Viking Link: UK Onshore Scheme Planning Appeal Core Document Reference 16.11 National Grid Network Options Assessment (NOA) 2017-18
Network Options Assessment 2017/18
UK electricity transmission
JANUARY 2018 Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 01
How to use this interactive document To help you find the information you need quickly and easily we have published NOA as an interactive document.
Home A to Z This will take you to the contents page. You will find a link to the glossary You can click on the titles to navigate on each page. to a section. Hyperlinks Arrows Hyperlinks are highlighted in bold Click on the arrows to move throughout the report. You can click backwards or forwards a page. on them to access further information. Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 02
For the past couple of years our Future Energy Scenarios (FES) publication has highlighted how we are in the midst of an energy revolution. Our Network Options Assessment (NOA) publication, along with our other System Operator (SO) publications, aims to help our industry ensure a secure, sustainable and affordable energy future.
We publish the NOA as part of Investment decision our SO role. The NOA describes The SO considered the investment the major projects considered options proposed by the to meet the future needs in GB’s Transmission Owners. A couple electricity transmission system of the highlights are: as outlined in the Electricity Ten • Recommendation for investment Year Statement (ETYS) 2017, and of £21.6m in 2018/19 across recommends which investments 22 projects to potentially deliver in the year ahead would best projects worth almost £3.2bn. manage the capability of the GB • Analysis suggests a total transmission networks against interconnection capacity of the uncertainty of the future. 17.4 GW between GB and European markets by 2030 To be transparent in our processes would provide optimal benefit. and to ensure that the SO is impartial throughout, we follow The NOA represents a balance the NOA methodology, approved between asset investment and by Ofgem earlier in the year. This network management to achieve methodology sets out how we base the best use of bill payers’ money. our recommendations on the data and How the future energy landscape analysis of the 2017 FES and ETYS. could look is uncertain, and the SO’s recommendations are The news about SO separation there to help make sure the GB from the National Grid Transmission transmission network is fit for the Owner was announced earlier in the future. In producing this year’s NOA year. I do not foresee that this results we have listened to and acted on in significant change to the NOA your feedback. We welcome your itself although the changing roles and views on the changes we have responsibilities of different parties will made and in helping further shape be reflected in future methodologies. the publication to meet your needs. We are also planning how NOA can continue to evolve over the coming Julian Leslie years to maximise consumer benefit. Head of Network Capability, Electricity Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 03
Contents
Chapter one Chapter five
Aim of the report...... 10 Investment recommendations...... 78 1.1 Introduction ...... 11 5.1 Introduction...... 79 1.2 How the NOA fits in with the FES 5.2 Interpretation of the NOA outcomes...... 81 and ETYS ...... 12 5.3 NOA outcomes...... 83 1.3 What NOA can do...... 13 5.4 Recommendation for each option...... 95 1.4 What NOA cannot do...... 14 1.5 The NOA report methodology...... 15 1.6 Navigating through the document...... 16 1.7 What’s new?...... 17 Chapter six 1.8 Stakeholder engagement and feedback...... 19 Interconnection analysis...... 102 6.1 Introduction...... 103 6.2 Interconnection theory...... 105 Chapter two 6.3 Current and potential interconnection...... 106 6.4 Methodology...... 107 Methodology...... 20 6.5 Outcome...... 111 2.1 Introduction...... 21 6.6 Summary...... 121 2.2 NOA process...... 22 2.3 Economic analysis...... 25 2.4 The NOA Committee...... 32 2.5 How the NOA connects to Chapter seven the SWW process...... 33 2.6 Interaction between the NOA results and the FES...... 35 Stakeholder engagement...... 122 2.7 Other options ...... 36 7.1 Introduction...... 123 7.2 Continuous development...... 124 7.3 Stakeholder engagement...... 125 Chapter three Chapter eight Boundary descriptions...... 38 3.1 Introduction...... 39 3.2 Scotland and the Appendix A – Economic analysis results...... 127 North of England region...... 40 Appendix B – SWW Projects...... 133 3.3 The South and East of England region...52 8.1 Shetland Link...... 133 3.4 Wales and West Midlands region...... 59 8.2 Orkney Link...... 135 8.3 Western Isles Link...... 137 8.4 Eastern Network Reinforcement...... 139 8.5 South East Network Reinforcement.....143 Chapter four Appendix C – List of four-letter codes...... 145 Appendix D – Meet the NOA team...... 148 Appendix E – Glossary...... 149 Proposed options...... 62 Disclaimer...... 153 4.1 Introduction...... 63 4.2 Reinforcement options – Scotland and the North of England region...... 64 4.3 Reinforcement options – the South and East of England region...... 72 4.4 Reinforcement options – Wales and West Midlands region...... 76 Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 04
Executive summary
Using the 2017 FES, ETYS 2017 and following the methodology approved by Ofgem, the System Operator (SO) recommends the options which the GB Transmission Owners (TOs) should invest in for the upcoming year. Below, we present a summary of the key points of the NOA 2017/18.
Key points
• The SO recommends investment • The NOA is about getting the right of £21.6m in 2018/19 across 22 decision, balancing potential constraint projects to maintain the option to costs against investment costs for an deliver projects worth almost £3.2bn. uncertain future. The NOA Committee This year’s investment will allow us to identified two reduced-build options manage the future capability of the that could create significant consumer GB transmission networks against the value. As the SO, we requested the uncertainty of the future. This will make TOs bring forward more reduced-build sure that the networks can continue options in the future. supporting the transition to the future energy landscape in an efficient, • We performed analysis of 76 different economical and coordinated way. reinforcement options in this NOA. Twenty-one options are given either • As the energy landscape is uncertain, a Stop or Do not start recommendation the SO must make sure that any as they are not optimal at this time. network investment is truly necessary. We also recommend 31 optimal options Our reviewed methodology was to be put on Hold where investment approved by Ofgem and included decisions could be made when there improvements to minimise the potential is greater certainty in the future. This for ‘false-positive’ recommendations. ensures that a recommendation for an The first improvement was the investment is made at the most efficient introduction of implied scenario time. Where the recommendation probabilities. Implied probabilities cannot be delayed any further, our calculate how probable we need to economic analysis assesses the cost believe a scenario is in order to make impact of not investing in this financial the same decision under a conventional year. Based on this analysis the SO decision-making process. The second recommends deferring the spend was the inception of a NOA Committee. of £8.6m on four options in 2018/19. This Committee, comprised of SO Table 0.1 is an overview of the representatives, provides scrutiny of the investment recommendations where results in a transparent and rigorous way. the decision must be made this year. Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 05
Executive summary
• This year the recommended investment the delay in the earliest in service dates spend is lower, primarily due to two of the Eastern Links combined with factors. Since the publication of the higher north–south flows, we identified NOA 2016/17 the Hinkley–Seabank the opportunity of implementing an project has progressed to a position operational measure to deliver up to and is now included in the baseline. £600m of consumer benefit. In parallel, Secondly, the South Coast reactive we’ve requested the TOs investigate the compensation scheme (due to feasibility of accelerating the delivery commission in 2018) has progressed of the Eastern Link options. We will to the final delivery stage where most therefore look to pursue these options of the capital cost has already been in more detail next year. incurred before this year’s analysis. • This year’s interconnection analysis • All Eastern Links (2 GW HVDC links and suggests that a total interconnection the Torness to north east England AC capacity of 17.4 GW between GB and reinforcement) have had their earliest European markets by 2030 would in service dates delayed by two to provide optimal consumer benefit. four years for this year’s analysis. Many other factors outside the scope This has delayed several reinforcements of this analysis will influence the because they only provide benefit once outcome for GB interconnection the links are in service. Due to over the next decade and beyond.
It is important to recognise that these This year the NOA identifies which options recommendations represent the best view at we recommend to proceed are likely to meet a snap-shot in time. Investment decisions taken Ofgem’s criteria for onshore competition. by any business should always consider these The competition assessment for SWW recommendations in the light of subsequent is in accordance with the Ofgem agreed events and developments in the energy sector. methodology and the outcomes are The project options we have recommended described in Chapter 5. in this NOA will make sure that the GB transmission network can continue supporting the transition to the future energy landscape in an efficient, economical and coordinated way. Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 06
Table 0.1 Summary of investment recommendations (the options are in order from north to south)
Option 017/18
2016/17 2016/17 1 EISD Degrees Two Power Consumer Progression Slow Steady State Local A Contracted Local B Contracted Local No A Contracted Local No B Contracted NOA Recommendation NOA 2 Recommendation Reasons Change for
E4DC Eastern subsea HVDC Link from Peterhead 2028 2028 2028 2028 2028 N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change to Hawthorn Pit (Potential SWW) ECU2 Generation East Coast onshore 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 N/A N/A N/A N/A Delay Proceed background 275kV upgrade changes (Potential SWW) ECUP Generation East Coast onshore 400kV 2026 2026 2026 2026 2026 N/A N/A N/A N/A Delay Proceed background incremental reinforcement changes (Potential SWW)
DWNO Generation No decision Denny to Wishaw 2028 2028 2028 2028 2030 N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed background required 400kV reinforcement changes
HNNO New Hunterston East–Neilston 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed reinforcement 400kV reinforcement E2DC Eastern subsea HVDC Link from 2027 2027 2027 2027 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change Torness to Hawthorn Pit (Potential SWW) TLNO Torness to north The EISD is 2030 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Hold for SWW east England AC delayed2 reinforcement
Generation HAEU Do not 2021 2029 2021 2021 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed background Harker SGT6 replacement proceed changes WHTI3 Turn-in of West Boldon 2021 2021 N/A 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change to Hartlepool circuit at Hawthorn Pit NOR1 Reconductor 13.75km 2021 2021 2021 2021 2023 N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change of Norton to Osbaldwick 400kV double circuit CPRE Reconductor sections of Generation No decision Penwortham to Padiham 2021 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed background required and Penwortham to changes Carrington MRUP Uprate the Penwortham to Washway Farm to 2023 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change2 Kirkby 275kV double circuit to 400kV
1 Earliest In Service Date – the earliest year that a project can be delivered. 2 For more information please refer to Chapter 5 – Investment recommendations. 3 We assessed the same reinforcement for one year’s later delivery (denoted WHT2). It is optimal under the Consumer Power and Steady State scenarios. Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 07
Executive summary
Table 0.1 Summary of investment recommendations continued
Option 017/18
2016/17 2016/17 EISD Degrees Two Power Consumer Progression Slow Steady State Local A Contracted Local B Contracted Local No A Contracted Local No B Contracted NOA Recommendation NOA 2 Recommendation Reasons Change for
LDQB 2020 N/A N/A 2021 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Proceed No change4 Lister Drive quad booster
Depends on OENO Eastern links to Central Yorkshire 2026 2027 2027 2027 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed Hold provide capability reinforcement and hence optimal timing.
