Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 1: Project Summary

1.1 Project Title:

Clean Energy Balance (CEB) - Hydrogen Injection for Carbon Displacement

1.2 Funding Licensee:

Wales & West Utilities Ltd. (WWU)

1.3 Project Summary:

The Future of Heating strategy, published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, recognises the potential of hydrogen, produced using renewable energy sources, and injected into the gas network as an effective and efficient means of decarbonising heat. If successful, this exciting new source of energy can exploit installed and future renewable generating capacity and maximise the continued use of the existing gas infrastructure.

A key aim of this programme is to test and demonstrate the practical feasibility of injecting hydrogen into the WWU gas distribution system using a unique electrolyser powered by a renewable electricity source to produce the hydrogen.

The key benefits from the programme are:

 Local community benefits and a significant investment opportunity for the Wales & West Region  Learning that will reduce the environmental impact of using gas for generation and heat. This will help WWU and the UK achieve greenhouse gas emissions targets  Avoidance of future costs for the local community and UK if the project is successful and replicated on a commercial scale  Improved security of supply by displacing imported and non-renewable sources of gas with a sustainable alternative  Demonstrating the sustainable role the gas distribution network can play in facilitating the more efficient use of intermittent renewable electricity generation.

This innovative proposal is an exciting opportunity for WWU and its partners to provide key learning on the road to a more secure, affordable and sustainable energy mix. You will note this is a joint LCNF and NIC submission and clear demonstration of cross sector intent from WWU and WPD to develop innovative energy wide solutions utilising new thinking from expert third parties.

1.4 Funding

N IC Funding Request (£k): 3,565 (£3,565,180)

1 .4.3 Network Licensee Contribution (£k): 0 (£0)

1.4.4 External Funding - excluding from NIC/LCNF (£k): 213 (£213,220)

1 .4.5 Total Project cost (£k): 4,290 (£4,290,370)

Page 1 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 1: Project Summary continued

1.5 Cross industry ventures: If your Project is one part of a wider cross industry venture please complete the following section. A cross industry venture consists of two or more Projects which are interlinked with one Project requesting funding from the Gas Network Innovation Competition (NIC) and the other Project(s) applying for funding from the Electricity NIC and/or Low Carbon Networks (LCN) Fund.

1.5.1 Funding requested from the LCN Fund or Electricity NIC (£k, please state which other competition): 12,750 (£12,749,790) from LCN Fund (WPD T2 05 v1) 1.5.2 Please confirm if the Gas NIC Project could proceed in absence of funding being awarded for the LCN Fund or Electricity NIC Project:

YES – the Project would proceed in the absence of funding for the interlinked Project NO – the Project would not proceed in the absence of funding for the interlinked Project 1.6 List of Project Partners, External Funders and Project Supporters: Partners: CGI IT UK Ltd (£35k) ITM Power Plc (£41k) Toshiba International (Europe) Ltd (£188k) will provide the energy management systems and overall programme management via Cornwall Development Company (£24k) and learning via TRL (£39k) Wadebridge Renewable Energy Network Ltd (WREN) (£23k) Wales & West Utilities Ltd (as detailed in 1.4.3) External Funding: £10m WREN privately sourced funding into wind farm Please note: the amounts shown within this section indicate our partner investments, over and above any funding highlighted within Section 1.4.

This is a joint LCNF and NIC programme. In response to Ofgem’s comments following the ISP, the allocation of costs between strands based on customer benefits has been further refined. Detailed in Appendix A.

1.7 Timescale

1.7.1 Project Start Date: 1.7.2 Project End Date: st st 1 January 2014 31 December 2017

1.8 Project Manager Contact Details

1.8.1 Contact Name & Job Title: 1.8.3 Contact Address:

Dr John Newton (Development Manager) ITM Power PLC Unit H Sheffield Airport Business Park 1.8.2 Email & Telephone Number: Europa Link [email protected] Sheffield S9 1XU 0114 261 5960 07730 761353

Page 2 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 2: Project Description This section should be between 8 and 10 pages.

2.1 Aims and Objectives:

The Context

Clean Energy Balance (CEB) has been developed as an overarching programme of work with three funding strands (The Low Carbon Network Fund (LCNF), The Network Innovation Competition (NIC) and The Network Innovation Allowance (NIA)). Each strand has associated activities and delivery projects. Henceforth this bid refers to the CEB Programme, funding strands and component projects.

All participants in this programme fully recognise the need to innovate to deliver secure, sustainable and affordable energy for the UK. It is hoped that this programme is the first of several innovative schemes that will make a major contribution to overcoming energy challenges.

This programme will provide specific learning within the Wales and West geography. The programme will also provide the local community with a significant investment opportunity and support local employment. The outputs of the programme will be learning about the technical feasibility of hydrogen injection into gas networks and the development of sustainable, safe, secure and more affordable energy for generation requirements and heating homes. By displacing a volume of natural gas with hydrogen from a renewable source, a small reduction in local environmental emissions will also be achieved.

The Future of Heating strategy, published by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, recognises the potential of hydrogen, produced using renewable energy sources, and injected into the gas network as an effective and efficient means of decarbonising heat. If successful, this exciting new source of energy can exploit installed and future renewable generating capacity and maximise the continued use of the existing gas infrastructure.

The existing world class GB gas network has the capacity to transport renewable energy away from points of constraint on the electricity network and, in doing so, provide a means of displacing fossil natural gas and distributing a source of low-carbon heat for domestic and industrial use.

By utilising the renewable generating capacity at times when the renewable electricity is not required, the outcomes from this programme may also significantly improve the productivity of current and future renewable energy generating plant. This, coupled with the exploitation of existing gas network assets, will minimise the costs to customers of providing secure, safe and sustainable energy, for both generation and domestic heating and cooking.

Hydrogen gas injection technology has not been demonstrated in the UK. In addition, the volume of hydrogen currently permitted in the natural gas network is too low for these needs. This programme will seek to increase this limit. In parallel, it will examine the potential of cross-sector working to demonstrate hydrogen’s ability to enable the storage of renewable energy and overcome constraints in the electricity network while providing benefits to gas consumers and helping to meet UK carbon reduction targets.

The LCNF strand uses electrolysis to absorb excess electrical energy that the electrical network cannot support due to a local constraint. The NIC strand will then test hydrogen storage and injection technologies which will allow the hydrogen generated by the electrolyser, operating as an electricity demand side load, to be injected into the natural gas network and transported beyond the electricity network constraints benefiting both gas but

Page 3 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued

also electricity customers. The gas will be used by existing gas customers or used by newly installed CHP to generate electricity at the point of use. The programme will explore, using the Wales & West Utilities (WWU) Fuel poor Connection Allowance, to see if fuel poor customers can be connected to the gas network and have CHP installed, thereby addressing the needs of some off-gas fuel poor customers. Appendix B illustrates an electrolyser unit.

A separate but related Network Innovation Allowance (NIA) strand will run to obtain an exemption from the Gas Safety (Management) Regulations (GS(M)R) to allow higher levels of hydrogen to be injected into the Wadebridge medium pressure network.

This programme is expected to start in January 2014 and run for four years.

The diagram below shows the project elements and the division between the LCNF and NIC strands.

We envisage that the renewable generation, electrolyser, gas mixing and injection will all be owned by one operator who will choose the best option depending on wind, generation constraints, electricity wholesale price, gas storage availability, gas wholesale price and gas network capacity

The Problem:

The current UK target to decarbonise building heating requires either a method to decarbonise the gas supply chain or an expensive change of heating systems for millions of premises. The latter option is likely to be unpopular with existing gas consumers as well as requiring reinforcement of the electricity distribution system and decarbonisation of electricity generation. In turn, the current UK target to deliver 15% of the UK’s energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020 will necessitate significant electricity network reinforcement and/or generation curtailment unless other means of overcoming constraints in the existing electricity networks can be found. A recent study by Imperial College for DECC (‘Understanding the Balancing Challenge’ (2012)) projects that surplus renewable power that cannot be moved from the point of generation to the areas of demand could

Page 4 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued reach 50 TWh pa by 2030, with 60-100 TWh pa curtailment possible by 2040-50 (i.e. 20- 30% of renewable output).

However, practical energy storage technologies are few, are generally expensive and/or limited in their capacity/duration and/or location. A further complication of available energy storage solutions is that energy is put into them and taken out at the same physical point. Although this allows a level of time-based smoothing of supply/demand, it ignores the fact that, in the main, certain areas will be generation (supply) dominant while others will be demand dominant. The most significant limitation that needs to be overcome is that effective energy storage needs to be not only time-specific but also location-specific.

The Solution:

The solution proposed by the CEB programme is to use electricity generation that would otherwise be constrained off, convert it to hydrogen, store it and inject it into the gas distribution system displacing fossil methane. This low-carbon gas will then be utilised by gas consumers for heating and/or electricity generation. This solution therefore helps to decarbonise the gas supply chain as well as addressing the electricity network constraints of time and geography. In parallel it enables the optimum use of the existing gas and electricity networks to deliver benefits to customers. It is an innovative example of “sweating the assets” and across two networks rather than one. In doing so, it will support the core theme of this programme of delivering benefits to both networks and their customers.

The combined LCNF and NIC programme will comprise two zones, a Generation Zone and a Demand Zone. The NIC strand will trial a solution that allows hydrogen produced by the LCNF electrolyser in the Generation Zone to be stored and subsequently mixed with natural gas, to the regulated limits, and then be injected into the natural gas network. The solution will comprise the following:

Electrolyser

This will be part of the LCNF strand. The electrolyser will be connected to the WPD 33kV network and will utilise electricity generated by the renewable generator but which is constrained off the WPD network

The following elements will be part of the NIC strand

Gas Storage and Mixing

Natural gas will be taken from the WWU network and blended with electrolyser-produced hydrogen from pressurised storage. The gases will be mixed to ensure the permitted 0.1% (or higher if a GS(M)R exemption is granted) hydrogen level is consistently maintained.

Gas Injection

The hydrogen/natural gas mixture will then be injected into WWU’s medium pressure gas network. The rate of injection will be carefully controlled to ensure that the pressure within the network is maintained within the regulated limits.

Gas Export and Usage

Gas containing hydrogen will be withdrawn from the gas network in the Demand Zone at a point beyond the electricity network constraint, either to be burnt by existing gas consumers

Page 5 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued

displacing fossil natural gas or used to fuel CHP units, subsequently returning an element of electrical energy back to the electricity network. The net effect is increased flows through the existing gas distribution network.

Control System

A control system will be up in place to manage the end-to-end flow of energy from generation, through electrolysis to storage, mixing and gas injection. The system will be optimised to maximise generation export and hence gas injection potential.

The Discrete Methods and Trials:

The discrete Methods within the above solution that will be tested by the programme include:

Energy Storage and Transport via the Gas Network

This Method will use hydrogen produced by the LCNF electrolyser in the Generation Zone as a means of converting constrained renewable energy to a form that can be stored, transported and reused.

The hydrogen will be stored and subsequently mixed with natural gas and injected into the gas network at the prevailing regulated levels at a time when there is available gas network capacity to accommodate it.

The Method will be trialled in the following way:

 The gas mixing and injection equipment will be deployed and the ability to inject hydrogen at regulated levels when headroom allows evaluated with particular attention paid to achieving blending at low flow rates  The capacity of the resultant gas injection system to consume the generated hydrogen will be evaluated over time and the subsequent impact on optimal hydrogen storage determined.

Regulatory Impact of Hydrogen Gas Injection

An evaluation of the current UK Regulatory framework on hydrogen injection will be evaluated from a WWU perspective and a wider perspective.

The Method will be trialled in the following way:

 The consequences of mixing hydrogen with natural gas on CV, Wobbe Index and any potential impact on metering and billing will be evaluated  Any impacts on the operation of the system will be noted and evaluated.

Gas Export: De-Carbonisation of the Gas Network

The gas network has the capacity to transport a source of low-carbon heat for domestic and industrial use. This would utilise existing investment in the gas network assets and thereby minimise the costs to customers of the continued maintenance of the gas network.

The Method will be trialled in the following way:

 The potential decarbonisation benefits for domestic and industrial use in the programme area will be evaluated compared to the theoretical benefits obtainable if

Page 6 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued the target level of injection was achieved  Hence the potential wider UK decarbonisation benefits will be evaluated.

Gas Export: Gas Network Life Extension & Wider benefits

Benefits will accrue to the gas network through the deployment of this Method.

The Method will be trialled by investigating:

 The decarbonisation benefits to gas consumers  The benefits of reduced methane leakage due to displacement by hydrogen  The benefit of keeping gas consumers connected to the network in terms of sharing fixed costs  A more detailed assessment of the number of sites to which this Method is applicable.

Commercial Modelling and the End to End Value Chain

This Method will look at the optimal cost, efficiency and commercial models for the end-to- end value chain from renewable generation through to end-user consumption.

The method will be trialled in the following way:

 Through operation of the discrete Methods, above, and wider analysis, system sensitivities against key variables will be assessed and the optimal end-to-end operating model identified for a given set of performance parameters (e.g. Carbon reduction, reinforcement avoidance, renewable energy connections, energy lost)  A key determinant of whether hydrogen injection is commercially viable is the price of hydrogen so the value chain from generation, through electrolyser and energy storage and gas injection will be modelled. Potential barriers to the development of the optimum model will be identified (e.g. ownership, regulation, technology costs/limitations, the ability to provide cross-subsidies across the value chain) and mitigations determined  The impact of increasing the permitted level of hydrogen content in the natural gas network will be evaluated and the potential benefit for the wider rollout of gas injection determined. This will include assessment of the economic viability from a Distribution Network Operator (DNO) and a Gas Distribution Network (GDN) perspective and also the wider benefit of decarbonising the UK gas network  The current and future opportunities for alternatives to one party owing the the end-to- end system from generation to hydrogen injection will be assessed and contrasted against opportunities for the discrete Methods in isolation, for example where gas storage and injection are owned separately from the electrolyser.  Subsequently, the optimal rollout strategy will be devised and the net benefit to the UK determined.

2.2 Technical Description of the Project

The combined LCNF and NIC programme will comprise two zones, a Generation Zone and a Demand Zone. The NIC strand will trial a solution that allows hydrogen produced by the LCNF electrolyser in the Generation Zone, to be stored and subsequently mixed with natural gas, to the regulated limits, and then be injected into the medium pressure natural gas network.

To maximise the use of the current gas transportation assets in the Generation Zone, a rapid response Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM) electrolyser (Appendix B) will be

Page 7 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued installed and will be connected to the local electricity distribution network in the Generation Zone. The electrolyser will present a 1MW load on the electrical network that can be controlled in response to a signal from the overarching control system. In this manner, it can also be used to absorb renewable energy that would otherwise be curtailed as a consequence of electricity distribution network constraints. The electrolyser’s ability to rapidly respond means that it can earn demand side management revenue.

The hydrogen produced by the electrolyser will be sent to a pressurised hydrogen store, capable of storing up to 400kg of hydrogen at a pressure of 300bar. The store will consist of steel k-type vessels and represents the best compromise between pressure and footprint (m2/kg of hydrogen stored). The storage system will provide a buffer between hydrogen production and the technologies which will utilise it, consequently allowing time shifting to accommodate electricity network constraints (gas engine) and/or gas pressure/hydrogen content constraints (gas injection).

From the store, hydrogen will either be sent directly to the gas engine or sent to a gas mixing installation where it will be mixed with natural gas withdrawn from the medium pressure gas network, hence ensuring that the total hydrogen fraction stays within the existing regulatory concentration limit.

The hydrogen/natural gas mixture will then be injected into the medium pressure gas network via a network entry point. The gas mixture will be analysed and metered before injection. The medium pressure gas network in the area identified for the location of the electrolyser (and hydrogen storage) and the siting of the gas mixing and injection facility, transports gas at pressure <2 bar. Consequently, the gas mixing and injection equipment will be less complex due to the low pressure requirement and the hydrogen will not require compression before mixing, instead pressure reduction prior to mixing will be necessary. Appendix C illustrates the gas network in the Wadebridge area.

The rate of injection will be carefully controlled to maintain the regulated hydrogen fraction and the network pressure within the regulated limits. WWU may need to make changes to the operation of the medium pressure network in the area to facilitate this.

The overarching CEB control system will be in place to manage the end-to-end flow of energy from renewable generation, through electrolysis to storage, mixing and gas injection. The objective of the CEB control system will be to maximise generation export and hence gas injection potential. Given the trial nature of this system, failsafe for key elements of the process will remain with the primary equipment and/or the network operators. A separate NIA strand will run in parallel, to obtain an exemption from the GS(M)R necessary to allow higher levels of hydrogen to be injected.

The network entry point will be designed drawing on WWU’s experience of biomethane injection with, broadly speaking, the same equipment, measurement devices, telemetry and protection systems. WWU sees hydrogen injection as being a logical extension of biomethane injection although there will need to be some differences to take account of there being two different gases in the mixture. The network will be protected by Remotely Operable Valves and information required for the operation of the network will be passed to the WWU control centre by telemetry. There will be a network entry agreement between WWU and the operator of the entry facility which will stipulate gas quality and other key requirements such as metering and gas quality measurement. Ofgem will be asked to agree not to require installation of CV measurement equipment at the site in order to reduce cost, but Ofgem may not agree to this. The shipper injecting the gas into the network will be charged using the same principles as for biomethane although allowance will need to be

Page 8 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued made to take account of the gas being taken out of the network, blended and then re- injected.

2.3 Description of Design of Trials

The programme will initially trial the injection of up to 0.1% by volume hydrogen in order to test the functionality of the hydrogen mixing and injection technology. If this is successful and the linked NIA strand gains an exemption from the GS(M)R to allow higher levels of hydrogen injection, then higher levels of hydrogen will be injected.

The Location of the trial

Wadebridge was selected for the following reasons

 The initial thinking was that the programme would deliver most value in a location where the electricity network was constrained, as is the situation in Wadebridge. As described in section 2.1, the modelling will seek to determine if there is more general applicability  In April 2013 Wadebridge was short-listed as one of Britain's top eco-towns (ITV, 2013, Wadebridge short-listed as top-eco towns (sic)[online] http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/update/2013-04-26/wadebridge-short-listed-as- top-eco-towns/ Retrieved 31 July 2013) and is home to Wadebridge Renewable Energy Network (WREN) - a grass roots enterprise aiming to make the town the first solar powered and renewable energy powered town in the UK (Independent, 2011, Cornish town aims to be UK’s first to adopt solar power – struggle becomes YouTube series [online] http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/cornish-town-aims-to-be-uks-first- to-adopt-solar-power--struggle-becomes-youtube-series-2289830.html Retrieved 31 July 2013). WREN is the key party in developing the renewable generation project and also provides crucial local community involvement  The constrained 33kV electricity distribution line runs very close to the WWU medium pressure (up to 2Bar(g)) pipeline that serves the Wadebridge low pressure network  Wadebridge is representative of a growing number of communities where commercial generators are dominant and hence capacity for community generation is limited. Hence the community has the inconvenience of wind and PV farms on its doorstep but none of the benefit. With more power being given to communities to veto wind farm developments, it is critical to find a willing community with which to prove a viable community model to address this.

Replication potential

 An analysis of the WWU and Western Power Distribution (WPD) network maps in Appendix E shows that there are approximately 50 locations in Cornwall and 30 around Cardiff where the WPD 132kV or 33kV lines cross or run very close to the WWU intermediate pressure (up to 7Barg) or medium pressure (up to 2Barg) pipelines. While many locations will not be suitable for this type of scheme owing to planning, water supply and other reasons, this suggests that the Wadebridge location is not an isolated example. As renewable generation is rolled out, it is likely that more of these electricity lines will become constrained. Although this a small sample, it nevertheless suggests that there will be many more potential sites across GB where this solution could be utilised.  The programme will determine the effectiveness of the system design in delivering the gas mixing and injection solution. In order to reduce, so far as possible, the technology risk of up-scaling, the technology-specific aspects of the technology will be tested to determine function, reliability and performance in particular: Page 9 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Description continued

 Gas mixing – The robustness of the technology at various flow rates and how closely it can meet the regulatory limits  Gas injection – how the gas injection performs with a hydrogen methane blend, whether existing systems and processes need modification, whether a direct injection solution may be worth looking at in future  Control system – the overarching CEB control system is delivered by the LCNF strand of the programme, to manage the end-to-end flow of energy from renewable generation, through electrolysis to storage, mixing and gas injection. The trials will seek to understand and develop the control algorithms necessary to maximise the gas injection potential and ensure compliance with regulatory requirements.

2.4 Changes since ISP submission

The following changes have been made in response to points raised during the review process:

 Although the programme deliverables and Methods have been refined since the ISP, the learning expected to be gained from the programme remains the same  The target level of hydrogen injection sought has been reduced from 20% to 2% since this is seen as a more likely to be achieved in the timescales and does not unduly impact the programme.  The model has been updated to include a CPI rate of 2.5%, a 0.5% PA energy price increase as standard (based on DECC’s future fossil fuel price projections) and the discount rate used for NPV has been increased to 3.5%. Additionally all results have now been calculated post tax and depreciation  Various changes to LCNF strand have been made including the µCHP arrangements and the assumptions about Demand Side Management revenues payable to the electrolyser and gas engine, and wind farm modelling. These are detailed in the LCNF submission.  The control system costs are now modelled on a shared service model  The Gas mixing costs have been reduced by approximately £400k and are now all in 2014/15 as we are now using German suppliers rather than UK based who would have needed to design the system.

The allocation of costs between the NIC and the LCNF strands of the programme based on customer benefits has been further refined. The detailed logic behind this allocation can be found in Appendix A. However, in summary, cost allocation has been undertaken based on the following principles:

 Gas Inject is the core technology required by the NIC strand to extend gas network life. However, it is an optional solution to LCNF. Hence all costs have been allocated to NIC  Gas mixing supports gas injection and hence is an NIC cost  The electrolyser and gas engine provide a means of storing/time-shifting electrical generation and hence are LCNF costs  Gas Storage is required by both the gas injection system and the gas engine. Hence costs are shared  Shared activities (PM, IT, Learning) have been allocated approximately 20% NIC and 80% LCNF

The above has resulted in a proportion of the control system costs being allocated to NIC where none were previously, given the benefit this provides in maximising the potential gas injection rate. The NIC cost has therefore increased accordingly.

Page 10 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 3: Project Business Case This section should be between 3 and 6 pages.

3.1 Business Case Context

The main aim of this programme is to test and demonstrate the practical feasibility of injecting hydrogen into the WWU gas distribution system, using a unique electrolyser powered by a renewable electricity source to produce the hydrogen. This will reduce the environmental impact of using gas for generation and heat. In turn, this will make gas a more attractive option as the UK government considers its energy policy options.

The two key benefits from the programme are:

 Demonstrating that hydrogen injection is technically feasible under the GB safety regime  Providing learning than can be used to enable a UK wide rollout

We recognise that the benefits of decarbonising the gas network will only be seen with levels of hydrogen injection higher than the 2% proposed; therefore this project should be seen as a project that demonstrates the feasibility of hydrogen injection.

3.2 Benefits of the Project

The hydrogen output from an electrolyser connected to the distribution network in the Generation Zone can be stored and subsequently injected into the gas grid, provided it stays below an existing regulatory concentration limit.

Therefore, the programme:

 provides a demonstration of a means of decarbonising the existing gas network and the heating load of customers connected to the gas network in turn avoiding reinforcement of the electricity distribution network which would be required if customers converted to electricity based heating and cooking  avoids customers having to spend money converting their in house heating and cookng systems to another energy source  prolongs the network’s useful life by enabling the total cost of ownership of the network  is apportioned over the widest possible customer base.

3.3 Overall Financial Benefits

The main financial benefits would be future cost avoidance for gas consumers if this programme is successful and developed on UK wide scale. The following sections provide further detail of the potential values.

A more immediate benefit is the small reduction in carbon emissions from reduced methane leakage and a reduction in Carbon Dioxide emissions from burning hydrogen rather than natural gas In Appendix G we calculate this benefit as £142,000 over 20 years in a rollout scenario.

3.4 Benefits of Wider Rollout

The success of the programme will enable the overall solution to be applied across other GB gas networks, subject to the required regulatory permissions, and has the potential to assist in delivering the UK greenhouse gas emissions targets. Notwithstanding the customer and carbon benefits described later, this programme will provide the following benefits: Helping to achieve UK greenhouse gas emissions targets

Page 11 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Business Case continued

The wider rollout will contribute to this target without customer resistance. DECC’s report, ‘The Future of Heating’ (2013), acknowledges the importance of the gas network in meeting peak heat demand. Page 24 of the evidence annex demonstrates that when asked spontaneously what system they would install, 90% of existing gas customers responded by saying a gas boiler. This shows that a policy that requires gas customers to move away from gas is likely to be very unpopular. Hydrogen injection offers a way to offset this requirement.

Avoiding future costs

The cost of converting the existing gas system to include a proportion of hydrogen is likely to be much less than the cost of converting customers from a gas based system to other systems. While we do not claim that hydrogen by itself will decarbonise the gas supply chain it can be part of the solution together with biomethane and potentially synthetic methane from the gasification of waste. Together, with energy efficiency measures, these technologies could provide sufficient decarbonisation to enable the continued use of the gas network

Costs of converting customers from a gas based system to other systems would include:

 The cost of converting 21 million premises from gas heating and cooking to non-gas systems is probably a minimum of £2000, which is the approximate cost of having a new gas boiler installed. This equates to £42bn  The cost of decommissioning the gas network  Cost of developing sufficient renewable generation and the associated electricity reinforcement to support electricity based heating systems.

Although many of these costs are uncertain, there appears to be a significant benefit of utilising the network compared to alternative non gas solutions.

Improving Security of Supply

Hydrogn injection will provide a degree of increased energy security and reduce the reliance on the import of gas into the UK. Reducing the UK’s reliance on foreign imported gas has the potential to reduce price volatility and deliver further value for GB gas customers, as well as improving the UK balance of trade. Notwithstanding the possible need for appliance inspection and modification, using hydrogen will ensure carbon reduction at the point of use with minimal customer involvement and inconvenience, since the generation of the low- carbon fuel occurs upstream of the consumer.

3.5 Customer benefits

Customers that disconnected from the gas network would need to be provided with heating and would therefore have to install replacement heating systems. It is unlikely that this would be less than £2000 a customer (the price of having a new gas boiler installed) and we estimate that this would cost a minimum of £330,000 over 20 years.

It is likely that that the electricity distribution system would need to be reinforced to support the increased load from systems, such as heat pumps, and the customers supplied by the electricity distribution network would have to pay for this reinforcement. Based on figures from WPD we have estimated this in Appendix G for transformer reinforcement only ; however the current estimates are small in comparison to other costs. In addition, the work by Delta EE for the Energy Networks Association, ‘2050 Pathways to Domestic Heat’ (2012), shows that the operating costs of the alternative systems are likely to be higher Page 12 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Business Case continued than the cost of operating a gas boiler because electricity per KWh costs much more than gas and modern condensing gas boilers are up to 90% efficient.

Customers that stayed connected to the gas network would have to share the higher unit costs of maintaining the system over a decreasing number of customers and then pay for decommissioning any parts of the network that was no longer required. WWU’s cost of maintaining the gas network for its 2.5m supply points is circa £400m per annum. This is circa £160 per supply point per annum. Wadebridge currently has 2,500 gas supply points (last census data); albeit another 800 homes are planned within the next ten years. One scenario within the DECC Future of Heating predicts a 25% reduction in customer numbers by 2040. If the number of supply points reduced by 25% by 2040, the cost per supply point would increase to £213 (a £55 increase per supply point). We estimate in Appendix G that over 20 year this equates to an additional cost of approximately £1.5M.

Therefore, customers will see considerable benefits from staying connected to the gas distribution system, they will not have to  Finance the installation of an alternatively heating and cooking system  Pay for reinforcement to the electricity distribution system.  Pay for decommissioning of the gas system Of these, appendix G shows that the first and the last points comprise the majority of the benefit.

This programme, which investigates whether hydrogen injection to decarbonise the gas network is feasible, offers considerable customer benefit.

3.6 Carbon Benefits

The biggest contribution by far to the carbon footprint of GDNs, including WWU, is the volume of leakage from their mains. The primary reason for this is that methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO 2. WWU’s carbon footprint is illustrated in Appendix F. If methane is displaced by hydrogen, then any leakage of hydrogen will not contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. In terms of the project, introduction of 0.1% hydrogen in the Wadebridge network would save the equivalent of 1 tonne of Carbon Dioxide a year. Appendix F shows that WWU’s primary emissions to atmosphere equal just over 500,000 tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent over 95% of which is attributable to network losses of natural gas. If 0.1% hydrogen was introduced throughout WWU’s network, the reduced leakage of methane would be equivalent to 500 tonnes/year of CO 2 . If Hydrogen is then used across all gas distribution networks, this benefit would increase ten-fold.

