APPENDIX N Coversheet - SSE · Appendix N – CHP Assessment . 1 Seabank 3 CHP Assessment April...

Appendix N – CHP Assessment

1

Seabank 3 CHP Assessment

April 2014

47064101

Prepared for: SSE Seabank Land Investments Ltd

UNITED KINGDOM & IRELAND

Seabank 3 Combined Heat and Power Assessment

CHP ASSESSMENT April 2014

REVISION SCHEDULE

Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

0 17/01/14 Draft for Comment

Veronica Hamilton

Senior Energy Engineer

Rob Boyer

Principal Engineer

Oliver Riley

Technical Director

1 04/03/14 Final Draft for PEI

Veronica Hamilton

Senior Energy Engineer

Rob Boyer

Principal Engineer

Rob Boyer

Principal Engineer

URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited 6-8 Greencoat Place London SW1P 1PL United Kingdom www.urs.com www.urscorp.com



Limitations This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited's (URS) appointment with its client and is subject to the terms of that appointment. It is addressed to and for the sole and confidential use and reliance of URS's client. URS accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared and provided. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of the Company Secretary of URS. Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this document should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole. The contents of this document do not provide legal or tax advice or opinion.

The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by URS has not been independently verified by URS, unless otherwise stated in the Report.

The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by URS in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The work described in this Report was undertaken between July 2013 and January 2014 and is based on the conditions encountered and the information available during the said period of time. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances.

Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available.

URS disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to URS’s attention after the date of the Report.

Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward-looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward-looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. URS specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report.

Copyright

© This Report is the copyright of URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.



TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................... 12 INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 33 PLANNING CONTEXT ...................................................... 54 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH .................................... 105 HEAT DENSITY ANALYSIS ............................................ 126 CHP ANALYSIS............................................................... 257 TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS 278 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................... 30 ANNEX A – SITE LOCATION ............................................................ 32ANNEX B – IDENTIFIED HEAT LOADS ........................................... 33ANNEX C – CHP-R ASSESSMENT FORM ...................................... 37



1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Combined Heat and Power (CHP) feasibility study has been prepared in support of an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) for the proposed Seabank 3 generating station. The Proposed Development will provide up to 1,400 megawatts (MW) electrical generating capacity alongside the existing Seabank 1 & 2 power station. This study has been produced in accordance with the requirements of the NPSs EN-1, EN-2 and the EA’s CHP Ready Guidance, national and regional planning policies to evaluate the heat demands in the area of the Proposed Development in order to assess the potential for heat recovery. The following sources have been consulted in order to identify potential existing and future core heat loads:

• The National Heat Map; • CHP Database and District Heating (DH) installation map; • Planning applications in the surrounding area; • Information available from local authorities; and • GIS data and benchmarking exercises.

This process identified 18 existing and 3 potential heat consumers within reasonable distance to the Proposed Development Site, of which two, Astra Zeneca and the Western Approach Distribution Centre, have been recognised as having some potential for connection to a district heating system. With the exception of the these two developments, there are predominantly only light industrial facilities in reasonable proximity to the Proposed Development Site, which URS would not consider individually or collectively to offer suitable viability to become customers of a successful DH network at this time. In addition to the low heat demands in the area, the Severnside Energy Recovery Centre is immediately adjacent to the Proposed Development Site and is currently under construction, with an anticipated commissioning date of 2016. It is understood that this Energy Recovery Centre will not be providing heat to surrounding developments, which suggests that no appropriate heat consumers could be found by its developer. The Energy Recovery Centre is of a smaller scale compared to the Proposed Development (circa 20 to 30 MWe), which is likely to be more compatible with the scale of heat demands that have been identified in the area, if a heat network were to become viable. A number of other energy recovery centres have been identified within 1km of the Proposed Development Site which would also be better placed to export heat to local users, further reducing the potential for the Proposed Development’s provision of CHP. These energy recovery centres would provide a more appropriate heat source due to their continuous generation compared to the Proposed Development, which will be more intermittent and unreliable. This would reduce the available heat loads in the area In conclusion, although the plant could provide significant volumes of heat when operating, given the anticipated intermittent operating regime for the proposed development, it is not considered that a CHP solution would be viable without significant additional back-up heat production. Additionally, heat mapping studies that have been carried out indicates there is no significant density of heat demand currently available in reasonable proximity to justify the development of a heat network. For those heat loads that have been identified, or may become available in the future, it is considered likely that these would be more effectively supplied by the smaller scale energy facilities already proposed, consented and/or under development within 1km of the Proposed Development Site Despite these initial findings, the Applicant will ensure that the Proposed Development is designed to be ‘CHP Ready’ and will carry out an on-going review of CHP potential, including:



• Maintaining a dialogue with heat users already approached; • Setting up a working group involving all key stakeholders to maintain momentum; • Carrying out an annual reviews to determine if there have been sufficient changes in

circumstances to warrant a new technical and financial review; and • Re-visiting the technical and economic assessments at least every 5 years or when a change in

circumstances warrants.

The above will be been incorporated into a Requirement contained within the draft Development Consent Order.



2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 URS has been commissioned by SSE (the ‘Applicant’) to undertake a Combined Heat and

Power (CHP) Feasibility Study for the proposed Seabank 3 generating station (hereafter referred to as the Proposed Development).

2.2 The Proposed Development Site (the Site) is located in Severnside, near Bristol, adjacent to the existing Seabank Power Stations (Seabank 1 & 2). The Proposed Development Site is entirely within the administrative area of South Gloucestershire Council (SGC), although part of the DCO Site for offsite Associated Development (a cooling water pipeline and electrical connection) falls within Bristol City Council (BCC).

2.3 The Proposed Development will comprise one or two combined cycle gas turbines (CCGT)

up to 1,400 Megawatts electrical (MWe) output plus up to two peaking plant units that will be up to 240 MWe. The total capacity of the generating station will not exceed 1,400 MWe.

2.4 This study evaluates the heat demand in the area of the Site, so that the potential for heat

recovery from the Proposed Development can be assessed. 2.5 This document has been produced in accordance with the requirements of National Policy

Statements (NPSs) EN-1, EN-2, and the Environment Agency’s (EA’s) CHP Ready Guidance, the national and regional planning policies in order to support an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO).

Principles of Combined Heat and Power and District Heating

2.6 A Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system generates electricity while also providing useable heat from the same process. The useable heat can be recovered from parts of the electricity generating process, such as the cooling or flue systems, where it may otherwise be lost to the environment. This can provide a more efficient energy generation system compared to traditional power-only CCGT generation systems, with the potential to improve typical gross efficiencies of modern plants from 55-60% to in the region of 75-80%.

2.7 For a CHP system to be viable, appropriate heat consumers in suitable proximity to the

heat source are required. Heat consumers could be in the form of a single user, which at this scale would typically be a large industrial process user, or a number of smaller consumers forming part of a District Heating (DH) system.

2.8 DH systems comprise of a network of pre-insulated pipes carrying hot water or steam from one or more centralised heat generating sources to a number of consumers. The hot water or steam is then typically used for process uses, space heating or Domestic Hot Water (DHW) generation, depending on the requirements of the consumer. District heating systems can deliver benefits to consumers by providing a low carbon source of heat in a more efficient manner than may be achievable through single buildings adopting individual measures, as well as reducing the plant and space requirements on-site, which in turn can provide capital and on-going maintenance and energy cost savings.



Description of the Proposed Development

2.9 The Proposed Development is adjacent to the existing Seabank 1 & 2 station, approximately 5 km northeast of Avonmouth and 10km northwest of Bristol in an area called Crooks Marsh in Severnside.

2.10 The Proposed Development Site is located within SGC but its southern boundary forms the BCC administrative area. The proposed associated development of the electrical connection and cooling water pipeline lie in BCC.

2.11 Surrounding developments are in the majority industrial in nature with Severn Beach, Hallen, Pilning and East Compton communities located several kilometres away. Annex A – Site Location provides a map of the area.

2.12 The Proposed Development comprises up to 1,400 MWe of generating capacity based on: one or two natural gas-fired CCGTs with a generating capacity of up to 700 MWe each; and natural gas-fired peaking plant units with a generating capacity of up to 240MWe. The peaking plants will be designed to ‘black start’ on distillate fuel in the event of failure of the UK electricity grid, to help enable restart of the grid. The peaking plant will also provide fast response ‘top up’ supply to the grid during peak periods, to support the development of renewable generation on the UK national grid.

2.13 The Proposed Development will be able to operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. However due to the predicted demand, it is anticipated that the CCGTs will operate at an average 31% load (an average 2,716 hours per year) over the course of its lifetime, with the peaking plant limited to approximately 17% load (a maximum 1,500 hours a year). The power generation will therefore be both irregular and intermittent.

