionnmentally pdevelopmen

Easterly dire

farm, agric

ads: A161.

ch River and

e). 

pecial Protec

berhead Pe

oute (Ref2).

rly directio

farm, agric

ads: B1392,

n Street (Pe

gton, and tw

, Special Pr

or from the f Bridlingtoorkshire  an

to Barmsto

ional Grid Y

e document

pecial Protec

ist within th

hese areas 

om the coas

en produceptions havens  are  sumprotected ant of a CO2 p

ection – Key

cultural area

d canal, M62

ction Areas

eatlands Nat

n – Key Fea

cultural area

, A161 (not 

nnyhill Cott

wo railways

otection Ar

end of pipen.  This pipend  Humber

on

Yorkshire an

t (Ref15). 

ction Areas

he 10km co

(Ref15). 

st to two po

TR‐G

d for the K been  idenmarised  bereas along pipeline in f

y Features

as, small far

2, Rawcliffe

or Sites of 

tional Natur

atures

as, small far

crossing bu

tages), Rive

s lines (near

eas or Sites

eline corrideline route r  CCS  Cross

d Humber C

, Sites of Sp

rridor.  An o

otential CO2

GEN‐AM‐KEA

Keadby 2 CCntified, as  selow.    No  bthese  routfuture. 

rm/resident

e Road, Rive

Special Scie

re Reserve 

rm/resident

ut within a 1

er Ouse, Ma

r Gilberdyke

s of Special 

dor options has been bs  Country 

CCS pipelin

pecial Scient

optimised r

2 storage sit

AD2‐003 

CGT.   Up hown  in barriers, tes have 

tial 

er Aire, 

entific 

to the 

tial 

1km 

in 

e). 

1 and 2 based on Pipeline 

e is 

tific 

route 

tes 5/42 

engineepage 29

Figure 1: O

ering centre9 of 38 

Option 1 and O

e 

Option 2 CO2 pippeline corridorrs up to 21km from the Keadbby 2 CCGT.

TR‐GGEN‐AM‐KEEAD2‐003 

engineepage 30

Figure 2: C

ering centre0 of 38 

CO2 pipeline co

e 

orridor from 211km away from Keadby 2 to thhe UK coast at Barmston, south of Bridlingtoon.

TR‐GGEN‐AM‐KEEAD2‐003 

engineepage 31

Figure 3: C

ering centre1 of 38 

CO2 pipeline co

e 

orridor from Baarmston, south of Bridlington to two potentiial CO2 storagee sites 5/42 or 2

2/48 (Ref5).

TR‐GGEN‐AM‐KEEAD2‐003 

engineepage 32

Appe

The amCCGT  isavoids aand matanks, w

Figure 4: C

ering centre2 of 38 

ndix II: C

mount of  lans sufficient affords adeakes  use  ofwhich are no

CO2 Capture Pl

e 

CO2 Capt

nd owned bto accommequate spacf  space  curo longer in 

ant location wi

ure Plan

by Keadby Gmodate a COcing from porrently  occuuse. 

ith CCGT plant

t Locatio

GenerationO2 capture ower lines, upied  by  liq

layout.

on

n Ltd adjaceplant, as shavoids obsquid  fuel  h

TR‐G

ent to the phown  in Figstructing exhandling  fac

GEN‐AM‐KEA

proposed Kures 4.   Thxisting publicilities  and 

AD2‐003 

eadby 2 e  layout c roads, storage 

engineepage 33

Appe

Overv

In a posfrom thgas  strestrippin

The chainclude

There aamine amines 

A typicaaround trains w

Each  aassociatlinked t

ering centre3 of 38 

ndix III: C

view

st‐combusthe stack.  Toeam  into  ang column w

allenges  inh: 

• The low C

•  The  volucolumns 

• The high 

• Degradat

• Materials

• The flexib

are numero(MEA)  withor ammon

al advanced6,000 tonn

would likely 

bsorption ted filters, to a single r

e 

CO2 Capt

tion CO2 capo achieve tha  solvent,  twhich releas

herent to p

CO2 concent

me of  amb

energy (ste

tion of the s

s compatibi

bility of the 

ous  solventh  corrosionia. 

d technolognes or morebe required

train  requheat exchaegeneration

ture Plan

pture planthis, a CO2 scypically  amses concent

ost combus

tration (~4%

bient pressu

eam) deman

solvent over

lity with the

CO2 captur

s available n  inhibitors

y GT exhau per day of d. 

ires  a  Direngers and n and CO2 c

nt Proces

t CO2  is capcrubbing comine  based.trated CO2.

stion captu

% wet) of th

ure  gas  to 

nd of the str

r time 

e solvent an

re plant in c

but  the ms.    Other  s

st flow at bCO2.  Conse

ect  Contacpumps.   Thcompression

ss Descri

ptured  just blumn is use.    The  solv

ure solution

he flue gas s

be process

ripping colu

nd carbonic

omparison 

ost maturesolutions  ar

base load woequently, a

t  Cooler  (here can ben section. 

TR‐G

ption

before the ed to absorbent  is  then

s  (particula

stream 

sed which  l

umn 

acid 

to grid dem

e are basedre  based  o

ould requirelayout with

DCC),  blow several ab

GEN‐AM‐KEA

flue gas  is b CO2 from n  regenerat

arly on a ga

leads  to  ve

mand 

d on mono on  more  ad

e the absorh multiple a

wer,  absorbbsorptions t

AD2‐003 

emitted the flue ted  in  a 

as plant) 

ery wide 

ethanol dvanced 

rption of absorber 

ber  and trains all 

engineepage 34

Proce

The Pro

Figure 6: P

ering centre4 of 38 

ess Descr

ocess Flow D

Process flow di

e 

ription

Diagram for

iagram for an a

r a single tra

amine absorber

ain unit is sh

r train

hown in Fig

TR‐G

gure 6. 

GEN‐AM‐KEAAD2‐003 

engineepage 35

Direct

The flueThis can~38°C t

A smallFilter (Fthe DCC

Cool,  sarequire

Absorb

The coowhere C

Flue gaCO2  realeaves  tSolvent

CO2 absfrom thvaporizenter awater is102) cir

Flue gas40‐50°Chave anCO2 cap

Prior  torecoverabsorbecan occthe cleafrom  thtemperreboiler

ering centre5 of 38 

Contact C

e gas exitinn be achievo maintain 

 slipstreamF‐100) to reC. 

aturated  flud to overco

ber, C‐101

oled flue gaCO2 in the f

s enters neacts  chemicthe bottomt Pump (P‐1

sorption byhese reactioed.  Strippenother pacs used to rerculates the

s is vented C.  The low n impact onpture retrof

o  the  DCC red by heater exit gas wcur within aaned absorbhe  stripper rature  by  rer condensat

e 

Cooler

g the Absoed in a DireCO2 recove

m of the circmove parti

ue  gas  fromome the fric

1

as from DCCflue gas is ab

ear the bottcally with  sm of  the Ab03). 

y MEA (a prons will resued flue gas, ked bed.  Tecover the ve wash wate

to atmosphtemperaturn plume visifit. 

some  of  tt exchanginwould aid da Gas‐Gas‐Hber exit gasreboiler  coeducing  thete) and hen

rber (C‐101ect Contact ery and min

culating watculates. A p

m  the DCC ctional losse

C is fed to tbsorbed by 

tom of  the solvent  andbsorber and

obable solvult in a veryvaporized Mhis packed vaporized Mer between 

here via there and watebility and d

the  waste g with the dispersion oHeater, potes.  An alternondensate.e HRSG  feece the econ

1) is requireCooler (DCCimise solve

ter  is extraportion of t

is extractees in the duc

the bottom the solvent

 Absorber ad  is  absorbd  is  transfe

vent) is an ey small portMEA and wbed is the 

MEA and wathe Absorb

e stack on ter saturatedispersion; w

heat  contaabsorber eonce  it exitentially trannative solut This optioed water  tenomiser out

es cooling pC), C‐100, wnt degradat

cted and rohis particul

d  through cting, DCC a

of the cout. 

and  flows ued  into  therred  to  the

exothermic tion of the Mwater travel wash sectioater.  A Wasber and Was

op of each d nature of which will re

ained  withixit gas in a s the stacknsferring COion would bon would  aemperaturetlet temper

TR‐G

rior to entewhich quenction.   

outed throuate free str

the Blowerand Absorb

nter curren

upward throe  bulk  solute  Stripper  (C

reaction.  TMEA and wthrough theon of the cosh Water Csh Water Co

Absorber athis post‐caequire scrut

n  the  HRSGGas‐Gas He.   However,O2 from the be to supplylso  reduce e  (supplied ature. 