The project could also lead to indirect carbon savings from avoiding the carbon emissions associated with installing new systems in customers’ premises; avoided reinforcement of the electricity distribution system and avoided decommissioning of the gas network.

3.7 Licensee learning benefits and alignment with business objectives

WWU’s RIIO GD1 business plan identified the following as a priority for innovation based on outputs from its stakeholder engagement programme:

 The sustainability challenge of ensuring that there is a longer term viability of gas networks, with lower environmental impact

The benefits of this programme for WWU are:

Page 13 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Business Case continued  Understanding the operational challenges of introducing hydrogen into the network and whether this is a long term viable option  Understanding the commercial (including Uniform Network Code) challenges of introducing hydrogen into the network  There may be learning that could be applied to the development of hydrogen-only standalone systems  Evaluate the pros and cons of working with the community and/or other third-party organisations to deliver solutions to what are inherently network problems.

3.8 Industry Benefits

The gas industry will benefit from demonstrating for the first time in the UK the injection of hydrogen, produced by electrolysis using renewable energy, into the natural gas distribution network.

This programme contributes directly to providing information to DECC on whether hydrogen can be injected into the gas network.

The hydrogen will displace natural gas from the network and be available to be transported away from the point of the constraint, used as a means of decarbonising local heat production and reduce greenhouse gas emissions due to gas leakage from the network. The hydrogen will also be available for subsequent re-conversion locally to energy and heat in distributed domestic CHP and electricity in a gas engine as a means of smoothing renewable generation output. This will demonstrate the beneficial role the gas distribution network can play in supporting the planned growth in renewable energy generation. The programme will provide valuable learning from the physical integration and operation of the individual system components which include a pressurised hydrogen store and gas mixing and injection technology.

3.9 Direct Benefits

There are three direct benefits for gas consumers which will materialise if the project is successful and is rolled out throughout the gas distribution networks:

 De-carbonisation of the energy usage and reduced greenhouse gas emissions as a result of leakage  Avoided costs of electricity reinforcement (included as all gas customers will also be electricity customers)  Lower costs by avoiding future decommissioning  Improved security of supply by using a non-imported, sustainable source of energy into the existing gas network.

The benefits of the programme to the network are long-term and will not be realised in the current price control period, they will accrue if hydrogen injection becomes a developed technology. This depends on a number of developments, not least government policy which itself will only develop as the capabilities and benefits of alternative technologies such as hydrogen are developed and demonstrated. Therefore, while hydrogen injection may not be adopted, it is clear that unless this technology is demonstrated, it will remain as a possibility and there will be no possibility of gas customers benefiting from hydrogen injection. The development of local sources of gas, may, in time, allow changes to the operation of the network, such as reduced reliance on the Local Transmission System with consequent reduction in maintenance and capital expenditure on renewal.

Page 14 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Business Case continued

Page 15 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 4: Evaluation Criteria This section should be between 8 and 10 pages.

The gas industry has faced and overcome threats to its existence in the past. In the 1920s, the spread of electric lighting forced the industry to develop new uses for gas as gas lighting declined; in the 1960s/70s the industry went through a fundamental change, converting to natural gas. If this programme is successful, it will be an opportunity for the industry to develop expertise in hydrogen conversion that will be marketable outside the UK.

4.1 Accelerates the development of a low-carbon energy sector and/or delivers environmental benefits whilst having the potential to deliver net financial benefits to future and/or existing Customers

Supporting the Carbon Plan

Hydrogen injection can drive increased decarbonisation of the gas network across the UK.

The Carbon Plan aims to reduce carbon emissions by 34% on 1990 levels by 2020 and to generate 30% of the UK’s electricity from renewable sources in the same timeframe in order to meet EU targets. In addition, DECC’s report, ‘The Future of Heating’ (2013), has targeted the decarbonisation of heating in the UK and recognises the potential benefits to be gained from changing the content of the UK gas grid. DECC believes that low carbon fuels like hydrogen could be deployed through the national gas network in a similar way as natural gas is delivered today.

The Government recognises the potential of the UK gas network as a means of storing and transporting electricity generated by renewable sources in the form of hydrogen. By using the existing gas network as a means of decarbonising the production of domestic and commercial heat, this programme could initiate fundamental change in the industry by being truly innovative and providing relevant learning.

As a source of heat, gas has a higher instantaneous power output and higher temperatures than electrical heat pump alternatives, this allows more flexible controls within buildings. Gas (hydrogen) mix offers increased functional utility and substantial savings in annual energy; SAP predicts a 15-20% saving depending on property (https://www.gov.uk/standard-assessment-procedure), Energy Savings Trust field trials predict a 5-10% saving (http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk). This is particularly important for commercial buildings with a high temperature hot water distribution system. This is also consistent with consumer demand for combi-boilers, which produce instantaneous heat and so require little or no hot water storage.

Encourage local communities to host renewable energy projects

Ed Davey recently stated that ‘Community groups know their local area best, so I want to see them taking control of their own energy projects, generating their own power and shielding themselves against the rising cost of wholesale energy prices. This type of collective action has great benefits for local economies, creating jobs, offering the opportunity to develop new skills and injecting investment across the country.’ (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/putting-local-communities-at-the-heart-of-energy- use).

The WREN community energy cooperative is seen by central and local government as a flagship initiative for its level of ambition and its success in raising community interest in their energy economy. However, WREN is constrained from achieving its ambitions by local grid constraints.

Page 16 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued CEB is one of the first energy schemes to formally involve a local community energy cooperative as a delivery partner, and design the scheme around both technical and economic outcomes sought by the local community. CEB aims to develop a Method that enables the community to benefit through ownership of the community wind project at the heart of the scheme, as well as developing an infrastructure for unlocking further community generation across the area.

WREN held a major exhibition on the theme of Wadebridge Energy Futures from 19th – 21st September which was attended by 463 people. Visitors gave feedback on some questions including:

Do you want a locally owned Energy supply company 94% in favour Should Wadebridge own more of its energy generation 90% in favour Should Wadebridge lead the way in developing smart grid 90% in favour These responses clearly show the local interest in local involvement in the energy supply chain.

Contribution of rollout to achieving Carbon Plan

The solution is replicable throughout GB and could be implemented at sites where the electricity and gas networks of appropriate capacities cross or are very close together. Maps of the WPD and WWU networks in Cornwall have been examined and approximately 50 locations where the WPD 132kV or 33kV cables cross the WWU intermediate pressure (up to 7Bar(g)) or medium pressure (up to 2Bar(g)) pipelines have been identified. A similar exercise in South East Wales covering an area of about 15 miles around Cardiff identified 30 locations. The population of Cornwall is about 532,000 and that of Cardiff approximately 330,000. Both these very different areas give a figure of approximately one possible site per 10,000 of population. Based on a GB population of 63M this suggests that there could be around 6,300 possible sites in GB. It is important to note that the electrolyser and gas injection does not have to be located close to the location of the renewable generation. The model works as long as they are on the same part of the electricity network, so the main constraints on location will relate to the requirement for a water supply and planning consents.

If the Method is successful, there would appear to be considerable scope to roll this out across GB, delivering decarbonisation benefits to the gas supply chain as well as enabling the connection of constrained renewable generation to the electricity distribution network.

How rollout will deliver a solution quicker than the most efficient current solution in the UK

Currently, the only Method of decarbonising the gas supply chain is through the injection of biomethane. This is very much in the development phase and WWU received gas from the first biomethane plant connected to its network in August 2013. Biomethane is eligible for the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI), which is not currently available to hydrogen injection, and, based on the current subsidy, is competitive with natural gas. Unfortunately, there is only a limited volume of suitable material for Anaerobic Digestion and therefore biomethane can only be part of the overall solution. DECC’s ‘Future of Heating’ (2013) paragraph 4.25 page 105 estimates that biomethane could contribute up to 20TWh compared to an annual total gas demand of 550TWh; however, this figure also includes gas from gasification of biomass which is currently an unproven technology. Biomethane injection is therefore a key part of the solution but is not sufficient on its own.

Page 17 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued Hydrogen injection therefore offers an additional way of decarbonising the gas supply chain and there is no current solution to provide this additional decarbonisation. The current solution is therefore “do nothing”. Since there is no current method, hydrogen injection will be the quickest method to achieve this additional decarbonisation.

The expected financial benefit the Project could deliver to customers

At 0.1% or 2% injection the benefits to customers of the first 3 benefits described in Section 3.9 (avoided conversion costs, avoided electricity network reinforcement, and continued use of the gas network) will not be realised as the level of decarbonisation will not be large enough. This programme will demonstrate that the technology is feasible and that it could lead to higher levels of hydrogen being injected. At 10% or 20% then the level of decarbonisation starts to become significant and it is reasonable to start claiming some of the decarbonisation benefits. As shown in Appendix G we have assumed that rollout is achieved at 10% volume of hydrogen and the benefits assumed below are based on 10% of the benefits of full decarbonisation.

The benefits from a rollout in the Wadebridge area using rollout costs and 10% injection could be as shown below (see Appendix G).

Carbon £141k Avoided conversion £330k Avoided electricity network reinforcement £9k Continued use of gas network £1500k Total Gross Benefit £1980k Cost £600k Net Benefit £1380k

Overall efficiency

The Electrolyser system efficiency is 75%. This includes the transformer losses stepping down from 33kV and the electrolyser Power Supply Unit efficiency. The gas storage is about 94% efficient due to energy losses in the compressor. The need for compression is due to a desire to minimise foot print and avoid the need to comply with COMAH regulations. Under some scenarios some of hydrogen the gas may not go into storage and in this case the storage energy losses will be less. Based on experience in Germany the gas mixing and injection is 98% efficient. Overall efficiency is therefore about 70% (75%x94%x98%) so 10kWh of constrained off (wasted) wind generation will produce 7kWh of hydrogen injected into the gas network.

4.2 Provides Value for Money to Gas Customers

This section shows, for plausible parameter values, both the hydrogen injection and the electrolyser can make returns over reasonable periods. Although the electrolyser is funded under the LCNF strand it is useful to include the analysis in this submission to demonstrate the end to end feasibility of the programme.

The LCNF strand assumes that the wind farm and electrolyser are owned by the same operator and therefore makes the simplifying assumption that the constrained off wind generation is provided free to the electrolyser. Given that electricity distribution use of system charges are largely fixed at 33kV which is the connection voltage of the wind farm and electrolysers, this is reasonable.

Page 18 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued The table in Appendix shows M various scenarios and the returns for the various methods. Method 3 (Gas inject) shows an acceptable rate of return in some scenarios but is outperformed by Method 6 which looks at the end to end returns assuming that all parts of the system are owned by one operator provides the best option. Method 5 (CHP) outperforms both but since it involves installing CHP using natural gas it does not contribute to any carbon reductions or environmental benefits other than any benefits from gas being a lower carbon fuel for generation than coal. The modelling suggests that Methods 6 and 3 could offer customers value for money.

The conclusions above, based on modelling and trials, would demonstrate whether the modelling assumptions are valid or whether in practice different methods are optimal.

GB shale gas may have an impact on the gas price but the effect is unclear for two main reasons. First the amount of shale gas that is recoverable and the cost is very unclear and second it seems likely that there will be a need for more gas fired electricity generation in the medium term and this may use all the shale gas that may be available.

Direct impact on network or GB system Operator

The programme will affect the WWU network by providing a new source of distributed gas. To date, the WWU system has received all its gas from the National Transmission System; however, the growth of biomethane injection requires WWU to manage injection points embedded in its system, so this will be another point to be managed. In the long term, distributed gas will affect investment decisions and slowly require changes in the way WWU designs and operates its network.

Justification that the scale/cost of the Project is appropriate in relation to the learning that is expected to be captured

The programme will deliver significant learning. It has the potential for providing the basis for the development of a substantial change to the GB gas industry and the cost is relatively small for such a large potential gain.

DECC’s own research (see section 3.4) and the Energy Networks Association project with Delta EE (Pathways for Domestic Heat, 2012) shows that gas customers like gas as a means of heating their homes and have no appetite for change. Therefore, there is significant value to them in continuing to use a gas-based system. In addition, using a gas-based system avoids significant capital conversion costs. The Delta EE study showed that, owing to the higher cost of electricity, heat pumps were more expensive to run than a gas boiler. DECC recognises that there will be a continuing requirement to use gas for peak heat and therefore many customers will need to remain on gas and bear the cost of maintaining the system. It is therefore far better value for money for them to use their gas-based heating system for all their heating requirements. This programme offers a way, together with other low carbon gases such as biomethane and synthetic methane, of enabling them to do that.

The processes that have been employed to ensure that the Project is delivered at a competitive cost;

Partners, such as ITM Power (ITM), are providing equipment at cost. Where partners use established subcontractors, they will have been subject to the partners’ procurement procedures. The IT integration service provider has been sourced by Toshiba using WPD’s procurement processes.

Page 19 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued Cornwall Development Company has been appointed to programme manage CEB and will have robust programme management processes to regularly review progress and monitor costs by means of monthly project manager meetings and quarterly programme review boards. Payments to partners will be back-loaded and paid on completion of outputs rather than expenditure and so partners will have a strong incentive to manage costs and ensure delivery of outputs relevant to the programme’s aims. See Appendix G.

Expected proportion of potential benefits accruing to the gas network as opposed to other parts of the energy supply chain and the assumptions used to derive the proportion of expected benefits;

If hydrogen injection enables the gas network to be decarbonised and therefore remain in use rather than be decommissioned, in whole or part, then substantial benefits accrue to the gas network. The programme will also indirectly benefit the electricity distribution network customers (which will comprise of the gas customers plus others not connected to the gas network) and renewable electricity generators; however, in designing and costing the programme, joint costs have been allocated in an equitable way. Hydrogen producers will benefit insofar as they can inject hydrogen but they will not receive any subsidy from the network and the charges they pay for entering gas will be cost reflective as they are for biomethane entry.

How Project Partners have been identified and selected including details of the process that has been followed and the rationale for selecting Project Participants and ideas for the Projects

This NIC strand is led by a third party: ITM. WWU was approached by ITM and the partners in the linked LCNF strand.

The rationale for selecting the partners was as follows:

ITM Power – NIC lead and therefore not selected as they initiated the strand.

Toshiba – lead for LCNF strand and therefore not selected as they initiated the strand. Toshiba's Bristol-based research facility, TRL, will be responsible for trial management and information dissemination.

Wadebridge Renewable Energy Network (WREN) – Community group and developer of renewable generation. Provides close links to the community in Wadebridge. A key requirement for the LCNF strand was a renewable generator on a constrained network and therefore, as the connecting party, WREN effectively self-selected as without a renewable generator, the programme was not viable. An additional benefit of WREN is the community contacts which will assist in the customer engagement for appliance inspections if required.

Cornwall Development Company (CDC) – procured through Toshiba’s procurement procedures to provide Programme Management.

CGI– procured through Toshiba’s procurement procedures to provide IT services integration.

The costs associated with protection from reliability or availability incentives and the proportion of these costs compared to the proposed benefits of the Project. None claimed.

Page 20 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued 4.3 Generates Knowledge that can be shared amongst all relevant Network Licensees

What new knowledge is intended to be generated from completing the programme The core learning generated by the programme and shared among UK GDNs will be three- fold:  Technical Learning – the programme will determine the technical issues and opportunities associated with the injection of hydrogen into the medium pressure gas network. This will include the engineering and safety challenges of integrating the mixing and injection equipment and the inter-operation of the hydrogen storage and the gas mixing stage with the medium pressure network and the subsequent safe transport of the natural gas/hydrogen mixture through the network. In addition, comprehensive learning will be developed in the steps necessary to seek an exemption to the Gas Safety (Management) Regulations 1996 (GS(M)R) necessary to inject hydrogen at a higher concentration than the current statutory limit.  Commercial Learning – the programme will demonstrate the financial viability of the technologies deployed. It will explore Methods that enable achievable reductions in carbon emissions from both the gas network (through leakage) and the gas transported through the network, while minimising network impact.  Programme Learning – the programme will provide learning on how to run a cross- competition programme both in terms of governance and in terms of demonstrating benefits to gas and electricity customers, when, in some cases, the benefits are inter- related.

It should be noted that all the learning from the programme will be foreground IPR (e.g. control algorithms, commercial models, etc.) and as such will be shared amongst GDNs.

Knowledge will be captured and disseminated by means of the processes described more fully in section 5. In summary, learning can be divided into planned learning that is expected to occur and unplanned learning that is not expect but which occurs during the course of the programme.

We confirm that the IPR arrangements conform to the default arrangements.

4.4 Is Innovative (i.e. not business as usual) and has an unproven business case where the innovation risk warrants a limited Development or Demonstration Project to demonstrate its effectiveness

The programme is innovative in several ways:  Injecting carbon-free hydrogen produced by the electrolysis of water powered by renewable energy, into the medium pressure gas network has never been demonstrated in the UK  The programme will trial a technology solution for the safe mixing of low concentrations of hydrogen with natural gas extracted from a representative UK medium pressure gas network and the subsequent re-introduction of the mixture back into the network at the same point  Working in conjunction with the Health & Safety Laboratory, as part of the NIA strand, the programme will develop the methodology necessary to demonstrate to the regulatory authority that an exemption to GS(M)R is required, how the potential hazards can be understood and demonstrate the steps necessary to assess risks and address knowledge gaps  Although similar technologies are being demonstrated in Germany, in response to the Energiewende (‘energy transition’) initiative launched by the Federal Government, UK companies are unwilling to fund the necessary development work required to prove them

Page 21 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued

in the UK.

The project make use of two major projects, NaturalHy and work by the European Gas Research Group, to inform the NIA strand to obtain an exemption to the GS(M)R to allow injection of greater than 0.1% hydrogen by volume. ITM’s involvement in power-to-gas projects in Germany and their participation in the HIPS project, means that this programme can draw on its experience to reduce risk. NaturalHy was a 5 year €17m European project funded by the European Commission’s 6th Framework Programme which ran from 2004 – 2009. The purpose of the project was to determine the conditions under which hydrogen can be added to the natural gas system (<40-8 bar) with acceptable consequences. Work packages studied the impact of hydrogen addition on: durability (pipelines), integrity (pipelines), safety & end use. The project concluded that the max. % hydrogen that can be added to natural gas is limited by (in order of increasing importance): 1. Pipeline, materials, 2. Safety, 3. End user appliances. The project concluded that for properly adjusted appliances and favourable natural gas quality can accommodate up to 20% hydrogen although stationary gas engines and gas turbines (based on state of the art at the time) would require adjustment and/or modification. The final report (www.naturalhy.net/docs/project_reports/Final_Publishable_Activity_Report.pdf) concluded that admixtures of 10-15 % are not critical in most cases, except for:

1. Modern gas turbines with pre-mixed burners (but on-going work is addressing this) 2. Steel storage tanks in NCVs and CNG fuelling stations (the current limit is 2% but activities to increase the value are underway) 3. Underground porous rock storage facilities (recent studies have been initiated to determine a reliable limit value although each case is unique based on the geology)

The recently concluded European Gas Research Group (GERG) project Admissible Hydrogen Concentrations in Natural Gas Systems also known as Hydrogen in Pipeline Systems (HIPS) undertook an analysis of the issues/impacts of hydrogen addition to natural gas on the end to end gas supply chain. UK participants included ITM Power, National Grid, KIWA Gastech and E.ON New Build & Technology Ltd. The study focused on gaps in knowledge related to the addition of up to 10 vol. % hydrogen to natural gas with the following results:

 Infrastructure (transmission & distribution pipelines) – For steel Pipes no impact of hydrogen on external repairs currently used for existing NG pipelines was observed, hydrogen induced stress corrosion cracking was only relevant for high-tensile steels, up to 10 vol.% hydrogen has no impact on lifetime. For plastic pipes (PE) the hydrogen permeation was higher than in steel but no demonstrated impact on safety was observed. No impact on lifetime has been found to date and leak tests show no impact on safety aspects  Pressure regulation systems - DIN EN 437 min. 60 vol.% hydrogen, a slight decrease in pressure was observed when hydrogen was blended with natural gas.  Domestic installations - The Ameland project (Netherlands) showed after 4 years testing of max. 20 vol. % hydrogen in natural gas, no problems were reported. There were two leakages were due to incorrect installation and a construction fault. No significant effects were reported on copper pipes, brass couplings, valves or rubber hoses.  Gas metering & billing - Gas meters showed <2% difference in flow rate for hydrogen/natural gas mixtures. Analysis suggests explosion frequency could increase by factor of 2 by adding 20 vol. % hydrogen, however the current risk of explosions was very low and even with this increase, the risks remains within acceptable limits. No expected design lifetime reductions for meters, gas chromatographs and volume conversion devices for up to 10 vol. % hydrogen.

Page 22 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued

WWU is not able to fund the programme as part of its business as usual activities for the following reasons:  The programme is unlikely to deliver any benefits to customers in the current price control period  The programme will not deliver any benefit to shareholders and therefore there is no reason for them to fund the programme  Other parties will gain from the programme and therefore it is appropriate that they should provide contributions of expertise and products at cost.

The programme is appropriate for NIC funding for two main reasons:  There is considerable uncertainty over the timing of financial benefits to customers owing to uncertainty with government policy  The regulatory, environmental and cross sector nature of the programme is too risky for commercial funding.

4.5 Involvement of Other Partners and External Funding

The programme will exploit learning developed by the individual partners over several years of operation, including, in ITM’s case, external funding from institutions and organisations such as DECC, The Technology Strategy Board and The Carbon Trust, which has enabled the partners to develop and increase the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) of their proprietary technologies. Funding for the programme includes:

Partner Contribution – Each partner will provide a 10% cost reduction in addition to the considerable efforts already invested in designing and modelling the systems, components and Methods to be deployed by this programme. These contributions are detailed within the costings of the overall programme.

WWU will make a contribution of 10% to the cost of the NIC strand and will also contribute the learning it has gained from playing a leading role in the development of biomethane connections, including leading the two studies in 2012/13 to demonstrate that raising the GS(M)R limit on Oxygen to 2% was safe. It is anticipated that the experience gained from that work will be of considerable help when conducting the NIA strand to seek an exemption to increase the hydrogen limit.

4.6 Relevance and Timing

DECC is demonstrating increased interest in the exploitation of hydrogen. Greg Barker (Climate Change Minister) commented, ‘Hydrogen and fuel-cell technologies are at the cutting edge of new low carbon energy solutions. We need to see how these technologies can be integrated with other energy and transport products.’ (cited by the Technology Strategy Board, July 2012, Accelerating the introduction of fuel cells and hydrogen energy systems [online] http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130221185318/www.innovateuk.org/content/ competition-announcements/accelerating-the-introduction-of-fuel-cells-and-hy.ashx Retrieved 31 July 2013).

Other companies involved in the hydrogen industry have demonstrated support such as KIWA Gastech.

Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, France and Holland all permit higher concentrations of hydrogen gas in their gas networks than does the UK. In Germany, hydrogen gas injection is being adopted widely and the German parliament now permits up

Page 23 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Evaluation Criteria continued

to 9.99% vol. hydrogen to be injected, achieving ~3% carbon saving. Several German utilities, including parent companies of two of the UK ‘big six’ electrical utilities, are actively involved in power-to-gas projects. In addition, several of the largest Stadtwerk (municipal utility companies) are also actively involved in developing projects and trialling the technology. Trials currently underway in the Netherlands are demonstrating the incorporation of up to 20% hydrogen in the Dutch natural gas distribution network.

On a national scale, therefore, the programme is relevant, as it addresses government requirements and it draws on experience of other European countries.

The programme is relevant for WWU as it fits in with its business plan objectives, which were developed as a result of stakeholder engagement. In particular:

 The sustainability challenge of ensuring that there is a longer term viability of gas networks, with lower environmental impact.

The WWU network has many rural areas that currently do not enjoy the benefit of gas connections. If successful, this programme has the potential to lead to standalone hydrogen-only networks or standalone hydrogen and biomethane networks and which could bring the benefit of gas to areas that currently are too far from the gas network to be connected. These customers tend to use carbon intensive heating systems, such as coal, oil or LPG, which are all more carbon intensive than natural gas and obviously much more carbon intensive than hydrogen-form renewable generation or biomethane. Inasmuch as some of these customers are fuel poor, they could benefit from reduced energy costs by being connected to a gas distribution network.

Appendix H demonstrates the Learning Approach to be adopted through CEB.

Page 24 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 5: Knowledge dissemination

This section should be between 3 and 5 pages.

Please cross the box if the Network Licensee does not intend to conform to the default IPR requirements.

5.1 Learning Dissemination

Knowledge Capture and Dissemination Plans for NIC Clean Energy Balance Knowledge capture is a very important aspect of this programme, which requires a robust methodology and plan for delivery. Due to the nature of the programme new knowledge will be produced that relates to various stakeholders. Knowledge will generally be of two forms; planned and unplanned. The approaches for capturing these types of learning are discussed below.

Planned learning:

 Will be integrated into the programme plan for each part of the programme.

 By the end of the design phase, each project team should have a framework and method in place for capturing learning. The key learning objectives must be included in the use-case document to ensure system design links to learning objectives. Each team will also have a clear method on how the key questions will be answered.

 Outcomes of these activities will be shared through reports published on the programme website.

 These documents will be available to all partners via an online document collaboration service such that documents can be read, edited and used as required.

Unplanned learning:

 It is very difficult to anticipate the nature of these lessons learned and, as such, issuing a standard template will be counterproductive.

 Instead, the learning lead for the programme will conduct diarised interviews with work package (and project) leads and project teams to identify lessons learnt. The advantage of having a project team together is that the discussion brings out a far richer context which when captured in a coherent manner is very valuable. It is imperative that these interviews are integrated into the programme plan and happen at regular intervals. This will make it a part of normal programme activity thus highlighting the importance of knowledge capture.

 This means that it will be a relatively quick process to capture knowledge and lessons learned with the majority of the work in post-processing and collating the information.

 These commentaries will be organised into a coherent structure and any recurring issues will be investigated where necessary. At agreed stages in the programme, learning will be collated and shared amongst the programme participants to enable implementation of any relevant lessons learned.

 This will capture issues that occur on an ongoing basis but that are likely to be forgotten after a period of time. This will be shared via a lessons learned document at various phases throughout the programme.

Page 25 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Knowledge dissemination continued

Aspects of the planned learning objectives for this programme have already started; Appendix H outlines the system-level use cases for the programme and how they relate to primary learning objectives. Maintaining this link between use cases throughout the programme is imperative to ensuring successful learning. Appendix H also shows primary use cases that are built below the system-level use cases. During the mobilisation phase, these system and primary-level use cases will be finalised with the programme partners. This will inform the use case specification which will be necessary at the design stage to ensure the trial operation and the objectives are compatible. Please note that NIC Appendix H actually shows the use cases across both NIC and LCNF strands, as this is the best way to ensure that learning objectives and aims are not omitted. Clearly, some areas will be more relevant to NIC, which will be the focus of GDNs and related parties and will be reflected in the dissemination outputs.

As part of capturing learning, regular interviews with project leads (or teams if appropriate) will be integrated into the programme plan. This ensures that learning objectives remain as a priority throughout the programme. The regular interviews will focus around what issues the project teams faced and how they dealt with them, as well as what aspects have gone well and what factors contributed to this. This type of experience will be very valuable to other parties interested in rolling out similar systems (e.g. GDNs, equipment providers). Combining this with a periodic (throughout the programme) written report collating experiences and evidence across different projects will make it easier for other parties to learn from CEB’s experience.

Figure 1 shows the overarching strategy to achieve the learning objectives of this programme. Key themes, as described earlier, cut through the entire programme period. Learning will be recorded in a log for ease of reference, which will include reference to whether there is an impact on GDN strategy or policies. Due to the integrated nature of LCNF and NIC, it has been decided to make the learning strategy follow the same principles, to ensure that both strands benefit from a rigorous learning methodology and robust framework.

Page 26 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Knowledge dissemination continued

Figure 1 Overview of Learning Strategy for CEB

Key Learning Outcomes:

Each stakeholder will have different interests in the programme, so the outcomes will be varied along those lines. Likewise, in terms of dissemination, external parties will have different interests. Here, the broad impacts for a range of stakeholders are captured.

GDN: Given the likelihood of increased capacity in the gas network, this programme will investigate how it can be used to provide a service for a constrained electrical network. The programme will investigate how this novel use of the gas network may affect its lifetime and commercial impacts it may have. For example, the programme will investigate the effect which the planned take-up of µCHPs (as a result of the CEB method) will have on the gas network capacity. Supporting a gas–based energy balance at a national scale will also require analysis into commercial arrangements for injecting gas (at the generation zone) and consuming gas (at the demand zone); any differences in the connection costs for customers needs to be addressed as well.

Other technical challenges also need to be investigated, such as: effects of injecting hydrogen into the network (e.g. maintaining pressure regularity), storage of hydrogen for injection into the network and commercial models to facilitate this. Future rollout potential of this solution and its effects on the network will also be investigated.