2.14 Although adjacent to the existing Seabank 1 & 2 station, the Proposed Development is being progressed independently, with some shared services including gas supply, cooling water electrical connections and access.

2.15 Due to the scale of the Proposed Development it is being made Carbon Capture Ready (CCR), such that it will be ready for any potential future application of Carbon Capture and Storage technology, as per the requirements set out in the EU Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Directive and associated DECC CCR Guidance, though any such development would be made under separate consent and is therefore outside the scope of this DCO Application. Nevertheless, in accordance with the CHP-R guidance, an assessment has been made of the CHP and Carbon Capture envelope for the Proposed Development, as presented in Annex C – CHP-R Assessment Form.



3 PLANNING CONTEXT

3.1 The Planning Act 20081 defines the Proposed Development as a ‘nationally significant

infrastructure project’ (NSIP) as it is an onshore electrical generating station with more than 50MW capacity. Under Section 31 of the Planning Act 2008, a Development Consent Order (DCO) Application is required for a NSIP.

3.2 Policies for NSIPs are set out in the National Policy Statements (NPS). Those that are relevant to the Proposed Development and CHP assessment are described below.

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

3.3 Section 4.6 of the NPS EN-1 highlights considerations for CHP and describes the government’s commitment to reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions through the promotion of good quality CHP and outlines the assessment criteria. In particular, it: (1) Describes CHPs as “Combined Heat and Power (CHP), which is the generation of

usable heat and electricity in a single process. A CHP station may either supply steam direct to customers or 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.”

(2) Highlights that heat generated by CHPs can substantially reduce the amount of fuel

consumed that would otherwise be wasted. Although there are other methods for thermal generation gas-fired is considered the most viable option.

(3) Denotes the benefits of CHP being a less CO2 intensive method of heating and

electricity generation. This is because the technology uses less fuel to produce the same amount of heat and power than conventional methods. In order to be eligible for the government support, associated with the CHP Quality Assurance programme, in accordance with the EU Cogeneration Directive, schemes need to achieve at least 10% primary energy savings.

(4) Emphases that according to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

(DEFRA), in 2009, there was a total of 5.6 gigawatts (GW) of ‘Good Quality’ CHP in the UK, providing over 7% of electricity and saving an estimated 9.5 megatonnes of carbon dioxide (MTCO2) per annum. DEFRA believes that, potentially, there is cost-effective development for a further 10 GW of ‘Good Quality’ CHP, estimated to offer a further saving of 175 MTCO2 by 2015.

(5) States that in order for CHP to be considered as economically viable the plant needs to be closely located to consumers with heat demands, though this distance will vary with the nature of the demand. An example of a cost-effective distance from a Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) report on district heating networks2 is given as 200 megawatts thermal (MWth) of heat within 15 kilometres (km).

(6) Denotes that DCO Applications must either include CHP or contain evidence that the

possibilities have been fully explored.

(7) Refers to liaising with potential heat consumers if identified and also bodies such as the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) and Local Authorities (LA).

1 http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/planning.html 2 The Potential and Costs of District Heating Networks, Pöyry and Faber Maunsell, April 2009



(8) Explains that, where the proposal is for thermal generation without CHP, the applicant

should: • Explain why CHP is not economically or practically feasible; • Provide details of any potential future heat demands in the area; and • Detail provisions in the proposed scheme for exploiting any potential heat

demand in the future.

(9) States that as some CHP systems require more plant room space than non-CHP generating systems. Applicants must show and explain how current and / or planned CHP systems will be integrated into the proposed site and be Carbon Capture ‘ready’.

National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Generation EN-2 (NPS EN-2)

3.4 CHP considerations and guidelines are described in Section 2.3 of NPS EN-2. These are to be considered in conjunction with those outlined in NPS EN-1 and the guidance document created by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) 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).

3.5 Paragraph 2.2.4 of this NPS states that sufficient space must be allocated for CHP systems and relates to EN-1 (Section 5.10)

3.6 Paragraphs 2.3.2 and 2.3.3 state that all CHP options need to be fully explored and applicants must include considerations and show evidence in conjunction with EN-1 (Section 4.6). Where there is reason to believe that future opportunities for CHP may arise, if a non-CHP solution is proposed, then developers are required to ensure that the station is ‘CHP ready’ to allow heat supply at a later date. All applicants must demonstrate that CHP has been considered and the IPC (now the Planning Inspectorate) should not give development consent until it is satisfied sufficient evidence has been provided (EN-1 Section 4.6.8).

National Policy Statement for Electricity Networks Infrastructure (EN-5)

3.7 This NPS is to be used alongside EN-1 and forms the basis for assessment of the Planning Inspectorate’s electricity networks infrastructure decisions. It does not specifically refer to CHP.

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)3

3.8 The DTI provides guidance for new power stations and electricity and heat generation.

3.9 Paragraph 11 provides details of the evidence and steps that need to be taken by the applicant in order to assess the viability of CHP. These include:

• 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 the exploration; and • A list of the organisations contacted.

3 December 2006



3.10 Paragraph 12 of the Guidance lists what must be included with applications where CHP is not to be included. This includes:

• 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.

3.11 Paragraph 14 identifies some of the largest and likely most economically viable prospective consumers to be considered. These are as follows:

• Industrial sectors; • Commerce, including;

o Hotels o Leisure centres o Large public buildings

• Public services, including; o Hospitals o Universities o Prisons o Defence installations

3.12 Paragraph 16 provides the details of the elements that should be demonstrated and included in applications:

• That the DECC UK heat map has been consulted; • Information gathered from regional and local planning bodies to identify

opportunities; • A number of different heat markets have been explored; • Consulted DEFRA, Combined Heat and Power Quality Assessment (CHPQA)

programme administrator and Regional Development Agencies (RDAs were abolished in 2012. Some of the roles of the RDAs are now undertaken by smaller scale Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs)); and

• The following have been identified as possible sources for general information: Combined Heat and Power Association (CHPA), The Energy Savings Trust and the Carbon Trust.

3.13 Paragraph 19 stresses that where heat opportunities have been identified developers should carry out detailed studies on the economic feasibility of these. Paragraphs 20 -22 provide further guidance on economic feasibility.

Environment Agency, CHP Ready Guidance for Combustion and Energy from Waste Power Plants

3.14 The EA has recently published detailed guidance on CHP Readiness Assessments as part of the Environmental Permitting regime. The EA requires application for Environmental Permits to demonstrate Best Available Technology (BAT) for a number of criteria, including energy efficiency. One of the principal ways of improving energy efficiency is through the use of CHP. The EA therefore requires developers to satisfy three BAT tests in relation to CHP. The first involves considering and identifying opportunities for the use of heat off-site. Where this is not technically or economically possible and there are no immediate opportunities, the second test involves ensuring that the plant is built to be ‘CHP ready’. The third test involves carrying out periodic reviews to see if the situation has changed and there are opportunities for heat use off site.



3.15 The EA guidance reiterates the need for applications for Development Consent involving generating stations to be supported CHP Assessment in line with Section 4.6 of EN-1, which contains details on:

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

• Identifying the CHP and carbon capture envelope for a CCR plant; • 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.

3.16 In addition, 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”.

3.17 Where Development Consent is granted for a new plant without CHP, the subsequent application for an Environmental Permit should build on the conclusions of the CHP Assessment and contain sufficient information to demonstrate the new plant will be built ‘CHP ready’ (for the chosen location and design)

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

3.18 The National Planning Policy Framework released in 2012 provides guidelines for Local Planning Authority plans. The following provides details those relevant to CHP, decentralised energy and district heating.

3.19 Section 10 of the NPPF describes how opportunities should be identified for developments to supply heat from decentralised, renewable or low carbon energy sources.

3.20 Section 15.6 of the NPPF specifies that Local Plans should set strategic priorities to deliver provisions for infrastructure, including energy and heat. Defra, Transposition in England and Wales of Articles 14(5)-(8) of the energy efficiency Directive (2012/27/EU) – Consultation

3.21 Defra is currently going through a consultation process on the transposition of Articles 14(5)-(8) of the EU’s Energy Efficiency Directive EED – (2012/27/EU) which was adopted in October 2012.

3.22 The objective of Article 14 is to encourage the identification of cost-effective potential for delivery energy efficiency, through the use of cogeneration, efficient district heating and cooling and the recovery of industrial waste heat. New thermal electricity generation installations with a total thermal input exceeding 20 MW are to assess the costs and benefits of providing high-efficiency cogeneration installations.

3.23 Defra is conducting a consultation process in February and March 2014 which will inform the requirements of that are to be included in the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA). The consultation document references Article 14(5) which states that Member States shall ensure that relevant installations shall carry out a CBA after 5 June 2014.