TDH1 Generation Drax to Thornton 2 circuit 2019 2019 2020 2019 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Proceed background thermal uprating changes
BMMS 3X225MVAr MSC 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 Proceed Proceed No change at Burwell Main
BTNO No decision Critical in one Bramford to 2025 2027 2029 2030 N/A 2025 2028 2027 2027 Delay required sensitivity4 Twinstead OHL
WYTI Interconnector 2021 2021 2021 2021 2023 2021 2021 2021 2021 Delay Proceed Wymondley turn-in flows changes
ESC1 New Second Elstree to New 2022 2022 2025 2025 2032 2022 2022 2022 2022 N/A Delay St John’s Wood 400kV reinforcement cable circuit
TKRE Tilbury to Grain and Interconnector 2025 2025 2025 2025 2027 2025 2025 2025 2025 N/A Proceed Tilbury to Kingsnorth flows changes upgrade
KLRE Kemsley–Littlebrook 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 Proceed Proceed No change circuits reconductoring
FLR2 Fleet–Lovedean 2020 2020 2020 2020 2023 2020 2020 2020 2020 Proceed Proceed No change reconductoring
SCN2 New Transmission Route between south London Interconnector 2027 N/A N/A 2027 2027 2027 2027 N/A N/A Do not proceed Proceed and the South East Coast flows changes Indicative Option 2 (Potential SWW)
SCRC South East Coast reactive 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 Proceed Proceed No change compensation
SEEU Reactive Compensation 2021 2021 2021 2021 2022 2021 2021 2022 2022 Proceed Proceed No change Auto-Switching Scheme
BNRC Required for Bolney and Ninfield No decision importing 2022 2022 N/A 2023 N/A 2022 2022 2022 2022 Proceed additional reactive required interconnector compensation flows
4 For more information please refer to Chapter 5 – Investment recommendations. Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 08
We welcome your views is published every year and involves input from We want to continue to develop the NOA stakeholders from across the energy industry. and we welcome your views on how to These scenarios are based on the energy improve it. Chapter 7 – Stakeholder trilemma (security of supply, sustainability engagement describes how you can and affordability) and provide supply and contact us with your views. demand projections out to 2050. We use these scenarios to inform the energy industry about Future energy publications network analysis and the investment being National Grid has an important role to play planned, which will benefit our customers. in leading the energy debate across our industry and working with you to make sure We build our long-term view of the electricity that together we secure our shared energy transmission capability and operability in future. As System Operator (SO), we are our Future Energy Scenarios (FES), Electricity perfectly placed as an enabler, informer and Ten Year Statement (ETYS), Network Options facilitator. The SO publications that we produce Assessment (NOA), and electricity System every year are intended to be a catalyst for Operability Framework (SOF) publications. debate, decision making and change. To help shape these publications, we seek your views and share information across The starting point for our flagship publications the energy industry that can inform debate. is the Future Energy Scenarios (FES). The FES Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 09 Chapter one 11
Aim of the report the Aim of
one Chapter Chapter 1010 2018 2018 – January – January 2017/18 2017/18 Assessment Assessment Options Options Network Network Chapter one the the transmission networks. When read together, the potential development of the electricity the (FES)Scenarios byunderpinned the data in our Future Energy This is report one of the publications to stakeholders. information relevant criteria for onshore competition, providing the meet projects which identifies also It Electricity Ten the in Year Statement defined as requirements, network future the to meet with to proceed projects reinforcement NETS major to which as (GB) Britain Great to the Transmission Owners (TOs) across recommendations to make options of range a to assess is purpose Its (SQSS). Standard Supply of Quality and Security (NETS) the National Electricity Transmission System of electricity transmission, consistent with system economic and coordinated efficient, the NETS. the for options potential and requirements of The The further. it to develop stakeholders, and we’ll use your feedback our you, for It’s produced published. to be The The (SO). Operator the System as produces publications Grid that National (NOA) Options Assessment the chapter Network This introduces 1.1 ofAim the report Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 11 ETYS ETYS NOA NOA Introduction , and explains, and how itworks the other alongside is the vehicle for developing an an developing for vehicle the is 2017/18 assessment third the is and the NOA the and assessing for base aconsistent have . This means that the NOA the that means . This give a full picture picture afull give
(ETYS)
and and
.
the output from this year’s NOA year’s this from output the used year. also We have last considered welfare and capital cost implications transmission network in addition to the included locational impacts on the GB We have by Ofgem. approved were which improvementsfurther to the methodology, undertaken have we analysis year’s this For market. GB the with capacity interconnector efficient of development the to facilitate signal a market interconnection, with the goal of providing future of benefits potential the of industry the to inform undertaken is analysis The Chapter 6 is our interconnection assessment. FES the on 2018 based is and The The to our stakeholders. value added of be will believe we which NOA the between analysis: this provides greater consistency NOA the for baseline network reinforcement assumptions NOA 2017/18 was published in January 2017/18 January in published was for Interconnectors ( Interconnectors for and NOA and IC analysis 2017. as the NOA IC) IC)
Chapter one
Network Options Options Network Assessment 2018 January and ETYS the we summarise reinforcement reinforcement summarise we emphasises the need reinforce to NOA In the NOA optionsand our economic analysis of those which by criterion The regions. by options a region is defined is that an option may not appear in more than one region (this is (SWW) analysis in this document. It is important note that to while we recommend optionsmeet to system needs, the TOs or other relevant parties will ultimately decide on what, where and when invest. to Some of the alternative options we have evaluated are reduced-build options as explained in Chapter 4 – Proposed options. The to preventto an option being evaluated more than once, with the risk of two different analysis, economic the on Based answers). For some options we have included a summary of the Strategic Wider Works the report also identifies our recommended regions. the of each for options or option the network, and we are keen embrace to innovative ways do to so. ,
Electricity Ten Electricity Ten Statement Year November 2017 fits in with the FESthe with in fits to assess to the network can be read together form to ). These). publications aim inform to in November 2017, and the TOs in November 2017, How the NOA the How and NOA publication. Further explanation of this this of explanation Further publication. Future Energy Energy Future Scenarios July 2017 see page 8 on the future of energy for Great Britain ( the whole energy debate addressing by specific issues in each document. The FES ETYS the reinforcing for options with responded network. Our economic analysis of these the for foundation the forms then options NOA process and each of the publications can be found in Chapter 2 – Methodology. an evolutionary and consistent voice in the the in voice consistent and evolutionary an network. electricity GB’s of development useWe the FES requirements for power flows across the GB published were requirements These NETS. in the ETYS The SO produces a suite of publications publications of suite a produces SO The 1.2 12 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter one • • • 1.3 ofAim the report Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 13 to consumers. benefit most the deliver will that atime at completed are they sure to make projects reinforcement stop or delay continue, start, Recommend whether the TOs should and economic future transmission system. coordinated efficient, an to facilitate networks should be made on the transmission investments when and where and no-build, Recommend what options, whether build or ETYS by the outlined as requirements transfer power bulk to meet to proceed Recommend the most economic options What theWhat NOA can do: can .
• • • for onshore competition. stakeholders whether options are eligible relevant other and to Ofgem Indicate potential SWW options. for Case Needs the developing begin Indicate to the TOs whether they should welfare based on market-driven analysis. – to European maximise socio-economic required to facilitate those interconnections reinforcements any as well –as grids interconnections to other European electricity of level optimum the market to the Indicate
Chapter one
and incorporate local voltage voltage local incorporate and Evaluate the operability challenges of of challenges operability the Evaluate evaluate only can It interconnectors. possible completed a that welfare socio-economic the provide. would interconnector Forecast or recommend future indicates It levels. interconnection interconnection. of level optimum the Assess network asset replacement projects which do not provide network capability connections. customer individual uplifts or List all of the options that the TOs develop as, for instance, some reach only a low level of maturity and are discarded early. It is for the develop TOs to options and consult options. on variations on stakeholders with voltage issues. are We also opening it up participants range of wider who a invite to transmission the meet to compete can system needs at least cost. This includes (DNOs), Operators Network Distribution participants storage as market such providers, the SO and TOs. This is expected to result in more cost-effective could This term. long the in options be through using market based or reduce to solutions network distribution larger network while constraint costs assets are built or could be the cost large avoid to delay to solution effective asset investment. are We running several trials to develop the processes and parties new involve to need capability we in the NOA challenges. be We’ll working closely with developments the stakeholders on our through results the publish will and available. become they as year the • • • •
cannot do: is a key part. local more consider to approach What the NOAWhat the or environmental impacts. These types These impacts. environmental or of decisions can only be made the by TOs options the parties when relevant other or are in a more advanced stage. Evaluate the specific designs of any option, route equipment, of choice the as such Comment on the specific details on any specific option, such as how it could be planned or delivered. It is the TOs or other relevant parties who decide how they options. their implement and where they invest. Make recommendations for system needs other than bulk power transfer at present, issues. voltage local e.g. Insist thatoptions be pursued. can We only analysis. our on based options recommend The TOs or other relevant parties are when what, for responsible ultimately With the introduction of new technologies new of introduction the With electricity the models, business and industry is experiencing significant opportunity deliver the with change to society. and consumers for value, great As the SO we have a key role in facilitating decentralised, more a transition to the carbon electricitylow industry model. One area we are developing is our assessing capability network to approach and operability needs as well as the the which of them, meet to options We willWe be publishing a roadmap this spring which will set out where we developments the with to get to want in the long term and the steps that are likely to be needed to get there. As a starting point we are expanding the NOA NOA local as such challenges, regional or • • • • 1.4 14 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter one published for consultation in May 2017. the methodology for the NOA of draft initial The Ofgem. and TOs onshore 2017, early the in with working methodology NOA the started We detail. finer the the the The The 1.5 ofAim the report Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 15 NOA NOA The The process should work, and establishes report methodology report sets out how NOA report methodology report 2017/18 was was 2017/18 report report
Chapter 2–Methodology. Chapter We describe the methodology in further 2017. September in by Ofgem our website. The methodology was approved on 2017, published July subsequently and methodology was submitted to Ofgem in the refinement and discussions more After
Chapter one
in future publications. publications. future in six five
seven Chapter Chapter Chapter and European markets, and explain the economic theory behind the benefit of interconnectors the to consumer. This is This is a useful chapter like give to if you’d opinion. and feedback your us Investment recommendations page 78 page recommendations Investment investment our presents 5 Chapter recommendations This is an for 2018/19. important chapter if you are interested in be to options recommend we whether proceeded for this investment It also year. eligibilitysummarises assessment the for transmission. electricity onshore in competition 102 page analysis Interconnection interconnection our presents 6 Chapter analysis results. describe We the optimum GB between interconnection of levels an important chapter if you are interested interconnection. European of future the in 122 page engagement Stakeholder Chapter 7 discusses how we can work with you improve to the NOA
document in a logical document in
,
process and process process analysis but are described in Chapter 4 – Proposed Options. Chapter 2 – Methodology two four
three
1 Navigating throughNavigating the document Chapter Chapter Chapter covers why these other options are kept separate from our analysis. Some options are not in our NOA 1 Boundary 38 descriptions page Chapter 3 describes how we divide the 62 page options Proposed Chapter 4 introduces and describes the the increase can that options reinforcement NETS capability. This is a good description Methodology page 20 page Methodology Chapter 2 describes the NOA the economic theory behind it. This is a good overview if you are unfamiliar with the NOA like understandor to if you’d more about how options. of analysis economic perform the we GB network into boundaries and regions for analysis, and gives a description of each boundary, as well as an overview of the types of generation you can find within each you’d if introduction good a is This boundary. the of understanding your improve to like GB network. of the types of options being proposed by the TOs. We have structured NOA the have We 1.6 manner to help you understand how we have reached understand have you help manner we to how recommendationsour and conclusions. 16 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter one ensure that our recommendations can be will definitions and terminologies new The NOA our for definitions We’ve reviewed the terminologies and The The sensitive. to be considered are or driver, or scenario by asingle driven are that those includes This marginal. to be considered are additional level of scrutiny to the results that our ..3 3 1.7. aNOA We’ve created 2 1.7. the robustness of the decision-making process, improve To driver. or further scenario a single especially when options are determined by positive’ investment recommendations, to ‘false- lead potentially could approach analysis regret least year single current the methodology review in March 2017 that NOA the in highlighted been has It 1.7.1 improveand the NOA Acting feedback stakeholder on we continue to evolve 1.7 ofAim the report Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 17 are new additionsare for the NOA terminologies definitions and NOA NOA What’s new? Implied probability Changes toChanges the NOA Changes toChanges the NOA recommendations to provide an an to provide recommendations Committee considers information Committee to review to review Committee recommendations. recommendations. together. following The areas
recommendation recommendation governance structure 2017/18: in Chapter 5 – Investment Recommendations. 5–Investment Chapter in terminologies and definitionsare explained ambiguities. The new recommendation interpretedclearly by our stakeholders without 2 – Methodology. the the and credible. For more information about NOA the that to ensure system the of needs holistic the of additional evidence, together with insights such as implied probabilities and other ‘false-positive’. being them of risk the reduce and justified well assure ourfurther NOA will analysis economic our of end the at step least regret analysis results. This additional provide additional insights to the single year to probabilities’ ‘implied introduced have we NOA Committee, please refer to Chapter to Chapter refer please Committee, recommendations are robust robust are recommendations recommendations are are recommendations
Chapter one
so don’t hesitate to let us NOA it to meet your needs. your meet to it know how we can further can develop we how know We alwaysWe want to hear suggestions the on how we can continue improving the results. recommendations. this end, moved we’ve To analysis economic detailed containing tables results Appendix to A, and created we’ve new diagrams in Chapter better 5 to visualise for Interconnectors for
for Interconnectors Interconnectors for economic analysis is a sophisticated sophisticated a is analysis economic Changes to the NOA the Changes to Changes to the presentation economic the the Changes of to 2017/18 background. 2017/18 NOA 1.7.5 analysis results The 1.7.4 18 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network This year’s NOA NOA analysis has been enhanced by taking into into taking enhanced been by has analysis potential of impacts locational the consideration welfare the to addition in interconnectors were which implications cost capital and considered last as well year, as using the process that produces results in different stages. been We’ve exploring more intuitive ways express to our economic analysis results that ultimately lead our to final Chapter one engagement for more information. the the develop us help and views your to share prefer you’d how to know keen also We are means. appropriate by any you from to hear delighted included in this publication, and we’d be we’ve questions to the limited isn’t Feedback 1.8 ofAim the report Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 19 NOA Stakeholder engagement and feedback and engagement Stakeholder . Please see Chapter 7 – Stakeholder 7–Stakeholder Chapter see . Please we’d like your views. we’d your like highlight in areas each section where throughout the publication and these engagement for this as such prompts included we’ve that see will you To help your encourage feedback, Chapter two
21
Methodology two Chapter Chapter 2020 2018 2018 – January – January 2017/18 2017/18 Assessment Assessment Options Options Network Network Chapter two Methodology It also explainsIt also how the NOA NOA for chapterThis the highlights used the methodology 2.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 21 Introduction , and explains the economic theory behind our analysis. our behind analysis. explains, and theory the economic ties in with the SWW process. in with ties the SWW
Chapter two
may recommend a or equivalent document.” equivalent or . It follows the five stages of the NOA Report methodology. We define We Reportmethodology. NOA In accordance with our licence our accordancewith In Electricity National Major condition, Reinforcements System Transmission are defined in Paragraph1.30 of the NOA as: them “a project or projects in development boundary additional capacity deliver to or alternative system benefits, as identified in the Electricity Year Ten Statement Some users’ connection agreements have have agreements connection users’ Some works. enabling their as reinforcements major This means that the NOA change the to delivery of these works. If this happens, we will work with those stakeholders connection their but informed them keep and date remains the same. shows theFigure steps we take 2.1 produce to the report process.