Page 27 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Knowledge dissemination continued

Technology vendors: This programme is a unique opportunity for vendors to understand what technical capability is required to address the challenge of using gas as an energy transportation medium to alleviate electrical constraints and utilise the gas network headroom. In addition, the commercial viability and agreements necessary for a large scale rollout will also be investigated (e.g. ownership of the gas mixing and injection equipment). Electrolyser performance and costs (operation, maintenance and capital) will also be evaluated in a real situation which will provide a better understanding of its capabilities for scaling-up of the solution.

Consumers: Take-up of µCHPs could increase the number of off-grid gas customers which reduces the fixed costs of the GDN. The programme will investigate how integrated energy systems such as CEB can cross-subsidise this to initiate and accelerate take-up of these technologies.

Gas Suppliers: Lowering electrical connection costs through innovative solutions that utilise the gas network would make it possible for renewable energy generators to connect to the grid in areas which would otherwise be uneconomical to do so. These generators would then (either directly or indirectly) ship gas through the network. Commercial arrangements to buy, sell and ship the gas need to be analysed along with asset ownership and operation.

Community: Communities being at the heart of this solution is a novel concept that CEB will explore in the hope of creating a repeatable model that can be implemented throughout the UK. Developing a rollout strategy will help secure the gas network infrastructure in the future as an integral component in the national infrastructure necessary to balance energy supply and demand. The programme will identify the key characteristics necessary to create this community solution as well as commercial aspects necessary for its success.

Dissemination Methods

Learning objectives of the programme will be formulated in terms of research questions, the results of which will be published in the following ways:

 Technical reports made publicly available on the programme’s website  Academic papers published in leading journals and conferences.

Learning objectives relating to novel commercial arrangements and strategic impacts will be shared in the following ways:

 Workshops with relevant participants  Reports and white papers made available on the programme’s website.

As this is the first time this type of end-to-end energy system is being implemented in the UK, the data set created will be hugely valuable to understand and develop similar systems for rollout in the UK. With such a vast amount of information being generated, its true value can only be realised through open access sharing. To enable ease of sharing, a web portal will be developed as part of the IT system to make data available (ensuring the necessary access and privacy controls are in place) either in its raw form (database) or through some basic analytics tool that will also be in the portal. This will be used by academics to simulate various scenarios to assess the economics and physical behaviour of such a system in order to develop more novel solutions. The information will also be useful for GDNs, consultants and equipment vendors to understand how rollout of this system can be achieved.

Page 28 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Knowledge dissemination continued

The outcomes relating to lessons learned in the practicalities of the programme will be shared as follows:

 Reports made publicly available on the programme’s website  Workshops with relevant participants  End of programme lessons learned booklet.

In addition to this, social media channels (e.g. Twitter) will be used as a means of notifying and updating interested stakeholders on the progress of the project. As part of the dissemination plans, the CEB programme will utilise various routes as outlined in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Dissemination Activity Outline for CEB

5.2 IPR

All parties agree to the default IPR agreements.

Page 29 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 6: Project Readiness

This section should be between 5 and 8 pages.

Requested level of protection require against cost over-runs (%): 0

Requested level of protection against Direct Benefits that they wish to apply for (%): NA

6.1 Evidence of why the project can start in a timely manner

The following issues have been considered in planning for a timely start

 Seamless transition from bid to delivery  Governance and Contractual model  Relevant experience  Mobilisation period  Partner engagement  Programme logistics  Learning from WPD involvement in LCNF projects in 2010, 2011 and 2012.

The WWU executive board have reviewed the NIC strand of the CEB programme and signed off both the bid concept and the final submission. The CEB Programme is a collaborative venture and other key partners have also obtained the appropriate approvals in their organisations. The Programme Management team from Cornwall Development Company (CDC) will continue their role into the delivery which enable the programme to move smoothly from the bid phase to the delivery phase.

The following processes, frameworks and documents have already been put in place to ensure a smooth and timely transition from bid to delivery and an efficient mobilisation phase:

 Programme Management - CEB will be planned and delivered in accordance with tried and tested project management methodology (PRINCE 2, adapted) and within a robust governance structure. This framework will provide the partner delivery organisations with a system that gives total clarity and support for all strategic objectives, strong risk and issue management, quality assurance processes in place throughout, and control over programme budgets. Through the lead sponsor, Toshiba, CDC has been appointed to undertake the overarching Programme Management function. A key role for this team will be to ensure that all the partner organisations work together to deliver the milestones for both this NIC strand and the associated LCNF strand.  Programme Plan - a high-level programme plan has been constructed, with input from CEB partners, covering the full extent of the programme and the key milestones and deliverables. It also highlights where key interdependencies exist. The collaborative manner in which the plan was produced ensures that all partners have agreed and signed up to the deliverability of the whole programme and to how their contributions fit into the wider picture. This is essential in giving everyone, including stakeholders not directly associated with the programme, the confidence that CEB will deliver. The Programme Plan is contained in Appendix I.  Governance Structure – there will be a Programme Review Board (PRB), consisting of senior representatives from partner organisations; this ensures that the board has appropriate organisational authority and that there is senior management commitment to the programme. The PRB will meet quarterly throughout delivery and will be responsible for strategic objectives and overall programme vision, as well as signing-off Page 30 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Readiness continued stage reviews, ensuring funding contracts are being delivered to the agreed standard and initiating action where key risks and issues arise. CEB is the overall programme, but it is made up of a number of projects (or ‘workstreams’), run by CEB partners. Thus, a Project Team, consisting of all the project managers will also be set up. The Project Team will meet monthly and will focus on progress, risks, issues and opportunities. (For more detail on the Governance Structure see Appendix J.)  Reporting Structure - a clear and concise reporting structure will ensure the Project Team meetings and the PRB meetings are well informed by accurate information. Highlight Reports, produced by the Project Team members, will be presented at each Project Team meeting; this will be coordinated through CDC, and further reports to the two sets of meetings will include a strategic overview by CDC, including review of programme risks / issues / budgets and stakeholder engagement and communications areas. The reports will focus on confirming deliverables and identifying risks (potential and experienced); this will allow for CDC to coordinate the sub-projects, which have many interdependencies, and also for CDC to escalate any strategic risks, issues and opportunities to the PRB.  To support and enable the programme to start in a timely manner, whilst ensuring continuity, key members of the bid team will be transferred into the programme delivery phases. This will help mitigate the risk of losing knowledge and ensuring relationships that have been built with partners through the bid process continues.

WWU will be drawing on recent experience in connecting biomethane plants to the distribution network and while this process is not business as usual at present the advantage is that the team has recent experience in thinking about the issues and this approach will serve us well in addressing the related challenges of managing hydrogen injection.

A high level Programme Plan has been developed in conjunction with CEB partners and is contained in Appendix I. It is believed that this provides a robust and realistic plan for the delivery of the programme of activities. The plan contains a 5 month Mobilisation Phase, which is realistic for a programme of this complexity and is necessary for sufficient planning to take place to allow the programme to be ready to enter the Design Phase.

Partners are fully engaged across the programme and bring relevant experience of mobilising competitive projects. CDC has experience of delivering EU funded projects and, as a local organisation, has a clear incentive to ensure that the programme is delivered. Partners in the LCNF strand also have relevant experience of other LCNF schemes (WPD), and WREN, as a community organisation, has a very clear local incentive to ensure the programme starts in a timely manner.

Work has already taken place to engage other affected parties, such as landowners and equipment suppliers to ensure that during the Mobilisation Phase these initial discussions can be turned into firm agreements.

The involvement of WPD has been of great help in providing support to the NIC strand as it has been possible to draw on their experience of previous LCNF projects in such areas as working with partners, the practical experience of managing LCNF projects and the business requirements for the deliverables, such as six monthly reports.

Page 31 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Readiness continued

6.2 Evidence of how the costs and benefits have been estimated

Estimation of Costs

 Costs as given in Appendix G have been calculated using a bottom-up approach  Partners have quoted fixed prices for the majority of their services  Method costs have been calculated based on credible information from suppliers  A large percentage of the costs of the equipment is driven by compliance and as such cannot be influenced by the programme, as detailed further in Appendix G.

A thorough and rigorous analysis of the costs and benefits of the CEB programme has been undertaken. Further detail is provided within Appendices G and M.

Experience that partners have brought to the programme planning has aided the completion of thorough, realistic and appropriate cost/benefit models. The approach to developing the analysis has been both bottom-up and top-down to give as rounded a view of the numbers as possible. This has ensured that all partners have confidence in the costs attached to their sections and are managing these, as well as having confidence that the overall programme costs have been analysed and will be managed and monitored centrally.

Partners have quoted fixed prices for the majority of their services and conventional costs, feeding into the Base Case, have been estimated based on previous experience of implementing traditional solutions. Method costs have been estimated based on credible information from suppliers and citable sources.

Estimation of Benefits

Benefits of the programme have been estimated using the current costs of running the WWU system and the value of Carbon.

6.3 Evidence of the measures a Network Licensee will employ to minimise the possibility of cost overruns or shortfalls in direct benefits

The programme has been broken down into discrete project packages and also into phases and deliverables, with each element having a cost allocated to it. This will allow cost management to individual items and enable action to be taken by the relevant project manager to address any potential cost overruns.

The Programme Management team will identify any actions that other parties could take in the event of cost overruns in one part of the programme to bring overall costs back within budget. The PRB will review the budget at each meeting and will only authorise each stage of the programme and spend when evidence is provided that the current stage is delivering the required outputs and is on budget.

Risk management processes will be in operation throughout the programme. Each risk will be assigned to an owner based on the risk rating and the ability of the individual to manage the risk. A risk register is given in Appendix K and a contingency plan is given in Appendix L.

6.4 A verification of all information included in the proposal

1. The proposal has been prepared by WWU in conjunction with CDC and information has been provided by programme partners and equipment suppliers.

Page 32 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Readiness continued

2. The bid has been prepared by a dedicated team of experts from across the partner organisations.

3. The proposal has been through independent checking processes, peer review processes and sent to programme partners to ensure the accuracy of information.

4. Information provided from partners has been reviewed by WWU to ensure accuracy.

6.5 How the Project plan will still deliver learning in the event that the take up of low carbon technologies and renewable energy in the trial area is lower than anticipated in the Full Submission

There is a risk that some aspects of the LCNF strand will not be delivered (for example take- up of domestic Combined Heat and Power boilers (CHP)). While this will mean that the increased demand for gas may be less and this will affect the volume of hydrogen that can be injected, it will not affect the learning from this programme which is related to the practical issues of the connection and management of hydrogen injection into the gas network.

The main risk for this NIC strand is that the planned wind farm component of the programme is delayed, in this case, the contingencies of both a constraint model using an existing wind farm and also a solar PV farm would be developed and the programme would still be able to deliver learning as to the viability or otherwise of the gas injection. In the unlikely event that none of these options are viable, the NIC strand will not be able to be delivered; however, even in this case, there would be some useful learning in terms of the development of a governance and contractual model for programmes across LCNF and NIC. Best practice and experiences will inevitably build up and logs of lessons learned and continual capture and transfer of knowledge will ensure that experience and best practice emerges from the programme in any event. TRL, in their role as ‘learning and dissemination partner’, will ensure that learning outcomes are maximised.

6.6 The processes in place to identify circumstances where the most appropriate course of action will be to suspend the project, pending permission from Ofgem that it can be halted.

Gateway Reviews have been scheduled for the end of each of the key programme delivery phases, as indicated in the Programme Plan (Appendix I), and are designed to determine whether or not the programme can successfully progress to the next phase of delivery. They provide assurance both to stakeholders and to programme team members that the scheme is on track, with regards to deliverables, and on budget.

At the point of a Gateway Review, CDC will coordinate a thorough examination of the phase, including:

1. Reviewing the Programme Plan, cost model and risk register;

2. Reviewing the outputs of the stage;

3. Assessing outputs against the Successful Delivery Reward Criteria; and

4. Ensuring that the best available skills and experience are deployed on the programme.

The above assessments will be carried out against the budget and the Programme Plan. As well as reviewing the current phase, the review process will take a forward look to the next

Page 33 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Project Readiness continued

stage, determining whether everything is in place for that phase to begin. Where the review highlights that remedial action is required by the PRB, this can take place, and this will also feed into the high level reporting to Ofgem.

In the event that the programme has moved beyond being a viable scheme, with Exception Reports and recommendations not being able to keep the deliverables as expected by partners and funders, the programme will report this to Ofgem via the DNO and request that the programme be halted. This stage review approach will ensure that CEB does not drift too far from proposal without review, be it the formal stage review or the ongoing monthly monitoring.

The PRB will review and agree the level of risk associated with the programme and determine a Delivery Confidence Assessment. This assessment will then provide the Project Team with recommended actions. The actions fall into the following categories.

1. Critical (Do Now): to increase the likelihood of a successful outcome, it is of the greatest importance that the programme should take action immediately 2. Essential (Do By): to increase the likelihood of a successful action, the programme should take action in the near future. Wherever possible, essential actions should be linked to a milestone and / or a specified timescale 3. Recommended: the programme would benefit from carrying out the recommendation. If possible, recommended actions should be linked to a milestone and / or a specified timescale 4. Halt the programme: either a. the programme has exceeded the tolerances set and agreed at the programme initiation and the situation is deemed as irrecoverable. The programme is halted and WWU senior management will contact Ofgem to discuss and agree the way forward. Or b. the related LCNF strand has been halted thereby meaning that the NIC strand cannot proceed. The programme is halted and WWU senior management will contact Ofgem to discuss and agree the way forward.

The Clean Energy Balance programme team has developed a strong position from which to deliver this scheme over the four year timeline. The relevant expertise in programme delivery, senior level partner representation and governance structures are all in place. There has been significant planning and preparation from all partners to support the vision, objectives, tasks and the interdependencies between teams and the budgets to undertake these activities.

The overarching CEB Programme has aligned LCNF, NIC and NIA strands; with the NIA derogation being based on a much broader set of deliverables and requirements through the NIC / LCNF strands, so it is essential to undertake these interdependent aspects of the Programme at this point in time, in line with the Programme timescales set out in this submission. The level of partner readiness and commitment of key resource to the Programme also underlines the ability and need to commence the Programme in line with these timescales from January 2014.

Page 34 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 7: Regulatory issues This section should be between 1 and 3 pages.

Please cross the box if the Project may require any derogations, consents or changes to the regulatory arrangements. Uniform Network Code

The Uniform Network Code is the contractual agreement that controls the commercial operation of the GB gas transportation system. The connection of the hydrogen injection will require gas to be taken off the WWU system to blend it and ensure that the hydrogen and methane are intimately mixed to avoid hydrogen in excess of the permitted limit being delivered to customers. This mixing will require an exit point from the WWU system to take off the methane and an entry connection downstream to put back in the slightly larger volume of mixed gas. This is currently not allowed by the Uniform Network Code, and would require a modification raising to allow it. WWU will need to determine the best way to achieve this. Appendix C illustrates the gas network in the Wadebridge area.

Direction of site for the purposes of measurement of the energy content (CV) of the gas injected

Under Section 12 of the Gas Act, Ofgem has the power to direct sites that inject gas to measure the CV of the gas injected. This information is then used to calculate the energy content of the gas metered at customers’ premises. This equipment is expensive and, based on the industry’s experience with bio-methane injection, it is unlikely that Ofgem will decide not to direct this hydrogen injection point; however, given the low volumes of hydrogen that will initially be injected, WWU will seek clarification from Ofgem as to their intentions.

Exemption to GS(M)R Regulations

WWU will require a exemption to GS(M)R to enable it to put greater than 0.1% by volume of hydrogen into the network. This will be the subject of the NIA strand. Currently, the GS(M)R Schedule 3 prohibits hydrogen in excess of 0.1% from being transported in the network. The systems can be demonstrated while conforming to this constraint and it seems likely that size of the wind farm will mean that injection of hydrogen in excess of the limit will not be possible on a regular basis, however, it would still be useful to obtain an exemption to enable the full potential of this innovative programme to be tested.

In order to obtain an exemption it will be necessary to demonstrate that “the health and safety of persons likely to be affected by an exemption will not be prejudiced in consequence of it” The experience of Wales & West Utilities in obtaining and exemption form GS(M)R to allow the limit on Oxygen in biomethane to be raised from 0.2% to 1% will be invaluable in obtaining an exemption for hydrogen.

The programme will need to:

1. Demonstrate that an exemption is required

WWU will need to provide a compelling argument to demonstrate why the gas conveyed can’t meet the gas specification. This ‘statement of need’, linked to the overall objectives of the power to gas project, will need to provide evidence to demonstrate the following: a) Why can’t the Hydrogen content be kept to <0.1%?

Page 35 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Regulatory issues continued b) Why can’t the hydrogen be reprocessed to make methane? c) Why can’t the hydrogen be conveyed outside the network i.e. to non-domestic premises or to an electricity generating station only?

Our consultant will provide an independent review of the ‘statement of need’ and provide commentary on the adequacy of the supporting evidence.

2. Demonstrate the integrity of the assets to be used by the hydrogen methane mix

WWU will need to demonstrate the integrity of the existing assets, their design specification, maintenance and inspection history etc.

This will produce a list of assets that will need to be investigated as to their suitability to carry the hydrogen methane mix. It will also eliminate some classes of assets that exist elsewhere on the WWU network but that do not exist in the Wadebridge area, such as over 7Bar pipelines.

3. Understand the Regulatory requirements

WWU will need to understand the regulatory requirements (beyond compliance with the GS(M)R 1996), along the value chain and across the life cycle of the programme, where compliance could be affected by conveying gas outside the gas specification.

4. Understand the hazards and who could be affected and existing work done

In order to demonstrate that health and safety standards are not being prejudiced, WWU will first need to identify ‘health and safety issues’ and ‘persons affected’ by the change in gas quality, considering all aspects of the value chain and life cycle. Some work has already been done, notably by NaturalHy and CERG, and some findings have been published. These will be reviewed to establish what work has been done, how far it goes to demonstrate the safety or otherwise of various classes of asset and appliances at various proportions of hydrogen. This will include work on hydrogen embrittlement of metallic pipes.

Workshop 1 This will systematically identify the ‘health and safety issues’ and ‘persons affected’. Outputs from the workshop will include:

 A matrix of persons affected and the hazards that they are exposed to  An initial identification of key risk control and mitigation measures available  An initial semi-quantitative ranking of these hazards including the identification of any ‘show stoppers’  Identification of potential sources of information to support the risk assessment and demonstration process for specific hazards identified (e.g. work from CERG and NaturalHy)  An assessment of hazards for end-users based on the existing network operation – to allow for comparisons with the hazard, including a comparison with the ‘issues’ and ‘persons affected’ for the existing gas distribution system (based on existing assessments).

Page 36 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Regulatory issues continued 5. Work on specific issues to develop the evidence base to demonstrate that the risks for specific issues would not increase.

It is anticipated that Workshop 1 will identify specific issues that require additional consideration and development, including by means of literature review, incident analysis, and specific detailed risk comparison studies.

6. Demonstrating that the risk have been assessed and do not prejudice persons health and safety

Building on the outputs from Workshop 1, WWU will need to demonstrate to the HSE, through risk assessment (and/or deterministic arguments), that the hazards identified can be managed to a level which does not prejudice the health and safety of persons affected i.e. that the risk levels are comparable to the risk profile of the existing gas distribution network. This could include, for example:

 Integrity assessment for the distribution network operation with methane/hydrogen mixtures  Risk assessment for different persons, e.g. end-users, maintenance workers etc  Comparison of risks between the existing gas network and the gas network conveying a hydrogen/methane mix.

7. Specifying a programme of work to address any gaps identified

It is foreseeable that the work above will identify a number of issues, including areas where the relative risks associated with conveying a hydrogen/methane mix are greater than those for normal operations of the network.

Workshop 2

A second workshop to examine in more detail the risk control and mitigation measure and identify any key gaps. The outputs of this workshop will include further experimental work and also specific mitigating actions that may be required to mitigate the risks for the Wadebridge area, for example inspection and modification of appliance.

For completeness and the bigger picture Appendix E shows the electricity and gas networks across Cornwall.

Page 37 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 8: Customer impacts This section should be between 2 and 4 pages. As part of the overall programme we will be developing the appropriate detailed customer communications plans for both power and gas customers where there is any likelihood of an impact on them and the plan will be shared with Ofgem for approval before any customer engagements.

There may be two major impacts on customers  Appliance inspection  CHP installation.

Appliance inspection

A process of appliance inspection and adaptation may be required if the work on obtaining an exemption to the GS(M)R to inject higher than the current limit identifies that this is required. This would require significant planning and resource to accomplish and it is envisaged that close working with WREN to plan this work and obtain customer co-operation would be necessary; however, at this stage, this is only a potential impact and the hope is that the work on obtaining an exemption will not require this approach, for example we may be able to demonstrate that 2% hydrogen / natural gas mixture does not burn differently from natural gas. It is recognised that some customers in Wadebridge are served by networks owned by Independent Gas Transporters and WWU would need to engage with these companies before conducting inspections for these customers. WWU has a workforce that delivers its emergency service in the area but these employees are not trained to work on gas burning appliances and would therefore require training. It is anticipated the programme will use a company such as Kiwa Gastech based in Cheltenham to provide this training to WWU. Owing to potential problems that may be found with appliances these inspections would need to be done in the summer to minimise the impact on customers.

We assume that it will be relatively easy to gain access to premises owned or occupied by WREN members but recognise that gaining access to those owned or occupied by non- WREN members will be more difficult.

In order to improve access rates we will make use of the following:

 Demographic profiling to target high risk premises. Appliances built since 1996 have been tested on 23% hydrogen mixture and therefore it is likely that premises built after 1996 will not have pre 1996 appliance although this would need investigating  Rental property have to have landlord safety checks and this may provide some useful information that will reduce the number of inspections required

The following should increase awareness and hence willingess to provide access:

 The WREN ‘community shop’ in Wadebridge will provide a point of engagement  We expect that there will be local interest and awareness of the project and that appliance inspections are required and WREN will be key to creating and sustaining this awareness  We will market the benefits of having annual gas inspections especially for older appliances and hence the value of our free inspection  We may offer incentives for example free Carbon Monoxide alarms as part of the inspection and organise prize draws

We will make use of WWU’s systems to ensure the necessary inspections are made and properly recorded. The high density of the inspections will require an fairly intensive

Page 38 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Customer impacts continued operation and this will assist in obtaining for the following reasons:

 It will be easy to call back to premises because we will be in the area for a number of weeks  We may be able to make appointments owing to local contact

We recognise that there are likely to be a number of hard to access properties, for example holiday lets and we will have to put in resources to address these issues as and when they arise.

Some customers may be reluctant to provide access and in these cases we would seek to speak to them in person to understand their concerns, explain why we want to inspect their appliances and provide reassurance.

We have budgeted £416k including a 50% contingency for this activity. This comprises:

 3,000 inspections taking one hour will be required  10% or 300 will require a return visit of 2 hours to do modifications  £15,000 for materials such as burner replacement or appliance replacement

The budget for material is relatively small because we have assumed that in the vast majority of cases only burner replacements will be needed.

During the course of the inspections we may come across some appliances that are “immediately dangerous” for example those that are producing carbon monoxide. We will deal with these in line with the procedures we use during our normal activities. While customers who are informed that their appliance is immediately dangerous may be frustrated at the inconvenience and expense they are also likely to be grateful that this potentially life threatening fault was identified.

We may also come across appliances that are “not to current standards”; theses appliances are not dangerous and we would offer advice to customers in these cases.

For rollout, it will be impractical to inspect appliances so it would be necessary to establish that all appliances could burn the hydrogen / natural gas mixture. Additionally the government may legislate to force burners to be able to burn hydrogen / natural gas mixtures and phase out old appliances; precedents include smokeless zones forcing customers to use smokeless fuels and the phasing out of incandescent light bulbs

Page 39 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Section 9: Successful Delivery Reward Criteria

This section should be between 2 and 5 pages.

Criterion 9.1 (NIC SDRC 1) Specific: Complete the Delivery Phase Project Plan (also into contracts) Measureable: Document produced and circulated to all organisations within the programme. Achievable: The Programme structure will see a fully developed set of project plans covering programme, budget and scope of works with clear actions and risk review incorporated. Relevant: The criterion responds to the Programme objectives of being well positioned and deliverable for all project partners. This SDRC will set the Programme out on a solid basis for the Design phases onwards. Timely: Completed by 24th June 2014 Lead: Cornwall Development Company Evidence 9.1 1. Full Delivery Phase Project Plan and associated detailed documentation.

Criterion 9.2 (NIC SDRC 2) Specific: Trial Design Measureable: Document produced and signed off by all the organisations within the programme. Achievable: The trial design will build on the initial Use Case document in order to specify the full range of planned trials to be undertaken by the project under each of its Methods. Relevant: This deliverable is critical for ensuring that the investment in this trial delivers valuable learning that is of benefit to both WPD and the industry as a whole. Timely: Completed by 31st March 2015 Lead: TRL Evidence 9.2 1. Trail design document produced and signed off by the project partners 2. Trial design document made available for wider industry circulation

Criterion 9.3 (NIC SDRC 3) Specific: IT architecture and System Design Measureable: This SDRC is measureable by the delivery of specific outputs (design documents) of the IT design work stream – see evidence 9.5 Achievable: These are typical design documents. There is nothing unique in their structure nor anything extraordinary in terms of the design issues they address Relevant: The IT architecture / design is a fundamental requirement of the solution. It is on the overall solution critical path Timely: Completed by 31st March 2015 Lead: CGI Evidence 9.3 1. Solution Architecture Diagram 2. Communications Network Design document 3. Security design document for CGI solution 4. SCADA solution design document 5. Data store and Analytics design document

Page 40 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Successful Delivery Reward Criteria continued

Criterion 9.4 (NIC SDRC 4) Specific: Gas Mixing & Injection passes Factory Acceptance Test Measureable: Gas Mixing & Injection Factory Acceptance Test certification. Achievable: Approval is based on standards which the CEB Programme, through ITM Power as lead project team, are qualified and experienced to deliver. Timescales projected are based on experience of such work in other projects. Relevant: The Gas Mixing & Injection technology is an essential component of the CEB Programme overarching technological requirements. Timely: Completed by 31st March 2016 Lead: ITM Power Evidence 9.4 1. Final design and specification documentation 2. Certification from the Factory Acceptance Test

Criterion 9.5 (NIC SDRC 5) Specific: Achieve first hydrogen injection Measureable: Hydrogen successfully injected into WWU network. Achievable: This is based on appropriate levels of hydrogen as set out in the bid submission, which is in line with recommended guidance at this point in time. Relevant: It is a core objective of the CEB Programme, and essential as a deliverable for the scheme. Timely: Completed by 31st March 2016 Lead: WWU Evidence 9.5 1. Measured flow of hydrogen into WWU network

Criterion 9.6 (NIC SDRC 6) Specific: Trials Completed Measureable: Report produced outlining the Commercial Models for the project, including options for the scheme which have been reviewed as well as the preferred option for potential roll-out of CEB to other communities. Achievable: This SDRC is a core deliverable of the project at the end of the 4 year programme, which all parties are committed to achieving. Relevant: The application of the CEB Programme through a role out of the full scheme, or components of it, is a core objective of the scheme. Timely: Completed by 29th December 2017 Lead: Toshiba Evidence 9.6 1. Report produced and dissemination of findings

Criterion 9.7 (NIC SDRC 7) Specific: Reports on the community engagement approach and customer experience with hydrogen natural gas mixtures Measureable: Report produced outlining the benefit, risks and opportunities in the delivery of the CEB Programme which can influence the planning and delivery of comparable projects and programmes. Report outlining customer’s experience of the inspections programme if required and using hydrogen / natural gas mixtures Achievable: This will be one of a series of such deliverables which WREN are positioned to deliver throughout the 4 year programme. Their community based remit aligns with this

Page 41 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma Successful Delivery Reward Criteria continued SDRC and is a core strand of work throughout the scheme. WWU will contribute experience from the inspection programme and any experience from customers’ use of hydrogen / natural gas mixtures Relevant: The CEB Programme is community focussed, and through the lead of WREN will ensure that this programme and future activities can deliver meaningful community benefits. Timely: Completed by 29th December 2017 Lead: WREN/WWU Evidence 9.7 1. Report produced 2. Report and findings disseminated to relevant audiences and made publicly available 3. Presentation of findings in formal events as part of the wider programme dissemination process

Criterion 9.8 (NIC SDRC 8) Specific: Reports on the learning about hydrogen mixing and injection Measureable: Report produced outlining the technical and commercial learning related to the hydrogen mixing and injection. Achievable: This will be one of a series of such learning deliverables and will be delivered by ITM Power and WWU. Relevant: The successful delivery and learning from the hydrogen mixing and injection is the key element of the NIC strand of the project and is key to achieving wider rollout. Timely: Completed by 29th December 2017 Lead: ITM Power & WWU Evidence 9.8 1. Report produced 2. Report and findings disseminated to relevant audiences and made publicly available 3. Presentation of findings in formal events as part of the wider programme dissemination process

Page 42 of 43

Project Code/Version No: WWU GN 01 v2 Gas Network Innovation Competition Full Submission Pro-forma

Section 10: List of Appendices

Appendix A Apportionment of Costs

Appendix B Indicative Images of Electrolyser

Appendix C Gas Network in the Wadebridge Area

Appendix D Not used

Appendix E Gas and Electricity Networks Cornwall and Cardiff

Appendix F WWU’s Primary Emissions to Atmosphere

Appendix G Financial Spreadsheet

Appendix H Use Cases

Appendix I Programme Plan

Appendix J Governance and Reporting Structure

Appendix K Risk Register

Appendix L Contingency Plan

Appendix M Cost Benefit Analysis

Appendix N Base Cost Description and Value for Money

Appendix O CEB μEMS System Diagram

Appendix P CEB Demand and Generation Diagram

Appendix Q Partner Roles Summary

Appendix R Letters of Support

Appendix S Power Network in the Wadebridge Area

Page 43 of 43

Appendix A Apportionment of Costs between Strands

In summary, cost allocation has been undertaken based on the following principles:

Gas Inject is the core technology required by the NIC strand to extend gas network life. However, it is an optional solution to LCNF. Hence all costs have been allocated to NIC.