South Gloucestershire Council Local Development Framework

3.24 The SGC Core Strategy forms a key part of the portfolio of Local Development Framework planning documents. The key policy in relation to heat recovery is as follows:

3.25 Policy CS4 – Renewable or low carbon district heat networks outlines how any applications to develop a thermal generation station or proposals that have a capacity to generate significant waste heat as part of an industrial or commercial process must either:

o Include heat recovery and re-use technology; and o Heat distribution infrastructure; or o Provide evidence that heat distribution has been fully explored and is

unfeasible

3.26 The South Gloucestershire Local Plan (Saved Policies) encourages the inclusion of combined heat and power and district heating technology on a building scale but does not include policies of relevance to industrial processes.

Bristol Local Development Framework

3.27 Bristol City Council’s (BCC) Core Strategy outlines the overall approach for planning developments in Bristol. Policy BCS14 ‘Sustainable Energy’ describes BCC’s support for the development of low-carbon sources of energy including CHP, Combined Cooling Heat and Power (CCHP) and district heating, and outlines how new developments are to demonstrate the suitability of these for their development, particularly in Heat Priority Areas. The core strategy refers to the Bristol City-wide Sustainable Energy Study, where Avonmouth is identified as having potential for CHP/CCHP plant, potentially for biomass, but recognises that in the short term a connection to the City Centre heat loads are not likely to be economically viable.

3.28 Policy BCS 15 ‘Sustainable Design and Construction’ aims to ensure new developments minimise their environmental impact and meet targets for CO2 reduction. BCC objectives are to integrate sustainable design and construction to all new developments and one key issue is to maximise energy efficiency and integrate Low and Zero Carbon (LZC) energy.



4 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH

4.1 Based on the planning context described above the following scope was developed:

• To identify and assess the magnitude of the industrial and other significant heat demands which are within the vicinity of the Proposed Development; Identify future potential loads;

• To comment on the projected economic and technical feasibility of connection to heat users identified above;

• Where viable connections are identified provide a list of the relevant organisations contacted;

• To assess the good quality CHP implications of heat demand uptake scenarios representing a range of heat network extents; and

• Outline the provisions made for exploiting any potential heat demands in the future including a CHP-R Assessment where immediate heat loads are not found to be viable.

General Methodology

4.2 In order to address the items above the following methodology has been utilised.

4.3 The viability of a potential heat load is dependent on both the size of the heat load and the distance it is located from the heat source. Therefore two search zones have been identified. A 15km radius search zone has been used to identify very large heat loads and a 5km radius has been used to identify smaller heat loads.

4.4 Initial heat load density and large heat load consumer searches for 15km and 5km search areas have been conducted through consulting with the following resources:

• The National Heat Map; and • CHP Database and District Heating (DH) installation map.

4.5 Using the information gathered from these sources, areas to focus on in greater detail have been identified. Maps, satellite information and GIS data have then been used to estimate individual heat loads for particular sector types in the areas identified using benchmark heat demand data. The sector types focussed on in this study, as recommended by the DTI guidance document

4, are as follows:

• Industrial users; • Hotels; • Leisure centres; • Large public buildings; • Hospitals; • Universities; • Prisons; and • Defence installations

4 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



4.6 Following the identification of existing core potential heat loads the potential of future developments occurring in the area will be undertaken through gathering information from the following bodies:

• Planning application notifications; and • Information available from local authorities

4.7 Analysis of the available heat output from the plant, impact on electricity generation and potential to export to consumers has been undertaken, followed by a Combined Heat and Power Quality Assessment (CHPQA) calculation to understand if the heat and power generated can be classified as ‘good quality’.

4.8 Following this analysis the key technical and commercial considerations are discussed and provisions for exploiting potential heat demands in the future outlined. A CHP-R Assessment Form is included in Annex C – CHP-R Assessment Form.



5 Heat Density Analysis

The National Heat Map

5.1 The National Heat Map5 has been designed by The Centre for Sustainable Energy and commissioned by DECC. This tool can be used to search for potential viable heat loads for CHP and district heating applications in support of planning and deployment of local sustainable projects in England.

5.2 The viability of a heat connection is dependent on the size of the heat load and its proximity to the source of heat. As outlined in the EN-1 guidance and the scope presented in Section 3, a search area of 15km has been used to identify very large heat loads. A 5km search area has then been assessed in order to identify smaller heat loads which may be viable connections due to their closer proximity to the source of heat at the Proposed Development. The River Avon, just over 5km to the south of the Proposed Development Site, also provides a natural barrier to the installation of heating infrastructure connecting to the Proposed Development beyond this range in this direction.

5.3 The 15km search radius heat map indicates that the largest heat loads in this search area are located in Bristol City Centre, approximately 10km from the Proposed Development Site. The National Heat Map shows some areas reaching a relatively high heat density of over 200 kilowatt-hours per square metre (kWh/m2). The heat map however, also indicates that there are very few existing developments with any heat loads between the Proposed Development and Bristol City Centre, which may reduce the viability of connection to the city centre, due to the scale of heat losses and capital costs of installation; unless a single very large head demand is identified.

5.4 The 5km radius heat map indicates that within this closer proximity search area, Severn View Industrial Park, Cabot Park and Patchway have the most significant heat load densities. Though the heat density of these areas are comparatively lower at 100 kWh/m2, due to their closer proximity to the Proposed Development Site they may provide more viable options for developing a district heat network compared to a single large load at a greater distance.

5 http://tools.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/heatmap/about_map/about_map.aspx



13

Figure 1: National Heat Map - Heat Density in a 15 km Radius



14

Figure 2: National Heat Map - Heat Density in a 5 km Radius



UK CHP Development Map

5.5 The UK CHP Development Map6 has been created by DECC to support the development

of CHP systems in the UK. Initially produced to assist developments in the planning process, the tool can be used to identify the size and location of existing CHP and District Heating systems and also areas of high heat demand for the development of new systems. Heat densities are expressed in peak demand format (kW/km2), as opposed to the annual heat consumption (kWh/m2) as described by the National Heat Map.

5.6 Similar to the above, a search area of 15km has been used to identify very large heat demands and a 5km search area has then been assessed in order to identify smaller heat loads which may be viable connections due to their closer proximity to the source of heat.

5.7 The CHP development map identified total heat loads of around 2,550 MW within the 15km radius and around 203 MW within the 5km radius. The Severn View Industrial Estate and Severn Beach are identified as one of the areas with the highest net load density within the 5km search criteria.

5.8 By sector, the largest heat demand has been found to be from domestic consumers, accounting for 60% of the heat demand in the 5km radius search area, rising to over 75% in the 15km search area. Though this sector may represent the greatest heat demand, the heat load density is considered too low to enable viable heat delivery from a district heating system in the majority of cases. This is due to the large amount of heat distribution network that would be required to enable the connections, which in turn corresponds to high heat losses and capital cost of installation, notwithstanding the logistical and commercial complexity of connecting numerous existing low rise residential properties.

5.9 Other sectors with high heat demands have been found to be: Small & Large Industrial units (23%), Retail (3%), Commercial Offices (2%) and Hotels (1%). These sectors, in addition to those suggested in the DTI guidance document, have been used to inform a more detailed search for specific heat consumers in the next stage of analysis.

6http://chp.decc.gov.uk/developmentmap/



16

Figure 3: UK CHP Development Map - Heat Density in a 15 km Radius



17

Figure 4: UK CHP Development Map - Heat Density in a 5 km Radius



5.10 In addition to identifying the heat load density of the area, the UK CHP Development Map provides information on specific large heat consumers, the proportion of their existing heat requirements that are fulfilled by CHP technology, and if there are existing district heating networks that the system could feed into. Table 1 provides details of the largest heat loads identified in the area and Figure 5 shows their location in respect to the Proposed Development. Table 1: Major Heat Consumers in a 10km Radius

Map Reference

Large Heat User

Approx. Distance

(km)

Total Heat Load (kW)

Provided by CHP

(kW)

Total Remaining

Load (kW)

A AstraZeneca

UK Ltd 1 7,129 - 7,129

B Bristol Energy

Limited 7 7,496 - 7,496

C United Bristol Heath Care NHS Trust

10 6,539 4,116 2,423

D University of

Bristol 10 8,717 1,716 7,001

Figure 5: UK CHP Development Map - Major Heat Consumers in a 15km Radius



5.11 Of the large heat loads identified within the search area, the AstraZeneca site on the Severn View Industrial Estate represents the greatest opportunity as a potential heat consumer from a district heating network. It is within 1 km of the Proposed Development Site and none of its 7 MW heat demand is currently supplied by CHP.

5.12 There is some existing infrastructure situated between the Proposed Development Site and the existing AstraZeneca site, including various drainage channels such as the Red Rhine and a railway line, which would cause some challenges for the installation of a district heating network. The rail lines currently running to the south of the Severn View Industrial Park appear at present to be unused, nevertheless, suitable agreements would need to be put in place to install infrastructure in this area.