is . We have. We process methodology on our our on methodology NOA methodology describes how we we how describes methodology The NOA The 2.2 22 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network www.nationalgrid.com/noa assess Major National Electricity Transmission Transmission Electricity National Major assess System (NETS) Reinforcements meet to the requirements that we find from our analysis of the Future Energy Scenarios (FES) our on methodology year’s this published methodologies the includes also It website. for interconnectors and SWW. As the NOA Policy Development Network the from derived similar. are methodologies two the (NDP), can findYou a copy of our NDP methodology NOA the alongside website below: website Chapter two Methodology and economic analysis. The four scenarios are: scenarios four The analysis. economic and studies our for foundation the form and against, of future background conditions to assess FES the with starts • • • • The 2.2.1 NOA process Figure 2.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 23 Consumer Power. State Steady Slow Progression Degrees Two UK generation engagement and demand NOA Stakeholder scenarios process F Input E Future Energy Scenarios Future Energy process for the NETS planning planning NETS the for process S
. They are a plausible range range aplausible are . They Future transmission and requirements Network analysis Requirements capabilities E T Y S meet requirements Network analysis Reinforcement options to Options Network OptionsAssessment(NOA) > fes.nationalgrid.com which you can find at: find can you which FES the see please created, are they FES our on information more For FES document. analysis ofoptions preferred options Selection of Economic Selection
recommendations NOA publication GB investment and how Output 21, 2017,
Chapter two
process, process, are the ones that provide the most benefit the list of proposed options into a list of believe we which options, preferred our for consumers. can find You the full list Chapter in recommended options our of 5 – Investment recommendations. How we in described is analysis perform economic section. following the in detail greater ‘Selection’. We use our understanding our use We ‘Selection’. of constraint costs carry to out economic analysis of all the options. This narrows With this varied list of options, we move onto the fourth stage of the NOA www.nationalgrid.com/etys
. We to transmission transmission to is the second stage in the NOA Electricity Ten Year Statement Year Electricity Ten Network Options Assessment Options Network 2017, which you can find at: 2017, ETYS As well as these build options, both the both options, build these as well As opportunities propose can SO and TOs Reduced- options. reduced-build for that solutions are options build instead and veryrequire little build maximise use of existing assets often in innovative ways. can find You a full list of the options that we analysed in Chapter 4 – Proposed options. encourage a range of options that include that options of range a encourage new creating or assets existing upgrading assets ensure to that we have a wide assess. to options of selection In order to create an electricity transmission transmission electricity an create to order In network that is fit for the future, we engage equally with all TOs in order for them to propose options meet to the system capability requirements outlined the by ETYS 2.2.3 process. apply We the FES system models and calculate the power flow network. transmission the across requirements do this we haveTo developed the concept of physically, exist don’t Boundaries boundaries. but are insteadconceptual a split of the network into two adjacent parts. As power transfers between these areas, we can see which parts of the network are underthe most stress and where network reinforcement would be most suitable. The capability of the network and its future requirements are published in the ETYS The 2.2.2 24 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter two Methodology 2.3.2 2.3.2 each economically viable option has an best value for consumers. Consequently, the achieve will right balance this Getting late. too by investing costs constraint high potentially incur or unnecessarily, early too to invest want We don’t options. of timing optimal the consider we when account into this to take We need this. before delivered be can’t option an and Date’ (EISD) Service In ‘Earliest the It’s called analysis. our in factor important an is delivered be can option an that year earliest The others. some options taking longer to implement than with network, the to TOs upgrade the for time takes However, it time. right the at options right the in invest TOs the that recommend must we consumers, to benefit To maximise energy with generation on the importing side this replace we balance, energy an maintain to order In output. their to limit boundaries stressed the of side exporting the on generators When we constrain the network, we ask network. the ‘constraining’ to as referred is a boundary assets. This limiting of power transfer across dangerously overloading the transmission to avoid transfer power the reduce must room above that boundary’s capability, our control is boundary system atransmission across locations. When the power transfer required demand are typically situated in different boundaries occurs because generation and network our across energy of transfer The networks. their in invest TOs the that recommend we why understand to first important is it To understand our investment recommendations 2.3.1 2.3 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 25 Economic analysis Theory Optimum years Optimum
investment recommendations for this year. this for recommendations investment the decide ultimately we where analysis, regret least year single our into entered are then considered ‘critical’. All critical options is option an year. Such optimum its missing risking without longer any delayed be cannot recommendation on whether to proceed a then EISD, its as year same the is year option’s optimum an However, yet. if made be whether to proceed with the option needs to on recommendation no then EISD, its than later is delivery of year option’s optimum an If year. optimum its in delivered be to option an time to aim we and benefit, most the realises that delivery of year optimum constraining it. and network the in investing between balance best the to find places right the in time right the at networks transmission the toTOs upgrade the with together We work to constrain. need be transferred across boundaries without the can power more that meaning network, the of they cost money they also raise the capability potential investments as ‘options’, and although to these We refer network. transmission future overhead lines and underground for cables the investmentsrecommend such as creating new and to evaluate us enables It process. is factor an important in our decision-making Assessment of these future constraint costs begin to accumulate. costs constraint these then regularly amounts by large network the constraining are we if and switching generation on and off costs money, of these boundaries. Balancing the network by
Chapter two
Scenario D 2021 Scenario C 2020 Optimum of Delivery Year For example, two critical options in the same the in options critical two example, For possible different four produce would region courses of action, as demonstrated 2.2. in Table analysis. make a recommendation To the to TOs, we must analyse the potential ‘regret’ of making one recommendation and not the other. As we are only interested in making investment utilise we options, critical for recommendations ‘single year least regret’ analysis. As each recommended be either can option critical recommend. could we action of courses of to ‘proceed’to there or are ‘delay’, a number be delivered on its EISD, or delaying it so it risk between recommending that the the that recommending between risk TOs proceed with a critical option so it may may be delivered closer its to optimum year. Scenario B 2019 Scenario A 2019 EISD 2019
Single year least year Single regret analysis Critical Option In the above example, the earliest year that the option can be delivered The optimum is 2019. year of delivery varies across the scenarios, but for Scenarios therefore A and 2019, B it’s this is a critical option. For thosescenarios, the for be would recommendation right the proceedTOs to with this option maintain to its However forEISD scenarios of 2019. C and the rightD, recommendation would be not to proceed with this option this and year, allow its EISD slip to back one by year If 2020. the to EISD of an option cannot slip back a year by work, the of aspects carrying some out without a delay cost should be submitted for economic Table 2.1 Table Example of a critical option’s optimum years of delivery optimum years Example of a critical option’s 26 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network The uncertainty of the future means that the optimum year of delivery for an optionwill likely not be the same for each ofthe energy scenarios. Therefore, we must understand the 2.3.3 2.3.3 Chapter two Methodology presented by critical options for the next investigate all possible courses of action we analysis, regret least year single the In option. the of cost total the and costs between thedifference savings in constraint the is lifetime its over brings option an benefit their implementation, and therefore the net with associated acost have options all However, network. to the brings it capability constraint costs decrease due to the additional delivered, is option areinforcement Once 2.3.4 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 27 Possible coursesofactionfortwocriticaloptionsinaregion Table 2.2 of ‘economic regret’. ‘economic of concept the utilise we to risk, exposure and investment of level the to balance order In Course ofCourse action 4 ofCourse action 3 ofCourse action 2 ofCourse action 1 accordingly. This means that an option forrecommendations an option may adapt is landscape energy changing, our our As EISD. its maintain and year one by forward progressed be can just the right amount so an option invest to TOs the to recommend to us Single year least regret analysis allows Economic regret
Delay both Options A and B Aand Options both Delay Proceed Option B but delay Option A Proceed Option A but delay Option B B Aand Options both Proceed single year least regret analysis. regret least year single economic regrets are calculated in the following descriptions demonstrate how The risk. of amount least to the exposed consumers leaves regret maximum lowest the with strategy the Selecting scenarios. different across poses action of course each risk maximum the quantify and identify us help to strategies to different respect with scenario Economic regrets are calculated under each strategies. investment different as treated are action of courses year. These investment date best remains for the consumer. year to ensure that its planned completion each revaluated is project ongoing an that is analysis regret least year single the of robustness The versa. vice and year this delayed be to recommended be may year last proceed to werecommended that
Chapter two
Strategy 3 Strategy £400m £125m £250m £185m Strategy 3 Strategy £60m £460m £400m £0m Strategy 2 Strategy £200m £165m £50m £150m the worst regret we could potentially incur selectingby that strategy. However as we face an uncertain future,we must consider the regret of our investments across each of the four energy scenarios. The same strategy always won’t deliver the same value across every scenario: it will have more regret in some scenarios and less in others. As a result, the best strategy for one scenario might not be the best strategy for another scenario. regret results 2.3’s Table were for just one scenario. cannot We predict the future, so we analyse a strategy’s regret across all four credible scenarios and note Strategy 2 Strategy £20m £220m £200m £200m
Strategy 1 Strategy £380m £120m £350m £160m £380m £20m Strategy 1 Strategy £40m £420m
Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D Net Benefit Net Savings in in Savings constraint costs Net benefit Regret Initial investment investment Initial cost Table 2.4 Table across multiple scenarios Example of net benefits from different strategies 28 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Table 2.3 Table Scenario A benefits of different investment strategies under Example of the costs and In economic analysis, strategy’s a ‘regret’ is defined as the difference in benefit of that strategy and the benefit of the best strategy. Therefore the best strategy will have a regret of zero, and the other strategies will have different levels of regretdepending onhow they compare theto best strategy. In table Strategy 2.3 3 is the best strategy, so there is no regret in choosing it. If we were select to Strategy 1 we would see a net benefit of £380 million, which is almost as good. But we would regret the decision as we didn’t select Strategy which 3, is £20 million least with strategy the choosing Clearly, better. economic sense. makes regret Chapter two Methodology year least regret decision are calculated. single by the implied weights probability the instead scenarios, to any applied directly not additional step, a-priori probability weights are this In strategy. preferred the interrogate help weightings on scenarios are calculated to recommendations, implied probability To mitigate the risks of giving ‘false-positive’ the highest level of congestion on the system. with scenario by asingle driven are strategy when recommendations given by the preferred ‘false-positive’ recommendations, especially to lead may approach the circumstances, across different scenarios. However in some regret worst the minimises that strategy the find always will analysis regret least year single The 2.3.5 regret Least scenarios. two other the of either but would be a much poorer choice under D, Aand Scenarios for choice best the be 3may Strategy choice. aworst and choice abest has scenario each example, above the In regret. worst lowest the has strategy which upon based selected is strategy preferred The Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 29 Example ofleastregretanalysis,withStrategy1havingthelowestworst Table 2.5 Worst regret Regret Scenario D Scenario C Scenario B Scenario A Scenario Implied probability
£45m £25m £0m £45m £20m Strategy 1
1 is scenario B, which provides us with the the with us provides B, which scenario 1 is strategy for need the of end opposite the at scenario The chosen. 1being strategy behind driver main the is so 3, and 2and strategy for regret highest the Cproduces Scenario results. analysis regret least year single the Cdeciding B and Scenario mainly is it that see Table in 2.5, can we shown example the In two. the between indifferent us compute the probabilities, which would make and strategy chosen regret least year single the against strategy competing each compare therefore We can strategy. other any for than greater be must strategy chosen the of benefit net weighted the preferred, to be strategy chosen regret least year single the for order In regret. to significant range of and minimises exposure uncertainties, the against decision robust and stable a more provides approach This £45 million. than more no be will regret its as scenarios, four all across risk 1minimises Strategy that shows analysis £300m £35m £300m £0m £200m Strategy 2 £100m £0m £100m £40m £0m Strategy 3 Chapter two
≥13.04%. we find that p To ensure a successfulTo transition BID3, to benchmarked extensively been has model the against the ELSI, and two independent University Bell, Keith (Professor reviewers of Strathclyde, and Dr Iain Staffell, Imperial our review to appointed were London) College work, BID3 configuration and benchmarking. uncertain, is landscape energy future The so the information we use in our cost–benefit analysis changes over time. revisit We our data, assumptions and analysis results every year to make sure that the preferred strategy is still the market- to respond we when So, solution. best allows approach this changes, policy-driven or us be to flexible, while alsokeeping the cost associated with this flexibilityto the minimum. This means that we need believe to that Scenario C is greater likely than to 13.04% happen against Scenario B for us make to regret least year single as decision same the analysis suggests. Conversely, we would need believe to that scenario B is less than 86.96% likely when compared with scenario C. Solving for p for Solving
p
.