GEN‐AM‐KEA

ering the Abches the flu

ugh the DCCream is retu

r  (BL‐100) wer. 

nt Absorber

ough packetion.    Rich C‐102) by  t

The heat pwater solutioe chimney tolumn, wheirculating Pooler (E‐101

at a temperapture fluetiny in the e

G  exit  gas eater.  Hea, some gas  HRSG exit y the requirthe HRSG partially  fr

AD2‐003 

bsorber.  ue gas to 

C Water urned to 

which  is 

r (C‐101) 

ed beds. solvent the Rich 

roduced on being tray and ere wash Pump (P‐1). 

ature of  gas will event of 

can  be ating the leakage gas into red heat exit  gas rom  the 

engineepage 36

Strippe

Rich soamine hLean/Rito >100

The prea liquidfrom th

The leawhere i

To  remAmine amine d

Reflux

The oveReflux CReflux Compre

Heat E

Associaa  layoufabricatrequire

Amine

In additpurifyinsolventvolatiledrained

Centrif

The weComprerequirinapproxi

ering centre6 of 38 

er C‐102

lvent  leaveheader.  Thich Cross Ex0°C using th

eheated rich distributorhe Reboiler 

n amine froit is cooled t

ove  impuriFilter Packadegradation

x Condens

erhead vapCondenser Drum  (V‐

ession/Dehy

Exchanger

ted with thut  challengtors with thd. 

e Reclaime

tion  to  theng  the  ami.    The  Res,  leaving  td to the Rec

fugal Com

t CO2 from essor  (K‐10ng  significaimately 150

e 

es  the bottoe combinedxchanger ine heat in th

h amine entr and flows (E‐104) rele

om the bottto ~50°C ag

ties  from  tage  (F‐102)n products. 

ser

pour  from  t(E‐106), co‐100)  sepaydration un

rs

he Stripperse.  Larger  shese capabi

er

 Amine  Filtne  solutionclaimer  is the  non‐voclaimer wast

mpressor

the Strippe01).    The  cnt  quantiti0barg to ens

om of  the Ad rich aminecreases thehe lean amin

ters the Stridown throeasing the a

tom of the Sgainst the ri

he amine s).   This  rem

the Stripperndensing soarating  thenit. 

s are the phsingle  unitslities could

ter Packagen  by  remova  steam  hlatile  degrate drum. 

er Reflux Drcompressioies  of  coolsure it rema

Absorber ate flows to ae efficiency ne stream f

ipper belowugh the paabsorbed CO

Stripper is rch amine fr

system, ~10moves  suspe

r at ~100°Come of thee  product 

hysically lars  may  be make the c

e,  the Reclaving  the  prheated  ketadation  pro

rum is routon  process ling  water.ains in dens

t ~44°C anda Lean/Rich of the procfrom the Str

w the wash scked beds cO2. 

routed to throm the abs

0% of  the cended  solid

C and 0.8 b vapour.   Tgas  whi

ge heat excbuilt.    Howcost excess

aimer proviroducts  of tle‐type  reoducts  in  th

ed to a (prohas  multip    The  capse phase du

TR‐G

d  is  routed Cross Exchcess by heatripper. 

section of tcounter‐cur

he Lean/Ricsorber train

cooled aminds  and high

barg  is  coolehe two‐phach  is  rou

changers (Ewever,  theive and mu

des  suppleoxidative  de‐boiler,  whhe  Reclaim

obably elecple  stages tured  CO2 ring transpo

GEN‐AM‐KEA

to a commanger (E‐10ting the ric

he column rrent to the

ch Cross Excn. 

ne  is  routedh molecular

ed  to ~35°ase flow enuted  to  th

E‐102) whiche  small  numultiple units 

ementary mdegradationhich  vapori

mer which  a

ctrically drivwith  interis  compreortation. 

AD2‐003 

mon  rich 02).  The h amine 

through e vapour 

changer, 

d  to  the r weight 

C  in  the nters the he  CO2 

h create mber  of may be 

means of n  of  the ises  the are  then 

ven) CO2 rcooling, essed  to 

engineepage 37

Dehyd

CompreDehydradsorpt

For a glcontactindirect

For an athe  adswater isthrough

<50 wt 

Proce

Steam

A supplprocessdevelopCO2 cap

This steto Low dedicatsteam; CHP plaaddition

The  simdownstof this sturbine

The  ovreductioa 10%  lCO2 capoverall 

Ultimatbalanceflexibilit

ering centre7 of 38 

dration Un

essed  gas  aation  Packation process

lycol wash sted with  let gas fired h

adsorption sorption bes removed h it. 

ppm of wat

ess Utility

m Supply O

ly of  low prs.  The precpment aim ptured. 

eam could bPressure (Lted  LP  turball with andant could bnal CO2 emi

mplest optiotream presssize, this st and may le

erall  impacon, dependloss  in termpture plant plant efficie

tely, these ce  cost  andty. 

e 

nit

at  ~50  bargage.  This ms.  The dry v

system, thean  glycol, heating. 

system, theed  is  saturafrom the sa

ter is requir

y Require

Options

ressure (~3ise quantitybeing to red

be supplied LP) inlet ‘crobine  bleed, d without vbe  installed issions, whi

on would  asure sustaineam extracead to desig

ct  on  the  oding on the sms of efficiepower reqency by a fu

consideratid  efficiency

g  is  extractmay  either vapour is th

e wet CO2 eand water 

e wet CO2 isted with waturated be

red to preve

ements

to 4 bara) y will dependuce as far 

from the stoss‐over pipwith  possiarious ST reto provide ch would n

appear  to bning controlction represgn and oper

output  andsteam consency  is absouirements urther 10%,

ons would y  impacts; 

ted  from  tbe mono‐e

hen routed b

enters the bis  removed

s passed thwater,  the Ced by depre

ent corrosio

steam willnd of the caas possible

team turbinpe’, i.e. inteble  augmeesizing scen the requireed to be c

be  from  thel valve, andsents arounrational rest

d  efficiencysumption ‘eolute, e.g. 6(CO2 comp approxima

need to bewith  acce

the  CO2  Coethylene  glyback to the 

bottom of td  from  the

rough a fixeCO2  feed  is essurising a

on of the CO

 be requireapture proce the ratio o

ne (ST) Interrnal to the ntation  fronarios.  Alteed steam, acaptured.  

e  cross‐oved an unchannd 50% of ttrictions. 

y  on  the  Cfficiency’ of60% × 0.9 =ressors, solately. 

e studied  inptable  pla

TR‐G

ompressor  aycol wash compresso

he dryer abe  gas.    The 

ed bed of zesent  to  annd passing 

O2 transport

ed for the aess design –of required s

rmediate Prcycle.  Othem  higher  grnatively, aalthough th

r pipe withnged ST.  Hohe steam fl

CGT  may  bf the amine= 54%, not lvent pump

n detail at tnt  operatio

GEN‐AM‐KEA

and  routedor  a  zeolitor. 

bsorber, whe  glycol  is  d

eolite pellenother  vesshot nitroge

t pipework.

amine regen– the technsteam per t

ressure (IP) er options ingrade  ‘cold uxiliary boihey would 

h  the  additowever, forlow through

be  around e process  N50%.   Addips, etc.) wil

the design sonal  integr

AD2‐003 

d  to  the e  based 

here it is dried  by 

ts. Once sel.   The en or air 

. 

neration nological tonne of 

exhaust nclude a reheat’ lers or a produce 

ion of  a r a CCGT h the LP 

10‐15% ote that tionally, l reduce 

stage to rity  and 

engineepage 38

Treate

Additiodemandcooling may  hetemperconcentproblem

Coolin

The coosimilar would bsignificaCCGT corecover

In  all  cexisting

ering centre8 of 38 

ed Water (

nal processd  of  the  bathe flue ga

elp  with  plrature  (~35tration of Nm, possibly 

ng Medium

oling mediuto  those  tybe requiredant.   Howeooling demry process d

considered g site constr

e 

(Process m

s water wouase  CCGT  aas below thume  humid5°C)  may  bNOx and COthrough he

m

um requiredypically used.  The makeever,  if  LP  smand due todescribed ab

scenarios  traints. 

make‐up a

uld be requalone.   Mete water dedity  and  utbe  problem.  Reheatingat exchange

d is a clean wed  for CCGTe‐up water steam  is  suo the reducbove would

the make‐u

and boiler

uired, ~3 timthods  to  reew point matility  watermatic  for  gg of the fluee with strip

water systeTs.    It  is anrequiremenpplied  fromced LP steamd also reduc

up  water  d

r feed)

mes greaterecover wateay be practr  requiremeas  dispersie gas wouldper conden

em with monticipated  tnt for the cm  the CCGTm flow to tce site wate

demand  is 

TR‐G

r than the eer  internal ical and useents,  an  evion  and  hed be requirensate or HRS

dular low lehat an addooling wateT  there willhe steam tr demand. 

considered

GEN‐AM‐KEA

expected mto  the  proeful.  Althoven  lower  fence  grouned to overcoSG exit gas.

evel coolingditional 50%er system wl be  a  reduturbine.   Th

d  to  be  wit

AD2‐003 

aximum ocess  by ugh this flue  gas nd  level ome this  

g towers %  supply would be uction  in he water 

thin  the 

Annex C2

CHP Report

Intended for

SSE Generation Ltd

Date

August 2015

Project Number

UK12-21748

KEADBY II COMBINED CYCLE GAS TURBINE GENERATING STATION COMBINED HEAT AND POWER ASSESSMENT

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 1 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