5.13 The other two significant heat loads identified in the centre of Bristol are of a similar scale, in the order of 7 to 9MW, however a significant proportion of their heat loads are already provided by CHP so the motivation for an additional CHP heat connection is not likely to be high. These loads are not significant enough to consider a 10km installation of buried network and have therefore not been considered further.

Future Developments

Generating Station Developments

5.14 In addition to the existing Seabank 1 & 2 station and the Proposed Development there are plans for additional generating stations in close proximity to the Proposed Development Site.

5.15 The following schemes have been granted or are known of within 1km of the Proposed Development Site:

• There is the consented Severnside Energy Recovery Centre (SERC) which is currently under construction by SITA, and expected to be operational by 2016. This is located immediately west of the Proposed Development Site and is expected to have the capability to process up to 400,000 tonnes of waste a year, with a generating capacity of up to 32 MWe

7; • Scottish Power began a consultation process for a new 900-1,200 MWe CCGT

power station in 2011/12 on the former Terra Nitrogen ICI site, immediately north of the Proposed Development Site8. A meeting note is logged on the National Infrastructure Planning portal dated September 2012, however no further submissions are included;

• VIRIDOR has planning permission granted for a Resource Recovery Centre including an energy from waste and bottom ash facility, approximately 500m south of the Proposed Development. This is anticipated to have a capacity in the region of 500,000 tonnes per annum of waste, with a generating capacity of up to 30 MWe;

• W4B is a bio-fuel energy plant on the Former Columbian Chemicals (Sevalco), Severn Road, which was granted on appeal and is located approximately 700m south of the Proposed Development. This is anticipated to have a capacity to generate and combust in the order of 90,000 tonnes of oil per annum, with a generating capacity of up to 50 MWe; and

• The New Earth Anaerobic Digestion Facility is located approximately 900m southeast of the Proposed Development Site. This has a capacity in the order of 50,000 tonnes per annum of waste, with a generating capacity of up to 3 MWe.

7 http://www.sita.co.uk/news-and-views/our-plans/severnside 8 http://www.avonpowerstation.com/



5.16 A further three biomass and energy recovery generating station plants have been granted planning permission approximately 2.5km south of the Proposed Development Site.

5.17 These developments could have the potential to generate heat as part of a CHP process. The Severnside Energy Recovery Centre, which is currently under construction, submitted a Heat Plan as part of the planning submission in 2009 that includes many of the potential consumers identified in this study. It is understood that it will not be providing heat to surrounding developments, which indicates that no appropriate heat consumers have yet been identified.

5.18 If a heat network were to become viable in this area it is likely that a number of other developments in Servernside (including the Severnside Energy Recovery Centre) would provide a more appropriate heat source in the first instance, due to its continuous generation, compared to the Proposed Development which will be more intermittent. The Energy Recovery Centre is likely to be a more consistent and predictable heat source for consumers as it is expected to run as a base load plant rather than the intermittent operation expected for the Proposed Development, reducing the need for top-up provision from alternative sources, and so a more efficient system as a whole. This would however reduce the available heat loads in the area, further reducing the potential for the Proposed Development’s provision of CHP. Bericote Avlon Development

5.19 Planning permission was granted in August 2011 for up to 120,000 square metres (m2) of manufacturing and distribution developments. The site is located within 1km to the north of the Proposed Development

9. This development may provide future heat loads for a district

heating system, however due to the industrial nature of this site it does not necessarily guarantee that the units when developed will have heating requirements or if they do that they would be of sufficient scale to make connections viable. Central Park Western Approach Development

5.20 Central Park is a warehouse and distribution park development with 93,000m2 capacity10

that is currently under construction to the northeast of the Proposed Development Site. These units currently have planning permissions in place and are being offered as a design and build packages. However, similar to the Bericote Avlon development, due to its industrial nature it is not guaranteed that they will prove to have suitable heating loads to enable a connection to a district heating system. Cribbs/Patchway New Neighbourhood

5.21 There are plans currently in consultation on the development of an entirely new neighbourhood in the Cribbs/Patchway area 3-6km to the east of the Proposed Development. These would include an additional 5,700 dwellings, 6 new schools and additional commercial, community and retail space to be constructed over a period of 10-15 years

11. At the time of writing, initial framework plans had been submitted to the council

and the landowners were waiting on a response to the proposals.

5.22 This new development could provide a substantial opportunity for the development of a district heating network in this area. However, the viability of this will depend on the density of the heat loads. Though there are expected to be a large number of additional dwellings developed, if these are single storey houses rather than communal high density units, such

9http://www.bericoteproperties.com/land-portfolio/avlon-bristol/overview/ 10http://www.centralparkbristol.co.uk/the-scheme/ariel/ 11http://www.southglos.gov.uk/Documents/Cribbs%20Patchway%20Exhibition%20material.pdf



as blocks of flats, the large amount of network required to connect each of them and associated cost and heat losses would likely make large scale connections unviable.

GIS Mapping and Heat Benchmarking

5.23 Building on the information from above, GIS mapping and satellite information of the search area has been used to conduct a more refined search to identify specific consumers. This approach also enables clusters of heat loads to be identified in greater detail. A number of consumers with a moderate heat demand may, when considered together, provide opportunities for district heating network where individual developments would not.

5.24 In accordance with the DTI guidance document, searches for heat loads such as industrial consumers, hotels, leisure centres, large public buildings, hospitals, universities/teaching institutions, prisons and defence installations have been undertaken. These categories represent buildings that are likely to have significant heat loads and may have existing centralised plant systems, which simplifies connection to a district heating network.

5.25 Sites with an area greater than 2,000m2 were used as an initial measure for buildings which may have relatively large heat consumptions. A full list of the buildings found in these categories is included in Annex B.

5.26 Following this initial identification process a heat benchmarking exercise was undertaken to understand the size of the heat demands. The approximate area of the buildings was calculated based on URS’s in house GIS tool. CIBSE Guide F and CIBSE TM46 typical practice benchmarks were used to identify the approximate heat demands.

5.27 Table 2 details the benchmarks assumed.

Table 2: Heat Benchmarks

Type of building

Fossil Fuel Thermal

Benchmark (MWh/m2 p.a)

Schools – Primary/ Secondary 0.15

Retail / Warehouse 0.17

Major retail/ Department stores 0.19

Leisure Pool Centre 1.13

Combined centre 0.59

Industrial/Distribution Warehouse 0.023

Chemical factory 0.595

5.28 The heat users within the region of interest were categorised into three groups based on their annual estimated heat consumption, in order to identify those with the greatest potential and eliminate those with the lowest. Table 3 illustrates these three bands of heat demand and their limiting values.

5.29 Industrial buildings and warehouses tend to vary considerably in their heat usage depending on the nature of their operations. Therefore for such buildings a number of benchmarks have been consulted in order to determine the most appropriate. These have ranged from zero heat consumption up to 0.18 MWh/m2. In order to provide a conservative



view on the initial heat benchmarking assessment 25% of the good practice CIBSE F industrial benchmark has been utilised. The next recommended stage to determine the viability of connection, following this initial assessment, would be to gather metered data from the identified potential consumers to develop detailed heat profiles.

Table 3: Heat Load Categories

Category Heat consumption (MWh p.a)

High potential above 5000

Medium potential 1000-5000

Low potential below 1000

5.30 This process removed all of the schools as potential opportunities and many of the smaller distribution/warehouse units. The remaining heat loads were then further refined to take into account their proximity to the Proposed Development and if there were any particular areas of clusters which could provide opportunities for the development of district heating networks. The results of this are shown in Figure 6 and Table 4.

5.31 From this initial analysis the development with the greatest potential was found to be the Astra Zeneca site due to its close proximity to the Proposed Development and its relatively high peak heat requirement of 7MW and an estimated annual heat consumption of 11,000 MWh per annum.