2017. ) p )≥50p+165(1- p Economic tools Economic is the probability of scenario and C, 1- p +120(1- p from Pöyry Management Consulting. We began for econometric using it from 2016/17 analysis work. It forecasts the costs of factor important an are which constraints, in the full cost–benefit analysis of the NOA useWe this information help to us identify the taking strategies, investment economic most into account all the future energy scenarios that we described in Chapter 2 of the ETYS We useWe a constraint costs assessment tool analyseto and establish the benefitsto Historically, options. different the of consumers Electricity Scenario Illustrator the used we’ve (ELSI) determine to these costs. In March 2016 we purchased a new economic tool, BID3, 2.3.6 30 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network largest regret for strategy 1 with respect to strategy 2 and In 3. order for the same decision as the least regret decision be to made under expected net benefit maximisation, it must be that the expected net benefit of strategy 1 is greater than the expected net benefit of strategy 2 or For 3. example, choose to strategy 1 over strategy it must 2, be that: 350 where where is the probability of scenario the B; net benefit provided Strategy by 1 is £350m and £120m under Scenario C and B respectively, and the net benefit providedby Strategy 2 is £50m and under£165m Scenario C and B respectively. Chapter two Methodology Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 31 BID3 toolinputs Figure 2.2 forecasts so we can estimate full lifetime costs). lifetime full estimate can we so forecasts 2037 from extrapolated are 2038 from values to 2037 (the up us takes analysis resulting The Future Scenarios Energy detailed the of each all options for network reinforcements against assesses –BID3 Scenarios Energy Future EISD. the and cost capital its provides, option includes the increase in that capability the to BID3 input The input. an as capabilities takes and boundaries, the across flow market-driven the calculating for tool the is BID3 package. analysis system power aseparate using future development – These were calculated Existing boundary capabilities and their categories: three into broadly fall inputs The Figure 2.2 shows the various inputs to BID3. EISD construction cost) and uplift (boundary capability solutions Transmission Scenarios Future Energy
Economic analysis modelling BID3 constraint • • • Input data Forecast Forecast capabilities. Existing network/boundary Physical constraints. . constraint prices. www.nationalgrid.com/noa available at the main NOA are reports The to BID3. inputs the on detail for, more it and use will we what BID3, selected which provides information further on why we and Network Constraint Modelling Report Term Long Market our as well as available, is report reviewers’ independent the of A copy website. our on available resources of a number are there BID3, about more to know want you If European member states. availabilities and prices in interconnected plant forecasts, cost fuel of account takes Assumptions – BID3’s other input data data input –BID3’s other lifetime costs with strategies transmission of Suite webpage. , Chapter two
Committee if at least one of their their of one least at if Committee Committee also provides holistic holistic provides also Committee Committee meeting, the SO discusses SO the Committee meeting, NOA The energy industry insight, and takes into into takes and industry insight, energy account whole-system needs to support to needs whole-system account or revise those marginal investment recommendations. preparation In for the NOA with results analysis economic of details the both internal stakeholders and the make TOs to sure the final recommendations are robust. The TOs will be invited present to information at the NOA options (or joint options) is be to discussed.
Committee – process? Committee Committee Committee focuses on focuses Committee NOA recommendations. In this final step, The NOA We’ve broughtWe’ve in the NOA to probabilities implied use and methodology. strengthen the How did you find the explanations for NOA parts the new of these This year created we’ve the NOA consisting of SO senior management add – to to scrutiny of level transparent additional, an our 2.4 32 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network the investment recommendations from our from recommendations investment the economic analysis are presented the to NOA Committee. The NOA by driven are that recommendations marginal a single scenario or driver, or are considered single their challenges then and sensitive, be to year least regret analysis results with implied probabilities and other evidence. Chapter two Methodology again, all costs are in 2009/10 in prices: are costs all again, all of the criteria shown below. Once to meet needs Scotland in option An as SWW. All costs are in 2009/10 in prices: are costs All SWW. as one of the criteria below to be considered least at to meet needs Wales and England in the Needs Case for such an option. An option develop who TOs, by the led are SWWs SWW. to as referred is option this then below, shown criteria the of one satisfies that infrastructure option is recommended but it involves large an If options. recommended our forward put and options, potential of benefits and NOA the We use 2.5 • • • • • • Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 33 provision of the TO’s price control settlement. other any under recovered be cannot Costs benefits. system wider or capability, (orcross-boundary sub-boundary) The output will deliver additional and £100 million for SP Transmission. than £50 million for SHE Transmission more of costs delivery total has option The scenarios, but would require consents. most in required not is and customer, one by only supported is £100 million, than less of cost aforecast has option The scenarios. most in required not is and customer, one by only supported is between £100 million and £500 million, of cost aforecast has option The million. £500 than more of cost aforecast has option The How the NOA process to look at the costs costs the at to look process connects to the SWW process to connects the SWW www.nationalgrid.com/noa Needs Case submissions on our website. SWW TO-led into input for process SO the We have published our methodology for funding. SWW’s the to justify analysis detailed the to pursue TO needs the sooner the is, date this closer The building. to start option is needed in service, determines when the which at date the with combined This, option. the to deliver taken time the is factor important Another formula. funding SWW the the forecast costs, and whether they trigger factors,depending on certain including projects SWW for work Case Needs economic analysis. The TO initiates the the TO with the support we but projects, SWW for Cases Needs developing on leads TO relevant the to that note It’s important
Chapter two
of capital or and WACC) benefits at preference time social Treasury’s HM The Joint Regulators Group on behalf competition and economic UK’s the of discounting regulators recommend a costs all discounts that approach (including financing costs as calculated based on a weighted average cost rate (STPR). This is known as the used is Spackman and approach for all our reinforcements. Such variations are assessed, case by by case assessed, are variations Such case, with Ofgem. the base network is not straightforward. We mayWe vary the process where modelling
Summary SWW of economic cost–benefit analysisexamines the economic benefit of a range of reinforcement options lifetimes. their across network base the against The base is usually nothing’ ‘do or minimum’, ‘do and usually has no associated capital costs. Constraint costs are forecast for the base scenarios. all across option network each and calculateWe the present value (PV) of constraint savings compared the to base for each network the from subtracted then are These solution. each with associated expenditure capital of PV network option, giving a net present value (NPV) for each of the network options. Taking these NPVs, we use lifetime least regret analysis to determine a preferred network option and an optimal delivery The year. results are analysed capital project changing how determine to affect would savings constraint and costs recommendations. the When an option is deemed be to an SWW, 2.5.1 34 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network analysis methodology Chapter two Methodology the investment recommendations for onshore year, This markets. European and GB between the future optimum interconnection capacity Chapter 6 – Interconnection analysis describes and consumers, GB for benefit maximum the providing on based reinforcements, our options recommended for onshore 5 – Investment recommendations explains and European interconnection. Chapter future of the electricity transmission networks NOA the In 2.6 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 35 Interaction between theInteraction NOA between , we set out our vision for the the for vision our out set , we analysis in Chapter 6 – Interconnection analysis. described the methodology for interconnection 2018/19 the for ETYS therefore contribute to the credible assumptions 2018our FES influence will results of sets Both recommendations. on the most up-to-date onshore reinforcement ensuring the interconnection analysis is based NOA year’s last on improvement an is 6. This input to the interconnection analysis in Chapter an 5form Chapter in detailed reinforcements results and the FES and results and NOA and analysis, and will . We’ve We’ve . , Chapter two .