Gas mixing supports gas injection and hence is an NIC cost. The electrolyser and gas engine provide a means of storing/time-shifting electrical generation and hence are LCNF costs.

Gas Storage is required by both the gas injection system and the gas engine. Hence costs are shared. The gas injection can operate without the control systems and hence these are LCNF costs.

Shared activities (PM, IT, Learning) have been primarily allocated in line with the ratio of initial direct strand costs. This results in approximately 20% of shared costs being allocated to the NIC and 80% to the LCNF

Apportionment of Costs between Projects

On a cross-sector project of this nature it is critical that costs are apportioned in a manner that best reflects the underlying value they deliver to the customers of the respective networks. To achieve this, each of the logical components of the overall solution has been evaluated in terms of its value to both gas and electricity distribution customers. Costs were subsequently allocated on this basis.

The highlights of this analyse are provided below:

• Constraint Scheme – The constraint scheme is only pertinent to the electricity network hence any costs specifically associated with this will be allocated purely to the LCNF project

• Electrolyser – The electrolyser is a controllable load used to allow excess export from the wind farm to be accommodated when the electricity network is constrained. Although it is used in conjunction with gas injection, gas injection is not the primary reason it is there, the excess generation is the reason. It is appreciated that the argument could be made that without the electrolyser there is no hydrogen to inject, hence no NIC gas injection project and consequently all benefits associated with gas inject are lost. However when considering the direct benefits of the electrolyser these sit firmly with the LCNF project for the reasons stated above and hence all electrolyser costs have been allocated there

• Gas Engine – The gas engine provides a means for peak shifting electrical generation. It provides no direct benefit to the gas network. Hence all costs have been allocated to the LCNF project

• Gas Injection – The gas injection system, if successful, will reduce carbon for gas customers and extend the asset life of the gas network. For electricity customers it provides an alternative Method to the gas engine for accommodating otherwise-constrained generation. As such it is an optional resource for the electricity DNO to achieve the same benefit it can achieve in other ways but it is a compulsory resource for the gas network to achieve the benefits specific to its network. Hence the primary beneficiary, arguably, is the gas network and therefore all costs should be allocated to the NIC • Gas Storage – The gas storage helps provide a buffer for both the gas engine and gas inject. Hence, following the logic deployed above, this is resource that is shared between both NIC and LCNF project components. As such its costs have been shared 50:50

• Gas Measurement and Mixing – Although the gas engine burns a blend of gas the mixing activity is supported by standard gas engine operation. Consequently the additional gas measurement and mixing equipment identified is required purely to support the gas injection process. All costs for these items have therefore been allocated to the NIC project

• Demand Zone – The purpose of the Demand Zone equipment is to provide a means of aligning CHP generation to the electricity demand peak while ensuring the subsequent apparent reduction in load doesn’t create problems at higher electricity network levels. In doing so it aims to reduce the need for electricity network reinforcement and, as such, its primary benefit lies with the electricity network. Although the project is also seeking to identify means of stimulating CHP take up, which in turn can extend the life of the gas network, this is a consequential benefit and not the main purpose for the CHP inclusion in this trial. Consequently all Demand Zone costs (control system and CHP trial) have been allocated to the LCNF project

• Generation Zone – The Generation Zone control system is responsible for managing all of the discrete components within the Generation Zone and operating these as logical units that support each of the LCNF Methods being trialled. Included within this is the operation of the gas storage and injection, hence this cost needs to be apportioned across both projects. This has been done based on an assessment of the complexities and associated learning value that each will deliver to its respective customers. Given the LCNF learning encompasses multiple Methods each with the potential to deliver customer value where as NIC is focused on one specific technical Method and its associated learning, the costs have been allocated as described above for shared costs.

• Knowledge Capture and Dissemination – Learning applies across both the LCNF and NIC projects. Given learning costs have not been broken down based on specific trials at this stage but have been derived based on appropriate resourcing levels, it is difficult to accurately predict to allocation between LCNF and NIC. Consequently the costs have been allocated as described above for shared costs.

• Programme Management – Programme Management have been apportioned in the same manner as Knowledge Capture and Dissemination costs following the same logic

• Information Technology –IT the costs have been allocated as described above for shared costs. which is felt to be a good approximation of the level of IT enablement and integration complexity required for each and also a good approximation of the associated learning and hence customer benefits delivered

Appendix B Illustrative Images of the Electrolyser Unit

Schematic diagram of containerised 0.3MW PEM electrolyser. Electrolysis stacks and gas separation on left, balance of plant (including water treatment) in the centre and right.

An array of 8 electrolysis stacks representing a load of 0.5MW capable of producing 200kg hydrogen/day. A 1MW electrolyser system contains 16 stacks.

SS23 SS33 SS43 SS53 SS63 SS73 SS83 SS93 ST03 ST13 ST23 ST33

SS12 SS22 SS32 SS42 SS52 SS62 SS72 SS82 SS92 ST02 ST12 ST22 ST32

SS01 SS11 SS21 SS31 SS41 SS51 SS61 SS71 SS81 SS91 ST01 ST11 ST21 ST31

SS00 SS10 SS20 SS30 SS40 SS50 SS60 SS70 SS80 SS90 ST00 ST10 ST20 ST30

SW99 SX09 SX19 SX29 SX39 SX49 SX59 SX69 SX79 SX89 SX99 SY09 SY19 SY29 SY39

SW88 SW98 SX08 SX18 SX28 SX38 SX48 SX58 SX68 SX78 SX88 SX98 SY08 SY18 SY28 SY38

SW77 SW87 SW97 SX07 SX17 SX27 SX37 SX47 SX57 SX67 SX77 SX87 SX97 SY07 SY17

SW66 SW76 SW86 SW96 SX06 SX16 SX26 SX36 SX46 SX56 SX66 SX76 SX86 SX96 SY06

SW55 SW65 SW75 SW85 SW95 SX05 SX15 SX25 SX35 SX45 SX55 SX65 SX75 SX85 SX95

SW44 SW54 SW64 SW74 SW84 SW94 SX04 SX14 SX24 SX34 SX44 SX54 SX64 SX74 SX84 SX94

SW33 SW43 SW53 SW63 SW73 SW83 SW93 SX03 SX63 SX73 SX83

SW32 SW42 SW52 SW62 SW72 SW82 SW92

SW41 SW51 SW61 SW71 SW81

PROJECT ID: 29614

SCALE: 1:250,000 Wales and West Utilities Ltd GIS Low Pressure High Pressure USER ID: MVAGG TITLE : DATE: 18/06/2013 Medium Pressure Intermediate Pressure

PROJECT PLAN The plan shows those pipes owned by Wales & West Utilities or the relevant Gas Distribution Network in their roles as Licenced Gas Transporters (GT). Gas pipes owned by other GTs, or otherwise privately owned, may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the relevant owners. GRID REFERENCE: The information shown on this plan is given without warranty, the accuracy thereof cannot be guarenteed. Service pipes, valves, syphons, stub connections, etc. are Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey Easting : 235698 Northing : 74058 0 4,300 8,600 17,200 Meters not shown but their presence should be anticipated. No liability of any kind whatsoever is accepted by Wales & West Utilities, the relevant Gas Distribution Network, on behalf of HMSO. ©Crown copyright and or their agents, servants or contractors for any error or omission. Safe digging practices, in accordance with HS(G)47, must be used to verify and establish the database right 2012. All rights reserved. actual position of mains, pipes, services and other apparatus on site before any mechanical plant is used. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information Ordnance Survey Licence number 0100044308. is provided to all persons (either direct labour or contractors) working for you or near gas apparatus. The information included on this plan should not be referred to beyond a period of 28 days from the date of issue. PROJECT ID: 30854

SCALE: 1:50,000 Wales and West Utilities Ltd GIS Low Pressure High Pressure USER ID: MVAGG TITLE : DATE: 18/09/2013 Medium Pressure Intermediate Pressure

PROJECT PLAN The plan shows those pipes owned by Wales & West Utilities or the relevant Gas Distribution Network in their roles as Licenced Gas Transporters (GT). Gas pipes owned by other GTs, or otherwise privately owned, may be present in this area. Information with regard to such pipes should be obtained from the relevant owners. GRID REFERENCE: The information shown on this plan is given without warranty, the accuracy thereof cannot be guarenteed. Service pipes, valves, syphons, stub connections, etc. are Reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey Easting : 315060 Northing : 175386 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Meters not shown but their presence should be anticipated. No liability of any kind whatsoever is accepted by Wales & West Utilities, the relevant Gas Distribution Network, on behalf of HMSO. ©Crown copyright and or their agents, servants or contractors for any error or omission. Safe digging practices, in accordance with HS(G)47, must be used to verify and establish the database right 2012. All rights reserved. actual position of mains, pipes, services and other apparatus on site before any mechanical plant is used. It is your responsibility to ensure that this information Ordnance Survey Licence number 0100044308. is provided to all persons (either direct labour or contractors) working for you or near gas apparatus. The information included on this plan should not be referred to beyond a period of 28 days from the date of issue. Appendix F Toshiba TRL

Appendix H Clean Energy Balance: Use Cases

Clean Energy Balance: Learning Approach

Introduction The CEB Programme The CEB programme aims to trial a number of Methods which utilise both the gas and electricity distribution networks in order to maximise renewable generation, minimise network reinforcement and provide a mechanism for community energy engagement. To achieve this, a number of discrete technologies will be deployed, including: a hydrogen electrolyser, hydrogen storage, a gas engine, gas injection, CHP units and a number of control systems.

Purpose of this document This document details the learning that CEB proposes to undertake. The aims and objectives of CEB and the Methods which support this have been translated into specific use cases which will be used to evaluate each Method. The use cases have been defined in the following categories: • System use cases – These have been defined to evaluate the performance of the Methods which underpin CEB from both a technical and commercial view point • Functional use cases – These have been defined to evaluate the performance characteristics of the discrete components upon which the system use cases rely The diagram below provides an overview of how the programme’s Aims and Objectives and use cases align. It is the programme’s intention that this document forms the basis for the business requirements for CEB and, as such, will inform both programme and engineering design. In this manner, CEB can be assured that delivery of the programme and the supporting system will deliver the learning sought.

1

Toshiba TRL

Documentation Approach Within this document, the use cases have been defined in terms of: • Summary – A high level summary of the use case • The Opportunity – What are the key benefits of proving the use case? • The Objectives – What is the key learning sought in order to demonstrate the benefit potential of the use case? • The Trials – What are the trials that will be undertaken as part of the use case in order to achieve the objectives? • The Actors – What are the key elements necessary to deliver the use case? – these may be either individuals or system components • Roles and Responsibilities – What is expected of each actor in support of the use case? For example, the actions each is expected to undertake • Data – This is the data required to feed the use case • Information – The use case also needs to be considered in terms of the information it is expected to produce in order to achieve the objective The above information has been specified on an incremental basis (i.e. the additional data/information required over and above that already specified for a previous Use Case upon which the current Use Case relies).

2

Toshiba TRL

System Use Cases

ID Name Description S1 Constraint Summary: Scheme This Method will look to connect multiple generating resources above the available firm capacity and maintain the net export across these resources within available network capacity. Opportunity: It is anticipated that by combining different generation forms, such as solar and wind via this Method, the generation diversity will naturally provide a degree of export smoothing and therefore allow more generation to be connected sooner. Objectives: • To understand the key factors that influence the level of constrained energy within a constraint scheme. This will include the size and mix of solar and wind generation sets • To understand the level of control on a constraint scheme required to protect the network from limit excursions. This will include speed of response, the level of response and the need for advanced warning via forecasting • To understand wind farm viability at different levels of firm connection and with different levels of diverse generation within the scheme • To evaluate ownership structures and commercial models that might further improve scheme viability • To understand the key factors which influence the level of constrained energy within a constraint scheme. This will include the size and mix of solar and wind generation sets • Impact of the scheme on different levels of firm connection and sizes of generating sets • Wider impact of roll-out of the solution and its technical implications for both WPD and the UK as a whole Trials: • To connect the wind farm with a constrained connection and manage its export within available firm limits. The level of curtailed energy will be measured and the impact on wind farm viability will be assessed • Based on actual data, to simulate lower firm connection levels and determine the impact on curtailed energy and hence viability • Based on actual data, to simulate variations on the generating mix and controllable generation type (wind, PV) and its impact on curtailed generation and hence generation set viability • To monitor the scheme response to actual network events and refine the scheme to achieve optimal response actions and times Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • Wind Farm – Willing to connect and operate in constrained mode • PV Farm – To provide real time generation data • Met Office – To provide wind and solar weather forecasts

3

Toshiba TRL

• uEMS – To forecast generation and manage the wind farm export to ensure network limits are not breached • DNO – To provide near-real time network measures and limits within which the constraint scheme must operate Data: • Generated power/power flow (kW) every five seconds from Wind Farm, PV Farm and 33kV feeder • Voltage (kV) every five seconds at 33kV constraint points • Frequency (Hz) every five seconds at Wind Farm, PV Farm and MV substation • Status and fault information on event occurrence from Wind Farm, PV Farm and 33kV feeder • Wind and Solar forecast from Met Office every 30 minutes for next 24 hours • Wind farm development and operating costs from Wind Farm developer/operator Information: • Forecast solar and wind generation from uEMS • Current and future available network capacity from uEMS • Potential curtailed generation (kWh) from analysis • Optimal constraint scheme fault responsiveness for different constraint levels/types from analysis • Assessment of comparative costs/responsiveness of controllable PV vs controllable wind • Assessment of responsiveness/costs/accuracy of proactive control based on forecasting Vs responsive control • Assessment of potential UK opportunities (based on generation mix, constraint level, constraint type, etc) from analysis • Control scheme install and operating costs based on different ownership structures and associated assumptions from analysis • Evaluation of Wind Farm viability from analysis • Evaluation of future cost/benefit (based on energy prices, carbon saving, component cost glide, commercial models) from analysis • Evaluation of customer benefits from analysis S2 Gas Summary: Enabled This Method will utilise the constraint scheme in conjunction with an Peak electrolyser acting as a controllable load, hence allowing the wind farm to Shifting increase export in line with electrolyser size. The gas generated will be stored and subsequently blended with natural gas and burned in a gas engine at a later date/time when the available network capacity allows. Opportunity: Through operating as described above, the gas micro-system deployed by this Method will provide a mechanism for generation peak shifting and smoothing which should have the potential to greatly reduce, if not remove, the need for network reinforcement and/or generation curtailment when connecting renewable generation. Objectives:

4

Toshiba TRL

• To demonstrate the viability of using an electrolyser, gas storage and a gas engine to support generation peak shifting • To determine the optimal sizing of equipment to maximise the commercial viability of the Method for different Wind Farm sizes • To evaluate ownership structures and commercial models that might further improve scheme viability • Evaluate current and future opportunities to optimise the economic model • Future evolutions of the underlying technologies will be assessed and the impact of this on price and performance will be evaluated Trials: • To operate the electrolyser, gas storage and gas engine as a peak shifting scheme and evaluate performance, energy losses and commercial viability • Based on actual data, to simulate increasing levels of constraint and review the scheme performance, losses and viability • To simulate different comparative sizes of wind farm, electrolyser, energy storage and gas engine and model the optimal size from a performance and commercial viability perspective • Based on actual data, to include the gas engine within the constraint scheme in order to maximise its generating output (based on both hydrogen and natural gas) and hence use Spark Spread to contribute to costs • To utilise the electrolyser as a balancing tool when not required to offset Wind Farm curtailment • To evaluate the commercial viability of the above based of changes in external factors such as wholesale energy prices • To evaluate the implications of different ownership structures and the implications on contractual relationships and hence commercial viability (e.g. the impact on working with a non-bound gas engine) Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • Electrolyser – To absorb excess wind generation to produce hydrogen gas • Wind farm – To connect to electrolyser in order to maximise its output • uEMS – To coordinate renewable generation, gas engine and electrolyser within constraint limit • Gas storage – Provide capability to store hydrogen gas for burning in the gas engine • Gas engine – Maximise generation output Data: • Generated power/power flow (kW) every five seconds from Wind Farm, PV Farm and 33kV feeder • Voltage (kV) every five seconds at 33kV constraint points • Frequency (Hz) every five seconds at Wind Farm, PV Farm and MV substation • Gas storage capacity; pressure, temperature • Electrolyser capital and operating costs • Gas engine output (kW) and running costs Information:

5

Toshiba TRL

• Current and future available network capacity • Potential curtailed generation (kWh) • Value of Spark Spread from wholesale market prices • Optimal gas engine operation • Optimal gas engine and gas storage sizing • Method install and operating costs based on different ownership structures and associated assumptions • Evaluation of Method viability • Evaluation of future cost/benefit (based on energy prices, Carbon saving, component cost glide, commercial models) • Evaluation of customer benefits S3 Constraint Summary: Circum- This Method will employ the electrolyser to convert the electrical energy vention to hydrogen. The hydrogen will be stored and subsequently injected into via the the gas network at the prevailing regulated levels at a time when there is Gas available gas network capacity to accommodate it. In support of this, an Network exemption to the Gas Safety (Management) Regulations (GSMR) will be sought to allow the injection of hydrogen at higher levels. Opportunity: If a cost-effective approach can be demonstrated, this will provide a viable means of transporting energy beyond a constraint in the electricity distribution network. Objectives: • To demonstrate the viability of using the electrolyser, gas storage and gas injection as a means of maximising generation output • To simulate different levels of constraint and subsequent effect on electrolyser behaviour • To evaluate the effect of injecting hydrogen on the gas network; pressure changes, effects on infrastructure • Evaluate ownership and commercial models Trials: • The gas mixing and injection equipment will be deployed and the ability to inject hydrogen at regulated and higher levels evaluated when headroom allows • The capacity of the resultant gas injection system to consume the generated hydrogen will be evaluated over time and the subsequent impact on optimal hydrogen storage determined • Current and future opportunities to optimise the economic model will be assessed. This will include options for ownership, impact of a potential hydrogen injection RHI tariff, scheduling injection for peak pricing and the impact of future energy prices rises • The impact of increasing the permitted levels of hydrogen content in the natural gas network will be evaluated and the potential benefit for the wider rollout of gas injection determined. This will include assessment of the economic viability from a DNO and GDN perspective and also the wider benefit of decarbonising the UK gas network • Evaluate ownership and commercial models.

6

Toshiba TRL

• Current and future opportunities to optimise the economic model will be assessed. Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • Electrolyser – absorb excess generation and produce hydrogen gas • Gas Injection – transfer hydrogen from storage into gas network • Gas storage – store hydrogen gas as required Data: • Hydrogen generation rate (mol/s) as a function of the available input power • Power available for hydrogen generation (kW) and its fluctuations • Level of pressure (bar) in the hydrogen storage tanks • Hydrogen flow (mol/s) from the storage system to the gas grid • Level of pressure (bar) and gas flow (mol/s) in the gas network • Ratio (%) of hydrogen and natural gas in the gas network • Parameters of quality measurement of the gas infrastructure (e.g. Level of corrosion, pressure, safety, etc) Information: • Fluctuations of the available power for hydrogen generation • Hydrogen generation capacity of electrolyser • Storage capacity and pressure variations in hydrogen storage tanks • Optimal conditions for electrolyser operation • Optimal electrolyser sizing • Maximum capacity of hydrogen injection into the gas network • Method install and operating costs based on different ownership structures and associated assumptions • Gas injection cost/benefit and sensitivity analysis to key variables • Evaluation of future cost/benefit (based on energy prices, carbon saving, component cost glide, commercial models) • Evaluation of customer benefits S4 Network Summary: Arbitrage This Method will combine each of the above Methods into one Model overarching solution set. This will then be operated to explore opportunities to exploit network availability and prevailing energy prices in order to offset an element of the cost of energy lost in the conversion process. Opportunity: If it is feasible to shift between gas injection and gas engine, an opportunity to utilise network availability to offset costs elements will be created. Objectives: • To demonstrate the ability to switch between gas injection and gas engine operation • To evaluate whether it is feasible to exploit differences in energy prices to overcome conversion losses • To evaluate commercial models to support network arbitrage Trials:

7

Toshiba TRL

• The ability to switch between gas injection and gas engine will be assessed operationally and the impact on overall efficiency of shorter operating timeframes on each energy route determined. The optimal responsiveness will be gauged and the most economic batch sizes determined • The comparative efficiency and economics of gas-enabled peak shifting Vs gas injection and the sensitivities of each method to key variables will be assessed • The opportunity to maximise returns and consequently minimise losses by providing a solution that effectively arbitrages across gas and electricity markets and trading windows will be assessed • The opportunity to maximise energy throughput by exploiting available capacity across both networks will be evaluated Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • uEMS – utilise system constraints to manage generation • Electrolyser – provide conversion mechanism for electricity into hydrogen • Gas engine- utilise hydrogen and natural gas to produce electricity • Gas injection – inject hydrogen into the gas network Data: • Gas input flow for the gas engine (mol/s) • Output power from the gas engine (kW) • Demand profile characteristics in the electricity and gas grid • Historic and forecast energy pricing in the electricity and gas markets Information: • Energy efficiency of gas engine • Energy efficiency of gas injection • Associated cost of gas engine and gas injection operations • Restrictions of the volume on hydrogen that may be added to the gas network • Switching time from gas injection to gas engine and vice-versa • Analysis of gas and electricity price fluctuations for different markets/ contract volumes and hence sizing of arbitrage opportunities • Method install and operating costs based on different ownership structures and associated assumptions • Method cost/benefit and sensitivity analysis to key variables • Evaluation of future cost/benefit (based on energy prices, carbon saving, component cost glide, commercial models) • Evaluation of customer benefits S5 CHP as a Summary: means of This Method will explore the ability of CHP systems to support local load Reinforce and hence minimise the need for urban reinforcement. ment Avoidance Opportunity: Subsidising micro CHP costs can stimulate unit take up and subsequently deliver increased levels of local generation capable of offsetting peak demand. This would reduce the cost of both location and regional reinforcement and also the need for central balancing reserve.

8

Toshiba TRL

Objectives: • To evaluate the level of incentive required to stimulate micro CHP adoption • Investigate concerns over remote operation of CHP units through liaison with both domestic and commercial customers • To demonstrate the ability to align CHP generation to peak electricity demand and the potential benefits to the network that may result • Demonstrate the extent to which CHP generation can be controlled to avoid impacting constraints at higher network levels • Identify viable commercial models including ownership of the units and the energy (heat and electricity) that is generated • Analyse the operational efficiency of a model where heat is a by-product of generation and identify the conditions that maximise generation while minimising energy losses. • Assess the current and future opportunities to optimise the economic model Trials: • The ability to stimulate demand for micro CHP will be assessed through the inclusion of additional incentives • Concerns over remote operation of the CHP units will be assessed by direct customer liaison with both domestic and commercial customers • The degree to which CHP generation can be aligned to electrical load will be assessed by remote management of the unit’s generation • The ability to control CHP output in line with generation at higher network levels will be assessed including the ability to smooth intermittent renewable generation profiles • The operational efficiency of a model where heat is a by-product of generation will be assessed and the conditions identified that maximise generation while minimising energy losses Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • Micro CHP – convert gas into heat and electricity at domestic sites • Commercial CHP – convert gas into heat and electricity at commercial sites • uEMS – control the demand zone CHPs • Demand forecast – provide forecast of demand for planning CHP utilisation Data: • Efficiency of energy conversion in CHP • Output power from CHP (kW) • Output heat from CHP (kW) • Gas flow input for CHP (mol/s) • CHP thermal storage capacity and efficiency • CHP generation responsiveness • Local electricity demand (kWh) • Household/property temperature • Local weather/temperature data • Demographic/site usage Information:

9

Toshiba TRL

• Peak demand period in the local electricity network • Unit impact on peak gas demand • Impact of aligning energy to peak demand on hot water availability, system efficiency and customer benefits • Cost of deploying, operating and maintaining CHP based on different ownership structures, control scenarios and associated assumptions • Evaluation of Method viability • Evaluate impact of different technologies (CHP size, heat to energy ratio, separation of heat and electricity generation, etc) • Evaluation of future cost/benefit (based on energy prices, tariff models (RHI, ToU, etc), Carbon saving, component cost glide, commercial models) • Evaluation of customer benefits S6 End to Summary: End Value This Method will look at the optimal cost, efficiency and commercial Chain models for the end-to-end value chain from wind farm through to CHP. Opportunity: This Method aims to show the total benefit of maximising renewable energy output through the combined Methods developed by the CEB programme. Objectives: • To understand the system performance (economic and technical) for all the methods listed above and develop and optimal model • To evaluate the benefits and barriers to an end-to-end system • Develop an end-to-end rollout model • Investigate current and future opportunities for the end-to-end model and compare it to opportunities for the discrete methods in isolation. • Develop commercial models to optimise the risks and returns for all parties. Trials: • Through operation of the discrete methods above and wider analysis, system sensitivities against key variables will be assessed and the optimal end-to-end operating model identified for a given set of performance parameters • Potential barriers to the development of the optimum model will be investigated and mitigations determined • The current and future opportunities for the end-to-end model will be assessed and contrasted against opportunities for the discrete methods in isolation. Subsequently, the optimal rollout strategy will be devised and the net benefit to the UK determined Actors’ Roles and Responsibilities: • Wind Farm – Willing to connect and operate in constrained mode • PV Farm – To provide real time generation data • Met Office – To provide wind and solar weather forecasts • uEMS – To forecast generation and manage the wind farm export to ensure network limits are not breached • DNO – To provide near-real time network measures and limits within

10

Toshiba TRL

which the constraint scheme must operate • uEMS – To manage demand-zone CHPs • Electrolyser – convert excess generation to hydrogen • Hydrogen storage - store hydrogen gas until it is needed for injection or burning via the gas engine • Gas engine – create electricity from hydrogen and natural gas • Gas inject – inject hydrogen gas into the gas network Data: • Cost of operating the overall system, including hydrogen generation, storage, and injection into the gas grid. As well as, the use of gas engine • Efficiency and saving provided in the different stage of the end-to-end value chain • Benefits derived from new business and commercial models Information: • Levels of interdependence between the gas network and the electric network • Defined key parameters to measure the overall technical and economic performance of the system • Energy saving contribution • Carbon reduction contribution • Monetary saving for final users and new business opportunities for actors • Limitation associated to the commercial and business models proposed • Renewable clean energy sources contribution

Functional-Use Cases ID Functional Actors Description Use Cases 1 Manage DNO, Wind power integration to the grid (both electric and gas) is wind GDN, dependent on a number of key factors: wind generation, power wind network headroom, electrolyser capacity, gas engine farm capability, H2 storage size. owner, Key operating scenarios include: gas • Manage constraint scheme (turn wind export up/down engine, based on PV capacity not utilised) H2 • When wind power exceeds the capacity of the constraint Storage uEMS, scheme, divert it to the electrolyser and convert to hydrogen commerc • When wind power exceeds capacity of the constraint ial CHP scheme and electrolyser, turn CHP generation down owner, • When wind power drops off, removing generation domestic CHP constraints, utilise the gas engine and CHP to generate owner, • Use wind forecasts to manage gas storage, i.e. lower H2 consume storage levels when strong wind is expected next day (using r, Met gas engine or gas inject) office Key outputs from analysis: • Impact of forecast on gas storage management • Level of constraint and its impact on wind power economics