23

Figure 6: Identified Heat Loads in a 5km Radius



24

Table 4: Identified Heat Loads in a 5km Radius

Map Reference

Building Type of UseEstimated. Heat load (MWhp.a)

Heat User Category

Proximity to Site

Proximity to a Cluster

Overall Potential

A Astra ZenecaIndustrial/trading

estate 11,353 High High High High

BWestern Approach

DistributionIndustrial/trading

estate 3,846 Medium High High High

C Chittening Industrial EstateIndustrial/trading

estate 1,076 Medium High Medium Medium

D Severnside trading estateIndustrial/trading

estate 1,895 Medium Medium Low Low

E St Martins Industrial ParkIndustrial/trading

estate 315 Low High Low Medium

FSt Brendan's Industrial

EstateIndustrial/trading

estate 1,279 Medium Low High Medium

GCabot Park Industrial


estate 1,904 Medium Medium Medium Medium

HCrowley way Industrial


estate 865 Low Low High Medium

I St andrews trading estateIndustrial/trading

estate 1,704 Medium Low High Medium

JCribs Causeway Centre

industrial estateIndustrial/trading

estate 234 Low Low Medium Low

K Distribution CentreIndustrial/trading

estate 902 Low Low Medium Low

L The Venue Retail Park Retail Park 1,360 Medium Low Medium Medium

M Cribbs Mall Retail Park Retail Park 14,280 High Low High Medium

N Asda Retail Park 2,176 Medium Low High Medium

O Patchway trading estateIndustrial/trading

estate 1,205 Medium Low Medium Medium



6 CHP ANALYSIS

6.1 The development comprises of up to 1,400 MWe of generating capacity based on a combination of: one or two natural-gas-fired CCGT with a generating capacity of up to 700 MWe each and peaking plant units with a generating capacity of up to 240 MWe.

6.2 The peaking plant(s) will be designed to ‘black start’ on distillate in the event of failure of the national grid, to help restart the grid. The peaking plant will also provide fast response ‘top up’ supply to the grid during peak periods.

6.3 Electricity will be generated by the gas turbines by mixing combusted gas and compressed air which, as the pressure is reduced, expands and rotates the turbine blades, which then drives a generator. After the hot gases pass through the turbine they are then channelled through a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) boiler to provide high pressure steam to a steam turbine which in turn drives a generator providing additional electricity. The use of a steam turbine in addition to the gas turbine provides the combined cycle rather than single. The waste gases are then exhausted to the atmosphere form the HRSG boiler. The steam turbine is cooled and its output optimised by using a condenser, which circulates the water to hybrid cooling towers.

6.4 The most viable option for heat extraction is from the steam turbine, which has the most compatible temperatures for district heating applications and the least impact on power generation. However, the higher the pressure of steam extracted from the turbine, the greater the corresponding loss of electrical efficiency. It is therefore recommended to extract the heat at the lowest compatible pressure required by the consumers. For District Heating applications providing hot water for space heating and DHW generation in particular this may be Low Pressure (LP) steam, or where possible Medium or Low Temperature Hot Water.

6.5 The Proposed Development has been designed to operate for at least 7,700 hours per annum on average, equivalent to an overall average availability of 85-90%. The actual running hours of the turbines will be subject to demand. It is however, as detailed in the Project Description report, anticipated that the CCGTs will actually operate at 31% load over the course of its lifetime (an average of 2,716 hours per year).

6.6 The peaking plant will be limited to a maximum 1,500 hours a year, which is approximately 17% load. This is a maximum, and in reality the operation will be intermittent, infrequent and cannot be guaranteed. For this reason the option of CHP from the peaking plant has been discarded and is not considered further in this assessment.

6.7 A CCGT plant such as the Proposed Development operated as a CHP system can be entitled to fiscal and other incentives such as Climate Change Levy (CCL) exemption and Enhanced Capital Allowances (ECA) where applicable, if it qualifies under the good quality CHP programme.

6.8 This following section investigates the potential quality of CHP for any hypothetical heat network. In assessing qualification as a Good Quality CHP (GQCHP) system, there are a number of key criteria involved. In order for the power outputs under annual operation to be fully eligible for CCL exemption and ECAs, the ‘quality index’ of its performance must be greater than 105 for new plants with a Power Efficiency of greater than 20% under annual operation

12. The guidance note GN-10, available from “quality assurance for CHP

schemes” provides the calculation methodology for the Quality Index (QI). The formula

12 http://chpqa.decc.gov.uk/guidance-notes/



below is abstracted from GN-10, Table GN10-2, and is applicable for the calculation of QI for natural gas fired new plants.

Fuel: Natural gas Formula: QI = (172 x ηpower) + (115 x ηheat) (where the installed capacity range is greater than 500 MWe) ηpower = Electrical efficiency ηheat = Thermal efficiency (based on useful heat supplied)

6.9 The amount of power and heat generated by the plant will depend on its mode of operation. At this stage of development, full thermal modelling has not been undertaken on the CCGT units to understand the impact on efficiencies if heat is extracted from the CCGT system. Notional efficiencies have therefore been derived from similar systems to give an indication of the performance of the system and the scale of heat extraction required to meet minimum CHPQA requirements.

6.10 Table 5 summarises the indicative CHPQA performance of three notional operational modes at full output, based on a CCGT generating station up to 1,400MWe. This assumes the system operates at these outputs all year round with all heat extracted used usefully for heat supply to consumers, and with no other heat source, or fuel source, providing top-up heat to the system. Without detailed thermal modelling these are outline estimates only at this stage and will vary depending on actual annual operation.

Table 5: Notional CHPQA Calculation

6.11 Table 5 indicates that MTHW extraction could be expected to provide greater efficiencies than steam extraction and that a relatively small proportion of heat compared to electrical generation would need to be extracted to meet the minimum good quality CHP criteria, with a relatively low impact on the electrical efficiencies. However, though a small proportion of the peak electrical generation, 140-200 MWth in terms of heat supply represents a very substantial heat load. For example one of the largest heat loads found in the vicinity, Astra Zeneca, has a peak heat demand of only 7 MW. Finding sufficient numbers of heat consumers for this scale of heat generation to achieve the good quality CHP criteria is therefore not at this time likely to be achievable.

6.12 In line with the CHP-R guidance, published by the EA, a CHP-R Assessment Form has been completed in order to identify the CHP operating envelope and quantify its potential performance see Annex C – CHP-R Assessment Form.

Scenario Fuel In MWHeat

Extracted MWth

Gross Electrical

Output MWe

Thermal Efficiency %

Electrical Efficiency %

Total Efficiency %

CHPQA

Zero Heat Extract 2414 0 1400 0% 58% 58% 100MTHW Extract 2414 141 1379 6% 57% 63% 105Steam Extract 2414 195 1343 8% 56% 64% 105



7 TECHNICAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 This section provides technical and commercial considerations for the potential development of a CHP based heat network based around the Proposed Development. These are not exhaustive but do outline some key high-level considerations. District Heating Network Considerations

7.2 Network Route - The route and sizing of the network need to be carefully considered so that suitable provision for current and future connections are allowed for whilst minimising the length of pipe network installed in order to reduce installation costs and heat losses.

7.3 Outside of the site the pipework would need to be routed along highways, and in order to do so the Applicant would need to comply with the requirements of the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 (NRSWA) and other relevant design guides for Highways installations of buried pipework. Traffic management would be required and limitations to working hours identified. Where works may be required to route network through private land negotiations and legal agreements concerning for wayleaves and easements would be required with the land owner, which would influence the installation costs and timeframes.

7.4 The level of existing sub-surface utilities will influence the potential routing of the district heating pipework. Congested areas may provide a potential constraint/limitation on the district heating network routing which could influence the viability of a network if long lengths are required to route round certain areas or if the pipework needs to be buried to such a depth that it becomes impractical to install.

7.5 Physical Constraints - In terms of physical constraints for installing a district heating network the most significant obstacle in close proximity are the various drainage channels including the Red Rhine and the railway line situated between the Proposed Development Site and the existing AstraZeneca site which may cause some challenges for the installation of district heating network. In the event that a suitable district heating load were to become viable beyond the Red Rhine, appropriate infrastructure would need to be installed to facilitate the expansion of a network and this may reduce the viability of connecting these particular heat loads. The rail lines currently running to the south of the Severn View Industrial Park appear at present to be unused, however suitable agreements would need to be put in place to install infrastructure in this area.

7.6 At a greater distance of 2km and 4km respectively the M49 and M5 motorways may influence the viability of expansion of a network to the east of the Proposed Development if the Cribbs/Patchway connections prove to be viable, due to the complexity and additional cost associated with these crossings. The River Avon to the south of the Proposed Development Site provides a natural barrier to the expansion of a network beyond this point; however this is just outside of the core 5km radius under consideration so is not anticipated to have a significant influence. Heat Supply Considerations

7.7 Grade of Heat Supply - The form of heat that is exported by the Proposed Development to a district heating network, whether this is steam, MTHW or LTHW, is an important consideration for maximising efficiencies and compatibility with the existing network. A steam off-take reduces the overall efficiency of the turbine to a greater extent than a MTHW off-take would. Heat losses from steam networks are higher than MTHW and the majority of potential consumers identified are likely to require MTHW or LTHW rather than



steam. However, a steam system could provide greater flexibility of heat supply depending on the grade of heat required in the area.