. . Work on the Wylfa–Pentir second double circuit has already started and should continue due to a local customer agreement in place. Therefore the project is considered in the base networks in this NOA Case process was initiated in December Since the2016. customer has paused their development consent the order, SWW Needs Case has been deferred indefinitely while the the Therefore plans. its reviews customer project is not considered in this NOA The North West Coast Connection project is driven a customer, by and its SWW Needs The SWW Needs Case for Hinkley–Seabank the Therefore established. been has project project is considered in the base networks and not assessed for cost and benefit in this NOA
for Excluded options Other options Orkney link Orkney link Isles Western link. Shetland voltage control over the summer minimum, minimum, summer the over control voltage boundary no capabilitybut improvement (this is an area where we would welcome feedback) your the costs for the expected benefits would prohibitive be analysis of options where, by inspection, inspection, by where, options of analysis submitted options conceptual long-term theby support TOs to the analysis; this is section. next the in detail more in explained options that provide benefits, such as projects with no boundary benefit(unless they are specifically included for another reason, such as links the to Scottish islands that trigger the SWW category) • • • • • willWe include a summary in the NOA • help meet major NETS reinforcement needs, include: doesn’t it • projects where the has TO started the SWW Needs Case process, even though they won’t following The boundary capability. provide projects connect to the to Scottish islands are in this category: While this report looks at options that could 2.7.1 2.7 36 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter two Methodology value for consumers. transmission networks to deliver the best constantly evolve and develop their electricity to able are TOs the which through strategy along-term provides process This decades. few next the over options for dates delivery optimum year, and investment optionsrecommended for the upcoming NOA the Through 2 2.7. Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 37 Long-term conceptual options conceptual Long-term process, we state our our state we process,
to the support long-term future network. us with more conceptualised reinforcements provide also TOs the analysis, economic our these long-term eventual reinforcements in to represent order In unknown. are future distant the in reinforcements some for costs and designs the where process a continuous be will network the in reinforcement of However,development benefit. and cost for assess we which and comparison, and analysis for TOs by the provided options of range awide receive we this, For
Chapter one 39
Boundary descriptions
three Chapter Chapter 3838 2018 2018 – January – January 2017/18 2017/18 Assessment Assessment Options Options Network Network B1a B1 B3b B2 B4 B5 B3b NW4 r re SW1 SW1 arr SC1 NW3 SW1 SW1 B6 B12 B8 B10 re a t r a NW2 B7 e a r a r B9 rther re a B1 NW1 B16 1 Carra a e a ee B13 e r e rt ea e a t erara h a t Cr a Chapter three r e Cr a ha Cae a r C ra ter t he r h C a ha Whistlefield rt a C rr e e B0 ter t a a t at re e h pa a a rth a e ea hea hart ter t e e h e e ra te art e t a e a t trath e e a a e ar h e a ar r r Ca e he rr e a h a ea rth er arr erar a a ph e t r r e ea a Ca h e ar e e r h a a a a h er tt rt rr B13 e r e e ee r h ar h te ee t C t th e e t ha TRANSMISSION SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC h h te ee a er h Boundary descriptions Boundary e t r e C a ETYS GBboundaries Figure 3.1 ETYS year’s this in description fuller a find You will NETS. the on boundaries to the This section provides a introduction short 3.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 39 a a e e t er e B1a B1 B3b a h Car a r ar a tratha e ar e ar t B2 rr ht rr ht r e a r th r e a t t r C e a C a r t a e ra re a a ae e a ra B4 C er a e h at B5 B3b t r NW4 a terh e ha a t C at r e h he e a B7a h e a e alney I&II e arth rea e t e e rr ht er tat ertha ha pper at a r r e r re a r are ta e pha tee a et a a SW1 SW1 arte at arr SC1 NW3 r ra eath SW1 SW1 ar e B6 B12 B8 B10 re a ra e th at ath ate C ah a a te r a SP t Introduction r r t r a NW2 B7 e t C e rth r e C e eter e a a a e e TRANSMISSION L C e th r a r e e ha rth e B9 Car a t rther re a r h r Chape r C e r a r e B1 C rr e Char e t er e th h r arr ter th NW1 r e t h re rra e r the a t B16 a h ter re r a hr h e a e h teh e 1 e t estfield per a Carra a e a te ar a ee ret a eat rt e r
ta ah ea e a e e h e B13 e r e rt e a ea e a t erara a a e Cape h r t C par TD C e e h h t a t e e h r t Cr a a h r e Cr a ha r ater ar er Cae a r C ra ter t he r h C a ha Whistlefield hre r e ha rt a ar C rr e e ea a B0 h pe a h a ter t a Cr ta e th a t at re e h ar a h pe pa e rtha a a Ch ere a rth a e ea hea et a a hart r ha a a h e t re e e ter t h e e er re Carr t ra te art e t a e a t th a he ter ar trath e e a a e t Cra e ar h ear e e a ar r r Ca e tt he rr e a h a ea rth er arr erar a a ph r r e h p e t r r e ea a Ca h e ar e e r h er a a a err a h er tt rt rr B13 e r e e ee r h ar r r ath h te ee t C t th ra rth e e t ha r Cra e er TRANSMISSION SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC h a ha h te ee a er h e e t r e C a h a e a ha a a e a e t e er e tr he er h a h Car a r ar a tratha e r e ar t e ar t rr ht rr ht B17 r e a r th r e a t er t r C e a e a e e C a r e h te ate e t a e ra re a a ae e a ra a t C er a e h at t r a terh e ha a t C at r e h he e a B7a h re r r t e e a e alney I&II e arth rea e ha e t e e Macclesfield rr ht er tat ertha ha pper at ta r e h r a r r e t e a r er e are ta e te a pha tee a et a a arte at e ha Ce arhea r ra C a h eath ar e e a e ar ha ea ra er r h ra e th pe r at ath ate C ah a a te r a SP t r r r e e ha et e t C e rth r e C e eter rth a a e e TRANSMISSION L t r e t eh C e th ra r e e ha a rth e Car he eep e a t r h r Chape r t er C e r a e t e he r e e t C rr e Char e t er e th a eterhea h r arr B1 ter B1a th ar h r a th rpe r e t h re field City rra e r the a t a h ter re r a hr h e a e h teh e e t rt estfield per a a te a ar Chesterfield ret a eat rt e r t ta ah ea e a e er e e h e e p e r h r ta e a a a e are r h Cape h r t C par TD C e e B0 h t e e h r t a h r ater t r r ra et ar er a e hre r e ha ar ea a err r e h pe a h a C e tr th Cr ta e th ar a h pe e rtha Ch ere a et ra e a a r ha a a h e a th e t re ra e e t th h e er re Carr t th a he ter e th ar t Cra e ear e e t tt r r e h p t e ar ph er err ert a th r e t rt ee e t r r ath ra rth ra e r Cra e er art r a ha e t e a t C a ar e h a e t e a ha a e tr he er ar at h h r r t r e t art ep ta th rpe B17 er r rth t er pp et t a e r t e e a e e h te ate e a t C e r h re r r t e C ha re t e e ha Macclesfield e ta r e h r t e er e ar ha h te a e ha Ce arhea C a h h rpe e a e ar ha ea ra er r h pe r ar h er ha a a e ea r e e ha et rth t r e t eh ra r a ra he eep e t er e t e he e t ee e a eterhea B1 B1a ar h r a th rpe field City at r rt h r t r e a Chesterfield t er e e p e r h r ta are r h B0 eet e t t r e ht ea r ra et a eha a e ar rt err r e C e tr th ra e e t a th e ra e e t th h e e th C tta L h e e t er e r e t e ar ph re ert a th r e t rt ee e t B14 ra e art r e t a t C a ar e t e ar at h r r t E art ep ta th rpe er r rth t pp et t r t a e C e rth a te e e r h at r a C ha re t e Cre e e e B5 ar ha h th h rpe B2 a er ar h er ha a a e ea 1 e a ree at ra e Che t ee e at r h r t r e t h eet er e e t B6 e ht ea a eha e e ar tree e r rt a te th pa rth e t C tta L h e er e r e re tte ha e B14 Humber Refinery r e t C t B4 E e rth a te e e e Cr at r a Cre e e B5
th B2 a er 1 e a ree at e Che t r e tt EC3 e ter t h t h er e B6 . a e e e tree e r e t a a te th pa tt e r r e a rth r t
tte ha e r e e Humber Refinery e t r e t C t B4 h r a r e erat te pe t ra e e e Cr Cr e ha ar er ate a a tha r e tt EC3 a p e t a p e e ter t h a e e t a tt e r r e a r t h rr e r e e t h r a r e erat te pe t ra e Cr e ha ar er er ate a a tha a p EC1 e t a p e a t Northfleet h rr ra tree er ar e EC1 a t Northfleet e e ra tree r ar e e e r Ninfield Ninfield rth rth a e h a ter e t r C r t C r t C r t C r t tat tat tat e t a e h a ter e t r C r t C r t C r t C r t tat tat tat r e erat C e te at C e te at e ter C ra e t e e a e a C r t r e erat C e te at C e te at e ter C ra r t S e e rth Ca ter r a e a C r t e t h at e e C e e Gunfleet SandsI&II C r t ra r er a have considered for this year’s analysis. year’s this for considered have we 3.1 boundaries the all Figure shows e e B1 2 S her ha h a rth Ca ter r B15 e t h at r h a B10 e e C e e Gunfleet SandsI&II C 1 L e ra r er a e e E B15 B1 ra e 2 r ea 1 e e her ha h a ether a B15 r h a ha et B10 r a B12 1 L e rra S SC1 E reater a ar C a t B15 reater a ar part B8 ra e 2 r ea 1 B7a a e e ether a ha et r a B9 B12 EC5 B7 rra S SC1 B16 reater a ar C a t reater a ar part EC5 B8 2 B7a a B9 EC5 B7 B16 EC5
Chapter three
SHE Transmission and SP Transmission, Transmission, SP and Transmission SHE but is operated National by Grid as SO. Introduction Scotland andScotland North the England region of The following section describes the NETS in NETS the describes section following The Scotland and Northern England. The onshore transmission network in Scotland is owned by 3.2.1 3.2 40 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary implemented will strengthen the network. Moray reinforcement project presently being is relatively sparse, although the Caithness– transmission infrastructure north of Beauly Sutherland and Orkney. The existing Beauly, Highland, comprising north Caithness, of north area the separates B0 Boundary Geographic representationofboundaryB0 Figure B0.1 3.2.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 41 r re arr t r a Boundary B0 – Upper North SHE Transmission SHE North –Upper B0 Boundary e a
ea e r e C ra C rr e e B0 a hart ra a a e r Ca e ea rr r h h a er e a r a ae e h he rea a r r ra eath across this boundary. High renewables output causes high transfers Thurso. from link subsea a33kV via connected is Orkney Thurso. and Mybster Dunbeath, grid supply points at Alness, Shin, Brora, along the east coast, and the serves local route alonger takes line 132kV overhead the while to Dounreay, Beauly from north route adirect takes line 275kV overhead The Beauly. from north extending lines overhead double circuit and 132kV double circuit 275kV existing the across cuts boundary The h r ter a h e th t re ra rth a tr he e er e ra er r h t er eterhea B0
Chapter three
eterhea t er rth rth ra er r h a e e C a h er e e e h tr he a Cra e er r r ath B1 t Cra e t re h pe ar a e th h pe h r t e e C par e a e ea estfield a h e r the Char e t r h r C e r ra at arte a r rr ht er tat e e e h he e a ae t a rr ht rr ht ar The boundary crosses the 275kV double double 275kV the boundary crosses The Knocknagael from eastwards running circuit to Blackhillock, the 275/132kV interface at Keith Keith at interface 275/132kV the Blackhillock, to south running circuit double 400/275kV the and output renewables High Augustus. Fort from causes high transfers across this boundary. er e a h er SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION ha t e e r h e r e rr rt a h Ca h e
ea
erar a er arr e rr r a a e ra h e e hart a a a C rr e e rt a C a ha C ra Cae a r Cr a ha r e r e a t h erara a t ea e r a r e a arr r re
Boundary – North SHE Transmission B1 West B1 Boundary B1 runs from the Moray coast coast Moray the from runs Boundary B1 near Macduff the to west coast near Oban, separating the North West of Scotland from area The regions. eastern and southern the theto north and west of boundary includes B1 Sutherland, Caithness, Highland, north Moray, Western Isles, Skye, Mull and Orkney. Figure B1.1 of boundary B1 Geographic representation 3.2.3 42 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary causes high transfers across this boundary. boundary. this across transfers high causes from Fort Augustus. High renewables output the 400/275kV double circuit running south as well as Kintore, and to Peterhead Keith 275k double circuit running eastwards from another and route, adirect on to Kintore circuit running eastwards from Blackhillock The crosses boundary the 275kV double from the southern and eastern regions. Scotland of West North the separating Oban, near coast west to the Macduff near B1aBoundary runs from the Moray coast Geographic representationofboundaryB1a Figure B1a.1 3.2.4 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 43 SHE TransmissionSHE B1a Boundary B1aBoundary West 1a –North r re
e a r a r ea e a t erara h a t r e Cr a ha Cae a r C ra Whistlefield C a ha rt a C rr e e a a a hart
h e e ra a a e
r
rr e er arr
erar a ea Ca h e
a h rt rr e r e r h e e t ha TRANSMISSION SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC er a er e ar rr ht rr ht reinforcement across B1a. across reinforcement transmission for requirement the B1a drives generation between boundaries B1 and substation is north of the boundary. Additional Blackhillock that is B1 the boundary from Blackhillock and Kintore. Its main difference to consider the critical circuits between 2016, specifically November in 2016, published ETYS the in B1a introduced was Boundary t a a ae e e e e rr ht er tat a r arte at ar e C e r h r Char e t e r the a h estfield ea e a e e h e
C par e e h r t h pe e th ar a h pe t re t Cra e r r ath Cra e er a tr he h e e B1a er e C a h e a e ra er r h rth t er eterhea
Chapter three B2
rth rth ar ha ea e C a h e er r e
Cra e er r r ath t Cra e ar a a h pe ar a Cr ta h pe h r t e e C e e C par e h e e a e ea rt e eat a te estfield e t h teh e a e hr h e r the rra er e th Char e t C rr e r e e r r h r e e C e double circuit overhead line running south south running line overhead circuit double from Fort Augustus. As a result it crosses all from routes north–south main transmission the the North of Scotland. High renewables output causes high transfers across this boundary. r r t a a te ath ate ra e th ar e at arte a et a a a r rr ht er tat e e e arth e C at r e ha a terh e t r C er a e t a C e
a t r e th r e rr ht rr ht ar tratha e a h er h te ee h SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION ha t e e e r e rt a h e e r h Ca h e r e e t erar a er arr r e trath e e a t h e e ter t a e rth a a pa a t at ter t rt a Whistlefield C a ha ter t Cae a r Cr a ha Cr a a t h erara a t rt
Boundary – North B2 South to B2 two double 275kV circuits single and a 132kV circuit in the east, as well as the 400/275kV Boundary B2 cuts across the Scottish between coast east the from mainland Aberdeen and Dundee nearto Oban on the west coast. The boundary cuts across the Figure B2.1 Geographic representation of boundary B2 Geographic representation 3.2.5 SHE Transmission 44 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary Westfield in the east and two 132kV double two double and 132kV east the in Westfield by 275kV double circuits to Kincardine and crossed is boundary The west. the in Long Loch of head the to near Tayof east the in Firth the from running interface, Transmission SHE and Transmission SP the at network B4 separatesBoundary the transmission Geographic representationofboundaryB4 Figure B4.1 to Transmission SP 3.2.6 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 45 B4 Boundary B4 – SHE Transmission –SHE B4 Boundary