Project No. UK12-21748 Issue No. B Date 15/10/2015 Made by Emily Agus Checked by Stephen Loyd Approved by Malcolm Sangster Made by: EA Checked / Approved by: MJS

This report has been prepared by Ramboll Environ with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, and taking account of the Services and the Terms agreed between Ramboll Environ and the Client. This report is confidential to the Client, and Ramboll Environ accepts no responsibility whatsoever to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known, unless formally agreed by Ramboll Environ beforehand. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk. Ramboll Environ disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the Services. Version Control Log

Revision Date Made by Checked by Approved by Description

1 23/07/2015 EA SL MJS Draft for client review

2 18/08/2015 EA SL MJS Revised draft

following client comments

3 15/10/2015 EA MJS MJS Addition minor amendments

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 2 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

CONTENTS

1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 1 2 INTRODUCTION 3 2.1 Preamble 3 2.2 Background 3 2.3 Intention to Vary Consent under S36C of the Electricity Act 1989 3 2.4 The Structure of this CHP Assessment 4 3 CONTEXT (THE PURPOSE OF A CHP ASSESSMENT) AND

METHODOLOGY 5 3.1 Context 5 3.2 Assessment Methodology 7 3.3 Checklist 9 4 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT 10 4.1 The Consented Development 10 4.2 The Proposed Development 10 4.3 Comparison between the Consented Development and the Proposed

Development 11 4.4 The Proposed Development Site 11 4.5 Requirement for the Proposed Development to be CHP / CHP-R 12 5 CHP OPPORTUNITIES 13 5.1 Introduction 13 5.2 CHP Opportunities 13 5.3 Summary of the Preferred CHP Opportunity 18 6 PREFERRED CHP OPPORTUNITY 19 6.1 Introduction 19 6.2 Identification of the CHP Envelope 19 6.3 Further Consideration of CHP 24 6.4 A Note on the Potential Implementation of CHP 25 7 CONCLUSIONS 26 FIGURES

FIGURE 1: Illustrative Layout Showing CHP Provisions APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Relevant Extract from the CHP Guidance

APPENDIX 2 Relevant Extract from the CHP-R Guidance

APPENDIX 3 Summary of the Application for the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development Submitted on behalf of the Lucent Group

APPENDIX 4 Summary of the Application for the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development Submitted on behalf of Maltgrade Limited

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 1 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BAT Best Available Techniques

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

CCGT Combined Cycle Gas Turbine

CCR Carbon Capture Readiness

CHP Combined Heat and Power

CHP-R Combined Heat and Power Ready

CO2 carbon dioxide

DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

HP high pressure

KDL Keadby Developments Limited

km kilometres

LHV lower heating value

LP low pressure

MJ/s megajoules per second

MSL Minimum Stable Load

MW megawatts

NPS EN-1 Overarching National Policy Statement (NPS) for Energy (EN-1)

NPS EN-2 National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (EN-2)

OS Ordnance Survey

PES Primary Energy Savings

SSE Scottish and Southern Energy

ηCHP CHP efficiency

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 3 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Preamble

2.1.1 Ramboll Environ UK Limited (Ramboll Environ) has been commissioned by SSE Generation Ltd (SSE) to conduct a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Assessment of a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) generating station at Keadby, in North Lincolnshire (Keadby II). This Document presents the results of that CHP Assessment. This Document is intended to accompany an application to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to vary a consent under Section 36C of the Electricity Act 1989. All work conducted was performed in accordance with Ramboll Environ proposal UKP12-20125 dated 1 June 2015.

2.2 Background

2.2.1 On 10 September 1993, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (the Secretary of State) granted consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 (the Consent) and directed that planning permission be deemed to be granted pursuant to Section 90(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (the Deemed Planning Permission) to Keadby Developments Limited1 (KDL) for the construction and operation of a 710 MW CCGT generating station at Keadby, in North Lincolnshire (Keadby II or the Development). The Development would be located adjacent to the existing 735 MW Keadby I CCGT generating station owned and operated by SSE.

2.2.2 In 1997 / 1998, the Government undertook a review of the energy industry which affected the timing of decisions on applications for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and some applications for consent to burn gas as a fuel under Section 14 of the Energy Act 1976. In 1998, the Secretary of State announced that the Government’s provisional conclusion arising from this review was for a stricter consents policy regarding generating stations whilst certain reforms of the electricity market were put in place.

2.2.3 At this time, the Secretary of State has already granted Consent for the Development and the Council had confirmed that the Development permitted by the Deemed Planning Permission had been commenced. However, in December 1998, when considering notification by KDL of its proposal to establish a generating station fuelled by natural gas (the Development), the Secretary of State directed that the consented Development should not proceed (under powers granted by Section 14(3) of the Energy Act 1976) with the proviso that it would be expected that this decision would be reviewed once the stricter consents policy was relaxed.

2.2.4 The Government subsequently lifted its stricter consents policy in 2000. However, differing market conditions to those prevailing in 1998 meant that KDL placed the consented Development in abeyance.

2.3 Intention to Vary Consent under S36C of the Electricity Act 1989

2.3.1 In February 2012, SSE announced that against a background of higher costs associated with gas fired generation, they had decided to undertake a comprehensive programme of maintenance to support more flexible operations at its Keadby I CCGT generating station from 2013 onwards, while suspending electricity generation with effect from 26 March 2012.

2.3.2 At the same time, SSE also decided to continue with Keadby II. In making this decision, consideration was given to the significant advances in engineering design that had been made since the granting the Consent and Deemed Planning Permission. These advances included the development of more efficient CCGT units (in particular, gas turbines steadily increasing in size, output and efficiency), with corresponding improvements in environmental and economic performance.

2.3.3 In terms of implementing these advances for Keadby II, requiring variations in design and layout, both the Section 36 Conditions and the Planning Conditions contemplated that, with written agreement of the Secretary of State and the Council respectively, these variations could be sought. Subsequently, in 2012, KDL moved forward with a process of screening the

RE 1 Keadby Developments Limited are a wholly owned subsidiary of Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE).

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 4 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

environmental effects of the amended proposals for the Development against the environmental effects of the consented Development (the 2012 Screening Exercise). As part of the 2012 Screening Exercise, additional environmental studies were commenced in order to address the regulatory requirements that had been introduced since the granting of the Consent.

2.3.4 However, the 2012 Screening Exercise was superseded by the enactment of the Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 and the making of the Electricity Generating Stations (Variation of Consents) (England and Wales) Regulations 2013. This represents the most up-to-date mechanism for seeking to vary an extant Consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act.

2.3.5 Accordingly to implement the advances in engineering design for Keadby II, KDL are submitting an application to vary the Consent under Section 36C of the Electricity Act 1989 alongside a related application to vary the Deemed Planning Permission under Section 90(2) and (2ZA) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (together, the Variation Application).

2.4 The Structure of this CHP Assessment

2.4.1 This CHP Assessment is structured as follows:

• Section 1: Provides a brief introduction, summarising the purpose of this CHP Assessment;

• Section 2: Describes the context (i.e. the need for a CHP Assessment) and the assessment methodology that has been employed;

• Section 3: Provides a description of the Development (covering the overall proposed Development, the proposed Development site and an assessment of the requirement for the Development to be CHP / CHP-R);

• Section 4: Summarises the evaluation of the CHP opportunities for the Development;

• Section 5: Describes the preferred CHP opportunity; and,

• Section 6: Presents the conclusions of this CHP Assessment.

Supporting information is provided in the Appendices.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 5 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

3 CONTEXT (THE PURPOSE OF A CHP ASSESSMENT) AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Context

Introduction

3.1.1 CHP is the generation of electrical power and usable heat in a single process. This is also known as co-generation. CHP is a well proven process for reducing primary energy consumption, and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

3.1.2 In recognition of the role that CHP can play in meeting the UK’s Energy Policy priorities, the UK Government states that it is committed to the development and installation of CHP schemes2,3.

3.1.3 In particular, wherever possible, the UK Government has committed to promoting CHP schemes which qualify as ‘Good Quality CHP’ schemes. ‘Good Quality CHP’ schemes are those which have been certified as highly efficient under the CHP Quality Assurance Programme and, in accordance with Directive 2012/27/EU on energy efficiency (the Energy Efficiency Directive), achieve at least a 10 per cent saving in primary energy consumption.

3.1.4 Information on installed CHP schemes is provided in Chapter 7 of the Digest of UK Energy Statistics4 (DUKES) (July 2015) and Table 7A notes that in 2014 there were 2,066 CHP schemes in the UK with an electrical capacity of 6,118 MW (or a heat capacity of 22,539 MW). The corresponding electrical power and heat generation was 20,281 GWh and 43,306 GWh respectively. Furthermore, Table 7I notes that in 2014 the use of CHP schemes provided an estimated 12.99 Mt of CO2 savings against all fossil fuels, and an estimated 7.55 Mt of CO2 savings against all fuels (including nuclear and renewables).