7.8 Where no suitable heat loads can be connected to at the time of construction the system should be created to be CHP ready (CHPR) so that it is able to provide heat as and when it becomes viable. Such provision can be made at the design stage, for instance identifying points for steam or MTHW take-off and allowing sufficient space around these points for access for fitting appropriate equipment for extraction such as heat exchangers, pipework and associated control and metering systems, in addition to other additional heat extraction equipment.

7.9 System Resilience - District heating systems can either provide all of the heating demands of the consumer, including peaking and resilience requirements, or just a proportion. If the entire heat demands are provided this system is dependent on sufficient resilience being delivered from the central heat generating source, typically in the form of top-up and back-up boilers in addition to the heat off-take from the turbine. This is generally a more attractive solution to potential consumers, providing greater space and cost savings from operating only one system, but this does require additional plant to be provided by the district heating supplier to maintain resilience to the system as a whole. In general this system tends to provide a more efficient district heating system that can benefit from greater economies of scale and simpler control by centralising all of the heat generating plant. If all the heat demands of the consumer are not provided by a connection to a district network they would need to maintain their own top-up and back-up facilities to meet peak demands, with the Proposed Development providing base load only.

7.10 Absorption Cooling - Heat could also be supplied via the district heating network to enable cooling to be generated by absorption chillers on the consumer’s site. This would provide an additional heat load for the system, which could optimise the use of heat particularly during summer, usually the lowest seasonal point of utilisation, when there are only typically Domestic Hot Water (DHW) demands. A key consideration for this heat supply would be the need to install absorption chillers, and associated heat rejection equipment, on the consumer’s site, with the associated costs and space provisions. This has not been considered in detail at this stage of the project.

7.11 Contamination Issues - The heat supplied by the system is likely to be provided by a MTHW or steam off-take from the turbine. If a steam system is selected this will be in the form of a flow pipe providing steam and a return pipe with condensate. To ensure that the condensate is clean and does not contain any contaminates, which would negatively impact the operation of the turbine, considerations around suitable detection and/or filtration would need to be made at the design stage.

Retrofit of Existing Buildings

7.12 Plant Lifecycle - Where existing developments have heat generating plant (e.g. a boiler system) that has remaining life, motivation to connect to the system from the outset may not be high due to capital cost of connection to the consumer. This could reduce the number of viable consumers at least in the short term.

7.13 System Design - Compatibility of consumer secondary side systems (i.e. the heating system components beyond the central generating boiler plant) to a district heating system may influence the viability of a connection. There will be a cost of bringing district heating pipe to the building. There will be a further cost to ensure that the customer is able to successfully utilise the heat provided. This secondary side element will require detailed site investigation and may result in the connection becoming unviable.



7.14 Compatibility of Systems - Pressure and temperature compatibilities are important considerations. Generally if the operating pressures and temperatures of the network are higher than that required by the consumer then a heat exchanger can relatively simply provide a hydraulic break and temperature reduction to the appropriate range. If the temperatures of the network are lower than that required by the consumer, the heat may not be useable or may only provide a partial solution to the consumer as pre-heat, which would then require the consumer to maintain their own plant in addition to the district heating supply. Considerations for Connection to New Build Developments

7.15 System Design - Connections to new developments will typically provide a simpler district heating connection in technical terms compared to retrofit. This is due to the greater ability to influence the design of the consumer side systems to optimise the connection to the particular district heating system, which a retrofit scenario will not typically offer to the same extent.

Commercial Considerations

7.16 Heat Price and Connection Charge - Suitable mechanisms for an appropriate heat price and potential connection charge for consumers would need to be established which provide the consumer with an equivalent or better than whole life cost against appropriate alternative systems, while providing sufficient revenues to enable a viable district heating system to be operated.

7.17 Heat Supply Agreements - The length of heat supply agreement that a consumer can enter in to is to be considered. District heating system heat supply agreements are often long term in nature in order to ensure a revenue stream against the investment made in constructing the network and installing the CHP plant. Commercial properties may be on short-term leases that could deter potential consumers from connecting to the district heating network. To an extent this can be contended with by ensuring that the heat supply agreement is of a similar length of time to the life of the alternative plant system.

7.18 Number of Consumers - In order to ensure that the district heating system is viable it is necessary to establish sufficient numbers of commitments from consumers to connect, particularly at the early stages of a project. This can frequently be difficult to achieve, given resistance to change and generally a conservative approach of organisations to technologies that might appear to have a high level of risk.



8 CONCLUSIONS

8.1 This study has identified, via a variety of sources, the most promising heat demand users in the vicinity of the Proposed Development. The estimates of heat demand have been based on floor areas, estimated from GIS data and satellite information, and benchmark energy consumption figures derived from recognised publications. This methodology has limitations, as actual energy use for a given site has the potential to deviate considerably from the norm that is represented by benchmarks. Nevertheless, given the combination of sources for identifying significant heat loads in the area, this study provides reasonable confidence that there is no single very significant users (e.g. >20MWth) of heat within the primary 5km radius of the study, and that the local heat loads available vary considerably in magnitude, heat profile and proximity from the Proposed Development Site.

8.2 The two areas of greatest potential for connection to a district heating system have been identified as the Astra Zeneca site and the Western Approach Distribution Centre. Both these developments are in reasonably close proximity to the Proposed Development and from the information available at this stage may represent reasonable heat loads to enable effective supply from a DH system. However, both of these sites, as with the majority of potential heat consumers identified, are industrial in nature and therefore likely to have bespoke requirements for heat, which may reduce their potential.

8.3 With the exception of the these two areas, there are predominantly only light industrial facilities (existing or being consented) in reasonable proximity to the Proposed Development Site, which are not considered individually or collectively to offer great viability to become customers of a successful DH network at this time. This is a combined function of both their relatively diffuse locations, low anticipated heat demands, and the costs associated with DH connection, commercial agreements and administration.

8.4 There are currently a number of smaller scale energy facilities identified within 1km of the Proposed Development Site. It is understood that none of these facilities will be providing heat to surrounding developments, indicating that no appropriate heat consumers have yet been identified by these developers. These facilities are generally of a smaller scale compared to the Proposed Development (circa 20 to 30 MWe each) and if developed are likely to be operating continuously, which is likely to be more compatible with the scale and nature of heat demands that have been identified in the area. If a heat network were to become viable it is likely that these other facilities would be better placed to provide a more appropriate heat source in the first instance, due to their continuous generation compared to the Proposed Development which will be generating significantly more intermittently. These other facilities would therefore more likely to be able to provide a more consistent and predictable heat source for consumers, reducing the need for top-up provision from alternative sources, and so establishing a more efficient system as a whole. This would reduce the available heat loads in the area, further reducing the potential for the Proposed Development’s provision of CHP.

8.5 In conclusion, although the plant could provide significant volumes of heat when operating, given the anticipated intermittent operating regime for the proposed development, it is not considered that a CHP solution would be viable without significant additional back-up heat production. Additionally, heat mapping studies that have been carried out indicates there is no significant density of heat demand currently available in reasonable proximity to justify the development of a heat network. For those heat loads that have been identified, or may become available in the future, it is considered likely that these would be more effectively supplied by the smaller scale energy facilities already proposed, consented and/or under development within 1km of the Proposed Development Site



8.6 Despite these initial findings, the Applicant will ensure that the Proposed Development is designed to be ‘CHP Ready’ and will carry out an on-going review of CHP potential, including:

• Maintaining a dialogue with heat users already approached; • Setting up a working group involving all key stakeholders to maintain momentum; • Carrying out an annual reviews to determine if there have been sufficient changes

in circumstances to warrant a new technical and financial review; and • Re-visiting the technical and economic assessments at least every 5 years or when

a change in circumstances warrants.