rther re a Carra a e rt a t erara a t Cr a Cr a ha ter t he r h C a ha Whistlefield rt a ter t a t at re e h pa a a rth a e ea hea ter t h e e a e a t trath e e ar h e a ar r he a h erar a e t r r e Ca h e ar e e r h a h e r e e ee ar h te ee t C t th ha TRANSMISSION SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC h h te ee e C
a h Car a tratha e ar e ar t rr ht rr ht r e th r e a t C e a C a r t a e a ra
C er a t r a terh e ha a t C at r e e a e e arth e e rr ht er tat a r r e across this boundary. High renewables output causes high transfers Inverarnan. at 275/132kV the and interface North Denny into line overhead circuit double 400/275kV the Hunterston, and Kintyre in as well as the 220kV cables between Crossaig west, the in to Windyhill Sloy from circuits are ta e a et a a ar e ra e th at ath ate a a te SP t r r C e rth C e e e TRANSMISSION L C e th e e ha r h r e r r e C rr e Char e t er e th rra e r the hr h e a e h teh e e t estfield a te ret a eat rt e ea e a e e h e C par TD C e e e e h r t h pe Cr ta h pe a a a a a h e ar t Cra e
r r ath e r e er e r t e ar ha ea rth th
B4 Chapter three B5 e t e th th h e th e t rth rth ar ha ea te a r t e er r e e r r ath t Cra e ar a a h e a a h e a a a h pe Cr ta h pe ar er h r t e e C e e TD C par e h e e a e ea rt e eat ret a a te estfield e t h teh e a e e hr h e r the rra er e th Char e t C rr e r e e r Chape r r h r network across the boundary comprises three boundary three comprises the across network double275kV circuit routes: one from Windyhill substation275kV in the west; and one from 275kV Longannet and Kincardine of each cables 220kV The east. the in substations between Crossaig in Kintyre and Hunterston boundary. the cross also e e ha C e th TRANSMISSION L e e C e C e rth r r t SP a a te ath ate at ra e th ar e a a a et are ta e r e a r rr ht er tat e e e arth e a C at r e a t ha a terh e t r C er a a ra e t a C a r a C e a t r e th r e rr ht rr ht ar t e ar tratha e Car a a h e C a h te ee h SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION ha th C t h te ee t ar e ee e r e a h e e r h ar Ca h e r e r e t erar a a h he r a ar e ar h trath e e a t a e e t te art ter t ea hea a e rth a a pa re e h a t at ter t rt a Whistlefield C a ha he r h ter t Cr a ha Cr a a t erara a t rt Carra a e
Boundary B5 – North SP South Transmission to rther re a B5 Boundary B5 is internal the to SP Transmission system and runs from the Firth of Clyde in the west the to Firth of Forth in the east. The pumped storage station at Cruachan, together with the demand groups served from Mossmorran Bonnybridge, Lambhill, Windyhill, and Westfield 275kV substations, are located between B4 and B5. The existing transmission Figure B5.1 of boundary B5 Geographic representation 3.2.7 46 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary Western HVDC link from Hunterston in Ayrshire Ayrshire in Hunterston from link HVDC Western new the and West to Blyth/Stella Eccles from and to Harker Gretna from are routes 400kV key The boundary. the across 132kV circuits capacity limited some also are There routes. consistsprimarily of two 400kV double-circuit transmission network across the boundary existing The systems. NGET the and Transmission SP the separates B6 Boundary Geographic representationofboundaryB6 Figure B6.1 Transmission Electricity (NGET) Grid 3.2.8 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 47 rther re a B6 Carra a e Boundary B6 – SP Transmission –SP B6 Boundary to National
Cr a ter t he r h ter t a t at re e h rth ea hea ter t e e te art e t a e a t trath e e ar h e a ar r he a h e t r r e ar e ee ar h te ee t C t th h h te ee a e C a h Car a tratha e e ar t th r e a t C e a C a r a ra a terh e ha a t C at r e e a e arth a r r e are ta e a a at ath ate a a te SP t C e rth TRANSMISSION L C e th e e ha Chape r r e C rr e e a e h teh e generation output. renewable low of periods during occur can flows power south-to-north large while of high renewable generation output, times at to south north from typically are requirements flow power Peak farms. wind thancapacity demand, increasingly from contains significantly more installedgeneration Scotland Wales. North in Quay to Connah’s a te ret a eat TD ar er Cr ta a a a a a h e tt e r e er r t e te a ar ha ea pe r e t rt ra et th a th e th h e e th e t ert a th r e t art r art ep t a e
B6 re t e
ee e
Chapter three
B7 er ate a e ter t h Humber Refinery e a te th Cre e e a te rth ea h r t ee e ra a re t e r h a e r t pp et t art ep art r a th r e t ert e t e th th h e e t ra e a th e err r e ra et are r h r ta rt a e t e t ra r pe r te a r t e h a e be drivenrenewables by output in Scotland. so north-to-south exports across tend B7 to one in the west. Net generation output from from output generation Net west. the in one between the B6 and boundaries B7 is small, a ha tt er re et e rtha e ha ar er ta ah arr Chape r r e e t a e a e t te art e e
he r h Boundary – Upper North B7 B7 Boundary B7 bisects England south of of south England bisects Boundary B7 Teesside, cutting across Cumbria. As well as the new Western HVDC link from Hunterston Connah’s itto Quay, is characterised three by 400kV double circuits: two in the east; and Figure B7.1 of boundary B7 Geographic representation 3.2.9 48 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary Western HVDC link. B7a is a modified version version B7a link. amodified is HVDC Western new the and 275kV circuit one west), the in one east, the in (two circuits double 400kV three by characterised is It area. Ring Mersey the into and Lancashire across Teesside, B7aBoundary bisects England south of Geographic representationofboundaryB7a Figure B7a.1 3.2.10 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 49 re a a B7a Boundary B7aBoundary North –Upper
t r re a a e e t r a r e arr r ta ah a h e ha ar a h a e rtha et er re Carr t ear e tt
a ha h a e h te ate ta r e
t r e ra r e t a of the circuit heading south from Penwortham. from south heading circuit the of of the and boundary allows closer monitoring group of generation around Heysham north the puts move This Penwortham. to below south brought is side west the which B7of in rt e p e r h r ta are r h t r ra et err r e ra e e t e t e t pp et r t a e r h re t e h rpe ar h a ra ee e h r t ea h e rth a te Cre e e th a er a te th e Humber Refinery r e ter t h e t B7a er ate a r t
Chapter three r a e e e r h a her ha h a r t B8 a e a e t er a p e er ate a e t r e a e ter t h tt r e r Humber Refinery e rth pa a te th er e er a th Cre e e a te rth re h e C tta e t rt ea h r t ra ar h h rpe h ar ha e r h r t pp et r rth er ta th rpe h r r t at ar ar e e t crosses four major 400kV double circuits, circuits, double 400kV major four crosses with two of these passing through the East Midlands, the other two passing through the connection 275kV limited a and Midlands, West Southto Yorkshire. e t rt ee t e ar ph e t ra e ra e C e tr err r e t r r ta e p e r h a a er e t Chesterfield t eh field City r a th rpe a e t e he eep e he a ra r t r e r e e ha e ha Ce arhea t e h r ta r e Macclesfield re r h te ate e e a e er h a e e a ha err er r r e ear e th a he ter Carr t r ha et e rtha a h a ar hre r a h Cape h r t a a e e a ta ah r t h re r e arr a rth e r a C ah e t e a h at re a ra t r r
e t e t r Boundary B8North – Midlands to a B8 re a The North-to-Midlands boundary B8 is one of the wider boundaries that intersects the centre of GB, separating the northern generation Northern England Scotland, including – zones and North Wales – from theMidlands and southern demand centres. The boundary Figure B8.1 of boundary B8 Geographic representation 3.2.11 50 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary B9 centres. The boundary crosses five major major five crosses boundary The centres. demand southern the from Midlands the and separates the generation northern zones The Midlands-to-South B9 boundary Geographic representationofboundaryB9 Figure B9.1 3.2.12 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 51 e r e re a Boundary B9 –Midlands B9 to South Boundary
a ea rth a e t r e t r t r ra re a h at e a h C ah r a a a rth e a r e t h re per a ar r e a a a e Cape h r t a h hre r ar a h a r ha Carr t th a he ter ear e r r e h p er err
e a ha er a e e e h te ate re r Macclesfield ta r e h r t e Ce arhea e ha e e ha r t r e a he eep e e he r a th rpe field City t eh Chesterfield t er e a e p e r h t r C e tr ra e t e ar ph rt ee e t e t a t C a southern demand hubs, including London. to the distance along over north the from 400kV double circuits, transporting power ar e ar at h r r t ta th rpe er r rth C e e ar ha h h rpe ar h er ha a at r r e e ht ea ar rt e t C tta h e re at r th a er at er e e e tree e r pa rth Humber Refinery r r e tt a e r e a e t h r Cr e ha a tha a p e er ra tree e t a e a r t Gunfleet SandsI&II ra r her ha h a r h a e e e r a reater a ar
B9 Chapter three in London and generation in the Thames the in generation and London in Europe continental to Interconnection Estuary. is present on the south coast, and influences power flows in the regionby being ableto import and export power with Europe. Introduction The and South East England region of The South and East region includes East East includes region East and South The the along stretches and London Anglia, south coast Devon to and Cornwall. It has a high concentration of power demand and found demand the of much with generation, 3.3.1 3.3.1 3.3 52 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary the east. to directly lies that zone 3offshore Round wind projects, including the large East Anglia offshore of connection the for attractive are Anglia East around waters and coastline The towards London. power export mainly that circuits 400kV four crosses It Bramford. and Sizewell Norwich, at most of East Anglia, with 400kV substations EC5Boundary is a enclosing local boundary Geographic representationofboundaryEC5 Figure EC5.1 3.3.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 53 h r Cr Pelham ar altham e t a p e h rr Inner Dowsing a t Northfleet ra tree ar e Singlewell r rth a e h a e t Boundary EC5 Anglia –East Boundary ra Kemsley a e a C r t e t h at
C e e Gunfleet SandsI&II Bramford Sheringham Shoal Norwich Main Dudgeon Sizewell ha et Scroby sands rra reater a ar a t reater a ar part a EC5
ether a EC5 nuclear generation development. new for selected sites approved the of one is Sizewell at site generation nuclear existing The Chapter three C C B14/B14e C C C C C C C during winter peak conditions. The circuits circuits The conditions. peak winter during are further stressed when the European continent. the to export interconnectors
r e e ar e ra tree Northfleet a t h rr e t a tha ar e ha Cr h r e r e r t tt e r e t a a e e Cr C t e t tte ha r e tree e e t h Che t e
e a ree a at r e e Boundary B14 – London Boundary B14 B14 e r e er ar a eha e ht e t eet a small amount of generation. The circuits circuits The generation. of amount small a entering from the north can be heavily loaded Boundary B14 encloses London, and is and London, encloses Boundary B14 and demand local high by characterised Figure B14.1 3.3.3 representation of boundary B14 Geographic and single-line 54 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary of generation. In addition there are several levels high relatively and demand high both of generation. The south east contains part levels small relatively and demand local high is there London Within it. of east and south to the areas the and London LE1 covers Boundary Geographic representationofboundaryLE1 Figure LE1.1 3.3.4 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 55 C e C ha er ha a Lovedean at r Bridge eet e t Leighton a eha Buzzard L Iver Boundary LE1 –South East Boundary eybridge re E e e at r Ealing Sundon
1 e a ree Socon at e Chessington St Johns e e tree e r tte ha Beddington C t e e Cr Pudding a e e t a tt e r r e a r t Redbridge Highbury Cr e ha Barking a tha a p e t h rr a t Northfleet ra tree ar e Singlewell r Ninfield Kingsnorth Rayleigh Main ra e e C r t rth Ca ter r e t h at Dungeness Cleve Hill Gunfleet SandsI&II ra r Sellindge
L E on interconnectors to or from GB. from to or interconnectors on flows on more and more depend circuits these on loadings and boundary, the cross to mainland Europe. Six double 400kV circuits current and potential future interconnectors ra e 1 Sizewell ether a ha et rra reater a ar reater a ar part
Chapter three SC1 rra ha et ether a ra e e e C e e e e e t h at Ca ter r rth C r t e e ra a e h a rth Ninfield r e e ar e Northfleet a t h rr e t a p ar e r e r t tt e r e t a a e e Cr e C t e t tte ha t h Che t e e a ree a e e e r e er a eha e t eet e ea C ha t t e ra e a e r Interconnector activity significantly influences boundary power Crossing flow. the boundary are three 400kV double circuits, with one in the east, one in the west, and one midway Bramley. and Fleet between ar h et e ha a t t r Ch ere ea a r ater h t re r a ter a t th C a t Car eter e t pha tee pper at ha ertha e ar a a a e er tt a a a a ph
Boundary Coast – South SC1 a ee SC1 The south coast boundary runs SC1 parallel with the south coast of England between the Severn and Thames estuaries. times At of peak winter GB demand, the power flow is typically north south to across the boundary. Figure SC1.1 3.3.5 of boundary SC1 Geographic representation 56 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary and Lovedean. It connects significant demand, demand, significant connects It Lovedean. and relatively long 400kV route between Kemsley the in takes SC2 boundary coast south The Geographic representationofboundarySC2 Figure SC2.1 3.3.6 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 57 C ha er ha a e ea eet e t a eha Boundary SC2 – South East Coast SC2 –South East Boundary er e r e
e e at r a e a ree Che t e tree t h tte ha e t C t e e Cr a e e t a tt e r e r e r t h r ar e t a p h rr a t Northfleet ar e e e r Ninfield rth a e h a ra e e C r t S rth Ca ter r e t h at interconnection to continental Europe. and generators large both connects and e e C e e C e e 2 ha et rra S C ra e 2 ether a Chapter three
t e ra e a e r ar h e ha a t Ch ere ea a r ater h t re r a ter a t as Mannington. The boundary The crossing Mannington. as circuits are the Hinkley Point Melksham to 400kV double circuit, and the 400kV circuits Fawley. and Nursling to Mannington from a t Car eter e t pha tee
ha ertha e
a a e B13 er tt a ph B13
a ee Boundary B13 – South West – South Boundary B13 in the south west and stretching as far east Wider boundary is defined B13 as the southernmost tip of GB, below the Severn Point Hinkley encompassing Estuary, Figure B13.1 3.3.7 3.3.7 of boundary B13 Geographic representation 58 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary other boundaries in the region aren’t active. aren’t region the in boundaries other dominated by Wales North boundaries while is region Midlands West and Wales The 3.4.1 3.4 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 59 Wales West and Midlands region Introduction Chapter three