Requirement for Consideration of CHP in Applications for Consent under Section 36 / 36C of the Electricity Act 1989

3.1.5 Current national policy for energy infrastructure (including the construction / extension of a generating station with a generating capacity of more than 50 MW) is provided in the Overarching National Policy Statement (NPS) for Energy (EN-1) (NPS EN-1), and the technology-specific NPSs. Used together, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 104 of the Planning Act 2008, the NPSs form the primary policy basis for decisions made by the Secretary of State on applications for energy infrastructure comprising Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) under the Planning Act 2008. However, it is considered that the NPSs also form a material consideration when determining the Variation Application for the Development.

3.1.6 NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.1) that:

“A CHP station may either supply steam direct to customers of capture waste heat for low-pressure steam, hot water or space heating purposes after it has been used to drive electricity generating turbines. The heat can also be used to drive absorption chillers, thereby providing cooling”.

3.1.7 Furthermore, in terms of electricity generating stations and their potential to incorporate CHP, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.2) that:

“In conventional thermal generating stations, the heat that is raised to drive electricity generation is subsequently emitted to the environment as waste. Supplying steam direct to industrial customers or using lower grade heat, such as in district heating networks, can reduce the amount of fuel otherwise needed to generate the same amount of heat and power separately. CHP is technically feasible for all types of thermal generating stations, including

RE 2 Energy White Paper: ‘Our Energy Future – Creating a Low Carbon Economy’ (February 2003). 3 Energy White Paper: ‘Meeting the Energy Challenge – A White Paper on Energy’ (May 2007). 4 Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/447639/DUKES_2015_Chapter_7.pdf

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 6 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

nuclear, energy from waste and biomass, although the majority of CHP plants in the UK are fuelled by gas”.

3.1.8 When considering CHP opportunities, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.5) that:

“To be economically viable as a CHP plant, a generating station needs to be located close to industrial or domestic customers with heat demands. The distance will vary according to the size of the generating station and the nature of the heat demand, but is likely to mean within a distance of 15 km”.

3.1.9 In terms of consideration of CHP in applications for Consent, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.6) that:

“Under guidelines issued by DECC (then DTI) in 2006, any application to develop a thermal generating station under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 must either include CHP or contain evidence that the possibilities for CHP have been fully explored to inform the [Secretary of State’s] consideration of the application. […] The [Secretary of State] should have regard to [the guidelines issued by DECC] or any successor to it when considering the CHP aspects of applications for thermal generating stations”.

3.1.10 The guidelines issued by DECC (then DTI) in 2006 are the ‘Guidance on Background Information to Accompany Notifications under Section 14(1) of the Energy Act 1976 and Applications under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989’ (December 2006) (the CHP Guidance).

3.1.11 The CHP Guidance states (at paragraph 24) that:

“The Government recognises that decisions on major new power station investments, including the location and anticipated load duty of the station (e.g. base load, mid-merit, peak-lopping, support to local industry, etc) will primarily be driven by the market, taking into account fiscal and other incentives now on offer for CHP”.

3.1.12 In this regard, and in terms of the location and anticipated load duty of the station, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.7) that:

“In developing proposals for new thermal generating stations, developers should consider the opportunities for CHP from the very earliest point and it should be adopted as a criterion when considering locations for a project”.

And (at paragraph 4.6.8) that:

“Utilisation of useful heat that displaces conventional heat generation from fossil fuel sources is to be encouraged where, as will often be the case, it is more efficient than the alternative electricity / heat generation mix. To encourage proper consideration of CHP, substantial additional positive weight should therefore be given by the [Secretary of State] to applications incorporating CHP”.

3.1.13 Further technology-specific information is provided in National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (EN-2) (NPS EN-2). In terms of CHP, NPS EN-2 makes reference to the guidance presented in NPS EN-1 and states (at paragraph 2.3.3) that:

“The [Secretary of State] should not give [consent] unless it is satisfied that the applicant has provided appropriate evidence that CHP is included or that the opportunities for CHP have been fully explored. For non-CHP stations, where there is reason to believe that opportunities to supply heat through CHP may arise in the future the [Secretary of State] may also require that developers ensure that their stations are ‘CHP ready’ and are configured in order to allow heat supply at a later date”.

Requirement for Consideration of CHP in Applications for an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, as amended

3.1.14 Further to the publication of the CHP Guidance, guidelines have been issued by the Environment Agency to be used in applications for Environmental Permits under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, as amended. These

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 7 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

guidelines are the ‘CHP Ready Guidance for Combustion and Energy from Waste Power Plants’ (February 2013) (the CHP-R Guidance).

3.1.15 However, in terms of the requirements of the CHP-R Guidance in applications for Consent under Section 36 / 36C of the Electricity Act 1989, the CHP-R Guidance states (in Section 3.3) that:

“When consulted by the planning authorities on relevant consent applications for new plants, the Environment Agency will highlight the need for the plant to be CHP or CHP-R and will make reference to this CHP-R Guidance. Where a [Consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989] is required, the Environment Agency will additionally comment on the results of the CHP Assessment”.

Note on the Implementation of the Energy Efficiency Directive

3.1.16 In addition to the requirements of the CHP-R Guidance, the Energy Efficiency Directive has been implemented in the UK through the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2015. From 21 March 2015, these Regulations require operators of certain combustion installations to carry out a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) where opportunities for ‘Good Quality CHP’ schemes (or high efficiency co-generation) are identified. These schemes are those which achieve at least a 10 per cent saving in primary energy consumption.

3.2 Assessment Methodology

3.2.1 Based on the above, in developing the assessment methodology for this CHP Assessment, the requirements of the CHP Guidance and the CHP-R Guidance have been considered holistically and the separate assessment methodologies have been combined. Accordingly, the assessment methodology for this CHP Assessment is shown in Insert 2.1. The relevant extracts of the CHP Guidance (paragraphs 11 and 12) and the CHP-R Guidance (Insert 1) are provided in Appendix A and Appendix B respectively.

3.2.2 In addition to this assessment methodology, wherever relevant, reference is also given to the Energy Efficiency Directive and likely requirement for a CBA to be undertaken when applying for an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, as amended.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 8 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

INSERT 2.1: ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Step 1

• Establish a high level design concept for the Development, and determine whether the relevant parts are required to be CHP or CHP-R.

Step 2*

• Determine whether there are opportunities for the supply of heat (requirement of paragraph 16 o the CHP Guidance / first Best Available Technique (BAT) Test of the CHP-R Guidance).

Step 3

• If there are opportunities for the supply of heat, determine the most appropriate heat load to the Development (Requirement 1 of the CHP-R Guidance).

Step 4

• Using the most appropriate heat load, identify the CHP envelope for the Development to determine whether the requirements of the heat load can be met (Requirement 2 of the CHP-R Guidance).

• Using the CHP envelope, identify the opportunity for a 'Good Quality CHP' scheme (i.e. identify th opportunity for high efficiency co-generation).

Step 5

• Using the CHP envelope, identify the effects of the heat load on the Development (Requirement 3 of the CHP-R Guidance).

Step 6

• Based on the most appropriate heat load, identify the technical provisions and space requirement for CHP / CHP-R (Requirement 4 of the CHP-R Guidance).

Step 7**

• Justify the degree to which the Development will be CHP / CHP-R (requirements of paragraphs 11 and 12 of the CHP Guidance / second BAT Test of the CHP-R Guidance).

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 9 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

3.2.3 In terms of Step 2, the requirements of paragraph 16 of the CHP Guidance are that applicants:

• “Demonstrate that they have properly consulted the results of the UK Heat Mapping Exercise [...];

• Demonstrate that they have worked with regional planning bodies and local planning authorities to identify whether opportunities presented by emerging spatial planning strategies can support CHP in planned development and that they have contributed wherever possible, given timing and commercial confidentiality constraints, to such strategies;

• Demonstrate that they have explored a number of potential heat markets, either singly or in combination; and,

• Demonstrate that they have contacted [a number of] organisations that can assist developers in identifying potential CHP customers".

3.2.4 In terms of Step 7, the requirements of paragraphs 11 and 12 of the CHP Guidance are that applicants include within their application:

• “An explanation of their choice of location, including the potential viability of the site for CHP;

• A report on the exploration carried out to identify and consider the economic feasibility of local heat opportunities and how to maximise the benefits from CHP;

• The results of that exploration; and,

• A list of the organisations contacted”.

And if the proposal is for generation without CHP, applicants should include within their application:

• “The basis for the […] conclusion that it is not economically feasible to exploit the existing regional heat markets;

• A description of potential future heat requirements in the area; and,

• The provisions in the proposed scheme for exploiting any potential heat demand in the future”.

3.3 Checklist

3.3.1 For ease of reference, a link to where the requirements of the CHP Guidance and the CHP-R Guidance are met is provided in Table 2.1 below. This is based on the methodology presented in Insert 2.1 (and the CHP Guidance and the CHP-R Guidance).