11

Toshiba TRL

• Added benefit of constraint scheme and electrolyser compared to business as usual 2 Manage GDN, H2 The electrolyser plays a key role as the interface in the Electrolyser storage, power-to-gas system. The electrolyser operation can be H2 operated under various scenarios: electrolys • If over generation from renewable energy, then utilise er, H2 electrolyser to create hydrogen injector, • Utilise electrolyser as variable load to solve other network uEMS. constraint issues • Utilise electrolyser above firm to determine cost/benefit by increased capacity Vs asset degradation Key outputs from analysis: • Performance in terms of operation costs, maintenance costs, operation patterns, system efficiency, asset degradation, and availability • Identification of minimum spares inventories for different levels of O&M contracts (bronze, silver, gold), minimum remote monitoring requirements and min/max staff attendance on site • Electrolyser stack and system efficiency changes due to varying load profiles (part/full/overload) • Ability to use the electrolyser as a controllable load to generate revenue from the balancing market 3 Manage Gas The gas engine mixes H2 gas and natural gas to produce Gas Engine, electricity that can be fed into the distribution network. Key Engine H2 operating scenarios include: storage, • If H2 storage capacity is low use gas engine to create Wind headroom when network constraints allow and gas injection farm, PV, is not the preferred option H2 • injector Control gas engine such that headroom created by PV and wind variability is utilised Key outputs from analysis: • Analyse the effects of hydrogen content on the gas engine performance and maintenance cost • Using the gas engine to provide other grid level services • Analyse the economics of using the gas engine by considering the cost of natural gas and the benefit of generating electricity at a given time 4 Manage Wind Gas storage will enable flexibility in using and transferring Gas farm, H2 wind power. Key operating scenarios include: Storage storage, • Manage excess capacity via electrolysis into gas storage H2 • Release from storage via route forecast to be most injector, economically viable (assuming capacity exists either to inject Gas engine or generate) Key outputs from analysis: • Use the data to develop methods to estimate size requirements of gas storage • Impact of CEB roll-out on gas storage requirements and sizing

12

Toshiba TRL

5 Manage DNO, The gas network is a medium by which energy is gas GDN, H2 transported from the generation site to the demand zone. inject storage, Key operating scenarios include: H2 • Gas demand high: Gas injection can be used to shift excess injector, electricity generation uEMS, • Gas Demand Low/Electricity demand high: Gas injection can commerc ial CHP be used to support electrical demand via the use of CHPs in owner, the demand zone hence creating demand to enable more domestic injection CHP • Gas storage capacity low: Assuming there is capacity to owner, inject, it can be used to reduce stored H2 levels consume r. Key outputs from analysis: • Operation of the gas inject due to constraints of hydrogen storage size, gas injection percentages and CHP operability • The effects on the gas network due to the location of hydrogen injection can be evaluated using data from the trial • Evaluation of viable locations of gas injection and hence scalability of this solution 6 Manage GDN, Domestic and Commercial CHP within the Demand Zone will demand DNO, provide a release for hydrogen injected into the gas network zone consume and a tool to further balance intermittent generation. Key CHPs rs, uEMS, operating scenarios include: commerc • Gas demand low: Utilise the CHP to convert gas to thermal ial CHP storage in order to alleviate predicted gas peak periods owner, • Electricity demand high: Utilise the CHP to convert gas to domestic CHP heat and electrical output for local use owner. • Manage generation against higher-level constraints to avoid increasing the problem Key outputs from analysis: • Methods of cross-subsidising CHPs in order to accelerate CHP adoption • Benefits of CHP operation for domestic consumers • Develop methods to ensure safe operation of remotely controlled CHPs

13

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names 2, 2013 Qtr 3, 2013 Qtr 4, 2013 Qtr 1, 2014 Qtr 2, 2014 Qtr 3, 2014 Qtr 4, 2014 Qtr 1, 2015 Qtr 2, 2015 Qtr 3, 2015 Qtr 4, 2015 Qtr 1, 2016 Qtr 2, 2016 Qtr 3, 2016 Qtr 4, 2016 Qtr 1, 2017 Qtr 2, 2017 Qtr 3, 2017 Qtr 4, 2017 Qtr 1, May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 1 Clean Energy Balance - Overarching Programme 1180 days Mon 24/06/13 Fri 29/12/17

2 Mobilisation Phase 270 days Mon 24/06/13 Fri 04/07/14

3 Contracts 73 days Thu 02/01/14 Mon 14/04/14

4 Draft Bi Laterals 10 days Thu 02/01/14 Wed 15/01/14 Toshiba,ITM Power Toshiba,ITM Power

5 Review Bi-Laterals 10 days Thu 16/01/14 Wed 29/01/14 4 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

6 Redraft Bi-Laterals 3 days Thu 30/01/14 Mon 03/02/14 5 Toshiba,ITM Power Toshiba,ITM Power

7 Agree Bi-Laterals 6 days Tue 04/02/14 Tue 11/02/14 6 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

8 Sign Bi Laterals 44 days Wed 12/02/14 Mon 14/04/14 7 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

9 Logistics 89 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 05/05/14 All

10 Working location 15 days Wed 01/01/14 Tue 21/01/14 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

11 IT 15 days Wed 01/01/14 Tue 21/01/14 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

12 Team 15 days Wed 01/01/14 Tue 21/01/14 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

13 Project Planning 15 days Tue 15/04/14 Mon 05/05/14 8 WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner WREN,CDC,ITM,WWU,WPD,IT Partner

14 Community and stakeholder engagement 30 days Mon 05/05/14 Fri 13/06/14

15 CEB display in WREN shop 30 days Mon 05/05/14 Fri 13/06/14 WREN WREN

16 CEB information to WREN website 0 days Tue 06/05/14 Tue 06/05/14 WREN 06/05

17 Local CEB launch event 0 days Fri 30/05/14 Fri 30/05/14 WREN 30/05

18 Generation project 245 days Mon 24/06/13 Fri 30/05/14

19 Complete feasibility studies (aviation, noise, ecology, etc) and decision to proceed to planning 94 days Mon 24/06/13 Thu 31/10/13 WREN WREN

20 Finalise land option 65 days Fri 01/11/13 Thu 30/01/14 19 WREN WREN

21 Neighbour engagement 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 19 WREN WREN

22 Scoping submission 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 19 WREN WREN

23 Input to generation zone trial design 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 19 WREN WREN

24 Commercial CHP 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14

25 Community business model development (owner funded and WREN Energy Co funded). 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 WREN WREN

26 Host engagement (technology feasibility, business model options and implications of CEB project,108 includin daysg engagement Wed 01/01/14 of CHP Fri specialist 30/05/14 consultant. WREN WREN

27 Domestic CHP 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14

28 Community Business model development 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 WREN WREN

29 Aiding TRL with engagement CHP suppliers and partners, including assessment of available technologies.108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 WREN WREN

30 Electroliser and gas engine 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14

31 Support WPD and ITM to engage landowners and secure site 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 WREN WREN

32 ITM Scope 125 days Wed 01/01/14 Tue 24/06/14

33 Recruitment 23 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 31/01/14 ITM ITM

34 Project IT 23 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 31/01/14 ITM ITM

35 Project working method 23 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 31/01/14 ITM ITM

36 Develop technoeconomic model 64 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 31/03/14 ITM ITM

37 Compliance and Certification 125 days Wed 01/01/14 Tue 24/06/14 ITM ITM

38 TRL Scope 197 days Fri 27/09/13 Mon 30/06/14

39 Use case scenarios, stakeholder and system requirements 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL

40 Use case model development 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

41 Stakeholder/business model development 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

42 Functional and system requirements 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

43 System modelling and analysis 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL

Project: NIC Appendix M CEB Delivery Task Split Progress Milestone Summary Project Summary External Tasks External Milestone Deadline Date: Thu 10/10/13

Page 1 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names 2, 2013 Qtr 3, 2013 Qtr 4, 2013 Qtr 1, 2014 Qtr 2, 2014 Qtr 3, 2014 Qtr 4, 2014 Qtr 1, 2015 Qtr 2, 2015 Qtr 3, 2015 Qtr 4, 2015 Qtr 1, 2016 Qtr 2, 2016 Qtr 3, 2016 Qtr 4, 2016 Qtr 1, 2017 Qtr 2, 2017 Qtr 3, 2017 Qtr 4, 2017 Qtr 1, May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 44 Developing electrical network models 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

45 Develop gas network models 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

46 Knowledge Capture, dissemination and training 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL

47 Development of KC&D plan and methodology 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

48 Project communications and awareness 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

49 Capturing and recording project knowledge 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

50 Dissemination of project learnings and results 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

51 Design and delivery of awareness/promotional programmes 129 days Wed 01/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

52 Demand zone: microCHP trial (some parts sub-contracted to WREN) 197 days Fri 27/09/13 Mon 30/06/14 TRL

53 Trial Design + Participant Recruitment 197 days Fri 27/09/13 Mon 30/06/14 TRL TRL

54 CGI Scope 121 days Fri 10/01/14 Mon 30/06/14 CGI

55 Trial Design + Participant Recruitment 65 days Tue 01/04/14 Mon 30/06/14 CGI CGI

56 Design activities 88 days Wed 19/02/14 Fri 20/06/14 CGI CGI

57 Solution architecture diagram 0 days Mon 05/05/14 Mon 05/05/14 CGI 05/05

58 Communications network design 0 days Mon 02/06/14 Mon 02/06/14 CGI 02/06

59 Security design for CGI solution 0 days Fri 02/05/14 Fri 02/05/14 CGI 02/05

60 Hardware - bill of materials 0 days Fri 10/01/14 Fri 10/01/14 CGI 10/01

61 Licences – list of requirements 0 days Fri 10/01/14 Fri 10/01/14 CGI 10/01

62 CGI project plan (MS Project format) 0 days Fri 14/02/14 Fri 14/02/14 CGI 14/02

63 IT/SCADA Requirement 0 days Fri 25/04/14 Fri 25/04/14 CGI 25/04

64 IT/SCADA Architecture 0 days Fri 16/05/14 Fri 16/05/14 CGI 16/05

65 I/O Schedule 0 days Mon 07/04/14 Mon 07/04/14 CGI 07/04

66 Datastore & Analytics Design 0 days Mon 07/04/14 Mon 07/04/14 CGI 07/04

67 SCADA Solution Design 0 days Tue 20/05/14 Tue 20/05/14 CGI 20/05

68 Integration and Test Strategy 0 days Fri 02/05/14 Fri 02/05/14 CGI 02/05

69 Master Test Plan 0 days Fri 11/04/14 Fri 11/04/14 CGI 11/04

70 SIT [test] Specification 0 days Mon 16/06/14 Mon 16/06/14 CGI 16/06

71 NFT [test] Specification 0 days Mon 16/06/14 Mon 16/06/14 CGI 16/06

72 UAT [test] Specification 0 days Mon 16/06/14 Mon 16/06/14 CGI 16/06

73 Toshiba Scope 108 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 Toshiba

74 Study of operational algorithm and how to learn optimum operation 43 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 28/02/14 Toshiba Toshiba

75 Study and difinition of specification, how to operate and control for each equipment 43 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 28/02/14 Toshiba Toshiba

76 Study and definition of transmission data contents and timing for each equipment. 43 days Wed 01/01/14 Fri 28/02/14 Toshiba Toshiba

77 Study and definition of required hardware resource and performance. 43 days Mon 03/03/14 Wed 30/04/14 76 Toshiba Toshiba

78 Study and definition of communication protocol 43 days Mon 03/03/14 Wed 30/04/14 Toshiba Toshiba

79 Study and definition for functions and performance of µEMS. 86 days Fri 31/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 Toshiba Toshiba

80 Study and definition of design for operator's display pictures. 86 days Fri 31/01/14 Fri 30/05/14 Toshiba Toshiba

81 WWU Scope 0 days Tue 24/06/14 Tue 24/06/14 WWU 24/06

82 6 monthly report to Ofgem 0 days Tue 24/06/14 Tue 24/06/14 WWU 24/06

83 WPD Scope 0 days Tue 24/06/14 Tue 24/06/14 WPD 24/06

84 6 monthly report to Ofgem 0 days Tue 24/06/14 Tue 24/06/14 WPD 24/06

85 Programme Management 131 days Fri 03/01/14 Fri 04/07/14 CDC

86 Highlight Reports submitted to CDC (inc risks, issues, costs, outputs) 111 days Fri 17/01/14 Fri 20/06/14 CDC

Project: NIC Appendix M CEB Delivery Task Split Progress Milestone Summary Project Summary External Tasks External Milestone Deadline Date: Thu 10/10/13

Page 2 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names 2, 2013 Qtr 3, 2013 Qtr 4, 2013 Qtr 1, 2014 Qtr 2, 2014 Qtr 3, 2014 Qtr 4, 2014 Qtr 1, 2015 Qtr 2, 2015 Qtr 3, 2015 Qtr 4, 2015 Qtr 1, 2016 Qtr 2, 2016 Qtr 3, 2016 Qtr 4, 2016 Qtr 1, 2017 Qtr 2, 2017 Qtr 3, 2017 Qtr 4, 2017 Qtr 1, May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 93 CDC internal review and production of overarching Highlight Report for CEB Programme 86 days Fri 24/01/14 Fri 23/05/14 CDC

99 Agenda and reports - Project Mng mtg / Programme Mng Board (Quarterly) 111 days Fri 03/01/14 Fri 06/06/14 CDC

106 Project Management mtg / Programme Management mtg (Quarterly) 111 days Wed 08/01/14 Wed 11/06/14 CDC

113 Assembly of full Gateway Review information 25 days Mon 05/05/14 Fri 06/06/14 CDC CDC

114 GWR1 0 days Fri 20/06/14 Fri 20/06/14 113 WPD / WWU 20/06

115 SDRC Review 0 days Fri 20/06/14 Fri 20/06/14 113 WPD / WWU 20/06

116 Sign off process within CEB Sponsor / Lead Organisations 10 days Mon 23/06/14 Fri 04/07/14 114 WPD / WWU WPD / WWU

117 SDRC's for Mobilisation Phase 0 days Mon 24/06/13 Mon 24/06/13 24/06

118 Finalise the Delivery Phase Project Plan 0 days Mon 24/06/13 Mon 24/06/13 CDC 24/06

119 Knowledge Strand Paper on Cross Sector Working 0 days Mon 24/06/13 Mon 24/06/13 TRL 24/06

120

121 Design Phase 261 days Thu 01/05/14 Thu 30/04/15

122 Community and stakeholder engagement 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

127 Wind Farm 239 days Mon 02/06/14 Thu 30/04/15 WREN

132 Control Systems 80 days Thu 01/05/14 Wed 20/08/14 Toshiba

137 Gas Injection 80 days Thu 01/05/14 Wed 20/08/14 ITM

142 Community and stakeholder engagement 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

147 Generation project 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

153 Commercial CHP 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

156 Domestic CHP 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

160 Electroliser and gas engine 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WREN

162 ITM Scope 239 days Thu 01/05/14 Tue 31/03/15

170 TRL Scope 197 days Tue 01/07/14 Wed 01/04/15

187 CGI Scope 197 days Mon 30/06/14 Tue 31/03/15 CGI

200 Toshiba Scope 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 Toshiba

208 WWU Scope 196 days Tue 01/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 WWU

212 WPD Scope 0 days Wed 24/12/14 Wed 24/12/14 WPD 24/12

214 Programme Management 192 days Mon 07/07/14 Tue 31/03/15 85 CDC

223 SDRC's for Design Phase 0 days Tue 31/03/15 Tue 31/03/15 31/03

224 Trial Design 0 days Tue 31/03/15 Tue 31/03/15 TRL 31/03

225 Complete logical control design 0 days Tue 31/03/15 Tue 31/03/15 Toshiba 31/03

226 IT architecture and System Design 0 days Tue 31/03/15 Tue 31/03/15 CGI 31/03

227 Report on application of business best practice to the D&B of site infrastructure electrolyser / hydro0gen days injection Tue 31/03/15 Tue 31/03/15 ITM 31/03

228

229 Build Phase 502 days Wed 30/04/14 Thu 31/03/16

230 Community and stakeholder engagement 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 WREN

235 Generation project 502 days Wed 30/04/14 Thu 31/03/16 WREN

243 Commercial CHP 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 WREN

245 Domestic CHP 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 WREN

248 ITM Scope 196 days Wed 01/04/15 Wed 30/12/15 ITM

254 TRL Scope 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 TRL

267 Toshiba Scope 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 Toshiba

276 WWU Scope 131 days Wed 24/06/15 Thu 24/12/15 WWU

Project: NIC Appendix M CEB Delivery Task Split Progress Milestone Summary Project Summary External Tasks External Milestone Deadline Date: Thu 10/10/13

Page 3 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors Resource Names 2, 2013 Qtr 3, 2013 Qtr 4, 2013 Qtr 1, 2014 Qtr 2, 2014 Qtr 3, 2014 Qtr 4, 2014 Qtr 1, 2015 Qtr 2, 2015 Qtr 3, 2015 Qtr 4, 2015 Qtr 1, 2016 Qtr 2, 2016 Qtr 3, 2016 Qtr 4, 2016 Qtr 1, 2017 Qtr 2, 2017 Qtr 3, 2017 Qtr 4, 2017 Qtr 1, May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Fe Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 279 WPD Scope 131 days Wed 24/06/15 Thu 24/12/15 WPD

282 Programme Management 262 days Wed 01/04/15 Thu 31/03/16 CDC

293 SDRC's for Build Phase 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 31/03

294 Acquire compound 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 WPD 31/03

295 Gas Engine passes Factory Acceptance Test 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 ITM 31/03

296 Electrolyser passes FAT 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 ITM 31/03

297 Gas Mixing & Injection passes FAT 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 ITM 31/03

298 Local Comms / PR Event on deliverables / benefits 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 WREN 31/03

299 Sign Network Entry Agreement 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 WWU 31/03

300 Report on readiness to commence trials 0 days Thu 31/03/16 Thu 31/03/16 CDC 31/03

301

302 Trials 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17

303 Community and stakeholder engagement 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 WREN

308 Generation project 65 days Fri 30/06/17 Fri 29/09/17 WREN

311 Commercial CHP 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 WREN

313 Domestic CHP 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 WREN

315 TRL Scope 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 TRL

334 Toshiba Scope 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 Toshiba

336 WWU Scope 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 WWU

347 WPD Scope 261 days Fri 24/06/16 Mon 26/06/17 WPD

351 Programme Management 391 days Fri 01/04/16 Fri 29/09/17 CDC

362 SDRC's for Trials Phase 0 days Fri 30/12/16 Fri 30/12/16 30/12

363 Mid trial dissemination event - local event 0 days Fri 30/12/16 Fri 30/12/16 WREN 30/12

364

365 Consolidate and Share 66 days Fri 29/09/17 Fri 29/12/17

366 Community and stakeholder engagement 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN

371 Generation project 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN

373 Commercial CHP 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN

376 Domestic CHP 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN

379 ITM Scope 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN

381 TRL Scope 66 days Fri 29/09/17 Fri 29/12/17 TRL

398 Toshiba Scope 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 Toshiba

400 WWU Scope 0 days Wed 27/12/17 Wed 27/12/17 WWU 27/12

402 Decommission network modifications 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 WWU

405 WPD Scope 0 days Wed 27/12/17 Wed 27/12/17 WPD 27/12

407 Programme Management 65 days Mon 02/10/17 Fri 29/12/17 CDC

419 SDRC's for Consolidate & Share Phase 0 days Fri 29/12/17 Fri 29/12/17 29/1

420 Report on the Commercial Models 0 days Fri 29/12/17 Fri 29/12/17 TRL 29/1

421 Report on the community engagement approach 0 days Fri 29/12/17 Fri 29/12/17 WREN 29/1

422 Agree ongoing commercial arrangements 0 days Fri 29/12/17 Fri 29/12/17 Toshiba 29/1

Project: NIC Appendix M CEB Delivery Task Split Progress Milestone Summary Project Summary External Tasks External Milestone Deadline Date: Thu 10/10/13

Page 4 CEB NIC Appendix J

Accountable Body Western Power Distribution (South West) – LCNF Wales & West Utilities Ltd - NIC

Project Assurance Programme Review Board Ongoing & Gateway Reviews Roger Hey, Western Power Distribution (South West) Nakada san, Toshiba (Technical) Steve Edwards, Wales & West Utilities Ltd Steve Stead, Toshiba (Vision holder) Stuart Fowler, CGI (Commercial) Stakeholders / PR / Bryan Morgan (Legal) Tara McGeehan, CGI (IT) John Newton, ITM Power Communications CDC (Audit, Compliance) Scott James, CDC Others TBC CDC Contract Services (Secretariat, Audit) Mahesh Sooriyabandara-TRL

Programme Management - CDC Scott James – Programme Manager Jim Cooper – Project Manager Emma Simmons – Assistant Project Manager Anthony Vage – Contract Services (Secretariat, Audit)

Wales & West ITM Po wer WREN CGI Consulting Western P ower Toshiba TRL Project Manager – Project Manager – Project Manager – Project Manager – Project Manager - Project Manager – Project Manager – Richard Pomroy Helio Bustamante Jerry Clark Rob Maddocks Steve Gough Ito san Saraansh Dave

Risk Register Last updated 10.07.13 CEB NIC Appendix K

Programme Name: Clean Energy Balance Bid Programme Manager: CDC High Level Definition Cause Effect Workstrea Risk Ref. Last Risk Status Owner "There is a risk that..." Impact Probability Proximity Rating Movement Raised by Raised on Target Date "...because of..." "...leading to..." Mitigation Action Plan Issue ID m No. Updated If risk has Responsibl See Table Last date ID of Issue Risk Dropdown See Table below See Table below changed to a Who raised when was it Target Date What will happen if it Next No. Dropdown list e for Details of the Risk below Auto Calculated the risk was What will Trigger the Risk? How will this Risk be avoided? has transferred list Score 1-5 Score 1-5 higher / the Risk? raised? for Resolution occurs? mgmnt Score 1-5 updated to lower priority Governance arrangements Partners not formally unclear or inappropriate to Potential to undermine the Clear legal partnership formalised with all R001 Closed CDC 4 3 4 48 CDC 16/05/2013 07/06/2013 committed to the process deliver the bid to a high bid. parties. in agreed timescales. standard. Partnership not adequately Potential to undermine the Failure to engage community in addressing tangible Ensure adequate community buy-in to the R002 Closed CDC 5 3 4 60 CDC 16/05/2013 07/06/2013 bid, as per the previous the project. community buy-in to the process, through the partnership agreement. submission. process. Failure to hit deadlines set by Delaying the pre- CDC for bid submission, due to submission review. Adherence to programme and ongoing liaison R003 CDC 4 3 5 60 CDC 16/05/2013 21/06/2013 Deadline missed. late contributions of material Potential to reduce quality with bid management team. from partners. and viability of the bid.

Unclearly defined Ensuring that all parties are clear Re-neogatioan of contracts responsabilties in contracts R004 Closed CDC of the nessary responabilties 5 4 3 60 WPD 22/05/2013 07/06/2013 and inopriprate input to the Clear and stingent contractual framework and poor comincation required in the develary phase. bid between partners Constant communication by team and Stakeholders' perceptions of the Change in stakeholders' R005 CDC 5 1 4 20 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 Potential to undermine the confirmation of targets and SDRC throughout programme change views programme and delivery the programme delivery phase. Impact on budget will be Overal programme cost and/or unexpected hike in capital negative; requre re- Contant review of market prices and R006 CDC 4 1 3 12 JC 09/07/2013 17/07/2013 scope could creep item cost appraisal possible communication with potential suppliers. virement. Refinement?

It becomes apparent to Significant impact on programme partners that Constant communication by team and Stakeholder may withdraw from deliverables, key one stakeholder is confirmation of targets, SDRC and resourcing R007 CDC programme or have oversold 5 1 5 25 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 components or link in chain withdrawing or is failing to throughout the programme delivery phase. their project solution could be missing and deliver on target required to be re-procured Early contracutal tie in of all parties. deliverables and SDRC. with consequential delays.

Programme delivery team does Significant impact on Constant communication by team and CDC is failing to deliver on not have the required knowledge deliverables, key confirmation of available personnel and their R008 CDC 5 1 5 25 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 its target deliverables and and skills to deliver the components may be skill sets throughout the programme delivery SDRC. programme undeliverable or delayed phase. whilst skills are reinstated. Inputs from this Constant communication by team and Insufficient CDC resource for CDC is failing to deliver on stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R009 CDC programme management 5 2 5 50 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 its target deliverables and inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery delivery SDRC. programme delivery. phase. Provide full detail on interfaces to be supported. Provide as much info as possible on data Lose both LCNF and NIC requirements. Provide as much detail as R010 CGI IT Costs are too high 5 2 5 50 SS 07/05/2013 01/06/2013 Insufficient detail on bids possible on level of support required. Retain a requirements. Over pragmatic approach to solution. This is a four specified solution. year trial. Inputs from this Constant communication by team and CGI is failing to deliver on Insufficient CGI resource for IT stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R011 CGI 5 1 5 25 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 its target deliverables and support delivery inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery SDRC. programme delivery. phase. Inputs from this Constant communication by team and ITM is failing to deliver on Insufficient ITM Power resource stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R012 ITM Power 5 1 5 25 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 its target deliverables and for programme delivery inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery SDRC. programme delivery. phase. We will need to find Findings of constraint alternative constrained Complete constraint modelling and commercial Determining specification of gas modelling and commercial generation or buy in non- model work as soon as possible. R013 Closed ITM Power engine based on availablity of 4 3 5 60 JN 07/06/2013 30/06/2013 model work to be constrained electricity Identify alternative generators and/or agree sufficient fuel (hydrogen) completed (underway) necessary to produce business case to buy non-constrained electricity sufficient fuel Lack of technical input from W&WU re: Wadebridge MP network Uncertainty around Agreeing specification and cost of plus any unknown Complete analysis of MP infrastructure in R014 Closed ITM Power 3 3 5 45 JN 07/06/2013 12/07/2013 technical solution to gas gas mixing/injection equipment technical/regulatory issues proximity to proposed gas injection site mixing/injection with Wadebridge MP network at proposed injection site A longer-term view on the business case needs to be adopted given that without a low-carbon gas substitute, current predictions show 40% of gas customers migrating to electricity by 2050. NIC business case doesn't stack Insufficient timeline Lose NIC bid; LCNF alone R015 ITM Power 5 3 5 75 JN 07/062013 30/06/2013 Short-term planning horizons will only include up considered. becomes non-viable. the start of this migration. However actions are required now to protect this asset investment, hence a longer-term business case horizon is required to make this case Impact the build timetable Proposed payment sechedule in for electrolyser & storage Affect build of hardware Review proposed payment schedule from Ofgem R016 ITM Power 4 3 5 60 JN 07/06/2013 30/06/2013 CA hardware during delivery during delivery phase and how this is refelcted in CA phase

Printed: 10/10/2013 Page 1 of 4 Programme Name: Clean Energy Balance Bid Programme Manager: CDC High Level Definition Cause Effect Workstrea Risk Ref. Last Risk Status Owner "There is a risk that..." Impact Probability Proximity Rating Movement Raised by Raised on Target Date "...because of..." "...leading to..." Mitigation Action Plan Issue ID m No. Updated Given the financial risks associated with connecting a constrained generator with Current constraint on electricity commercial funding it is not possible to connect network is insufficient to justify Findings of constraint We will need to find a fully constrained generator for the trial. capital cost of electrolyser modelling and commercial alternative constrained R017 ITM Power 5 3 5 75 JN 07/06/2013 12/07/2013 However the trial will simulate more severe system - see assessor feedback model work to be generation or buy in non- constraint levels and demonstrate the viability re: costs from 2012 PATHS completed (underway) constrained electricity of commercially connecting generation under proposal these conditions, hence providing the pathway for future commercial projects. Gas Engine fails to pass Factory Follow established processes including QA and R018 ITM Power 2 1 3 6 JN 12/07/2013 31/03/2016 Engine failes FAT Repeat FAT Acceptance Test QC procudures during build phase Follow established processes including QA and R019 ITM Power Electrolyser fails to pass FAT 2 2 3 12 JN 12/07/2013 31/03/2016 Electrolyser fails FAT Repeat FAT QC procedures during build phase Gas Mixing & Injection fails to Gas mixing/injection fails Follow established processes including QA and R020 ITM Power 2 2 3 12 JN 12/07/2013 31/03/2016 Repeat FAT pass FAT FAT QC procudures during build phase Commodity price increases in Forward price increases factored into R021 ITM Power electrolyser stack components 3 2 3 18 JN 12/07/2013 15/07/2013 Commodity price volatility Price increase electrolyser costs at bid stage (SS, Ni, Ti, Pt, Ir) Report on application of business best practice to the D&B of site Delay to receiveing Utilise knowledge gained from other UK and R022 ITM Power 3 2 3 18 JN 12/07/2013 31/03/2015 Planning application infrastructure electrolyser / necessary consents European projects hydrogen injection

Risk that programme financial position is not clear for the bid, Poor presentation of Appoint dedicated lead programme accountant / or misrepresents the scheme to Potential to impact on R023 Toshiba 4 5 5 100 CDC 16/05/2013 21/06/2013 programme costs and finance role to support bid process. Preferably one or all partners making the funding application. funding. from the lead body. programme undeliverable or confusing for partners / funders There is a risk that the commercial position of the programme is not agreed No agreement on the Programme will not Dedicated workshops with a nominated member between all parties, thereby commercial position. One progress at this point for of each team to develop and agree the R024 Toshiba impacting on an agreed scope 5 3 5 75 CDC 16/05/2013 07/06/2013 or more parties not the immediate funding commercial structure. To be led by Toshiba as and financial position which will supporting the structure of deadlines. lead partner. in turn impede the development the programme. of the bid and funding opportunities. There is a risk that we do not Insufficient analysis of Non-appproval or clawback Clear interpretation and understanding of procure the right resources or compliance required. R025 Closed Toshiba 4 2 4 32 CDC 16/05/2013 07/06/2013 of funding. Sub-optimal legislation and robust procurement process they are inappropriately procured Inappropriate procurement input from IT Partner. implemented. against relevant legislation. process deployed. Clear understanding of what the Continual commuication between technical Poor comunication The use cases and intial exisiting systems are capable of delivery teams and bid preparation team. Clear R026 Toshiba 3 3 4 36 WPD 22/05/2013 07/06/2013 between programme bid design scoping will not be currently and what needs to be definition of scope of work within contracts at team and deilvery team approiate developed further outset. To address this, the strand has been broken down into a number of discrete Methods, each of which may be viable in its own right. Hence the strand is not simply dependent on the LCNF Business Case doesn't stack Insufficient commercial R027 Toshiba 5 3 5 75 SS 07/05/2013 01/06/2013 Lose whole bid viability of the end to end solution but may be up options considered justified upon the success of one or more of the Methods being trialled. Initially modelling has demonstrated the viability of each of these AND the full end-to-end solution. Constant communication by team and Inputs from this Toshiba is failing to confirmation of available personnel and their Insufficient Toshiba resource for stakeholder will be R028 Toshiba 5 1 5 25 SCP3 24/05/2013 12/07/2013 deliver on its target skill sets throughout the programme delivery programme delivery inadequate, jeopardising deliverables and SDRC. phase. Key resources identified and allocated as programme delivery. part of the bid process. WREN will not be able to to The curtailment model is not TRL/Cardiff Uni not comfirm investment for the TRL to manage Cardiff Uni closely and WPD to R029 Closed TRL ready in time for WREN to make 4 3 4 48 WPD 22/05/2013 07/06/2013 completing the analsys in wind farm extending the support both with data required a commitment to the windfarm time connection data SDRC and targets around dissemination of learning Lack of clarity at the outset System does not support and embedding good Develop detail use cases at the outset and map R030 TRL 4 2 4 32 SS 07/05/2013 01/06/2013 of what learning is required learning practice will be lost with to system requirements required consequential impacts on stage payments. Inputs from this Constant communication by team and Insufficient TRL resource for TRL is failing to deliver on stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R031 TRL capture of programme learning & 4 1 3 12 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 its target deliverables and inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery dissemination SDRC. programme delivery. phase. Too many ongoing Lack of resource to support bid Late summison of critcal R032 Closed WPD 4 4 4 64 WPD 22/05/2013 07/06/2013 programmes of key WPD Bringing in extra resoure preperation feedback representaives Budget lines will be Cost of high cost items are Quotations received as a WPD/Toshi inadequate for high cost Contant review of market prices and R033 significantly higher than 5 2 5 50 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 response to procurement ba items, jeopardising communication with potential suppliers. anticipated activity. programme unless re- procured or re-negotiated. Inputs from this Constant communication by team and WPD is failing to deliver Insufficient WPD resource for stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R034 WPD 5 1 5 25 SCP3 24/05/2013 12/07/2013 on its target deliverables programme delivery inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery and SDRC. programme delivery. phase.