t e re r h te ate e e a e er a ha h a e e a ha err er h p r r e tt ear e th a he ter Carr t er re r ha et e rtha a h a ar e ha hre r a h Cape h r t a a e e a ta ah r ar per a t h re r e arr a rth e a a r e NW3 r a C ah Pentir and Trawsfynydd are within the Snowdonia National Park, and are connected a single by limiting main the is which circuit, 400kV factor for capacity in this area. The two boundaries. local are boundaries ‘NW’ e t a e NW2 h e a h at re a ra t r r e t e t r
a re a
Boundary North and NW3 NW2 Wales NW2 connects Pentir, Deeside/Connah’s Quay Quay Deeside/Connah’s Pentir, connects and Trawsfynydd substations. A short 400kV connects Pentir from spur cable double-circuit station. power Dinorwig pumped-storage The onshore network in North Wales Wales North in network onshore The comprises a 400kV circuit ring that Figure NW.1 boundaries NW2 and NW3 of North Wales Geographic representation 3.4.2 60 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network NW3 Chapter three Boundary descriptions Boundary Trawsfynydd single circuit. 400kV the and circuit double 400kV Quay through the Pentir to Deeside/Connah’s closemainland to Anglesey. It crosses NW2Boundary bisects the Wales North Caernarvonshire and –Anglesey NW2 Boundary Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 61
to the Treuddyn Tee. Treuddyn to the Trawsfynydd from Quay, and Connah’s to Deeside/ Pentir from circuits double 400kV of pair by a defined NW2. is It behind generation connections, in addition to those NW3Boundary provides for capacity further Caernarvonshire and Merionethshire –Anglesey, NW3 Boundary
Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 62 Chapter four
Proposed options 63 Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Offshore TransmissionOffshore System Development current of relevant participation the require associated or non-developer associated) will works (regardless of whether developer offshore connections. Any additional offshore such of timing and status the on depends interconnection between offshore generation requirements. of The feasibility introducing transfer boundary identified the to meet an alternative solution to onshore options provide may that options offshore any identifying in arole have SO,As also we submitted. have TOs the that options re-profiling or uprating thermal reduced-build options are limited to the year, the this patterns demand and to generation changes the of Because transfers. boundary for abenefit provide assessments to identify options that could For For assets. existing temperature limits, or additional cooling on operating increase to re-profiling conductor line overhead like things include can options Such the addition or replacement of large assets. require typically not do and expenditure, little require that options are options light solutions or asset-light options. Asset- build, but these include typically operational about options that are classed as reduced- The The and some background. option, whether it is build or reduced-build, the of status the included have we option each For process. SWW the started have that options Bincludes Appendix SWW. are they because boundaries, particular benefiting than the Scottish islands, although radial rather We have included the options for connecting planning. of network part as capability boundary the NETS could increase options chapterThis that the reinforcement lists 4.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 63 NOA NOA Introduction Introduction 2017/18 out carried have we methodology gives more details
www.nationalgrid.com/noa alongside the NOA comment and viewing for available is OWW of Our methodology for the SO’s assessment and integration opportunities arise. as on certainty technology choices increase – analysis cost–benefit on –based designs onparties potential offshore interconnected planning consultations further with relevant year. are this We identified been have options offshore no reasons, these For (OFTOs). networks owned by multiple TOs Offshore modifications to the offshore transmission major and cost high incurs connected been have generators after OWW any establishing of cost The (OWW). Works Wider Offshore the for required works the to finalise harder the design of the connection. This makes it in uncertainty of alevel is there hence and offshore connections is still developing, in used technology the to that, addition In their design and construction programme. affect will it as Users, (OTSDUW) Works User methodology.
Chapter four
MW HVDC link between the MW HVDC link between the MW HVDC link between a new MW HVDC link between a new MW HVDC link between the on the Orkney Islands. The link will comprise both land and subsea cable. at Kergord on Shetland. on Kergord at Install a 220kV link HVAC between Dounreay, on the mainland on the north coast of Caithness, and a new substation at Orphir Install a 450 mainland the on Beauly, at substation 400kV near Inverness, and a new substation at Gravir the on Dundonnell via Isles Western the on west coast of Scotland. The link will comprise both land and subsea cable. Install a 450 mainland the on Beauly, at substation 400kV near Inverness, and a new substation at Dundonnell via Isles Western the on Arnish on the west coast of Scotland. The link will comprise both land and subsea cable. Install a 450 Caithness–Moray HVDC link, via the HVDC Caithness, in Head Noss at station switching and new a substation at Kergord on Shetland formto a three-terminal HVDC scheme. Install a 600 the on Blackhillock, at substation 400kV mainlandin and Moray, a new substation Install a 220kV link HVAC between Dounreay, on the mainland on the north coast of Finstown at substation new a and Caithness, on the Orkney Islands. The link will comprise both land and subsea cable. Install a 600 Caithness–Moray HVDC link, via the HVDC Caithness, in Head Noss at station switching and a new substation at Kergord on Shetland formto a three-terminal HVDC scheme. MW MW
MW HVDC link Reinforcement options – Scotland and – Scotland options Reinforcement the Norththe England region of Gravir 450MW HVDC link Scoping Status: Radial Boundary affected: Isles, Western to Beauly Arnish 450 Design/development Status: Beauly to Western Isles, Western to Beauly Orphir link subsea Design/development Status: consenting and Radial Boundary affected: consenting and Radial Boundary affected: Dounreay to Orkney, Orkney, to Dounreay Dounreay to Orkney, Orkney, to Dounreay Moray to Shetland subsea link Scoping Status: Radial Boundary affected: subsea linksubsea Design/development Status: consenting and Radial Boundary affected: Caithness to Shetland 450 linksubsea Scoping Status: Radial Boundary affected: link subsea Finstown Design/development Status: consenting and Radial Boundary affected: Caithness to Shetland 600 4.2 64 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundaries affected: B1, affected: B1a,Boundaries B2, B4 Status: Optioneering incremental reinforcement 400kV onshore Coast East ECUP B1, affected: B1a,Boundaries B2, B4 Status: Optioneering East Coast onshore 275kV upgrade affected:Boundaries B1, B1a, B2 Status: Scoping Reactive compensation at Tummel TURC affected:Boundary B0 Status: Scoping reconductoring circuit double 275kV Fyrish to Beauly FBRE affected:Boundary Radial consenting Status: Design/development and HVDCArnish 600MW link Beauly to Western Isles, Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 65 ECU2 ECU2
compensation at the new substation. Alyth transformers.shifting Install shunt reactive 275kV substation and install two phase- to match the rating. enhanced Tealing Extend cable sections at Kincardine and Longannet the uprate and Longannet, and Westfield Fetteresso, and Kincardine, Alyth and Tealing, Kintore, between circuits the 275kV re-profile Alyth, at 275kV substation anew Establish compensation. reactive shunt install and Tummel substation at Establish a 275kV double busbar rated conductor. (substation under construction) with a higher- Fyrish and Beauly between line overhead Reconductor the existing 275kV double circuit cable. subsea and land both comprise will link The Scotland. of coast west the on Arnish on the Western Isles via Dundonnell at substation anew and Inverness, near 400kV substation at Beauly, on the mainland a600 Install Fetteresso, Kintore and Rothienorman. and Kintore Fetteresso, Alyth, Kincardine, at transformers 400/275kV and Knocknagael from 275kV circuits the on phase-shifting transformers at Blackhillock and Kincardine for 400kV operation. Install Alyth Fetteresso, Kintore, Rothienorman, the 275kV circuits between Blackhillock, ECU2) for 400kV operation. Re-insulate under (proposed substation Alyth uprate and Kintore, and Rothienorman at substations 400kV operation. Establish new 400kV 275kV infrastructure on the east coast for the upgrades and (ECU2) 275kV upgrade The option builds on the East Coast onshore MW HVDC link between a new anew between link HVDC MW
Chapter four
a fourth north-to-south double circuit circuit double north-to-south fourth a central Scottish the through route Supergrid belt. One side of the new overhead line will operate at 400kV, the other at 275kV. establish Denny– will reinforcement This Bonnybridge–Wishaw, Bonnybridge, Wishaw– and No.2 Wishaw–Strathaven Torness 400kV circuits, and a Denny– circuit. Newarthill– 275kV Easterhouse the in conductors circuit double the Replace Elvanfoot Harker to circuits with a higher-rated ratings. thermal their increase to conductor Construct a new 400kV double circuit circuit double 400kV new a Construct overhead line from Bonnybridge Newarthill, to and reconfigure associated sitesto establish East–Devol Hunterston the of Modification Moor 400kV circuit become to the Hunterston overhead circuit double 400kV East–Neilston line (OHL), and development of a new (SGT4) transformer supergrid 400/275kV substation. 400kV Neilston at Turn the Windyhill–Lambhill–Longannet the Turn 275kV circuit into Denny North Substation 275kV to Windyhill–Lambhill–Denny 275kV a create North–Longannet Denny a and North circuit circuit. 275kV No.2 1000MVA 400/275kV new a of Installation supergrid transformer at Denny (SGT2) North substation. 400kV Upgrade the 275kV infrastructure on the east the on infrastructure 275kV the Upgrade establishing by operation 400kV for coast new 400kV substations at Rothienorman, Kintore and Alyth, and re-insulating the 275kV Blackhillock, between Rothienorman, circuits Kintore, Fetteresso, Alyth and Kincardine to phase-shifting Install transformers 400kV. from circuits 275kV the on Blackhillock at transformers Knocknagael 400/275kV and at Kincardine, Alyth, Fetteresso, Kintore and Rothienorman. Re-profile 275kV thecircuits between Tealing, Westfield and Longannet, and uprate the cable sections at Longannet to match the enhanced rating. the match to
EHRE Elvanfoot Harker to reconductoring Scoping Status: B6 Boundary affected: HNNO HNNO 400kV East–Neilston Hunterston Reinforcement Scoping Status: B5 Boundary affected: DWNO 400kV Wishaw to Denny reinforcement Optioneering Status: B6 B5, B4, Boundaries affected: DNEU DennyNorth 400/275kV SuperGrid 2 Transformer Scoping Status: B2 B1a, B1, Boundaries affected: 275kV circuit turn-in to Denny North substation275kV Design Status: B5 Boundary affected: WLTI Windyhill–Lambhill–Longannet ECU4 East Coast onshore 400kV reinforcement Optioneering Status: B4 B2, Boundaries B1a, affected: B1, 66 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundaries affected:Boundaries B6, B7, B7a started not Project Status: replacement Harker Transformer SuperGrid 6 HAEU affected:Boundaries B6, B7, B7a started not Project Status: replacement Harker Transformer SuperGrid 5 HAE2 affected:Boundaries B6, B7, B7a Status: Scoping Pit Hawthorn at circuit Hartlepool to Boldon West of Turn-in WHTI/WHT2 B7,B6, B7a, B8 B1, affected: B1a,Boundaries B2, B4, B5, Status: Scoping Pit Hawthorn to Peterhead from Eastern subsea HVDC Link E4DC affected:Boundaries B6, B7, B7a, B8 Status: Scoping AC reinforcement England east north to Torness TLNO B5, B7, B6, affected: B7a,Boundaries B8 Status: Scoping Pit Hawthorn to Torness from Eastern subsea HVDC Link E2DC Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 67
have different delivery years. options two The 275kV ring. east north the in connectivity increased and sharing flow load circuits.Hartlepool This would ensure better to Pit Hawthorn and Pit to Hawthorn Boldon West new create would to This it. to connect which currently passes the Hawthorn Pit site Turn-in the West Boldon to circuit, Hartlepool Blackhillock 275kV route to 400kV. to Peterhead the of reinsulation the and Rothienorman and Peterhead at substations works include the construction of new 400kV onshore the Scotland, In AC works. associated the and Pit, Hawthorn and Peterhead at construction of AC/DC converter stations England. The onshore works involve the of north the in Pit to Hawthorn Scotland of east north the in Peterhead from link subsea 2GW HVDC offshore anew Construct eastnorth England. area to a suitable connection point in Torness the in substation 400kV a new bycapacity installing a double circuit from This option provides additional transmission Pit. Hawthorn and Torness at AC works AC/DC converter stations and the associated The onshore works involve the construction of to provide additional transmission capacity. Pit to Hawthorn area Torness the from link 2 offshore anew Construct system faults. to prevent overloading following transmission substation with a new one of higher rating Replacing an existing transformer at Harker system faults. to prevent overloading following transmission substation with a new one of higher rating Replacing an existing transformer at Harker GW HVDC subsea subsea GW HVDC
Chapter four
Replace some of the conductors in Replace some of the conductors in Thermal upgrade of the Norton to them allow to circuits Osbaldwick Replace the conductors from Harker to Fourstones, Fourstones Stella to West and Harker Stella to circuits West 275kV with the increase to conductor higher-rated ratings. thermal circuits’ Lackenby the in conductors the Replace higher-rated with circuit single Norton to larger with cable the replace and conductor, cable of higher rating increase to the circuit’s thermal rating. The two options have different different ratings. provide types that conductor Replace some of the conductors in the with circuit double Osbaldwick to Norton the increase to conductor higher-rated rating. thermal circuits’ with circuit 1 Osbaldwick to Norton increase to conductor higher-rated rating. thermal circuit’s the with circuit 2 Osbaldwick to Norton increase to conductor higher-rated rating. thermal circuit's the temperatures higher at operate to rating. thermal their increase and Reinsulate the Harker Fourstones, to Fourstones Stella to West and Harker to Stella West circuits to allow operation operation allow to circuits West Stella to at 400kV. Other associated works are reconfigureto Harker and StellaWest circuits, 400kV the connect to substations new interbus transformers Fourstones to and a pair of quad boosters ensure to thermal prevent will This controllability. overloads, and balance the flows between the east and west of thecountry.