TABLE 2.1: CHP ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

Evidence Required Location in this CHP Assessment

Step 1 Requirement to be CHP or CHP-R Section 3.6

Step 2 Determination of CHP opportunities Section 4.2

Step 3 Determination of preferred CHP opportunity Section 4.3

Step 4 Identification of CHP envelope / Identification of opportunity for a ‘Good Quality CHP’ scheme Section 5.2

Step 5 Identification of the effects of the preferred CHP opportunity Section 5.2

Step 6 Identification of the technical provision / space requirements for the preferred CHP opportunity Section 5.3 / Figure 1

Step 7 Justification for the degree of CHP Section 6

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 10 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT

4.1 The Consented Development

4.1.1 In September 1993, Consent and Deemed Planning Permission was granted for the construction and operation of Keadby II. The Consent and Deemed Planning Permission was granted for a 710 MW CCGT generating station consisting of:

• Two industrial gas turbines each with an associated boiler and exhaust stack;

• One steam turbine;

• An access road;

• Ancillary plant and equipment; and,

• Other necessary buildings (including administration offices) and civil engineering works.

4.1.2 This consented Development is based on a number of fundamental aspects, primarily the development of a CCGT generating station adjacent to the existing 735 MW Keadby I CCGT generating station on land within the control of the applicant.

4.1.3 After obtaining approval of all details required prior to commencement of the Development, including discharge of the pre-commencement conditions, material operations commenced in 1998. Accordingly, the Council confirmed that the Development permitted by the Deemed Planning Permission had been commenced for the purposes of Section 56 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and, therefore, the Consent and the Deemed Planning Permission are extant.

4.1.4 However, Consent and Deemed Planning Permission are based on a design (and, more importantly, technology) developed over 20 years ago, and significant advances in engineering design have been made since the granting of the Consent and Deemed Planning Permission. These advances have included the development of more efficient CCGT units (in particular, as turbines steadily increasing in size, output and efficiency), with corresponding improvements in environmental and economic performance.

4.1.5 Therefore, to implement the advances in engineering design for Keadby II, KDL are submitting a Variation Application to the Secretary of State.

4.2 The Proposed Development

4.2.1 In contemplating how to implement the advances in engineering design at Keadby II, KDL have considered various configurations. However studies into the cooling options available for the Development, particularly regarding water availability for the operation of hybrid cooling towers, indicated that while water provision could be assured for approximately 750 MW of generating capacity, any significant additional generating capacity may require alternative solutions.

4.2.2 Therefore, the proposed Development will comprise one gas turbine with associated Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG), one steam turbine unit and associated infrastructure (including the hybrid cooling towers). The generating capacity of the proposed Development will be higher than the consented Development at approximately 810 MW (an increase of approximately 100 MW from the consented Development). This is in part through the advances in engineering design and in part through a proposed operational mode of supplementary firing.

4.2.3 Within the generation process, natural gas will be burnt in the combustion chamber of the gas turbine from which hot gases will expand through the turbine section to generate electricity. The hot exhaust gases still contain recoverable energy and will therefore be used in the HRSG to generate steam, which in turn is used to generate electricity via steam turbine equipment.

4.2.4 The steam exhausting the steam turbine equipment will pass to the hybrid cooling towers where it will be condensed. The source of the make-up water for the hybrid cooling towers

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 11 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

will be the Stainforth and Keadby Canal. The resultant condensate will be returned to the HRSGs to continue the steam cycle.

4.2.5 The flue gases will be discharged via a dedicated stack.

4.2.6 The use of a combined gas and steam cycle increases the overall fuel efficiency of the generating station. As such, the CCGT unit will be capable of generation in combined cycle mode with an overall electrical generation efficiency between approximately 55 to 60 per cent based on the Lower Heating Value (LHV) of the fuel.

4.3 Comparison between the Consented Development and the Proposed Development

4.3.1 There are several differences between the consented Development and the proposed Development. As noted above, the key changes have been adopted to allow KDL to implement the advances in engineering design at Keadby II.

4.3.2 The key differences are presented in Table 3.1.

TABLE 3.1: KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CONSENTED DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Consented Development Proposed Development

Redline boundary in two separate parts. Redline boundary in two separate parts connected by a corridor for cooling water pipe lines.

The consented Development comprises two gas turbines with associated HRSGs and a steam turbine unit with a generating capacity of 710 MW.

The proposed Development comprises one gas turbine with associated HRSG and a steam turbine unit with a generating capacity of approximately 810 MW. The proposed Development will also include provision for supplementary firing.

For cooling, the consented Development envisaged hybrid cooling towers with abstraction of make-up water from either the Stainforth and Keadby Canal or River Trent with effluents piped to the existing Keadby I CCGT generating station culvert.

For cooling, the proposed Development also envisages hybrid cooling towers with abstraction of make-up water from the Stainforth and Keadby Canal. The redline boundary has been extended to include route corridors between the Keadby II site and the Stainforth and Keadby Canal.

The consented Development envisaged that the hybrid cooling towers would be laid out in two separated banks of eight, making 16 hybrid cooling towers in total.

The proposed Development envisages that the hybrid cooling towers will be laid out in two back-to-back banks of eight, making 16 hybrid cooling towers in total.

No provision for an area set aside to demonstrate Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR).

Redline boundary also extended to include area set aside to demonstrate CCR.

Standby fuel oil storage tanks. No requirement for standby fuel oil or associated fuel oil storage tanks.

4.4 The Proposed Development Site

4.4.1 The proposed Keadby II site lies approximately 7 km to the west of Scunthorpe and approximately 27 km to the north east of Doncaster. The Ordnance Survey (OS) Grid Reference of the centre of the proposed Development site is approximately 482676, 411646. This is the centre of the area designated for the development of the gas turbine, HRSG and steam turbine unit.

4.4.2 The proposed Keadby II site occupies a total area of approximately 17.1 ha, within which approximately 4.0 ha of land has been set aside by KDL for the purposes of CCR.

Factors influencing Selection of the Proposed Development Site

4.4.3 The proposed Keadby II site was selected as the most appropriate site for the Development. Indeed, the proposed Development site offers a number of key benefits including:

• The use of existing infrastructure wherever possible;

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 12 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

• The presence of a skilled workforce at the existing Keadby I CCGT generating station, with established operational systems, who will be available for training new employees;

• The availability of technical support (if required) from the existing Keadby I CCGT generating station;

• The close proximity of the National Grid Gas National Transmission System;

• The close proximity of the National Grid Electricity National Transmission System, and the allowable use of the existing overhead line;

• The availability of sufficient land for the Development;

• An appropriate visual context with the adjoining land uses;

• The opportunities to link beneficially adjoining land uses;

• Compatibility with planning policy; and,

• The existing strong relationships with key stakeholders and the local community.

4.5 Requirement for the Proposed Development to be CHP / CHP-R

4.5.1 The Development will comprise a CCGT unit only. Under the requirements of the CHP Guidance and the CHP-R Guidance, this CCGT unit will be required to be CHP / CHP-R.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 13 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

5 CHP OPPORTUNITIES

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 As noted previously, when considering CHP opportunities, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.5) that:

“To be economically viable as a CHP plant, a generating station needs to be located close to industrial or domestic customers with heat demands. The distance will vary according to the size of the generating station and the nature of the heat demand, but is likely to mean within a distance of 15 km”.

5.1.2 In general, CHP is more attractive in cases when the heat load is large and constant throughout the year. This is typically the case with chemical plants, refineries and factories which depend upon continuous processes and use large amounts of heat (usually supplied as steam).

5.1.3 CHP is less attractive in cases where the heat load is seasonal or intermittent. This is typically the case for district heating in countries (such as the UK) which have a relatively short winter heating season (compared to Scandinavian or Eastern European countries). As such, there is a general absence of significant district heating schemes in the UK and, where they are developed, district heating schemes have generally been associated with new-build publically funded and often high-rise housing where the heat loads can be readily combined and the heat distribution piping is compact.

5.2 CHP Opportunities

Use of Online Resources

5.2.1 The CHP Guidance required that CHP Assessments examine the information available on the Online Industrial Heat Map5 to identify potential CHP opportunities. Since the publication of the CHP Guidance, the Online Industrial Heat Map has been replaced with the UK CHP Development Map6.

5.2.2 The results from the examination of the UK CHP Development Map, covering a search area of 15 km centred on the proposed Keadby II site7 (the CHP search area), are shown in Insert 4.1. The breakdown of the results from the examination of the UK CHP Development Map is shown in Table 4.1.

5.2.3 In addition to the breakdown of results, no large heat loads were identified from examination of the UK CHP Development Map within the CHP search area.

RE 5 This was available at: http://www.industrialheatmap.com 6 This is available at: http://chptools.decc.gov.uk/developmentmap/ 7 Grid Reference for the centre of the proposed Keadby II site is 482676, 411646. This is the centre of the area designated for the development of the gas turbine, HRSG and steam turbine unit. This area has been selected as the most likely location for the off-take of heat.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 14 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

INSERT 4.1: RESULTS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF THE UK CHP DEVELOPMENT MAP

TABLE 4.1: BREAKDOWN OF THE RESULTS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF THE UK CHP DEVELOPMENT MAP

Sector Total MW % of Total Heat Load

Communications and Transport 0.27 0.05%

Commercial Offices 4.10 0.70%

Domestic 513.59 87.12%

Education 5.04 0.86%

Government Buildings 3.54 0.60%

Hotels 5.56 0.94%

Health 1.41 0.24%

Other 3.71 0.63%

Small Industrial 25.65 4.35%

Prisons 3.90 0.66%

Retail 6.84 1.16%

Sport and Leisure 1.53 0.26%

Warehouses 14.41 2.44%

Total Heat Load in the CHP Search Area 589.55 100%

5.2.4 Based on the use of Table 4.1 it can be seen that the largest heat loads within the CHP search area were related to:

i) Domestic;

ii) Small Industrial; and,

iii) Warehouses.