Printed: 10/10/2013 Page 2 of 4 Programme Name: Clean Energy Balance Bid Programme Manager: CDC High Level Definition Cause Effect Workstrea Risk Ref. Last Risk Status Owner "There is a risk that..." Impact Probability Proximity Rating Movement Raised by Raised on Target Date "...because of..." "...leading to..." Mitigation Action Plan Issue ID m No. Updated Constant communication by team and Inputs from this WREN is failing to deliver confirmation of available personnel and their Insufficient WREN resource for stakeholder will be R035 WREN 5 3 5 75 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 on its target deliverables skill sets throughout the programme delivery programme delivery inadequate, jeopardising and SDRC. phase. WREN to employ additional project programme delivery. management capacity if needed Complete feasibility work as soon as possible. Identify alternative generators (e.g. new Technical / planning issue We will need to find Project Findings of feasibility work community solar project in area of wind project) R036 WREN identified which kills wind project 4 3 4 48 WREN 31/10/2013 alternative constrained inception to be completed and develop initial trial based on St Breock during bid approval process generation data, expanding out into generator control once project generator is in place. CEB will be put in the Wind project and/or details of All team members and sub-contractors need to position of having to deal CEB go public prior to planned be aware of risk Failure to keep project reactively with opposition, release leading to backlash Develop and maintain up to date reactive details confidential until which could undermine against project and/or statement R037 WREN/All 5 2 5 50 WREN 16/05/2013 31/10/2013 planned release by CEB public support for CEB and programme (because of WREN to be consulted on any information going programme team member, WREN and create a PR potentially controversial nature public colleague or sub-contractor problem for other of both the wind and hydrogen CDC to be responsible for control of information companies involved in the elements) going public programme Wind, CHP and community Insufficient resource to WREN will lead early and comprehensive engagement elements of Community consultation cover in-house and 3rd consultations with the local community to R038 WREN 4 2 4 32 JC 09/07/2013 31/10/2013 the bid will be poor which outcomes negative party costs for additional explain the design, scope and benefits of the could impact on viabiity of to BAU work involved programme. programme Preliminary modelling already undertaken which indicates viability. Complete detailed constraint Constraints modelling reveals Findings of constraint modelling and commercial model work as soon We will need to find wind project will not be Project modelling and commercial as possible. R039 WREN 4 2 5 40 WREN 12/07/2013 alternative constrained economically viable or financiable inception model work to be Identify alternative generators (e.g. new generation with constraint completed (underway) community solar project in area of wind project and/or co-operation with REG to create false constraint around St Breock wind repower) Feasibility work on key issues for the wind Generation capacity will be project is being carried out now. If an Source and type of generation Lack of agreement on a critical missing link an unresolvable issue is identified, WREN will seek R040 WREN unresolved (Wind, solar, installed 5 2 5 50 JC 10/07/2013 31/10/2013 generation type, scale and the programme will require to develop similar scale solar project in the capacity, location) location. modification through area. If no feasible site can be secured, WREN simulation. will approach other generators in the area to be involved in the programme. WREN is engaging a number of potential commercial CHP hosts in the town already, and Demand Zone trial will not will continue to do so until agreements have Inability to obtain required Failure to sign up sufficient have statistically significant been secured which will provide sufficient R041 WREN commercial-CHP in programme 4 3 4 48 JC 10/07/2013 12/07/2013 candidate properties number of CHP units and capacity for the programme. Inconvenience area hence will be at risk allowance included in bid. Spread risk of failure across both commercial and domestic CHP units. WREN will lead discussions and negotiations with RSLs, local owner occupiers and Demand Zone trial will not programme partners to secure sufficient Inability to obtain required micro- Failure to sign up sufficient have statistically significant numbers of units to achieve SDRC and R042 WREN? 4 3 4 48 JC 10/07/2013 12/07/2013 CHP in programme area candidate properties number of CHP units and programme viability. Provider discounts agreed hence will be at risk for micro CHP and inconvenience allowance included in bid. Spread risk of failure across both commercial and domestic CHP units. Failure to connect system Appraisal of the local infrastructure, inter- Gas system connection problems Inability to find connection R043 WWU 5 2 5 50 JC 10/06/2013 31/07/2013 components, inability to connectivity requirements and close liaison occur solution disperse hydrogen between WWU and ITM Power. Injection of Hydrogen at Early discussions and detailed proposals with Confirmation from the level required for regulator by WWU with support from ITM Power. Inability to achieve required regulator that propsed project viability will be dis- Inclusion of HS Labs in the project to have an R044a WWU 4 1 4 16 JC 10/06/2013 31/03/2016 exemption for hydrogen injection level of injection is allowed leaving only the early indication of problems. Inclusion of Gas disallowed option of conversion back Engine in Generation Zone to ensure LCNF to electricity. project is not reliant on gas inject. Risk assessment Appliance inspection programme required Requirement to conduct demonstrates that Risk of non compliant R044b WWU 1 4 2 8 RP 07/10/2013 30/09/2016 (requirement in project plan with costings so appliance inspections inspections are requried to appliances low impact) mitigate risk Inability to inspect Not able to gain access to Short term limit project to 0.1% hydrogen; Unresolved access appliances and hence R044c WWU required premises to conduct 4 3 2 24 RP 07/10/2013 30/09/2016 longer term initiate programme to do further problems unable to inject more than appliance inspections if required work to eliminate need to inspect appliances 0.1% hydrogen Inputs from this Constant communication by team and WWU is failing to deliver Insufficient WWU resource for stakeholder will be confirmation of available personnel and their R045 WWU 5 2 5 50 JC 09/07/2013 12/07/2013 on its target deliverables programme delivery inadequate, jeopardising skill sets throughout the programme delivery and SDRC. programme delivery. phase. Inability and/or delay in securing Identify multiple/alternative sites for necessary consents for building compound(s), earliest possible engagement with WPD & Delay to building R046 compounds for 5 3 4 60 JN 12/07/2013 01/06/2014 Planning application landowner(s) and appropriate planning WWU compound(s) electrolyser/hydrogen store, gas authorities and local stakeholders who might engine & gas mixing/injection raise objections to application(s)

Access to site for delivery and Access to site will require WPD & installation of upgrading (widening roads Include any necessary upgrades into the R047 4 2 3 24 JN 12/07/2013 01/12/2014 Access to site WWU electrolyser/hydrogen store, gas and access points to accept planning application engine & gas mixing/injection large vehicles)

Printed: 10/10/2013 Page 3 of 4 Programme Name: Clean Energy Balance Bid Programme Manager: CDC High Level Definition Cause Effect Workstrea Risk Ref. Last Risk Status Owner "There is a risk that..." Impact Probability Proximity Rating Movement Raised by Raised on Target Date "...because of..." "...leading to..." Mitigation Action Plan Issue ID m No. Updated WPD and WWU decide who owns (take title and Potential impact on what Ownership of equipment Failure to agree which benefit) for the duration of the programme. WPD & happens to assets having R048 bought/built under the 2 3 4 24 JN 12/07/2013 01/10/2013 party takes title to Ownership post programme subject of a WWU 'residual' value post- programme equipment seperate discussion based on programme programme outcome. The programme will begin working with data from the St Breock wind farm while the WREN wind farm is under development. This will allow many of the trials to commence without the need/ability to physically constrain the wind farm output. Once the WREN wind farm is WREN Wind Farm does not get Wind farm fails to get Alternative generation completed then this will be transferred into the R049 WREN planning permission/complete on 5 3 5 75 SF 16/07/2013 01/10/2013 planning permission solution trial allowing the full range of trial operations to time be undertaken.If the WREN wind farm fails planning, then an alternative solar farm will be pursued. This can complete in a much shorter time horizon and would allow the constraint model to work in reverse, i.e. controllable PV balancing against St Breock wind.

COPY ABOVE LINE TO INSERT MORE ENTRIES

IMPACT PROBABILITY PROXIMITY Movement 5 – Inability to deliver, business case/objective 5 – Certain 5 – Imminent (Award -
not viable 4 – More likely to occur than not Mobilisation)  4 – Substantial Delay, key deliverables not met, 3 – 50/50 chance of occuring 4 – Likely to be near future  significant increase in time/cost 2 – Less likely to occur (<1year) 3 – Delay, increased cost in excess of tolerance 1 – Very unlikely to occur 3 – Mid to short term (1-2 2 – Small Delay, small increased cost but years) absorbable 2 – Mid to long term (2-3 years) 1 – Insignificant changes, re-planning may be 1 – Far in the future (4 years) required

Printed: 10/10/2013 Page 4 of 4 Appendix L CEB Contingency Plan

With programmes of this size there are always risks and issues, and it is those risks and issues which manifest themselves in the need for contingency. Based on our experience of managing Low Carbon Projects as well as CDC’s significant expertise in managing infrastructure programmes of this size, we have adopted a robust, but pragmatic approach to managing risk and therefore our approach to contingency as part of the wider governance arrangements.

From the outset we have worked to ensure that there is an agreed governance structure in place and this structure will support the proactive management of the risks within this programme, thereby giving our stakeholders confidence that the programme is under control and that we are working to ensure that contingency is only used when it is necessary and that it is at the level most appropriate for the project being delivered.

Our contingencies are self-contained within each partner’s budgetary costs for their projects and are based on their individual skill and expertise to derive the most appropriate level of contingency.

There are the following key risk & contingency areas for this programme:

Area Risk Level % Labour Low to Medium 7.5-10% IT integration Medium to High 10-15% Equipment/commodity Medium to High 10-15% risk Commercial model Medium 10% Regulatory Low 5% Partner withdrawal Low 5%

It is important though to recognise the ones that have the potential to place the programme most at risk

This contingency plan has been written for the 8 most significant risks on the Risk Register. All risks will be continually monitored and appropriate high risk information will be referred to the Programme Review Board. Below are details of how we will mitigate against significant risks becoming an issue and the contingency plans.

R015: NIC business case doesn’t justify the expenditure Mitigation A longer-term view on the business case needs to be adopted given that without a low-carbon gas substitute, current predictions show 40% of gas customers migrating to electricity by 2050. Short-term planning horizons will only include the start of this migration. However actions are required now to protect this asset investment, hence a longer-term business case horizon is required to make this case

R017: Current constraint on electricity network is insufficient to justify capital cost of electrolyser system - see assessor feedback re: costs from 2012 PATHS proposal Mitigation Given the financial risks associated with connecting a constrained generator with commercial funding it is not possible to connect a fully constrained generator for the trial. However the trial will simulate more severe constraint levels and demonstrate the viability of commercially connecting generation under these conditions, hence providing the pathway for future commercial projects.

R021: Commodity price increases in electrolyser stack components Mitigation Forward price increases factored into electrolyser costs at bid stage.

R023: Risk that programme financial position is not clear for the bid, or misrepresents the scheme to one or all partners making the programme undeliverable or confusing for partners / funders Mitigation Appoint dedicated lead programme accountant / finance role to support bid process, preferably from the lead body.

R024: There is a risk that the commercial position of the programme is not agreed between all parties, thereby impacting on an agreed scope and financial position which will in turn impede the development of the bid and funding opportunities. Mitigation Dedicated workshops with a nominated member of each team to develop and agree the commercial structure. To be led by Toshiba as lead partner.

R027: The LCNF Business Case doesn't justify the expenditure Mitigation To address this, the strand has been broken down into a number of discrete Methods, each of which may be viable in its own right. Hence the strand is not simply dependent on the viability of the end to end solution but may be justified upon the success of one or more of the Methods being trialled. Initially modelling has demonstrated the viability of each of these AND the full end-to-end solution.

R035: Insufficient WREN resource for programme delivery Mitigation Constant communication by team and confirmation of available personnel and their skill sets throughout the programme delivery phase. WREN to employ additional project management capacity if needed

R049: WREN Wind Farm does not get planning permission/complete on time Mitigation The programme will begin working with data from the St Breock wind farm while the WREN wind farm is under development. This will allow many of the trials to commence without the need/ability to physically constrain the wind farm output. Once the WREN wind farm is completed then this will be transferred into the trial allowing the full range of trial operations to be undertaken. If the WREN wind farm fails planning, then an alternative solar farm will be pursued. This can complete in a much shorter time horizon and would allow the constraint model to work in reverse, i.e. controllable PV balancing against St Breock wind. Appendix M Cost Benefit Analysis

Appendix N

Base Cost Description of Estimates and Justification of Value For Money

The programme partners are each providing a 10% discount and ITM’s contribution to the LCNF and NIC strands is at cost.

ITM Power designs and manufacturers hydrogen energy systems for energy storage and clean power production and has grown from its original platform of novel polymeric electrolytes for electrolysis and fuel cells to that of a technology provider. ITM has a strong base of intellectual property and engineering expertise providing complete hydrogen solutions, CE marked and TÜV SÜD approved products. A first class team of 65 staff, including 15 with PhDs, comprising engineers and scientists account for more than 250 man-years of electrolyser, energy storage, fuel cell, polymer science, power electronics and combustion experience. ITM is accredited with ISO9001, ISO14001 and ISO18001 and has experience in leading and collaborating in numerous Technology Strategy Board and European funded projects and programs.

Prior to the start of the programme, ITM will have designed, built and installed three rapid response PEM electrolyser systems, one in Germany and two in the UK. The first unit, due to be delivered in September 2013 is a 0.3MW system for the injection of hydrogen into the gas network in Frankfurt and will be operated one of Germany’s largest Stadtwerk (municipal utilities). The second integrated 0.3MW system will be delivered to the Isle of Wight in April 2014 and will be due to commence trials in November 2014 concluding in October 2015. The third is a smaller15kg/day unit, also to be located on the Isle of Wight, to provide fuel for a boat.

The costs (materials and labour) to design and build PEM electrolysers, the balance of plant and the integration of the sub-systems necessary for hydrogen storage are well known to ITM who have considerable experience of developing the UK supply chains necessary to minimise the cost of components, sub-systems and services required. This best practice approach has been extended to the suppliers of the gas engine and the gas mixing and injection equipment. UK companies were chosen in preference to overseas based suppliers although the supplier of the gas engine is the UK agent for the OEM since no UK manufactured gas engines capable of operating on high concentrations of hydrogen were available at the capacity required or of a suitable technology readiness level (TRL).

To demonstrate the full potential of the concept of hydrogen injection in the UK as a means of decarbonising the operation of gas networks and the local heat demand, it will be necessary to move to a higher hydrogen fraction. To do this it will be necessary to apply to the Health and Safety Executive for an exemption from the Gas Safety (Management) Regulations.

Working with Health and Safety Labs (HSL), part of the Health and Safety Executive, means that the Executive will help to ensure that the arguments that hydrogen injection at the proposed levels are safe and proven and are aligned to the expectations of HSE in making changes in regulation to accommodate the higher percentages of hydrogen required. This limits the need for additional work to achieve exemptions.

To achieve an exemption, a separate Network Innovation Allowance (NIA) strand will be undertaken. Working in partnership with the Health & Safety Laboratory, and other service providers, the NIA strand will develop the methodology necessary to demonstrate to the regulatory authority that an exemption to GS(M)R is required, how the potential hazards can be understood and demonstrate the steps necessary to assess risks and address knowledge gaps. The service providers will be selected in accordance with WWU procurement rules to ensure value for money for gas consumers.

The NIC and LCNF strands of CEB will share programme management costs, TRL led learning costs and gas storage costs. Hence, if the gas component stakeholders ran the NIC scope alone, without being part of a combined LCNF NIC programme, costs would considerably higher for those partners.

Upon completion of the detailed design, the IT costs for this project will be reassessed by the consortium partners and we anticipate will be reduced further based on the increased certainty about key solution areas such as wind farm and CHP control.

Appendix Q Partner Roles Summary

ITM Power is an AIM-listed company that designs and manufactures hydrogen energy systems for energy storage and clean power production and has grown from its original platform of novel polymeric electrolytes for electrolysis and fuel cells to that of a technology provider. ITM will be responsible for the hydrogen conversion and gas injection project elements.

Toshiba will provide the energy management systems, programme management of the LCNF strand and of the overarching integration. Toshiba's Bristol-based research facility, TRL, will be responsible for trial management and information dissemination across both strands.

CGI has been selected as CEB’s IT Partner and will provide the data analytics, visualisation systems, IT integration, end-to-end testing, commissioning and operations and maintenance.

Cornwall Development Company (CDC) has been appointed as CEB’s Programme Management partner and will provide the lead specialist programme and project management resource to complement the programme, ensuring the programme vision and objectives are retained in the delivery phase with thorough processes to manage programme, budget and quality aspects of the scheme.

Wadebridge Renewable Energy Network (WREN) is a not-for-profit co- operative working with the Wadebridge community to raise income from renewable generation for local projects. It will develop and operate the constrained wind farm and the large CHP system and attract local community micro CHP participants to support the wider programme.

Western Power Distribution will submit an LCNF Tier 2 proposal to support the LCNF strand of the wider programme. It will also provide the required electricity network connections and status monitoring to support the NIC strand.

Little 1641 0040 2841 Bodieve BM 52.38m W H Quarry House 43/2839 M 0440 TCB BODIEVE R CARAVAN 51.3m i v (disused) SITE 0040 6940 8140 NTL e 4739 1639 r M 1 6241 C e 0840 3 60.5m 4939 6438 0039 a a 2 4 5738 m n 1138 Pond e 8738 9037 LB 0238 e l H s Bodieve Fm i v Caravan 8238 g e e 2937 h i g 8934 9736 d a W o t 43ZCY7 B t a Quarry 9335 Spring Issues 3937 t o 43/3201 C 7436 e TREVILLING r 3136 (disused) FARM 0335 T

3 Mud 2 w Foot Bridge P 3135 0 a r th . 1 (u m) H 68.2m D C a 3 3 1 k V 6235 5935 F c i k 7534 R r 0035 6032 o Caravan Site

1335 2336

s C 1 1036 2 29.1m Foot Bridge e o 6234 t TCB 43/3343 M C t WADEBRIDGE Pond 9233 e o TREATMENT a Trevilling Farm a t k WORKS n g c t e 3634 H a a 0035 i NTL Higher Trevilling r g Spreads g T h e y 1032 -b W 4531 y 7731 Mud La 1230 a 9933 Newlands 5031 9130 t 9935 4530 0030 e 4929 60.9m r Ponds 2830 7230 Mud 43ZCY6 Trevilling View 9330 P GP 0030 0429 a 43/3752 8729 8031 BALL FARM 5429 6928 t 35.8m 7033 8329 0928 k BUILDINGS 5428 6628 6932 h c a r ( 5429 1127 1128 k u T D c 9127 6529 m i a s T r ) 9726 0027 r m T a a c k n t 1926 1027 43/1822 l e 7326 ROSKEAR 0027 d P (ST.BREOCK) Pond 9025 a R 2925 t a Trevilling h Spring i l 6424 w 4024 8924 5124 5424 House ( 3924 a u 2824 y Mud m 2923 4024 8023 ) 0024 6623 0024 Based upon the Ordnance Surveys map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown Copyright Reserved. WPD Copyright: This copy has2022 been made by or with the authority of 3323 2522 1722 1022 0022 0122 8922 4421 53.3m 7719 0022 2021

V k 33

C D 8520 H 5 7621 .1 0 BM 49.15m 1321 0020 w BM 53.92m 55.6m 43ZCY5 3 th (um) Trevilling Pa Mud 0020 8420 BM 7320 Cottage 53.2m 43/3202 57.7m TREVILLING A39 A39 39.50m 3819 7519 A39 Western Power Distribution, Avonbank, Feeder Road, Bristol. BS2 0TB. Licence52.8m Nos. 100022488, 100024877 & 100021807. Western Power Distribution (WPD) pursuant to Section 47 of the Copyright Designs

Roskear 43ZCX12 77.2m 39.3m 4618 0018 9218

7316 8317 BM 60.78m 2617

7216 2

3016 1 0018 Ball Cottages 9 A3 43/1604 8015 CARE SHOULD BE EXERCISED TO ENSURE THE PRECISE POSITION OF THE) WPD APPARATUS IF WORK IS TO BE EXECUTED IN ITS VICINITY. 6715 PERLEES and Patents Act 1988 unlessGATES that Act provides a relevant exception to copyright 3415

m FARM Mud 61.0m 8914

POND 5714 u 3214 Pond (

4613 h

43ZCX11

Perlees Farm B t A 2113 39 u

a Ball 5913 T 6413 n

P 6 8813 h g 2612

e 1713 a 4 6712 l ) Issues o 43/2892 6608 E BALL G m w 7511 29.4m ID WADEBRIDGE ABI 1711 R u 431882 7211 B ( 5611 43ZCX10M1 If in doubt, contact 0010your local WPD office. 2110 3111 1 43ZCX10M2 43ZCX10M 3210 8010 3w 70 HDC 33kV 04/2013 the copy must not be copied without prior permission of the copyright owner. 013 /2 kV 03 PR 33 CU E 85 1c 43/0291 3 x 1 k h CARHART D=1.00 c 43/0108 t BM 31.47m a Sports Field 43/8036 BODELLICK 0010 DEV r T a Ponds Ball MIDDLE TREWORDER T R P FARM 33KV SOLAR PARK 4000 0009 E Pond V I 0209 L RD Pond Carhart 30.8m L 0009 I 4807 N G RD 0808 A 43ZCX10 5907 3 R 9 O A T 9 3 D r 5607 A P 4507 43ZCY4 a 2506 at 34.3m c 4702 h Issues (u k Tk m 6205 ) A39 5503 5200 Mud SPORTS HALL RD 9602 Bodellick 90.9m Sluice 43/4352 BALL MS k ROUNDABOUT ac 2900 RD Tr 5700 Pond Playing Field 0087 7600 2800 43ZCX9 7901 0300 E Football Ground 0095 G Tennis Courts 46.8m A

V D k B 33 I 3 4900 C 2800 D R 6000 0006 H 5200 5 5400 7700 1 2100 . 3700 B 8 0 9100 1100 1100 2100 7400 2200 3600 5600 1900 1400 4200 w 0006 1700 3500 4600 6400 7200 7900 0004 0004 3500 4500 5900 0006 7700 8400 0003 0003 2300 6000 0006 3 5700 1100 1800 3200 0900 Wadebridge School 3 7700 9 Trevanson Farm 3 (comprehensive) 1 4 RD Pond DEV Tennis

0006 5600 V 2100 Bodellick k 1100 3700 1100 3500 4500 5900 9100 2000 3600 0009 0003 3 7700 5700 2100 7400 2100 2800 3 0006 0004 0900 1400 4200 5400 6000 V 1700 Courts k 0300 5200 5700 0004 3 4600 6400 7900 3

0006 FB C Path (um) DC Boatbuilding D H H 15 . 0 1 w 1900 . Pond Stand 7700 3 0 2.361ha 0004 w 1.798ha 1.806ha 9900 7700 3 2.713ha E Yard RD DG 0004 43ZCX8 RI 4000 B Bodieve Park n o 43/3076 Quarry Wadebridge School l 43/3626 l (Football Ground) A EDMONTON a COUNCIL OFFICE 3500 v DEV 3 BUNGALOW (disused) Slipway A TRENANT 7200 - DEV 8 6592 n 7596 a 9 Pump

- V

k Goonvena y 3 3

39.4m

h 42.1m C Lodge RD D 0095 C H

1 5 43/4103 . 0

0095 BM 97.31m WADEBRIDGE w 43/4102 Spring 43/3203 3 BRADFORDS AUX NO.2 WADEBRIDGE Travanson Farm QUAY AUX NO.1 8400 Slipway 3294 T 8486 43ZCY3 r 9194 Teriant Pond a 7 Swimming DEV c Industrial Estate k Pool DEV 1800 43ZCX7 Pond 1392 Carhart Cottage Small Meadow Pond k D RD r Quarry a DEV c in 43ZCX1

8 Pen y bryn Issues 8292 (disused) a E r V 4691 T I RD V Mound k 3 7193 3 w 3 0. Bay Cottage 1 R 5 9190 m C 43ZBC103 H 2 D DC 3 H 3 9191 . 3 D k 8 1 V 3 . 0 M B w 3 Conkers S

E 43ZCY2 3 w 43ZCY1 V k 33 L 0 C . D 1 H 5 Trehane I 41.5m 5 1 Tall Trees . 2 43ZBC104 0 H w

3 D 3

Works C G 1 3490

3

2 3 0 k

V 1 T 4 S e DAFTEN 43ZCX6 Ford us 5 o LTD H T M R 43/7210 43ZBC102 n e E a V 43ZCX2 8588 o I Quarry WADEBRIDGE s C n L n R 9 L a 3 H I 33/11kV S/STN o i N v A g G 7 a o h r t M 1 (disused) T W St Giles s a 0087 u t t 8 e 9387 e l r Muddlewood DEV a 9687 t T 0087 3286 9986 g r o G 0086 e e w n o y e Playing Field n LB g d id R The Spinney T 43/2690 r O Ponds b A 43/2460 e g P h WADEBRIDGE 43ZCX5 Vale r R d n D 1 a i C 3 5185 i W t a e HS w TREVANSON v a h IND SW STN o S 0 e B t e . e 1 b r 5 43ZCX3 r u W B l h r H 2485 Cottage v n C P r ST:TP21D D R E y C o ( y o C RD 3 a 3 u a n d M The Retreat k y s a 40.8m V n m m 43/2976 d N Penn House e S d a ) WADEBRIDGE 1784 l E 2 v L COMPREHENSIVE o V e k 3084 I c 8784 3 3 DEV C SCHOOL D r G H 5 0584 k D .1 0 R T w y 3 a OC w T D The Old ip N l E 2 Landing S C Beechgrove S T 9984 y S 1.920ha 7984 c l K 3983 e Pond R House T e k C 5783 r Stage St C 1584 c 0383 a e 5