8.7 The above will be been incorporated into a Requirement contained within the draft Development Consent Order.



32

ANNEX A – SITE LOCATION



ANNEX B – IDENTIFIED HEAT LOADS

Table 6: Identified schools in the 5km search area

Name of School Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Name of School

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Severn Beach Primary School

2 BS35 4PP Woodstock School

4 BS10 7AH

Harris School of Motoring

3 BS35 4NH Henbury Court Primary School

4 BS10 7QH

Pilning School(SE-bound)

3 BS35 4JG Avonmonth C.E.V.C. Primary School

5 BS11 9LG

Saint Peter’s Church of England vc Primary School

3 BS13 8EF Avon Primary School

5 BS11 9NG

NAS Anderson School

4 BS35 4JN Wesley College 5 BS10 7QD

Bank Leaze Primary and Nursery School

4 BS11 0SN Long Cross Primary Nursery

5 BS11 0PA

Saint Bede’s Catholic College

4 BS11 0SU Weston Park Primary School

5 BS11 0LP

City of Bristol College

4 BS32 4QD Kingsweston School

5 BS11 0UT

Bristol Gateway School

4 BS2 9UR Blaise Primary School

5 BS10 7EJ

Henbury School 4 BS10 7QH Red Bus Nursery & Pre-school

5 BS9 2PR

Table 7: Identified supermarkets in the 5km search area

Supermarket Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Supermarket

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Tesco Kitchen 1 BS10 7SD The Mall at Cribbs Causeway

4 BS34 5DG

Booker Avonmouth 4 BS11 9YB Mower Supermarket 5 BS11 9DE



Supermarket Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Supermarket

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Aldi 4 BS10 7EL GymRatz 5 BS11 9EG

Bristol Cribbs Homeplus

5 BS34 5TS Bobbetts 5 BS11 0DW

Morrisons 5 BS10 7UD Asda Supercentre 5 BS34 5TL

Tesco Homeplus 5 BS34 5TS

Table 8: Identified retailers and leisure centres in the 5km search area

Retailer & Leisure Centres

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Retailer &

Leisure Centres

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Colton Wood Products

1 BS11 0YB Currys PC World 4 BS34 5DG

Gloster Furniture Ltd

2 BS35 4GG Harveys Furniture 4 BS34 5UL

Bristol Street Commercials 2 BS11 0YW Sports Direct 4 BS34 5UR

Seven Beach Antiques

3 BS35 4PE Costco 5 BS11 9EZ

Henbury Leisure Centre 4 BS10 7NG Country Baskets 5 BS11 9DJ

HorwoodHomewares Ltd

4 BS11 9HX Proton Cars (UK) Ltd

5 BS11 9YR

B&Q Cribbs Causeway

4 BS10 7TX Admiral Harding Ltd

5 BS11 9DJ

TK Maxx 4 BS34 5TS Wincanton Group 5 BS11 9HA

Hobbycraft Bristol 4 BS34 5TS

Table 9: Identified hotels in the 5km search area

Name of the Hotel

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Name of the

Hotel

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Berwick Lodge 3 BS10 7TD The Royal Hotel 5 BS11 9AD

Premier Inn Bristol Cribbs Causeway

4 BS10 7TQ Bradford Hotel 5 BS11 9LW



Name of the Hotel

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Name of the

Hotel

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Travelodge Hotel 4 BS10 7TL Cedar Lodge 5 BS10 6JU

Best Western Henbury Lodge Hotel

4 BS10 7QQ Midland Lodge 5 BS11 9AD

Kingsmead Lodge 5 BS11 9NJ The Miles Arms Hotel

5 BS11 9LW

Shirehampton Lodge Hotel

5 BS11 0DJ

Table 10: Identified hospitals in the 5km search area

Name of Medical Facility

Approx. Distance

(km) Post code Name of Medical

Facility

Approx. Distance

(km) Post code

St Peters Hospice Brentry

5 BS10 6NL Greenway Community Practice

5 BS10 6AF

Humphry Repton House

5 BS10 6NA

Table 11: Identified industrial and trading estates in the 5km search area

Industrial/ Trading Estates

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Industrial/

Trading Estates

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

Astra Zeneca 1 BS10 7ZE St Brendan's Industrial Estate. 17 units

4 BS11 9EZ

Western Approach Distribution. 10 units

2 BS35 4GG Distribution Centre. 3 units 4 BS10 7TL

Chittening Industrial Estate. 7 units

2 BS11 0YB St andrews trading estate. 19 units.

4 BS11 9YE

Severnside trading estate. 7 units

3 BS11 9AG Cribs Causeway Centre industrial estate. 4 units

4 BS10 7TL



Industrial/ Trading Estates

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode Industrial/

Trading Estates

Approx. Distance

(km) Postcode

St Martins Industrial Park. 4 units

2 BS11 0RS Crowley way Industrial Estate. 4 units.

5 BS11 9EZ

Cabot Park Industrial Estate. 8 units

3 BS11 0YW Patchway trading estate. 12 units

5 BS34 5TA



ANNEX C – CHP-R ASSESSMENT FORM

# Description Units Notes/Instructions

Requirement 1: Plant, Plant Location and Potential Heat loads

1.1 Plant Name Seabank 3

1.2 Plant Description Natural gas fired CCGT and peaking plant with a total generating capacity of up to 1400 MWe.

1.3 Plant Location (Postcode/GridRef)

Approximate postcode BS10 7SP. See Annex A - Site Location.

1.4 Factors Influencing Selection of Plant Location

• Potential CHP opportunities: The site is within 10 km of Bristol city centre, 5 km of Avonmouth and a in the order of 2 km of the communities Severn Beach, Hallen, Pilning and Easter Compton.

• Sufficient land available: Sufficient land has been identified, see plant layouts below.

• Current land use: Grassland criss-crossed with ditches that flow into the Severn Estuary

• Compatibility with relevant Local Plans: Bristol Local Development Framework has identified Avonmouth as having potential for CHP/CCHP plant, but also recognises that in the short term a connection to the City Centre is not likely to be viable.

• Environmental considerations: These are discussed in detail in the EIA chapters.

• Proximity to suitable utilities and grid export connections: Existing power station developments have provided appropriate provisions in proximity to the site.

• Suitability for CCS: CCS is applicable to the site. Suitable provisions have been allowed for.

1.5 Operation of Plant

a) Proposed Operation Plant Load

%

The Proposed Development has been sized for an overall average availability of 85-90% per annum. Actual run hours are subject to demand and are anticipated to likely be in the region of 31%.

b) Thermal Input at Proposed Operational Plant Load

MW 2310 MWth for CCGT and 674 MWth for peaking @ 100% load

c) Net Electrical Output at Proposed Operational Plant Load

MW Up to 1,400 MWe



d) Net Electrical Efficiency at Proposed Operational Plant Load

% CCGT: 58.09% / peaking: 37.36%. The total efficiency will be between these two points.

e) Maximum Plant Load % 100

f) Thermal Input at Maximum Plant Load


g) Net Electrical Output at Maximum Plant Load

MW Up to 1,400 MW

h) Net Electrical Efficiency at Maximum Plant Load

% Anticipated to be in the range of 60%

i) Thermal Input at Minimum Stable Plant Load


j) Net Electrical Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load

% CCGT: 53.06% / peaking: 33.86% / The total efficiency will be between these two points @ 60% minimum load assumed

1.6 Identified Potential Heat Loads

As detailed above no immediate suitable heat loads have not been found.

1.7 Selected Heat Load(s)

a) Category (e.g. Industrial/District Heating)

A mixture of industrial, commercial and residential heat uses have been considered.

b) Maximum Heat Load Extraction Requirement

MW N/A

1.8 Export and Return Requirements of Heat Load

a) Description of Heat Load Extraction

Low pressure steam

b) Description of Heat Load Profile

Variable

c) Export Pressure bar a

District heating applications for space heating and/or DHW generation in the region of 6. For industrial process use this would be specific to future connection requirements.

d) Export Temperature 0C

District heating applications for space heating and/or DHW generation in the region of 80-95 0C. For industrial process use this would be specific to future connection requirements.

e) Export Flow t/h N/A

f) Return Pressure bar a

District heating applications for space heating and/or DHW generation in the region of 3. For industrial process use this would be specific to future connections requirements.

g) Return Temperature 0C

For district heating applications for space heating and/or DHW generation in the region of 50-60 0C. For industrial process use this would be specific to future connection requirements.

h) Return Flow t/h N/A



Requirement 2: Identification of CHP Envelop

2 Comparative Efficiency of a Standalone Boiler for supplying the Heat Load

90 % LHV

90

2.1

Heat Extraction at 100% Plant Load. For the calculations below the following inputs for the extraction have been taken into account: P=4bar, m=55kg/s (aprox. 20% of steam mass flow). The extraction comes directly from a ST extract port so the temperature is fixed at 270 degC with an enthalpy of 3008 kJ/kg. The steam is not desuperheated. Delivery pressure approx. 3 bar. These are total values for both STs.

a) Maximum Heat Load Extraction at 100% Plant Load

MW 165 MWth

b) Maximum Heat Extraction Export Flow at 100% Plant Load

t/h 198 t/h (55 kg/s)

c) CHP Mode Net Electrical Output at 100% Plant Load

MW Peaking output remains unchangeable, CCGT: 1178 MWe

d) CHP Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at 100% Plant Load

% CCGT: 56.63%

e) CHP Mode Net CHP Efficiency at 100% Plant Load

% CCGT: 63.67%

f) Reduction in Primary Energy Usage for CHP Mode at 100% Plant Load

%

CHP-R guidance 2013 has been used. CHPH =63.67%, CHPE =56.63%, RefH =89%, RefE =58.09%. The outcome gives 40.48%

2.2 Heat Extraction at Minimum Stable Plant Load. 60%. At the load below the extraction pressure drops to 2.42 bar and the temperature at 263 degC. The enthalpy of the fluid goes down to 2993 kJ/kg

a) Maximum Heat Load Extraction at Minimum Stable Plant Load

MW 164 MWth

b) Heat Extraction Export Flow at Minimum Stable Plant Load

t/h 198 t/h (55 kg/s)

c) CHP Mode Net Electrical Output at Minimum Stable Plant Load


d) CHP Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load

% CCGT: 51.04%

e) CHP Mode Net CHP Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load

% CCGT: 60.77%

f) Reduction in Primary Energy Usage for CHP Mode at Minimum Stable Plant Load

%

CHP-R guidance 2013 has been used. CHPH =60.77% CHPE =51.04% RefH =89%



RefE =58.09%. The outcome gives 35.96%

2.3

Can the Plant supply the Selected Identified Potential Heat Load (i.e is the Identified Potential Heat Load within the 'CHP Envelope')?