5.2.5 These heat loads are examined further in this sub-Section.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 15 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

Domestic

5.2.6 In terms of the domestic heat loads within the CHP search area, the results from the specific examination of the UK CHP Development Map are shown in Insert 4.2.

INSERT 4.2: DOMESTIC HEAT LOAD RESULTS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF THE UK CHP DEVELOPMENT MAP

5.2.7 The results show that the domestic heat load within the CHP search area is 514 MW, approximately 87 per cent of the total heat load within the CHP search area. Based on the use of Insert 4.2, this domestic heat load is spread across the settlements that lie within the CHP search area, in particular at Scunthorpe to the east of the proposed Development site.

5.2.8 In combination with the domestic heat load spread, NPS EN-1 states (at paragraph 4.6.5) in terms of district heating networks that:

“A 2009 Report for DECC8 on district heating networks suggested that, for example, a district heating network using waste heat from a generating station would be cost-effective where there was a demand for 200 MWth of heat [assumed to be located in a concentrated area] within 15 km. Additionally, the provision of CHP is most likely to be cost-effective and practical where it is included as part of the initial design and is part of a mixed-use development. For example, retrofitting a district heating network to an existing housing estate may not be efficient”.

5.2.9 As the domestic heat load is spread across the CHP search area (i.e. is characterised by disparate, smaller settlements) and is not representative of a new heat load, the costs and practical benefits of including it as part of any initial design cannot be realised. Therefore, this domestic heat load is not considered to be a viable CHP opportunity.

RE 8 ‘The Potential and Costs of District Heating Networks’, April 2009. Pöyry and Faber Maunsell

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 16 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

Small Industrial

5.2.10 In terms of the small industrial heat loads within the CHP search area, the results from the specific examination of the UK CHP Development Map are shown in Insert 4.3.

INSERT 4.3: SMALL INDUSTRIAL HEAT LOAD RESULTS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF THE UK CHP DEVELOPMENT MAP

5.2.11 The results show that the small industrial heat load within the CHP search area is 26 MW, approximately 4 per cent of the total heat load within the CHP search area. Based on the use of Insert 4.3, this small industrial heat load is located in a number of disparate areas, mostly around Scunthorpe to the east.

5.2.12 However, as with the domestic heat load, as the small industrial heat load is not representative of a new heat load, the costs and practical benefits of including it as part of any initial design cannot be realised. Therefore, the small industrial heat load is not considered to be a viable CHP opportunity.

Warehouses

5.2.13 In terms of the warehouse heat loads, the results from the specific examination of the UK CHP Development Map do not allow for the identification of their locations. However, the results show that the warehouse heat load within the CHP search area is 14 MW, approximately 2 per cent of the total heat load within the CHP search area.

Additional Consultations

5.2.14 Further to the examination of the UK CHP Development Map, consultation has been undertaken with the organisations identified by DECC (and in the CHP Guidance) that can assist developers in identifying potential CHP opportunities. These are:

• DECC;

• Lincolnshire County Council / North Lincolnshire Council;

• Environment Agency;

• NHS Property Services Limited;

• Association of Decentralised Energy (formerly the CHP Association); and,

• The Carbon Trust / Energy Saving Trust.

5.2.15 A summary of this additional consultation is provided in Table 4.2

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 17 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

TABLE 4.2: SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL CONSULTATIONS

Organisation Summary of Consultation

DECC DECC’s ‘Heat Map Team’ advised that they were not aware of any significant developments / installations within 15 km of the proposed site. DECC further advised consultation with the Homes and Communities Agency and the Humber Local Enterprise Partnership.

North Lincolnshire Council North Lincolnshire Council advised of plans for up to 6,000 homes at the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development in the parish of Burringham (west of Scunthorpe). The ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development lies approximately 3 km to the south east of the proposed site. Applications have been submitted on behalf of the Lucent Group9,10 (see summary provided in Appendix C) and Maltgrade Limited11 (see summary provided in Appendix D). To accompany the applications, separate Energy Strategies have been prepared for both the Lucent Group development and the Maltgrade Limited development. Whilst both Energy Strategies note that district heating networks may be viable, they also note that further work needs to be undertaken as the detailed design of the overall development progresses. Therefore, within this Document, to provide a ‘best case’ CHP scenario, it has been assumed that the Proposed Development would provide the overall heat requirements for both overall developments (i.e. could provide for up to 6,000 homes).

Environment Agency The Environment Agency advised that they were not aware of any significant developments / installations within 15 km of the proposed site that were at an early stage (and therefore would not have been included in the UK CHP Development Map).

NHS Property Services Limited Whilst NHS Property Services Limited advised that they would potentially be interested in developing CHP opportunities, they did not identify any specific opportunities at the current time. In particular, NHS Property Services Limited were interested in whether any future new builds with “small demands” (e.g. clinics) would be considered an attractive CHP opportunity. Ramboll advised that these would likely be captured by consideration of district heating schemes. It is expected that, as the proposed Development, progresses, further consultation will be undertaken, which will cover any future new builds which could be developed as a CHP opportunity. This commitment will form part of the Environmental Permit which will be required under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, as amended.

The Association of Decentralised Energy

The Association of Decentralised Energy advised that they were unable to help with the identification of specific heat loads, but provided general guidance on identifying potential CHP opportunities (e.g. large industrial, domestic). This advice has been followed through examination of the UK CHP Development Map.

The Carbon Trust / The Energy Saving Trust

The Carbon Trust advised that they were unable to help with the identification of specific heat loads.

Homes and Communities Agency The Homes and Communities Agency advised that they were unable to help with the identification of specific heat loads.

Humber Local Enterprise Partnership

Whilst the Humber Local Enterprise Partnership advised that they would potentially be interested in developing CHP opportunities, they did not identify any specific opportunities at the current time. It is expected that, as the proposed Development, progresses, further consultation will be undertaken. This commitment will form part of the Environmental Permit which will be required under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010, as amended.

RE

9 Application Reference: PA/2013/1000 (See: http://www.planning.northlincs.gov.uk/planning/newplanet/planetMain.aspx?refno=PA/2013/1000) 10 Application Reference: PA/2013/1001 (See: http://www.planning.northlincs.gov.uk/planning/newplanet/planetMain.aspx?refno=PA/2013/1001) 11 Application Reference: PA/2015/0396 (See: http://www.planning.northlincs.gov.uk/planning/newplanet/planetMain.aspx?refno=PA/2015/0396)

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 18 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

5.3 Summary of the Preferred CHP Opportunity

5.3.1 Based on the examination of the online UK CHP Development Map and the additional consultation which has been undertaken, the preferred CHP opportunity is considered to comprise the plans for up to 6,000 homes at the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development. The ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development lies approximately 3 km to the south east of the proposed site. Within this Document, to provide for a ‘best case’ CHP scenario, it has been assumed that the Proposed Development would provide the overall heat requirements for up to 6,000 homes. Whilst no detailed information is available on the final design requirements for the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development, this is considered to represent an overall heat load of approximately 33 megajoules per second (MJ/s).

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 19 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

6 PREFERRED CHP OPPORTUNITY

6.1 Introduction

6.1.1 Based on the preferred CHP opportunity (the 6,000 homes at the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development), this Section describes the proposals for a CHP-R design.

6.2 Identification of the CHP Envelope

6.2.1 Based on the preferred CHP opportunity, it is expected that the design of the CCGT unit would be identical to conventional CCGT units with the inclusion of the following additional items:

• Accessible tie-in locations in either the:

− High pressure (HP) steam turbine exhaust (from the cold re-heat line); or,

− Low pressure (LP) steam turbine inlet.

• A stack design that would allow for future retrofit of flue gas extraction equipment; and,

• Control systems linked to the connections.

6.2.2 These provisions are comparable to those required as part of demonstrating the CCGT unit is CCR, with the design allowing for the extraction of steam from the electricity generating cycle.

6.2.3 Therefore, the potential CHP-R designs evaluated related to the different extraction points. These are:

• HP steam turbine CHP-R design;

• LP steam turbine CHP-R design; and,

• Stack heating CHP-R design.

6.2.4 If implemented, the HP steam turbine CHP-R design and LP steam turbine CHP-R design would have an effect on the steam cycle (and therefore performance) of the CCGT unit. The stack heating CHP-R design would not have an effect on the CCGT unit. Therefore only the HP steam turbine CHP-R design and LP steam turbine CHP-R design are evaluated further here. Accordingly, heat and power envelopes for the HP steam turbine CHP-R design and LP steam turbine CHP-R design showing the possible operating ranges for the CCGT unit have been prepared.