1982 c n a Trevanson k o h 6 r t n 3382 7182 a Michael's Cottage T n y d t a y r w Orange Telecoms k P a a w St Giles 0982 p e t L t li e 43ZCX4 h S P c

a Tower a d 5 a H a Cottage m a i d 3 t F r g g r 8281 o a k 3881 a h 0083 r c 3679 0180 e T

i r n k 6 H M 5981 R a 7680 BM 49.08m h 4780 m 43/2462 1 Quarry Mud e 9 a . Spreads TREVARNER 0 a a t v s d e r (disused) e o Bess Park C 1 5980 BM 29.25m n w B e P s w S o a Longhayes r The Cyclamens e C d r 2.175ha BS E H Pond L b n 3 O L u g The Orchard I O Pond r H a L 2 2179 4779 Depot y A l 2 m Gonvena House l W i 1 e N y h Mud K A 9378 n E S e Gonvena l I d y e L B V 1 e n T 43ZBC101 e l v e r K e N k v 9 h r n n e O 3 u B Issues e C A D G o 9077 r L Bryans 2577 w Sinks a E 43/3150 Springs A 1077 A Accident 5277 7177

c r PRECI-SPARK a T v 9 r R y S r a 5 Centre a r T P19 P22 g 66 t T P21 P30 e N e l r r D

1176 a P20 e r o T c e L 6 k g 24.6m L R

r I Well e n H 1 t l i S I

o 7 h s a W V Chapel Farm The Coombe HE h T e e t T E A P20 T a M M r h Oil 7 r F 1 S 2074 Hollies a e n Bank Little T Goodfellow t Trevarner

1 S c a w a I or k n S a 2974 0 P23 g 7676 H T

1 m Clocks a e

P21 H o n Coombe E 5 Tk 3174 i k

1 g R

h o 1 3

W M d Bank C Pentire TV Repair 7.39ha a o L

t 5 3 e li 11 Shop r n 4074

1 Depot e

. 3674 P L a 1 a 0373 P24-29 C e u

t

o r x 4

h

1 Perlees Cottage t 10 0873 ( r u t y H 66.8m m Menhennit R a n ck P19 D ra P31 r ) g 8 T Edmonton m a P15 i e & Prior Ltd. P35 1 n 5 P17 P16 9

. 7 3a Issues 2 0

9172 P34 H 3472

1 M i 3

P18 g 3b 2473 0072 0072 T h i 1 47.1m 7572 P18 c 43/3477 1 P33 R la d

33 E n R h S ST MATTHEWS 4a 64.7m V d e a 9 HILL P32 t t 8671 f I s n e 106.8m o L r 0 s l Trevarner P17 C L ' 1 b s

2 e Mud I a 16.8m h N u

1 s BM 62.16m 43/2996 T o

y G T r Cottages r 2

e

2 e

n r 1

PERLEES d g g

4 3170 P16 w l n e 5070 2 3 R

a e o 5 COTTAGE

l d e

n P 2 d

e r k O 43/2627

2 e Heverswood 2 c r a l

2 DEV a y d A T w G w r TREWORDER t n 110.1m s a D s Y o l n e B Richard 12.45ha e a W o e P15 C Trevarin 10 n Godden 9 54 Bureau 2370 Allen

6170 P40 P38 a 3

P13 P14 w t Pencarn s E 9 1968 e i 43/2461 0566 P12 i House PL1 S 7769 P14 V P11 V P House V O 2 P10 P39 TREVANSON I L r e G PL2 26 l Coombe Florey I 3768 r l G C

o Y C e e 60.6m Shelter n ROAD 14 12 LB B T v L PL3 1 TCB i d N A O R a N I 4968 10 43/3932 R E 1368 R L Boundary Stone P7 o K I WESTCOTT n y N 11 a A r Mud s A 43ZBC100 4267 g u k 11.6m 1 R P37 WADEBRIDGE u b F P6 P41 P36 y Pumping P

3867 The Shieling The Paddock L Slipway r 43/3100

a A e Wks o M 43/3342 n 10 P13 R

d D W 5 TRENANT 9967 P11 25 n 3167 n I K WADEBRIDGE r 5867 P8 a a IND ESTATE P9 n Station p 40.4m

P42 e PUMP STN i i

w n An Tyak P10 h 6f

e S

r 43/1439 Higher Treworder T T 18 5066 R 4 P9 E V 61.8m P12 A OLD WORKS ) P8 N H S y 4865 P7 O WADEBRIDGE (P BM 41.08m N a 5 1

R w d O 5a 5765 H A p a D i R M l e o Garage o m P6 S d C s Gr 14 a a e Issues 22 y o e m s 4965 P48 o to B t n 19 P47P46 r es t 22 r P5 P45 B P4 B t P44 P43 r e 29 r i R a P4 l A 21 c P3 P3 e D 4

y l P2 B Trenant FS 23 F i e P1 O 13 7464 n e R Farm d 283 l l 44 D DEV e l g l Pub / i 02/2010 PL4 f Q 1 l e 4763 k s h U P 20 h Restaurant c u P2 y l d A n y n c i u P5 Y a Warren Mead Trenant l BRIDGE o 5662 Pump W P1 o m r s 8764 0564 l n y a 21 o V 43/0586 o o PL3 e l I 1863 J 3563

H House

r F E n EDMONTON W 13 r u 23 Trenant a 6.4m 2563 L 0.502ha T V i Mill 0064 e c 6262 t h l H PL1 34 o o T r u i s a 3

e w 43/4437 PL5 19 9 0 W . 3 E D 1 S 5 WADEBRIDGE A 39 PL2 T A 8562 A E H R O D

2061 L C

A R WEST HILL N 26

D DEV 3 3 S 35 k R V TRAVEL LODGE O 9559 PL6 13 A e D 23 2261 y

8661 s 21 25 3961 PL10 r 7559 8061 a N

a g a PL9 O e s I ' P r t m) e M (u Hotel T o 0 th h n T l d D A T Pa A H 1 y T e o Path(um)

e 19 3 7960 ) B O C b O m . w n R C 24 J u a E n 43ZBC99 C .

Lavinleigh t 14 G C Job Centre A m 65.9m PL8 T S T M D S I Q S T R E S u P12 t E B U PL7 R E E a P9 S P10 u W O D A R Fair Winds H y West Croft

F A T ( d 17 X E N P11 W E E R C 7

T 2 1 43/0791 o n

y r 4 P15 P13 2 h 85.8m HAWKEYS Barn a W e o n Trenant E r GARAGE a T 43/2720 4

e E

t S n 8260

n 15 T 17 P16 P8 g a w a D 0 P14 r CAR l WESTERLANDS Villa d M l a i H 4 Cottages e D D 3 r I 5 h ROAD 1258 9658 e L s P17 P7 4858 y t A P L PARK k Y 1

m 1658 d e n O USED r USED o 5258 g n a S 2 i T R r CAR o b CAR

W

c n T Middle Treworder

n PARTS e 2

n n K PARTS

r 14 e 43/3084 O P18

e i 4 a r N P6 r DEV W G N

C TREFOREST y I

T 12 3 9 - r e n L E WESTERN E w n r ESTATE o 7 3 o a G h REPAIRS I 6 l

- t B e H a PME y P19 BM 86.52m y y e d R g n T V

h r h a BINS n o P1 u O C T W B R 6257 88.4m u 3256 b a

i B O s r A 7457 E i 28 d AUTO VALLET Co. HILL PARK 0056 e W E 0056 h

a o D P2 h a Trelynwith C P5 t g S B o g G S i o P20 w t E M P4 n H 43/0192 s 13 43/4560 r e L 6658 e e D

e n n v BRIDGEND o O BT CAB ROYAL h e a d I P3 a C t 8 n u L n M h l E f P21

e . SHOWGROUND 14 R The t a o P l r 1 s FLATS l 7 WADEBRIDGE FLATS i c 38 B 9860 e 9255 L y 0 El Sub Sta By-Ways P22 n M R

a D m 12 h

A P23 7855 Roundhouse t 4 s

a O

y 10 n R 4 o w c o H 9 D G 11 n 8 t I e s E 2954 P e L r S o M f

u 7 8055 L e E 0754 r 0054 T DEV 64.6m 53.4m West Brae E 5.695ha 60.2m e BM 49.35m n 1 L

e e

D a P40 0054

m A

8 BM 55.63m LB t 5 4 P41 5753 1 s w V

. e WEST HILL o 4 P43 2553 l W n 6 l e e P42 6 m B 6853 2 T 4952 9252 0152 n PL1 w P25 3 e P26 M M o P24 A39 P1 P l r P27 N B B u M 40 d s i A .6 7.0m d 1 6m o C P28 6452 y B g L N 46.0m e IT n o T g E n e L P2 i PL2 P29 E t u W n B R P3 y yn T R e n dh r ID T n e u d P4 P5 PL109 g 41.0m rs P30 G

PL108 e n t t E 43/4028 PL107 a P O o

r rc P t e h 4 A d PL106 ar R ORANGE t v d s K P6 TCB s l PL3 w

o k e n P31 r e P44 C a WADEBRIDGE y 4751 7050 a i M n Garage Keston P a b 43/0423 P45 r a P PL7 H r a F P47 a e 7 a d COMMISSIONERS C v 43ZBC98

PL105 t d P46

o S Q 5 P24

t l u e n ROAD P 1 to 34 to 1 C 4 g 3651 n e i h e e r u r a

r a s G Bistro/ 1 7951 T w e a v 2 ( n Offices P33 t a P32 P25 ASS POS u e 5050 P34 E y m PL6 P 4 h n 6749 e P2 ONLY ) v D o 7.0m A 43/3677 c U5 O P1 P26 8 e R B ADAMS (

0049 S 35 u R FOLLY 5 0746 E g N P48 m O 3948 P9 PL5 n i I S U4 P49 P27 r A S ) e I P51 P35 P8 P10 M 0548 k M 9 M P50 u Tip a H 2748 34.1m O 8 P11 W PL110 C U3 W 3 3 P12 8 Swimming 36 9

D 6 e (disused) P7 PL4 e A 3 PL8 9 40 7 c Pool 37 O Eden P36 6 34 C 7 38 Pond Cottage U2 6 50.6m 3847 2 S PL111 Car E y P d P53 P52 E e d 0047 e PL9 ro Church y T PL104 n k m Park s a PL3 r o t P37 o 2546 a o

l n

l r T e PL103 i H 5 b e PL98 K r P38 n r 6.9m P39 1 a a A c U1 9046 3846 r e 39 C g PL112 7.0m Treryn R PL97 h

PL10 7 t B 43 r PL1 5 6 o b P1 O M 33 w 8 PL11 e 1445 s u P2 r PL102 PL92 l s U 2 l n o d PL113 PL93 i d 44 PL96 a n 32 m Hall W a r R h l v r t 5945 l PL2 i e 31 a t M S P3 29 r s a 0844 r 43/3961 t e T i R R 30 S W e n Quarry PL114 PL94 PL91 10 43/3500 r e Methodist DEV d TESCO r l a O Green Acres e c 3 c TREVANSON P4 i WADEBRIDGE 25.5m e Hall 42 f o A 45 9a Church Wadebridge Junior 28 r r STREET E PL95 i 4.179ha t C

(disused) a A D i PL90 P16 e F L 7144 P PL115 P P21 41 46 E Girls and Infant School 0245 1243 PL99 t N v S 22 a P22 27 P15 O 7 l B 4 i M T 1

S 6 c 2 P20 E 2 Y 8 PL89 . T D PL12 7 R 4943 2 E D 94.5m m V 1 A E N P14 S t 1 O i P19 26

N e 7 40 Pond n 2 1 P5

S 6 43ZBC97 e T 21 5 U 6 r 6 47 e R 9 PL100 g M t P116 PL26 E i P13 a s o E PL13 a T u 43/1344 l n 3 PL88 m t e 2 P23 2 U l o s 39 e t P6 0742 E t t 43/4080 86 H w u o PC MOLESWORTH o i P24 2341 92 o 1 n 48 g C r 2 6 5541 6 4 t U KESTON a m STREET SWITCH

PL14 h BM 7.77m r 23 y a

e a r h C 2 P25 20 T PL101 s STATION Mud 1 3943 8241 PL25 P7 r d t 12 n i

e 5

a r P7 b 24 PL87 1 r L 43/4071 l P 7 DEV t PL15 u r 4241 d

9140 3840 P11 M a SHOWGROUND 2 2141 e o P18

Quarry 1

UNIT 1 25

P6 R o 28

COMMS TOWER w m o

c t M P8 R

o g

8

l i 1 UNIT 2 4 u o l 8 N PL24 PL86 1 P10 i a E d s W k (disused) 19 0 Down Park r P9 P5 W D C e O C UNIT 3 1 D 106.6m P17 X 38 D T C 7 6043 o h O 80 7.8m t F 32 34 PL16 PL80 P8 27 Y S il P4 S t l 43/4377 H M a 78 T 52 H Mud 2 Vally 43/2876

T u g 8 e Shop PL23 H WEST HILL B O 9

PL85 n i 0 PL17 (Flat Over) R g e a d

w

P16 5 MARSHALL AVENUE 78a P29 m N 18 IND EST o n O C D a 10 a

P5 o P3 74 C k 49 o n E W EAST d o B S P15 View 8

U P6 u '

' PL81 u

P9 s P9

r 76 s S u a 7 h r

t 4839 N H 1 E V A t o 7639 c R k PL18 W n n V K L P14 3

3 P30 E 8 r 10 1 YS k D n 50 E 6 O 17 15 C u

. D P2 6 P10 6 G y H T m A h M P13 P10 P4 R 5 A m s 1 C PL19 P8 G 43/2877 . 0841 PL82 H E 0 i 25 P8 d w 3 P3 B P11 12 43/3660 P12 H e FOXDOWN 1439 a P11 il

) PL22 P1 School n POLMORLA l R Site 2 k s

P7 B 51 m a RIVER i 2 O House 16 d

u PL83 P2 n e Hut 14 e k 9 1 5237 ( P7 A P8 PMP STN 2 s PL21 3 A PL20 D 22 2 16 11 r 52

68 19 20 13 2

43/2769 h P1 P1 A a u E 24 2 n 1 t 2 P6 U Def

WHITECROSS PL84 16 P20 d a P31 P2 BM S 43/2020 2 N n l 12 14 26 A39 e COTTAGE P6 .0 h P5 45 E P 8m THE PLATT l P39 15 56 62 e 2 V 1438 0036 28 P7 54 53

P79 P19 l 3 67 60 t A

9436 P32 14

e P3 1

2 56 55

13 r L

58 Hotel Bay Cottage 13 P5 M Hotel 36 6 1137 P18 P4 OL 43/1493 L

P38 P11 ES 58

P10 W Club 17 P78 61 OR 6.0m P8 A 57 TH PENDARREN

12 0035 P33 P5 19 H 7835

4035 P4 S 3134 a 0035 P17 STREET 21 P6 P P4

11 P9 P12 o 1 R

l

7 A P77 57

43/0988 10 M 23 18 n 5235 5534 HYCROFT P34 P4 P3 3.560ha P7 F Silver Parks P76 P16 9.7m 41.5m

WHITECROSS m O S 33 6 LB U 4534 t . N P3

a 2 D

1 43

P75 P15 R 9

Y 10 27 7 BS P35 PC S

T 4330 P14 C BM 40.21m R 6433 R FB P11 P2 6634 E P3 O 1 C E P74 S a 3 P13 T P S Newlyn

P2

P13 r

1 3

S k 28 13 a P36 T 4934 PLOT 1 RD 4.6m an Green P12 A 6

L B P H P29 Filling R P1 9 43ZBC96 t 7 MO KIOSK a P12 8431 a P73 43/0490 L T T 43/0988 P11 P2 O r Hill 7328 h P 2632 PC CROSS A HYCROFT P61 H k Station PLOT 2 2 P10 STREET E Shaft WHITECROSS P37 UNIT Hotel E P72 PME UNIT P9 P1 ( Car Park L UNIT L 9 P10 P9 u A 8 31 P13 N 5432 G

(disused) P60 S 5731 D 7 Y m O E R N AN D UNIT r N W r L P P8 a L N Egloshayle E N AP U T P1 m CH O R 2 e E P28 y CABLE 32 P16 n ) F U L W R a r O Play Area 14 O r C UNIT v MARKERS P15

A M e E E UNIT i M 1 BM 80.54m P59 Whiterock D T 3 A P14 O G

6 R P25 5 UNIT V 0 Tip T D L

2434 L 6130 O I c 4 L P27 2 X P7 Lodge UNIT T S

E L

R (disused) P62 5 O 1 S

100.5m P40 I P57 W 3 P N F E D 6 A H 43/2943 G D

1 R R

P71 ll P24 40

P6 T e a A

ROYAL r c C 7

e H G 1 a E

P63 g r

a r CWL P56 n 13 N r e P41 r DEV T w

P70 e o M Quarry k SHOWGROUND P5 y T E 9429 E r e d d Mud P26

P69 g n u P1 O P55 e Hycroft Showground o 34 E c F 43/2329 P64 Wyn T 43/0312

(disused) P4 u 3 m S TRENANT 9 E R P68 b P23 1 P23 CAMEL BROW Cattle Grid e P 2228 T P42 C TCB A a

l R

R i VALE K (Royal Cornwall Agricultural Show) e 1 1 r K G

Pedlar's v 1 A P3 a P54 e R r T 6 P67 d T O r

c r A a N

o o c G

k n e D k P22 2 5821 33

Down m Sewage R i A 3927 P43 l m M P2 l 107.8m 0027 KIOSK l A 1527

H P17 Treatment P53 o W R C PC M 1 la 4.7m Plant r P

e KIOSK D B P1 43/3838 n 30 1023 c e M T P44 e e P21 3926 P52 GUINNESS TRUST t e r c P18 P66 f l r

v o d 10

G o a r c 7 P1 13 P65 C r n e 5526 - e 2 P19

a e k P2 e 2 r 15 L n Garage Langarth a a e P20 P45 s P20 TCBs w P u a e o y

y c h 18 D l 12 P21

W a l l i 10 A

6725 h H lk P2 i P a 1 t W O i e r la R 14 P46 o or 4 43/2759 c m P22 k ol 6 P19

P 19 D T e Pond 5 20 WHITECROSS e 61

c P3 L 43/4087

r 12 a 7925 The r l D E a P 3 I TREWORDER CELLNET c l P47 e l F e Snaefell A D w D P18 M A k A O c O 2524 Rowans a O O

Shaft R r R P4 O

66 B 11 P48 K A R

T C L 15 R 40 O R 1 70 B

9224 R O

E M 2 13 TCBs O 27 r T S1 I L m 62 (disused) H O C i P17

l Whiterock 13 P o c W u 1 a r 1 63 1 t P5 S2 1 1

g DEV 64 4223 c P49 FB E 2 S3 E B 45 P16 9 Moorlands L M 65 69 k Whitecross Dunveth P50 I P6 1423 C 4 S10 43ZBC95 h B .

C 5 a 14 U Kimberley P51 o 9 R1 T G p J t m h l e 68 0822 t a 67 e l

a w

T Villas 72 s g 1322 S9 i P7 17 7 a l e 11 l 4222 e d l Cattle r i

o 51

r V 2322 S8 R2 G r 2 9 l r a Cinema il e c 71 H

M e 5 3 Tor y 8 2221

LB

S7 e s n

1 31 2 6620 d e t Up Top Library P8 5 27.9m 2018 r 5.8m

7 e o 3222 a Keithlea R3 r k o n P15 D G s 7421 5 e 63

6 A c 1 View s O 3

E 5 R H 7 74 0 a Lower Treworder Cottage 1 6.662ha i G l l W L c P9 r i 8 O 4 K r n 73 S 0 o t 57 P14 T H 5 A k f o

A 6

Greenshanks R4 t n 10 Y 75 Y P L 1 5 c Laurisdale a E 62 P10

x 11 t 1 Above Town E h 1 a R P13 G M Pond l 5 S6 12a O R5 a e A 5 A 5 P3 r r T b D 61

a 12 u R Penhale 3 6 n l P C 0 P2

S5 B a 2 T a 1 D t P1 t a T S 5 D 14

h r h C E 8 r r B L ( o 14 Health O E H Bowling Green 80 N

s u W w 4 I m S4 o 10 2819 b U 2 ) H u Polmear e F S i 15 e R6 l s o 2 P P11 16 7 s M Elm l e T a

103.3m c Centre J r 41 O Little 8 t t r t 2 h O e 17 n H M Verbena s Court P12 9 R 4018 2 e 2 P 22 t E H Track 4.3m B Cottage R19 4 C B 6 a

R7 1

Meadow 7 R W 20 1 r ) The 4

m 4 i Meadow (u r N k M e e DEV h D DEV t c v Lower Treworder a R18 a i E P R8 l R John Betjemen W e 4.3m s 0017 0017 P y 72 13

c 8517 43/0556 a r t 7 Whimbrel l b e A C 2 r u s a

o l Centre a

DUNVETH R17 C r Y t 86 7 h m u h 2 41 Davene l e 4 u N c Tennis Courts Outwood PME o 2 7 43/2765 S 3 20 P

a Car Park R9 .

Pond WHITEROCK 3 3 43/3387 12 J p W 1116 o 43/1521 3516 o 1 R16 r 4 6416

o e d JUBILEE s a

i e m 7 PENHALE d l e 2 F h l e a r FIELDS WADEBRIDGE d T 87 h R15 St Breok s A u m n W r R10 e Car Park S H b 2616 r a v 1

i s I R o

z T N M

v E v 35 e R 1 E e 2 a P e O ll ge r C Ha otbrid D Bodvel a n K c Shelter Fo 77 o

Kerboden C ni R T

C o n 2714 r s 34 o o L 43/0680 a A

c d

0051 O M w

t k S 43/4391 D Amb G e 43/2870 GLEN 2 n a E 32 n

Caradon e R 79 i

t 17 g m R11 FAIRPARK ROAD N 13 a LOWER a E eld s a r Sta fi s R 2315 L y 3 Y e e Estuary View H R13 RD FLATS a PME G Ma J g o TREWORDER 4314 g G a

a R12 9 t

4 A e 33 ot w y 7 R14 18 0 K C 1113 O

PCs C 31 n El y

V a Mud r

r Endsleigh l aw 2211 l 28

Pendellick i en B 9917 r 2

o e a G

H 18 p

Tredinick a 9 s w t 27 e s S i

3212 b b 0513 26 e l 1713 u lu r n Treview S C e

V m l 9 c e 25 7713 l 43ZBC94 s e i a F e e 12 H sa 4 0615 Issues 1312 w al E e P v FS v 1 e l O Tr R 6 P 85 H C Burleigh u N d 273 WADEBRIDGE CP l I T a Dunveth G R o 73.9m 11/2007 L e

O y 95 n

Westlands M P H

Elba Cottage P i BM 10 E g 2511 22 o 21 o 4711 2711 A t r 13 2 A E 6412 e I E R r 97 n o N C o u R

G t

5110 1 G I

Car Park l U u 1

103.04m B

DEV G e G q Tredonna 1 e H

K t n 7 11 n a L a h 1

t a w c 12 d a e A n 8 o g

a y D M A R N i e Hillcroft 0810 a O e T r n

r i R O e 1 E Tregolds The LB e a n T

d L i L 90 0 e s I A e Posts c

B H d r o 7

103.3m r e Liby a D r P e r 1

Anchorage K m C 2a 9

RO a 11 r TE o 1 HI

W 8 3 15 0

The 1 11.0m c 43/2731 1608 1 Pond 1409 6709 k 1 WEST 1 3807 ER 4 TCB GH 5 Lamorna HI Orchard PARK 0 32 Egloshayle Playing Fields 95 18.3m Fire Sta Tristan D V 4

t Roseath 5908 4 43/2949 A Council i

l 2 9

8107 TRESERRICK O l G 0 G 6 P1

a U 8

Atlanta Offices 1

R U 1 P

23 Coronation I 1

D s 1

1 I N 9 0 A 2

O N 5 E 0 3 i 2505 R 1 p E A 1 N

Rocklands 3 C E 1 A L FLATS l P p BM 68.25m Park G 2 Me if P O an H igh Wa f te i

Shelter 1-5 O R r De 8 c 72 n

31 R Cold Rock s T N P 1

L P2 Trehayle a T

SWITCH ) s

1

a 7 Dowdry View O r m 1

7105 HOUSE n (u L 4 1 Stonycroft k 1

3608 I y P h 1 R I t 8 P2 w a 0 N T O A P 5 r C 0007 a e A R H P5 A r 7005 BS P1 h o

' C The Old C r D Well

0007 V 1 5606 1

t

k R

2 Hillside 2 0404 Garage E 1 Forge War Memorial s y Pavilion t

c ' s E

r 0 R s 2 27 o e i

y C n

n 2 a

a 10 R

W T n 7

h r 9 e 2 r t Issues Cornerways o d 7 A i r r c C n v 1 g

e O n O Reservoir ak a e t la 0 2 n n P t e 1 a d r 6 T W Mud e 28 M w r T u 43ZBC93 (covered) B e P1 e ZBC93 R A

m 0001 O h r

O t Shadows P3 n C c 4500 K p C o 23 3 0001 5300 R S l a 1800 O i t Riverview h Hi A l M n ig r lc a K H ea P2 8 H e D 18 o n H m t t v igh T n a e o W i

ea W A e i ater P3

M t m 24 Dec e r 9 0005 Coronation 1 i 72 Terrace 0 E 6.821ha

u V . C S b P10 9 l a P4 0701 A q 5300 1 P5 m R n h e R n c

E e

17 R K a T e a r P6 2 4600 R c P ) Lower Town H to r k P7 W r l y R a l E V i 1002 h k 20 e t g I a Radfords k i o 3 V m H H 3 Park A e o m y 3800 P8 n K n C a R D t S e r P9 H 104.4m A P e M P T r l a Cottage P 5 1

g . o ( n 0 r p I w r n e 3

5400 2400 4400 0005 5800 0002 LB W e ie 1 3000 3700 6100 7500 19 4300 6100 0700 2600 1200 2200 3300 3200 0900 5500 n 3 f 4801 5600 4500 6200 7800 9100 2800 4600 6300 E e e ie P P4 3500 5300 7500 0005 r P t a A Trelinden N G n e t o Greons Cemetery Treserrick Barn Park v h

21 La t ( 7000 3 Sinks n u 8 l 2.139ha 2.236ha 2.920ha 9 ou m 9 n m 1 ) e r 3 n e

Cross e 5 r 5 P y 1 G s e a l 4.3m 1 e Raydene Polwhele n 2 l A 32 Porthgwer e b

H Ga E

27 6 H 1 3 I A o W W F 7 A

2 G 7500

0001 7500 0002 e W 1 2 0005

1100 4400 0900 2800 6300 7500 1400 3500 6800 H 36 s E t 4600 m 1 9000 0005 5800 4300 t H 0002 2500 t

9 6100 M B a 3 7800 9100 2 7 o R 3 a Greons 3 R 0 v i Allotment Cottage E r 3800 7 e 8 g e 8 . m N Path e 5300 O r 9 R o n 4500 A O l g r 9 2600

D 9 e L Gardens e 5 i

c p 2 a V

K 1

5300 NTL t k 3 A r 1 a a g 1200 2200 e 1 E L 3

5500 t Post C

3300 a 1

) 42 o e D 0005 O 35 2 p H d 5095 a D R I e A 6200 n W t 5 1 m 0 e H l S R . R 0 O H G t E N n 7000 o w 0001 u e S 3 A n e 5.632ha ( H t T TCB a i Court Place C E 2599 3000 3200 Barn Park h N D y 4898 P 6200 2400 e 4 e 3700 V t m o A L Pond Hall u

1800 f t E h K 2 R e n h 4 o C 7 T R 1 G K 60.0m a L n e R h The Earl of e 1.466ha Cottage H T r P r M G O t 1697 t A c E t a n d u ROAD Showground n e e Molesworth T A s G c P D Mud 1 50 o y d a r h a L 7.0m k r i D St Vincent s Thorncliffe v O P T 6596 (Royal Cornwall Agricultural Show) 17 E Cemetery t I S

28 r W n 25 45 H

Coronation Park 32 a (PH) P m E A s ) MHW den N 22 Y Gar Alnut

a k

L 2 m H P1 c

4995 e H E ra t 23 I e

n 26 G House T y l 4 u P3 P2 H e Church E m

c R a ( h C

e g m P4 F r R r E F e ) k R Riv O The Barn

n N G Villas 1

h o L 5 l E E a f c I 3 U A T m l G 7 e H 6 I

t t R N ( 27 30 R D O u e D E r

d e u . d W St Petroc's Issues 2293 ( o N A u a W P5 b 43/0463 l P M n a

0 f w e E m h a O s L 1 i 9686 CORONATION P 2 a n R R

I a l c 2293 2 t f f T

t i n E Church a i 7700 ) PARK PUMP h M r L l f H a o a a I R r V 23 6 e O T m C O G W I P M d 3 A H 1 Queens n W M L r n D K g t h D