Yes

Requirement 3: Operation of the Plant with the Selected Identified Heat Load

3.1 Proposed Operation of Plant with CHP

a) CHP Mode Net Electrical Output at Proposed Operational Plant Load

MW N/A

b) CHP Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at Proposed Operational Plant Load

% N/A

c) CHP Mode Net CHP Efficiency at Proposed Operational Plant Load

% N/A

d)

Reduction in Net Electrical Output for CHP Mode at Proposed Operational Plant Load

MW N/A

e)

Reduction in Net Electrical Efficiency for CHP Mode at Proposed Operational Plant Load

% N/A

f)

Reduction in Primary Energy Usage for CHP Mode at Proposed Operational Plant Load

N/A

h) Z Ratio N/A

Requirement 4: Technical Provisions and Space Requirements

4.1 Description of Likely Suitable Extraction Points

Steam turbine extraction port/s. Hot reheat inlet.

4.2

Description of Potential Options which could be incorporated in the Plant, should be realised outside the 'CHP Envelope'

Thermal storage and/or stand-by boiler systems could be utilised.



4.3

Description of how the future Costs and Burdens associated with supplying the Identified Heat Load / Potential CHP Opportunity have been minimised through the implementation of an appropriate CHP-R design

Minimisation of heat losses and best technical approach has been used in order to design the CHP extraction.

4.4

Provision of Site Layout of the Plant, indicating Available Space which could be made available for CHP-R

Space should be taken into account for the Heat Exchangers that exchange heat between LP steam and water and space in the steam turbine building as well as for the piping that will transfer the fluid etc. See indicative layouts below for single and multi-shaft configurations.

Requirement 5: Integration of CHP and Carbon Capture

5.1 Is the Plant required to be CCR?

Yes

5.2

Export and Return Requirements Identified for Carbon Capture. A separate small CCGT unit has been taken into account to supply the heat for the CCR as the steam extraction from the main CCGT STs has not been accepted. The new CCGT will be named CHP2 as a reference

100% Plant Load

a) Heat Load Extraction for Carbon Capture at 100% Plant Load

MW

Carbon capture plant needs approx. 225kg/s of LP steam with an enthalpy of approx. 2763KJ/kg. The above states that the thermal load is approx. 621 MWth

b) Description of Heat Export (e.g. Stream/Hot Water)

Heat will be extracted from CHP2 as LP steam and directed to Carbon capture

c) Export Pressure bar a 4.45 d) Export Temperature 0C 154 e) Export Flow t/h 810 t/h (225 kg/s) f) Return Pressure bar a 5.4 g) Return Temperature 0C 138 h) Return Flow t/h 810 t/h (225 kg/s)

i) Likely Suitable Extraction Points

There are no extraction points; a new CCGT (CHP2) has been taken into account.

Minimum Stable Plant Load. The heat for the carbon capture is not extracted from the main CCGT so there is no impact on it in any way, values remain the same.

j) Heat Load Extraction for Carbon Capture at Minimum Stable Plant Load

MW

Carbon capture plant needs approx. 225kg/s of LP steam with an enthalpy of approx. 2763KJ/kg. The above states that the thermal load is approx. 621 MWth

k) Description of Heat Export (e.g. Stream/Hot Water)

Heat will be extracted from CHP2 as LP steam and directed to Carbon capture

l) Export Pressure bar a 4.45 m) Export Temperature 0C 154



n) Export Flow t/h 810 t/h (225 kg/s) o) Return Pressure bar a 5.4 p) Return Temperature 0C 138 q) Return Flow t/h 810 t/h (225 kg/s)

r) Likely Suitable Extraction Points

There are no extraction points a new CCGT (CHP2) has been taken into account.

5.3 Operation of Plant with Carbon Capture (without CHP). The heat for the carbon capture is not extracted from the main CCGT so there is no impact on it in any way, values remain the same.

a) Maximum Plant Load with Carbon Capture

% 100

b) Carbon Capture Mode Thermal Input at Maximum Plant Load

MW 621 MWth

c) Carbon Capture Mode Net Electrical Output at Maximum Plant Load

MW CCGT: 1160 MWe / peaking: 240 MWe

d) Carbon Capture Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at Maximum Plant Load

% CCGT: 58.09% / peaking: 37.36% / The total efficiency will be between these two points.

e) Minimum Stable Plant Load with CCS

% 100

f) Carbon Capture Mode CCS Thermal Input at Minimum Stable Plant Load

MW 621 MWth

g) Carbon Capture Mode Net Electrical Output at Minimum Stable Plant Load

MW CCGT: 794 MWe / peaking: 135 MWe

h) Carbon Capture Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load

% CCGT: 53.06% / peaking: 33.86% / The total efficiency will be between these two points @ 60% minimum load assumed

5.4 Heat Extraction for CHP at 100% Plant Load with Carbon Capture [H]. The heat for the carbon capture is not extracted from the main CCGT so there is no impact on it.

a) Maximum Heat Load Extraction at 100% Plant Load with Carbon Capture

MW 165 MWth

b) Maximum Heat Extraction Export Flow with 100% Plant Load with Carbon Capture

t/h 198 t/h (55 kg/s)

c) Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net Electrical Output at 100% Plant Load


d) Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at 100% Plant Load

% CCGT: 56.63%



e) Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net CHP Efficiency at 100% Plant Load

% CCGT: 63.67%

f)

Reduction in Primary Energy Usage for Carbon Capture and CHP Mode at 100% Plant Load

%

CHP-R guidance 2013 has been used. CHPH =63.67% CHPE =56.63% RefH =89% RefE =58.09% The outcome gives 40.48%

5.5 Heat Extraction at Minimum Stable Plant Load with Carbon Capture. The heat for the carbon capture is not extracted from the main CCGT so there is no impact on it.

a)

Maximum Heat Load Extraction at Minimum Stable Plant Load with Carbon Capture

MW 164 MWth

b)

Maximum Heat Extraction Export Flow at Minimum Stable Plant Load with Carbon Capture

t/h 198 t/h (55 kg/s)

c)

Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net Electrical Output at Minimum Stable Plant Load Plant Load


d)

Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net Electrical Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load Plant Load

% CCGT: 51.04%

e) Carbon Capture and CHP Mode Net CHP Efficiency at Minimum Stable Plant Load

% CCGT: 60.77%

f)

Reduction in Primary Energy Usage for Carbon Capture and CHP Mode at Minimum Stable Plant Load

%

CHP-R guidance 2013 has been used. CHPH =60.77% CHPE =51.04% RefH =89% RefE =58.09% The outcome gives 35.96%

5.6

Can the Plant with Carbon Capture supply the Selected Identified Potential Heat Load (i.e is the Identified Potential heat Load within the 'CHP and Carbon Capture Envelope')?

Yes

5.7

Description of Potential Options which could be incorporated in the Plant for useful integration of any realised CHP System and

The CHP thermal load can serve district heating requirements or other process uses. At the same time the plant can produce electric power and the carbon capture plant can work in parallel with no disruption as it is



Carbon Capture System fed by a small separate CCGT unit (CHP2).

Requirement 6: Economics of CHP-R

6.1 Economic Assessment of CHP-R

Suitable immediate heat loads have not be identified so a full economic assessment has not been undertaken at this stage. Qualitative assessment of available heat loads are included in the main body of this study.

BAT Assessment

Is the new plant a CHP plant at the outset (i.e are there economically viable CHP opportunities at the outset)?

No

If not, is the new plant a CHP-R plant at the outset?

Yes

Once the new plant is CHP-R, is it BAT?

Yes

Figure 7: CHP Envelope



45

Figure 8: Indicative CHP Site Layout - Single Shaft Configuration



46

Figure 9: Indicative CHP Site Layout - Multi Shaft Configuration

APPENDIX N Coversheet - SSE · Appendix N – CHP Assessment . 1 Seabank 3 CHP Assessment April...

Documents

Transcript of APPENDIX N Coversheet - SSE · Appendix N – CHP Assessment . 1 Seabank 3 CHP Assessment April...