6.2.5 On the heat and power envelopes, the limits are defined as follows:

A: Minimum Stable Load (with no Heat Extraction)

B: Minimum Stable Load (with maximum Heat Extraction)

C: 100 per cent Load (with maximum Heat Extraction)

D: 100 per cent Load (with no Heat Extraction)

6.2.6 The CHP efficiency (ηCHP) is defined as:

ηCHP = Net Process Heat Output + Net Power Output

Fuel Input

6.2.7 Additionally, on the heat and power envelopes, the heat loads where ‘Good Quality CHP’ schemes would be feasible are also defined. This is shown as the Primary Energy Saving (PES) locus. Heat loads above the PES locus would mean that there would be a 10 per cent saving in primary energy consumption.

6.2.8 However, it should be noted that the heat and power envelopes should not be considered as definitive, and would ultimately depend on the required steam conditions and the steam turbine design of the CCGT unit.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 20 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

HP Steam Turbine CHP-R Design

6.2.9 The heat and power envelope for the HP steam turbine CHP-R design is shown in Insert 5.1. The performance of the CCGT unit (i.e. the indicative heat and power envelope data) is summarised in Table 5.1.

LP Steam Turbine CHP-R Design

6.2.10 The heat and power envelope for the LP steam turbine CHP-R design is shown in Insert 5.2. The performance of the CCGT unit (i.e. the indicative heat and power envelope data) is summarised in Table 5.2

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 21 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

INSERT 5.1: HP STEAM TURBINE SCENARIO – HEAT AND POWER ENVELOPE

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 22 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

INSERT 5.2: LP STEAM TURBINE SCENARIO – HEAT AND POWER ENVELOPE

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 23 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

TABLE 5.1: HP STEAM TURBINE SCENARIO INDICATIVE HEAT AND POWER ENVELOPE DATA

No Heat Extraction Maximum Heat Extraction

Minimum Stable Load (MSL) A B

Fuel Input* MJ/s 695 695

Net Process Heat Output MW 0 95

Net Electrical Power Output MW 384 350

Total Heat and Power Output MW 384 446

CHP Efficiency % 55.3 64.1

100 Per Cent Load D C

Fuel Input* MJ/s 1111 1111

Net Process Heat Output MW 0 130

Net Electrical Power Output MW 670 627

Total Heat and Power Output MW 670 757

CHP Efficiency % 60.3 68.1 *Fuel input is based on the Lower Heating Value (LHV)

TABLE 5.2: LP STEAM TURBINE SCENARIO INDICATIVE HEAT AND POWER ENVELOPE DATA

No Heat Extraction Maximum Heat Extraction

Minimum Stable Load (MSL) A B

Fuel Input* MJ/s 695 695

Net Process Heat Output MW 0 113

Net Electrical Power Output MW 384 355

Total Heat and Power Output MW 384 468

CHP Efficiency % 55.3 67.3

100 Per Cent Load D D

Fuel Input* MJ/s 1111 1111

Net Process Heat Output MW 0 147

Net Electrical Power Output MW 670 637

Total Heat and Power Output MW 670 784

CHP Efficiency % 60.3 70.6

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 24 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

Summary of HP Steam Turbine CHP-R Heat and Power Envelope

6.2.11 Insert 5.1 and Table 5.1 indicate that:

• The CCGT unit could supply heat loads up to approximately 95 MJ/s, without an impact upon the operational range (i.e. the CCGT unit could operate anywhere between MSL and 100% Load);

• The CCGT unit could supply heat loads between approximately 95 MJ/s and 130 MJ/s, with an associated impact upon the operational range (i.e. the CCGT unit would not be able to operate down to MSL); and,

• The CCGT unit would not be able to (in isolation) supply heat loads above approximately 130 MJ/s.

Summary of LP Steam Turbine CHP-R Heat and Power Envelope

6.2.12 Insert 5.2 and Table 5.2 indicate that:

• The CCGT unit could supply heat loads up to approximately 113 MJ/s, without an impact upon the operational range (i.e. the CCGT unit could operate anywhere between MSL and 100% Load);

• The CCGT unit could supply heat loads between approximately 113 MJ/s and 147 MJ/s, with an associated impact upon the operational range (i.e. the CCGT unit would not be able to operate down to MSL); and,

• The CCGT unit would not be able to (in isolation) supply heat loads above approximately 147 MJ/s.

Summary

6.2.13 Based on the use of Insert 5.1 and Insert 5.2 (and the corresponding information in Table 5.1 and Table 5.2), both the HP steam turbine CHP-R design and the LP steam turbine CHP-R design would be suitable for the preferred CHP opportunity. Furthermore, within both design options there may also be additional capability to supply other head loads (in addition to the preferred CHP opportunity) should they be identified in the future.

6.2.14 In addition, both Insert 5.1 and Insert 5.2 show that any ‘Good Quality CHP’ schemes would likely lie outside of the identified heat and power envelopes (i.e. the . Therefore, even if such a scheme was identified, it is likely that a bespoke steam cycle design would be required.

6.3 Further Consideration of CHP

6.3.1 To allow the identified (and any additional future) CHP opportunity to be realised, it is anticipated that the design and final build of the Development will incorporate a number of appropriate provisions which will allow for the future implementation of CHP. In terms of these appropriate provisions, it is expected that the design of the CCGT unit would be identical to conventional CCGT units with the inclusion of the following additional items:

• Accessible tie-in locations in either the:

− HP steam turbine exhaust (from the cold re-heat line); or,

− LP steam turbine inlet.

• A stack design that would allow for future retrofit of flue gas extraction equipment; and,

• Control systems linked to the connections.

6.3.2 The indicative location of these appropriate provisions is shown in Figure 1. These provisions are comparable to those required as part of demonstrating the CCGT unit is CCR, with the design allowing for the extraction of steam from the electricity generating cycle.

6.3.3 Accordingly, it is considered that the CCGT unit will be designed and built CHP-R. It is considered that this degree of CHP / CHP-R is an appropriate solution given the current status and uncertainty surrounding the preferred CHP / CHP-R opportunity. It is expected

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 25 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

that this requirement will be prescribed through amended Section 36 / Planning Conditions for the Development.

6.4 A Note on the Potential Implementation of CHP

6.4.1 Whilst the CCGT unit will be designed and built CHP-R, the ultimate implementation of CHP at the Development will be dependent on a number of factors. These factors include:

• Compatibility of the running regime of the CCGT unit with the requirements of the head load;

The anticipated role of the proposed Development is to provide a mixture of base load and flexing capacity to the National Grid National Electricity Transmission System. Therefore, the running regime and load of the CCGT unit will be somewhat unpredictable. In contrast, a primary requirement of a viable and effective CHP scheme is that it should be capable of meeting the requirements of the identified heat load (for example, requirements for residential heat loads (such as those likely to be required by the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ development) would be steady and consistent over the majority of the year). As a result, the ultimate running regime and load of the CCGT unit may not coincide with the requirements of the identified heat load, and this incompatibility may affect the viability and effectiveness implementing a CHP scheme.

• Compatibility with the specific Energy Policies of the heat load developments; and,

As noted previously, separate Energy Strategies have been prepared for both the Lucent Group development and the Maltgrade Limited development. These Energy Strategies will be based on specific Energy Policies for the developments. Any CHP scheme to be implemented will need to be compatible with these specific Energy Policies.

• Economic feasibility.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 26 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

7 CONCLUSIONS

7.1.1 To implement advances in engineering design for Keadby II, KDL are submitting a Variation Application to the Secretary of State. To accompany the Variation Application, KDL is providing supporting information to DECC. This Document is the CHP Assessment.

7.1.2 The proposed Keadby II site lies approximately 7 km to the west of Scunthorpe and approximately 27 km to the north east of Doncaster. The Ordnance Survey (OS) Grid Reference of the centre of the proposed Development site is approximately 482676, 411646. This is the centre of the area designated for the development of the gas turbine, HRSG and steam turbine unit. The factors influencing the selection of the proposed Development site include:

• The use of existing infrastructure wherever possible;

• The presence of a skilled workforce at the existing Keadby I CCGT generating station, with established operational systems, who will be available for training new employees;

• The availability of technical support (if required) from the existing Keadby I CCGT generating station;

• The close proximity of the National Grid Gas National Transmission System;

• The close proximity of the National Grid Electricity National Transmission System, and the allowable use of the existing overhead line;

• The availability of sufficient land for the Development;

• An appropriate visual context with the adjoining land uses;

• The opportunities to link beneficially adjoining land uses;

• Compatibility with planning policy; and,

• The existing strong relationships with key stakeholders and the local community.

7.1.3 As part of this CHP Assessment, both online resources and additional consultation has been undertaken to determine whether there are any CHP opportunities within 15 km of the proposed Development site. In this regard:

• The examination of the online UK CHP Development Map did not identify any viable CHP opportunities in the CHP search area; and

• The additional consultation undertaken with North Lincolnshire Council identified the plans for up to 6,000 homes at the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development. The ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development lies approximately 3 km to the south east of the proposed site. Applications have been submitted on behalf of the Lucent Group and Maltgrade Limited. To accompany the applications, separate Energy Strategies have been prepared for both the Lucent Group development and the Maltgrade Limited development. Whilst both Energy Strategies not that district heating networks may be viable, they also note that further work needs to be undertaken as the detailed design of the overall development progresses.