1 R 1 l H 2 L Alnut

e B i e e o

3 S 6 s t 3

n t e

1 a e o y y 7 72 i Lodge d l e n c 43ZBC92

n n e 3 v t Park r C e

c r 43/0624 D l 6 6 e The Old

T e s F e 2

1 P b e FERNLEIGH ROAD R r e 3 1 e

e d v k E V r m k 3 Vicarage

0692 v DEV T 7 e 3 c n S a a h o c n r k n i I a r 0691 r n R r a c C 1 s c

t s e r k

107.5m A l 4 e b E - 1 h 33

l A G r a A

2 d 6 3 w E v r N

36 BM 5.50m T e o y 0 n r T 3 Chygover 0.558ha P o e o T r v e 1 T r l N e C 8 A o IO PK d h N d a t EVA e n 9 TR p T r w n t c D n a T a O S a e i G k b K A l E i W e 0 W l n e m 3389 2 O H s e s D r Crosses o R n S e n T g b 1 v o o e

4488 19 E o 1 n

e

1 i t t 2 E n N 4

i s 9 l t e a

3988 R O l Herons Mill

2388 n P a 5 H T I 43/2458 T a 38 a

0 P 2 1 TREVANION o R S s e N PL1 M O n E 3 Kavorna u e t A PL2 2 St Breock W i V 1 s u r T V PL3 A s P e Cadwin

e N h E Place 7986 s il I E Well I m PL4 5 G 1386 8985 0086 o R O L 1 O H n T N S

2387 3 6 H

t 42 A I 39 1284 0 Y

PL5 P L G 2

2 E Higher Church Park

H E T H A 3

a 8 R

4985 0 E 43/3865 3 O E

r

r S R 1 A 1 C RIVENDELL 16 D R w PL6 K e 43/0590 o O WADEBRIDGE 4483 A o EGLOSHAYLE

v L

L

MS d L

2 CHURCH R

4284 1 A 5084 C PL7 Timaru 22 e P N 11 I i d

9 r d

v L C E

M 97.3m PL8 M o

LB a O 3 b N g 8084 n N a

0086 8 C o

4084 3983 3 h r e E 3 e B y O O e o m W 6

n e 1

u w a a

6 43ZBC91M

I 1 Nancient 5 n N T w

d 45 e

r 1 49

7

42 n

e n

8983 i 48 r

6484 r N O G

a c 52 l Mud 5982

8183 6

o I e

l 2 o A N o

4 y

w l

4 d

t N I H

Spring 5782 9 5 H 3482 V t

1 r

Pump 12 L i A i

C 1 C 0.473ha

5282 E g g o

L a

o V 3981 48.9m 54

R h w

m h 4881 t E E 3

6281 1 e e

T 1 W

3 R 0380

2280 43/1467 1 l r

1

W TCB 8 W 1.336ha

PARKWOOD T T 6 T T 1.215ha

113.4m 43/2653 9 R r a

E a

Parkwood 2 TWO TREES N a

E 43/0751 0.716ha t

1 t 1380 ESTATE A i

0080 0080 4781 G GUINEAPORT l e U e

E Hall WADEBRIDGE

12

2 r

5481 10 r

3

Issues P 2

K 2

D 3 D

2

Issues T A Kilronan 2 1 e 4179 h 0079 e

6280 r 5

1079 9179 e c 0079 3

27 c 8 3080 a Lobb's 7 c 2 8

7579 C d 2

3 7 1

h ia

a 1

Folly 13

7 n 7

0278 t 43/1853 4681 43ZBC91

2 e 2 r ST BREOCK Rugby Football Field St Breock VILLAGE

s 0 4 2 4977

Pond 5080 8078

15 3

0 5 8 3 7 Silo 3 0080 8777 2 2 43/0392 Issues 8276 3 CLAPPER

8 3 n 9 Issues 5 9 FB o Spring i 4 n 9 n 6475 7575 m o 7 40 5 a THE OLD 1

t 2

a v D 7874 1 9 4 9273 0072 r ORCHARD

e 0 Carthew Farm 3 A FB Tredinnick a 1 43/2869 5174 8873 r 6

O e CLEAVELAND 4973 A B 8 3674 FB T

3872 WADEBRIDGE 7672 R V Cottage 41 k r 38 3 3

5 C 0.712ha 5873 D H Issues 5 THE CULVERY 1 . 0

N t 7

V w 3

O S 6 A Goosey 0072 5

BM 111.42m 1 T 43/2868 4 Issues BM 26.29m L 0871 4 MEADOW

S k 1 HEAD L

8 U

9 St Breock's church c 20 WADEBRIDGE E 0.664ha R

3 Y

i 0474 D 30 A

8 35 7671 1 (C of E) 0870 43ZBC90

E d D 44 Sewage Works 1270 V E 29 2

R BM 31.66m 21 A g d E

E l T 5 o 7 u 22 32.6m I H s W

28 6

23 1 g W May Parc House e 24 27 1 P O Cleaveland 2 o r 3 25 1 t

T D 1 SEWAGE PLANT

7 t

2869 26 A 2

0 e

3369 21 kV 33 34 T C 6169 PV E C HD r 29.4m 4265 5 .1 0 r 3w

7969 M y 5 C a

1 D 7177 c r Greywalls 108.9m 6871 L ai 6967 43ZBC48 5067 k n P23 E B 8568 0066 4 M A 4467 4467 The 4868 V PR 8

E 5

Old Manor P22 4 .

1 2 W 05/1995 kV 33 7566 C 0 HD 16 5367

400164 15 0. 43ZBC89 3366 w E m 3 15

0466 6

k L 4066

0066 1 c P21 L 0

a

2065 3 D 2.753ha 8 1

r 7 e 43/0327

f

T 1

CARTHEY 29 3 26 ST ISSEY

2

1

8 1

1 0

1 0057 P19 2

P20 1

9 20.9m Quarry 28

2164 P18 1 43ZBC47

Carthew Bungalow 2163 4

0062 (disused) 3

7962 1 Clapper

D

9661 o 0062 43ZBC88 Clapper Cottage 2762 v BM 93.63m 0056 0059 P15 1262 9162 ) e 2061 m c 4760 8761 T u 1.312ha r ( o P16 P17 1.968ha a h Culverwood 0.494ha P c Polmoria t t k a n 6460 8660 e a P i 43ZBC49 5160 a

t Mill 1

P14 kV 33

C r h V 0059 P C HD 5 .1 0 D

3w

( u

9361 0659

m 2 104.9m V 3k 3 0558 VC P DC

) H 43ZBC87 5 43ZBC46 .1 0 5158 3w

kV 33 C 0058 HD 5 D .1 6657 0 3w r 0058 a Hals Grave Grove Cottage 92.9m i 7457 m n 2 3857 2 . 9056 5 3057 n 0 8458 i n 1 6957 43ZBC86 43/2888 5156 e M a Sladesbridge l B WHITECROSS l 4653 The Laurels r 9154 CNCL HSES 0556 4255 1156 A D V 3k 3 C 43/0773 DEV HD 5 1 3 0. w r

w HALS'GRAVE 0 Polmoria 3 .1 5

H D C e

3 3 k V k 4555 0655 Tuchelin v 106.5m i Kestle Mill 3153 c Hay Cottage Park Villa R A a 43ZBC85 0054 BM 43.80m 4155 Trelawney 43ZBC50 3 1 r 8 Drain 9854 9 14.9m T Lodge

2 )

43ZBC45 5153 m 108.7m 1749 Polmorla 3 u 8355 ( 0056 0057 h 43ZBC84 Cottages 4 k 104.9m c t 3849 ra a 3 w T 43/2457 0 .1 5 Broadmeadows 2051 H D P C TREVANION

3 8452 V 3 k k 33 V 9151 C D ROAD H n 15 i 1752 . Trelill 0 a BM 125.74m 5550 6951 Unit 3w Dr 115.2m 0054 1648 5.4m Cottage House Trelawney 3651 Green Bank Halt 0.700ha

Well 43ZBC83 Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit 4 5 1651 1.555ha 3 1 2 43ZBC78 Mud 43/2111 Fairview 43ZBC79 TREDRUSTON 7549 Mud COTTAGES 43ZBC80 Tearoa 43/3403 43ZBC44 Willow View WADEBRIDGE 125.8m 96.3m 0049 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 2349 0049 0048 2449 ud CONCRETE 43ZBC81 M

2647 2948 M ea 43ZBC51 6847 2 n

BM 119.68m 43ZBC82 Pond 5647 1 Hig BS The 0048 h Garden Centre Old Smithey Sladesbridge 0048 W Cottage T a 3248 te 43/2261 1345 r TRELAWNEY r WADEBRIDGE P1 Well a Wistaria

P2 3947 c 0048 MS P3 43ZBC66 5.2m 0647 7.3m k 8646 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 5645 e 7646 kV Slade's Bridge 3 3 DC d 43ZBC65 H 15 i 0. w Tredruston 9645 3 1746 A 389 s r 4443 4840 43ZBC67 n 6543 e i 1645 Cottage 43ZBC64 6645 43/1657 43ZBC77 Old v w 2645 i POLMORLA s 4.688ha 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV V R 33k DC Post H .15 3944 o 0 43/8039 3w Cross Park 43ZBC63 8043 R PENHALE 33KV 4.9m 8144 0044 Office SOLAR FARM 43ZBC43 D Sunday MP 1 View 3 1 5944 43ZBC68 0 9544 2 Fernley r / 4 0 0044 43ZBC62 V a k 3 3 School 43/0608 C i Kestle Quarry D H Shareven 43ZBC52 n 0 6741 FAIR VIEW 7 43ZBC61 2846 43ZBC76 w 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 3 6043 43ZBC43A 2643 3543 1743 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV Slades House 2742 43ZBC69 D=1.2 y 43ZBC60 ABI S 433189 V 3k e 3 O DC H .15 0 3w P 9 v . 43ZBC43B 0 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 49.8m = D a 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV nd S 43ZBC59 U d S 3241 l A 4741 Spring n l 43ZBC70 0340 i e D=1.2 3740 e H 0 Tr n 43ZBC58 . a P 43/1955 3 c 9 x Primrose k e 1 1 8 5 0040 m SLADESBRIDGE

1 1.77ha c r 0040 T x 1 R C U l 3 H

E 1 Kimberley P 0 Cottage R 2 l / 0 3 4 43ZBC57 3 0 . i k V E 9 FF

T 4 U 1 / O 5939 2 R m W 0 1 D 3 E 43ZBC71 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV M U S 43ZBC72 R S 2 A 43ZBC56 H

V 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 43ZBC73 k M 3 3 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 43ZBC74 43ZBC42 R P E R e

U C x 43/1028 T U R 3 i a c 1 43ZBC55 w 43ZBC75 KESTLE QUARRY 5 n v 8 ABI 1 Broad View 7 i n 433184 3539 0 x 8638 v 3 d H e D=1.2 D C 113.5m 4337 e 3 d 3138 3 r H 43ZBC54 k 9640 n D=1.2 V r U i 4638 g k C A h Collects 3w 0.15 HDC 33kV 43ZBC53 43ZAZ1 c a l 5636 a l r m e W T 43/2454 T e n a 1737 r TREVALLET t 4336 l a e Wild r 7836 c 0036 BM 15.38m 3036 ilway k a 0036 Hollow tled R Disman FF

6231 3

w

43/1603 7 FF d

0

n

PERCH H D 43/2375 U 7934 C

GARAGE 3 k 3 TRERAVEN k

91.2m V c 0029 7735 M 0735 V a 3k 3 DC e H 15 6834 r 0. 0034 5035 3w 7033 T 0034 a 0.445ha n 43ZBC41 0833 4733 P 1733 Uplands a 2333 t H 8033 h i Glynn Ash 6532 g C 1032 n ( h Tip i kV 33 u a DC 5 H 0.1 Meadows

3w a 5832 m 43ZAZ2 m Issues r ) e W D l a Issues 43/3413 T t 8831 TRERAVEN 3831 r 4830 LANE e 21.3m a TRERAVEN LANE r BM 89.91m 43/2274 i l 9530 TRELILL 1.272ha FARM DEV

0029 7028 7230 Lane Wood T 7628 8330 9028 r 3331 9927 7028 7729 a Pond 5028 Trelyll Farm 6428 Treraven c P Clover C y k a 8127 8927 Trevallett c Unit t Meadows l Sinks h 3 ) e 4527 0627 m 4527 ( 7527 43/2110 u ( u TREDRUSTON h 5626 t 5127 T Unit m a r 2 P ) Pond 1925 a c Unit k 1 6625 a 3525 n d Hay Wood 1.458ha 0025 5324 P Quarry BM 0023 a 2324 4028 4123 t (disused) 7121 2723 33.94m 3824 h 7123 Pendavey Tredruston Farm 4.793ha 6322 5222 Quarry 0025 3422 Pendavey Bungalow Treneague 5422 9120 (disused) 7922 5921 1.361ha 0820 6121 9321 6320 0120

T 5021 43/3618 k 5.125ha HIGHER Fairfield HAWKSLAND 5024 81.7m Spring

0020 43ZAZ3 0019 C 43/1494 C PENDAVEY

L WADEBRIDGE T

0019 W 7917 r 9018 0020 k a c 110.8m 5116 9318 a c Tr 84.1m k 13.4m 43/4012 POLMORLA 2217 Well MARKET Treneague 8119 7016 7400 GARDENS 1116 2915 43/2337 0915 0715 8300 TRENEAGUE 7815 0015 WADEBRIDGE 7715 8300 0015

Pond 6114 43/1002 POLMORLA Collects 6014 FOUNDRY P 37.4m

a

t FOUNDRY T h 8911 r a Spring

( c u 5814 m k MP 1.25 0211 ) BARN 0010 BM 39.33m

0010 5306 1309 Pond 0.461ha 77.4m 6208 Quarry (disused)

BM 17.09m 43ZAZ4

43/3188 4704 Issues THE CRAG Lower IRONS C FACTORY Treneague v T r 3900 a a c r Tredannick Hawksland k T FB Farm 7100

V

k

3

3

P C

D

H

Pond 0 2300 7 a Hawke's

w 0500 Foundry 3 t 8100 3000 5500

h Wood 1300 7400 0004 0004 3200 ( 3600 4900 0087 0024 8400 0006 4300 3100 4300 5000 6400 9200 3400 4200 5400 7300 0003 0003 u 7500 4400 1600 3.385ha 0004 7800 8600 0006 1900 2200 3700 5900 6600 P 8800 1800 2700 4500 9200 0004 2500 3400 5500 6700 0006 4000 5800 m a 8200 7200 9 t 5400 ) h 0006 Treraven Wood 2.243ha 1.21ha 3 18.1m ( 0.737ha Pond FB u A m )

8400 k h 2700 36003600 5400 7200 9200 0004 4400 5500 5500 1600 xx 1300 2300 3200 4900 0004 7800 8600 9200 3400 c 5400 2200 3700 7100 7500 8200 8800 0006 1800 2500 3400 xx 5800 0006 4300 5500 7400 0004 3100 4300 5000 6400 0006 1900 7300 0003 t 5900 6600 8500 6700 2700 a ) 8300 a 119.0m r m T 8500 P 4200 Sluice Pond u 2400 (

V

k

3 9 3 d

C

D

H u

3 4200 0 7 M 2900 4500 w 3 0004 A 8196 50.5m The Crag 6200 Hawksland Farm 0003 Pond 0500

Water Wheel 43/0793 HAWKSLAND (disused) 68.3m 17.9m

43ZAZ5

) m 7293 u 7593 3900 ( ck P Tra h a t t h a Hawke's Wood BM 122.44m P ( u FB 7891 m )

. BM 67.69m

Spring T T r 6589 r a a c n c k k 6787 0087 BM 62.00m 5389 6984 0087 k c a r

o 8086 T Quarry (disused) i 124.3m 1185 0684 8584 6184

3883 43ZAZ6 0383 Treraven Wood

t 9082 6882 6482 43/1382 5382 NANSCOW 67.4m 0882 1581 5580 9679 Inscribed Stone 6281 6981 3381 u

5879 7379 xx D 4379 r a P 8279 i Nanscow a n b 0178 t h

55.1m ( u i 5977 9477 m ) 0876 PORS 9178 MP 1.50 5372 9575 262 0075 9774 0076

r 0076

5074 9474 6474 2074

43ZAZ7 7174 2473 Pond 0075

t 43/4209 2173 6072 FULL UDDERS PAWTON. 6973 k c a BM 122.93m r T MS 3870 24.0m 8171 s 9670 6970 8770 i

V k 3 3

9371 C 6269 D H

0 6669 7

w ) 3 FB 5468 8368

D 5568 5766 8967

5966 5367 6265 4868 9367 s 9863 78.4m 6266 1067 2466 0166

7266 BM 24.51m 43ZAZ8

0964

r Pond Pond 5064

r 3363 BM 0063 0063 0061 117.1m 46.69m 43.4m 8663 Spring 1461 Collects o 0062 4861 6062 6962 8762 6262 6161 Penance Wood

e 7761 0062 Pennard Cottage 8061 0061 0861 Spring 2759 Little Trevorder t LB 8959 Wood

43ZAZ9 Penance Wood 3859

w GP 46.9m 0158

a 5357 FB Issues Hay Wood BM 86.65m 0553 k 8257 c 1 9657 0154 a 2 4857 r 7057 4257 T o 43.7m Tips 3 6257 k 4 c (disused) 43/1544 0156 a Derry's Wood r PENNARD 8356 r 4755 T Pennard Villas 3455 9555 4355

P Water 2554 0753 Wheel 4154 3851 8153 e 5852 0651 1153 MILK 1554 PARLOUR 5851 Pawton Mill 1653 8633 0052

93.1m 4952 43/1470 110.5m 9251 PAWTON MILL 7951 6052 BM 43.37m

p 3951 5050 0851 5450 3151 58.1m Quarry

n Quarry (disused) 6950 (disused) 3049 34.4m Pond

O Pond 52.7m 5249 Trigtahwheel 1849 4849

r 8046 1748 Pa BM 54.63m th (um) 43ZAZ10

MP 1.75 1 Issues 2 9947 43/2755 7647 WHEEL FARM 6347 5346 6844 e 42.2m 42.6m

k 6044 3 5444 0044 2749 0943 0044 4 6743 t Collects M Unit Houses 0443 5643 u 2743 d 2742 r Riv er 0042 0042 C am 7442 3338 el s 8140 5941

k Water Wheel c C o 6840 a C r L (disused) W er Issues T Wat igh n H e Mea 1739 8439 9539 7339 66.1m 0038 0038

w 72.2m 3538 5336 r Wate n High 2237 5736 6737 Mea 2337 43/3361

W 9635 PENGELLY 0936 FARM GP 4537 43ZAZ11

t Spring Penmellyn

107.5m 3634 4235 6731 4934

V k 3 3233 3 0033 C D 9933 H 5533

0 e Issues 7 7633 w 43/0228 2534 3 7033 Pond Trevorder Wood Pengelly Farm BURLORNE 0333 CHURCH 0033 2533

y 7032 Pengelly k Cross 97.5m c 43/0797 3631 T a HAY FARM r r N 6232 8031 5630 WADEBRIDGE a T 5730 8431 c Hay 4231 k b

n V

k i 3 3

C Hill Wood D 9931 H a

0 G 7 r w 2029 3 a D f 0026 k f ac

r T Burlawn W 5228 o Farm 6128 o 6127 81.8m 5130 d 6827 Bozion Cottage

1927 t

43ZAZ12

4027 Trelawny e 8726 8426 l t n o d t 0026 Home Boswynawle Cottage i i L t l 3625 4025 Meadow r e e 6625 o p 1825 c 9425 P a 0423 DEV n Cattle Grid a 8725 h r C 0024 109.0m r u l e r e FB p F e a r 8023 0023 MP 2 e h C T D 43ZAZ13 d 0023 l r 4623 O a

e e i h n 0024 T Quarry 2422 Pond 6921 43/0178 Trevorder BOZION (disused) n 5721 9421 Issues 0322 5321 7021 2520 Well

d 108.9m Playground P Collects 9120 0120 a t 7919 0819 h w 92.8m 5319 Pond Sheppen Park Wood ( Tregwindles Wood 5 LB u 7418 1 k m n Elm Terrace c PO a 4318 r )

5A T 6921 Well 2 3 0017 91.7m 0016 3318 43ZAZ14 Track 43/2554 3817 2216 TREVORDER 6 k

o c 7316 a r Bishop's Wood Bozion Farm

Issues 7 T 7016 6 e 9515 9915 Track 8 1216 0016 43/0229 6515 BURLORNE Rose Cottage 3615 COUNCIL 8A 0014 HOUSES 5314 6715 43/0227 p 3714 0017 BURLORNE Burlorne Eglos 0613 s 3212 Pawton Farm 5010 Greenfields k 1512 1800 e c Burlawn y Hay Wood a e Issues r l 8611 T r e 0008 Farm e g v a a t W t t P Whistlers o 71.7m a C

t Track 43/1468 h PAWTON d

FARM 9109 T ( BM 3909 BM 74.47m r u Moonrakers TCB ac Issues k m 74.5m 9705 0008 89.33m 6308 ) M

e 43ZAZ15 4508 a

y Quavers Well T Cock's Wood

n H r 6207 BM 113.71m o a Pond u c 5905 s k k 3506 BM 81.35m 0007 81.0m 90.7m e c s a I r Tra 77.5m 114.2m Spring ck Shafts Hustyn T Sl (disused) ( 2805 Cottage 8905 Pond 82.4m Woodside Pawton Mine s 9504 0002 3500 9100

Tregwindles Wood V 0002 3300 Treetops k 3 3

(disused) C D H

0 9200 7

w 3

0007 Collects 105.3m 3600 Undertown Wood 5800 9400 0001 a CORNWALL COUNTY 5100 NORTH CORNWALL DISTRICT ST BREOCK CP WADEBRIDGE ED No 21 WARD CORNWALL COUNTY NORTH CORNWALL DISTRICT ST BREOCK CP WADEBRIDGE ED No 21 WARD) B m r 3100 0001 4100 8400 0005 1100 3200 5300 0005 1200 2000 3100 The Garden House u 0001 1900 2800 3800 2600 5000 5600 6200 4900 3900 4400 4800 5600 M o ( 8900 9600 3300 0005

8900 0005 1200 1800 1400 6300 7800 H

4000 5900 6600 8200 9000 k 2900 3500 c 1 e Shaft a a u 64.7m r a h Round The Bend s T g d y Burlawn t

e h (disused) 2 o a w s a P

s m

' i d e

V k 3 Spring 3

C Tregwindles D H Gaff Wood 0 7 71.2m

w Round the Bend 3 Wood 62.3m 43ZAZ16 s O

Lovegate

T 119.6m St Warris r k a Gainsborough Bungalow c N

w c The Cottage St Warris a k P r T Pond a 62.1m Cottage t

h The Bungalow ( Spring

u V k 3 D BM 3

C D H m

o 0 7 43/0987

w 3 ) HUSTYN MILL Spring 62.07m Well Cock's Wood k T

c r a I a Issues c r k Shaft T T h r

a . BM MP .25 c 11.75m k Myrtle Cottage

Pond FB k 117.6m 43ZAZ17 43/4408 51.4m c s BURLAWN a PUMP r a Pond T 46.8m 12.3m

y 12.8m BM 40.90m T

r a Tregwindles c Bishop's Wood T k r e FB a Pond M c 37.9m e k b

a

Spring n

Y 32.6m

H

i r

g

h

Issues

W

Trerice M

a L Meadow e

t

a

e 43/0856 C

n

r C

a HIGHFURZE

k c L H 64.1m BM 54.17m W a i

d r Hustyn Mill g T h T N r

a 49.6m Pond W Undertown Wood BM 126.91m c a k 24.5m

t

43ZAZ18 43/2234 e TREWINDLES r

e k Slipper Rock c O a High Furze Issues r BM 125.84m T s

i k n c

a r T

Hamlet's Wood 64.6m h w

n Shaft

127.0m

V t k 3 3

C D H

a o 0 7

w 3

Stone l

80.0m

43ZAZ19 Mill

p 46.8m 125.2m Pool Mill Pool Wood

n Wood s

i Tank

t

s Hay Wood Spring BM 37.57m Tregwindles Wood e i

Normal Tidal Limit t

s 87.3m h n k Burial Chamber c a r

s Cliff T T k 43ZAZ20 ac Tr

e k

c 27.7m Cliff a Stone

r

a T : Tregwindles

s Cottage 143.8m Heron's Lake Ford E

Spring FB

127.0m e Kent's Piece Stone

43/2384 T

y TRERICE 91.4m WADEBRIDGE

r Issues Issues BM 129.51m Morgan Wood 9.3m MP .5 O t Morgan Wood p

i Well C

l

i Trerice Plantation f Polbrock Bridge N f R iv 43ZAZ21 e r

C 15.5m Trerice a

m

c e Issues l

i Issues

Collects Sinks e Track

E Issues Cliff r BM 93.96m BM 93.3m 9.01m b Polgeel Cottage S

43ZAZ22 Collects t

Stone

A Issues c T Issues 5.0m 136.6m r

a V Y k 3 3

C Well D c H

0 7

w E k Haycrock 3

43/3681 HAYCROOK e

90.0m 43/1628 Selley's Wood POLBROCK A Pond L l Stone 14.2m 15.3m

Stone

P E M Collects 43ZAZ23 WARNING: Not all voltages shown. Environmental Sites & Oil Pipelines switched off. Issues 83.3m

43ZAZ24 T

r

a

c

k Spring 151.2m

C

43ZAZ25 R

Stone Burlorne Tregoose

43/0232 BURLORNE TREGOOSE

T

Issues r Well a

c

k k Stone c a BM 81.39m Issues r T Stone OVERHEADBM 164.19m LINE UNDERGROUND CABLE Tank TITLE: Hustyn Wood 162.8m Tank FB Pond PL St Breock Downs Pole Mounted Stone SURF TELECOMS APPARATUS PME Earth 145.5m Belman's Park Wood 23.8m Track

161.9m 71.9m Stone k SERVICE c

43ZAZ26 a Transformer DRAWN BY: Stone r T k MP .75 c

a

r

Hustyn Wood T LV

S S 3 w

7

0

St Breock Downs

H

D

St Breock Downs C

3

3

k

V

Stone HV (11kV) DATE: 02/08/2013 Stone Stone 55.8m 12.9m 43/2022 Issues LOWER BURLORNE Stone 43ZAZ27 WESTERN POWER Lower Burlorne Tregoose

Tr ac k Belingick Wood BM 54.68m NORTH CORNWALL DISTRICT CORNWALL COUNTY NORTH CORNWALL DISTRICT HV (33kV)ST BREOCK CP WADEBRIDGE ED No 21 WARD CORNWALL COUNTY NORTH CORNWALL DISTRICT ST BREOCK CP WADEBRIDGE ED No 21 WARD 25.0m BM 152.44m SCALE 1:1:16000 T k @ A3

168.4m PILOT CABLES ) Thirteen Steps Underground m Ground Mounted u (

h NORTH CORNWALL CO CONST 43ZAZ28 NORTH CORNWALL CO CONST t k a c 3w 70 HDC P 33 T kV a r r a HV (66kV) 43ZAZ29 T 42.8m c Issues 3w 70 HD C 3 E 3 k kV 43ZAZ30 Belman's Park DISTRIBUTION Earth Wood Transformer k BM 40.93m c P 43/7790 P P a S ST BREOCK WIND FARM r

T 33/11kV S/STN T Collects B

R Hustyn Wood

E PLOT CENTRE: CENTRE: 198249.165,071039.229 43/3599 O 20.1m PAWTON Bishop's Wood GATE C K

C P HV (132kV) B11 Spring Hustyn Wood

k Issues Belingick Wood c a

r T Stone * * Spring ADVICE SHOULD BE SOUGHT FROM THE WESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION CONTACT CENTRE S.WEST (0845 601 2989) FOR ANY WORK THAT IS TO TAKE PLACE IN PROXIMITY TO 132kV UNDERGROUND159.2m CABLES AND 132kV OVERHEAD LINES Serving the Midlands, South West and Wales k c a r T 27.6m

B5

* 176.1m

13.6m

B9 Stone Springs B1

Issues MP 3

k

c Tumuli 98.1m a B10 Issues r B4 T Hustyn 131.8m Stone B11 BM k Vile's Park Wood c 99.68m 43/0985 LB a HUSTYN BM 14.28m r D

T

r

GP a Belingick Hill BM 132.44m i

n Pond

Brockton Cottage E

D

a W

n A Wells

d D

E U

W B n R a d I r

D

d

G 183.0m

E

B

d E

y D