7.1.4 Based on the examination of the online UK CHP Development Map and the additional consultation which has been undertaken, the preferred CHP opportunity is considered to comprise the plans for up to 6,000 homes at the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development. Within this Document, to provide for a ‘best case’ CHP scenario, it has been assumed that the Proposed Development would provide the overall heat requirements for up to 6,000 homes. This is considered to represent an overall heat load of approximately 33 MJ/s.

7.1.5 To allow the identified (and any additional future) CHP opportunity to be realised, the design and final build of the Development will incorporate a number of appropriate provisions which will allow for the future implementation of CHP. In terms of these appropriate provisions, it is expected that the design of the CCGT unit would be identical to conventional CCGT units with the inclusion of the following additional items:

Combined Heat and Power Assessment 27 Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

• Accessible tie-in locations in either the:

− HP steam turbine exhaust (from the cold re-heat line); or,

− LP steam turbine inlet.

• A stack design that would allow for future retrofit of flue gas extraction equipment; and,

• Control systems linked to the connections.

7.1.6 These provisions are comparable to those required as part of demonstrating the CCGT unit is CCR, with the design allowing for the extraction of steam from the electricity generating cycle.

7.1.7 Accordingly, it is considered that the CCGT unit will be designed and built CHP-R. It is considered that this degree of CHP / CHP-R is an appropriate solution given the current status and uncertainty surrounding the preferred CHP / CHP-R opportunity. It is expected that this requirement will be prescribed through amended Section 36 / Planning Conditions for the Development.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

Appendix 1 Relevant Extract from the CHP Guidance

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

APPENDIX 1: RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE CHP GUIDANCE

11. Developers should therefore provide evidence to show the steps that they had taken to assess the viability of CHP opportunities within the vicinity of their proposed location for the plant. Their application or notification should contain:

• an explanation of their choice of location, including the potential viability of the site for CHP;

• a report on the exploration carried out to identify and consider the economic feasibility of local heat opportunities and how to maximise the benefits from CHP;

• the results of that exploration; and

• a list of organisations contacted.

12. And, if the proposal is for generation without CHP:

• the basis for the developer’s conclusion that it is not economically feasible to exploit existing regional heat markets;

• a description of potential future heat requirements in the area; and

• the provisions in the proposed scheme for exploiting any potential heat demand in the future.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

APPENDIX 2 Relevant Extract from the CHP-R Guidance

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

APPENDIX B: RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE CHP-R GUIDANCE

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

APPENDIX 3 Summary of the Application for the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development Submitted on behalf of the Lucent Group

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE ‘LINCOLNSHIRE LAKES’ DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE LUCENT GROUP

The overall development comprises:

• Application 1: “An outline application, with all matters reserved with the exception of access, for the development of up to 500 new homes (Use Class C3), a village centre (Use Class A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1, D1), a care / retirement home (Use Class C2), a health care facility (Use Class D1), new roads and footpaths, informal areas of open space, play areas and sports pitches”;

• Application 2: “A full application for highway works to deliver the new terminating junction to the M181 Motorway (due to the de-trunked section of the highway to the north of the terminating junction) and the development of the western section of the east west link road”;

• Application 3: “An outline application for a commercial park comprising Use Class A1 (food and non-food), A2, A3, A4, A5, D2, C1 and B1”; and,

• Application 4: An “outline application, with all matters reserved except for access, for the development of up to 3,000 new homes (Use Class C3), a 3 form of entry primary school (Use Class D1), a village centre (Use Class A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1), a care / retirement home (Use Class C2), community facilities (D1), new roads and footpaths, informal areas of open space, play areas and sports pitches and new wildlife habitat, lakes and wetlands”.

As part of the application documents, an Energy Strategy has been prepared (WSP Environmental, August 2013). The Energy Strategy summarises an overarching strategy for the overall development.

The strategy considered followed the hierarchy principles of: ‘Be Lean’ (i.e. use less energy); to ‘Be Clean’ (i.e. supply energy efficiently); to ‘Be Green’ (i.e. use renewable energy systems).

The Lean Energy measures considered were mostly related to specific building design features, and are not considered further here.

The Clean / Green Energy measures considered included “gas CHP” and “district heating – waste CHP”.

Gas CHP represented a dedicated on-site CHP development, and was not considered to be able to meet the project targets of 20% of energy delivered from renewables. Therefore, it was recommended that gas CHP from a dedicated on-site CHP development was not considered further for the overall development.

District Heating – Waste CHP represented “the recovery of exhausted heat energy (otherwise rejected from power stations / generators as waste heat) which can be used to provide heating for both residential and non-residential purposes”. However, the consideration of these schemes related to de-centralised biomass / waste CHP developments which would contribute to the project target of 20% of energy delivered from renewables. Furthermore, the Energy Strategy noted that: “due to the low housing density within the residential site area (c 30 – 35 dwellings per hectare), the provision of district heating to the dwellings is not considered to be technically or economically feasible. However, the mix of uses within the commercial park may provide a high electrical baseload and a significant ‘anchor load’ for constant heating requirements. Therefore, the provision of heat and electricity to the non-residential elements via a decentralised renewable energy centre may be feasible”. Therefore, it was recommended that district heating – waste CHP should be considered further for the overall development.

In summary, the Energy Strategy concluded that “although district heating is not recommended on a site wide basis it is possible that [CHP] may be viable in some areas, particularly the commercial park”.

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

APPENDIX 4 Summary of the Application for the ‘Lincolnshire Lakes’ Development Submitted on behalf of Maltgrade Limited

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE ‘LINCOLNSHIRE LAKES’ DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF MALTGRADE LIMITED

The overall development comprises:

• Application 1: “Outline application for the development of up to 2,500 new homes, a 3 form of entry primary school, village centres, community facilities, new roads and footpaths, informal areas of open space, play areas and sports pitches and new wildlife habitat, lakes and wetlands”;

• Application 2: “Outline application for highway works to deliver the new terminating junction to the M181 Motorway (due to the de-trunked section of the highway to the north of the terminating junction) and the development of an east and west link road connecting to the existing B1450, Burringham Road”; and,

• Application 3: “Outline application for recreational, community and leisure facilities, new roads and footpaths, informal areas of open space, play areas, and new wildlife habitat, parkland, lakes and wetlands”.

As part of the application documents, an Energy Strategy has been prepared (fortynine design, December 2014). Whilst the Energy Strategy noted that detailed strategies would continue to be confirmed as detailed applications are prepared and submitted, an overarching strategy had been prepared to aid understanding of the overall development proposed.

The Energy Strategy noted that, throughout the development of the proposals: “careful consideration has been given to the incorporation of sustainable design features into the layout and form in order to create a legible and functional development, with energy efficiency at the forefront”. And that: “this [overarching Energy Strategy] considers the strategic low and zero carbon energy strategies that may be adopted at the site to meet policy and regulatory requirements”.

The strategies considered followed the hierarchy principles of: ‘Be Lean’ (i.e. use less energy); to ‘Be Clean’ (i.e. supply energy efficiently); to ‘Be Green’ (i.e. use renewable energy systems).

The Lean Energy measures considered were mostly related to specific building design features, and are not considered further here.

The Clean / Green Energy measures considered included “gas CHP”, noting that this would be applied at a macro scale (i.e. at district scale or larger). Of the Clean / Green Energy measures considered, the Energy Strategy states that: “at this stage in the Proposed Development it is concluded that whilst certain technologies may go a considerable way to meeting energy demands and creating carbon savings, no single technology can fulfil the site’s total energy demand and carbon reduction target. Therefor a combined technology solution will be required”.

Furthermore, in terms of the Clean / Green Energy measures, the Energy Strategy stated that: “at this early stage of development it is important to determine the most appropriate means of serving the heating, cooling and power demands of the [Proposed Development], looking for opportunities for sustainable energy choices, sharing demand and supply and taking into account local and national policy requirements. The proposals must be affordable, to developers and end-users, be technically feasible and appropriate to the site”.

Accordingly, the Energy Strategy noted that the only possible technologies to be considered were: district heating network; and / or, wind turbines. In terms of the district heating network, this could include gas CHP and the Energy Strategy notes that: “the likely heat profile may support the use of a local energy centre to supply a district heat network”.

However, the Energy Strategy also notes that “numerous studies suggest that for district heat networks to be economically viable (for the operator and the customer) a density of at least 40 – 45 dwellings per hectare (dph) is required and need a steady, year round, demand for heat (typically from a large heat user like a leisure centre, known as an anchor load)”. Furthermore: “whilst parts of the site do reach the above density, there is no obvious

Combined Heat and Power Assessment Keadby II Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Generating Station

RUK1221748_1

anchor load, either planned or existing, which would help make a local energy centre feasible in terms of energy efficiency or economic viability”.

Nevertheless, the Energy Strategy recommended that district heat networks may be viable in some areas of the site providing all thermal demand for that zone. And furthermore: “due to its scale, phased approach and impact or market forces on the [overall development] further details will be submitted as part of each detailed design phase”.