to Osbaldwick 400kV double circuit circuit 400kV double Osbaldwick to Status: Project not started B7a B7, Boundaries affected: NOHW Thermal uprate 55km of the Norton to Osbaldwick number 1 400kV circuit Status: Project not started B7a B7, Boundaries affected: NOR4 Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to 400kV circuit 2 number Osbaldwick Status: Project not started B7a B7, Boundaries affected: NOR2 Norton of 13.75km Reconductor NOR1 Norton of 13.75km Reconductor LNRE/LNR2 Norton to Lackenby Reconductor 400kV circuit single Design Status: B7a B7, Boundaries affected: circuit 400kV double Osbaldwick to Scoping Status: B7a B7, Boundaries affected: HSRE Fourstones, to Harker Reconductor Fourstones to Stella West and Harker to Stella West 275kV circuit Status: Project not started B8, B9 Boundaries B7a, affected: B6, B7, HSUP Uprate Harker to Fourstones, Fourstones to Stella West and Harker to Stella West 275kV circuit to 400kV Status: Project not started B8, B9 Boundaries B7a, affected: B6, B7, 68 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundary affected:Boundary B7a Status: Design Lister Drive quad booster LDQB affected:Boundaries B7, B7a, B8 buildReduced option started not Project Status: thermal upgrade toOsbaldwick Thornton 1 circuit OTHW affected:Boundary B7a started not Project Status: Penwortham to Carrington of Penwortham to Padiham and Reconductor sections the remaining CPR2 affected:Boundary B7a started not Project Status: Penwortham to Carrington Penwortham to Padiham and Reconductor of sections CPRE affected:Boundary B8 started not Project Status: Lancashire and east north the New east–west circuit between NPNO affected:Boundary B8 started not Project Status: Lancashire and east north the New east–west circuit between HPNO B7, B6, affected: B7a,Boundaries B9 B8, started not Project Status: Link HVDC Padiham to West Stella SPDC affected:Boundaries B7, B7a started not Project Status: thermal upgrade 1circuit Thornton to Lackenby LTR3 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 69
circuits’ thermal rating. higher-rated conductor to increase the with circuits to Carrington Penwortham and to Padiham Penwortham the in Replace some of the conductor sections options. outline two of second the is This determined. to be are points landing exact the time At this system. transmission the of rest the into England of north the from capability export power to increase England, of north the in circuit double 400kV anew Construct options. outline two of first the is This determined. to be are points landing exact the time At this system. transmission the of rest the into England of north the from capability export power to increase England, of north the in circuit double 400kV anew Construct substations. Padiham and West Stella of reconfiguration and stations, converter AC/DC network. The works involve the construction of the of side eastern the around flow power the to improve to Padiham West Stella from 1 onshore anew Construct temperatures and increase its thermal rating. higher at to operate it to allow 1 circuit to Thornton Lackenby the of upgrade Thermal in the Mersey Ring area. Ring Mersey the in Birkenhead and avoid thermal overloads to cable single the through flows power of control better to allow booster a quad with Replacing the series reactor at Lister Drive rating. thermal at higher temperatures and increase its to operate it to allow 1circuit to Thornton Thermal upgrade of the Osbaldwick circuits. the to uprate (CPRE) scheme another follows This rating. conductor to increase the circuits’ thermal to Carrington circuits with higher-rated Penwortham and to Padiham Penwortham the Replace the remaining conductor sections on GW HVDC Link Link GW HVDC
Chapter four
Thermal upgrade of the Drax Thornton to 1 circuit allow to it operate to at higher rating. its increase and temperatures Replace the conductors in the Drax higher- with circuit double Thornton to leg Keadby the on conductor the Replace of the Creyke Beck Keadby to Killingholme to the raise would This three-ended circuit. rating. thermal circuit’s Install series reactors at Thornton substation. substation. Thornton at series reactors Install These would connect the parts of the site one from disconnected operated present at another limit to fault levels. The reactors would allow some flow sharing between the different parts of the site and reduce thermal overloads circuits. connected on Thermal upgrade of the Drax Thornton to 2 circuit allow to it operate to at higher rating. its increase and temperatures circuits’ the increase to conductor rated thermal rating. Reinsulate the Penwortham Washway to Farm Kirkbyto double circuitallow to operation at 400kV. Other associated works are at Kirkby substation transform to voltage from 400kV and 275kV to replace the Washway Farm 400/132kV with transformers 275/132kV transformers. The option would prevent circuits. these on overloads thermal Construct a new 400kV double circuit in transfer power facilitate to Yorkshire central boundaries. relevant the across requirements Substation works might be required to circuits. new the accommodate
GKRE GKRE Reconductor the Garforth Tee TDRE Thornton Drax to Reconductor circuit double Status: Project not started B8 Boundary affected: to Keadby leg of the Creyke Beck Circuit Killingholme to Keadby to Status: Project not started B8 B7a, B7, Boundaries affected: thermal uprating thermal Status: Project not started option Reduced build B8 B7a, B7, Boundaries affected: TDH2 Drax to Thornton 1 circuit thermal uprating Status: Project not started option Reduced build B8 B7a, B7, Boundaries affected: TDH1 Drax to Thornton 2 circuit THS1 Install series reactors at Thornton Status: Project not started B8, B9 Boundaries B7a, affected: B7, OENO reinforcement Yorkshire Central Optioneering Status: B8 B7a, B7, Boundaries affected: MRUP MRUP Uprate the Penwortham to Washway Farm to Kirkby 275kV double circuit 400kV to Design Status: B7a Boundary affected: 70 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundary affected:Boundary B9 started not Project Status: Ryhall at MSC 225MVAr and reconfiguration Substation RYEU affected:Boundaries B8/B9/NW4/B17 started not Project Status: reconductoring Cellarhead to Drakelow CDRE B7, affected: B7a,Boundaries B9 B8, started not Project Status: split atwo-way run to replacement to allow Thornton Generator circuit breaker DREU Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 71
as system flows increase in the future. the in increase flows system as voltage across support the Midlands area to provide breakers circuit associated and (MSC) capacitor a225MVAr switched install and substation 400kV Ryhall Reconfigure rating. thermal with higher-rated conductor to increase their to Drakelow Cellarhead from circuit double Replace the conductors on the existing connecting to the substation. circuits on sharing load improves turn in This would allow higher fault levels, which equivalents including substation equipment. owned circuit breakers with higher-rated generator- to replace is reinforcement This
Chapter four
been reconductored with higher-rated higher-rated with reconductored been the increase These would conductor. remaining sections of the Coryton the South of sections remaining Tilburyto circuit, which have not recently rating. thermal circuit’s Replace the conductors on the the on conductors the Replace remaining the on conductors the Replace Tilbury circuit, to Rayleigh the of sections which have not recently been reconductored would These conductor. higher-rated with rating. thermal circuit’s the increase Replace the conductors in the Tilbury Grain to Kingsnorth higher-rated Tilbury with and to associated the replace and conductors, cables with larger cables of higher rating, Kingsnorth and Grain Tilbury, including increase will This equipment. substation rating. thermal circuits’ the Replace the conductors in the parts of the existing Bramford Braintree to Rayleigh to overhead line that have not already been conductor, higher-rated with reconductored Norwich from runs that circuit double The Bramfordto would be reconductored with circuit double 400kV new a Construct between Bramford substation and Twinstead tee point create to double circuits that run between Bramford Pelham to and Bramford Braintreeto Rayleigh to Main. It would East from capability export power increase Anglia into the rest of the transmission system. Three new MVAr switched 225 capacitors (MSCs) at Burwell Main would provide voltage support the to East Anglia area as system flows increase in future. rating. thermal circuits’ the increase to conductor. higher-rated a
Reinforcement options – the South and South – the East options Reinforcement TKRE Tilbury to Grain and Tilbury to Kingsnorth Upgradeto Status: Project not started B15 Boundary affected: RTRE Rayleigh of remainder Reconductor Tilbury circuit to Status: Project not started B15 EC5, Boundaries affected: CTRE Coryton of remainder Reconductor circuit Tilbury to South Status: Project not started EC5 Boundary affected: BTNO A new 400kV double circuit between Twinstead and Bramford Status: Project not started EC5 Boundary affected: NBRE Norwich to Bramford Reconductor circuit double Status: Project not started EC5 Boundary affected: BRRE Bramford of remainder Reconductor to Braintree to Rayleigh route Status: Project not started EC5 Boundary affected: BMMS 225MVAr MSCs at Burwell Main Scoping Status: EC5 Boundary affected: 4.3 72 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network of England regionof Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundaries affected:Boundaries B14, B14e, LE1 started not Project Status: Wymondley turn-in WYTI affected:Boundaries B14, B14e, LE1 started not Project Status: Waltham Cross 275kV to 400kV Uprate Hackney, Tottenham and HWUP affected:Boundaries B14, B14e, LE1 started not Project Status: and reconductoring 2 circuit turn-in Elstree–Sundon SER2 affected:Boundaries B14, B14e, LE1 started not Project Status: Elstree to Sundon reconductoring SER1 affected:Boundaries B14, B14e, LE1 started not Project Status: circuit 400kV Wood John’s St to Elstree Second ESC1 affected:Boundary LE1 started not Project Status: STATCOMS Cottam Two at hybrid affected:Boundaries LE1, B14e started not Project Status: of Cottam Series Compensation south COSC affected:Boundaries SC1, B15 started not Project Status: Substation 400kV Kingsnorth Thermal upgrade for Grain and GKEU Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 73 COVC COVC
to increase their thermal rating. Sundon circuit 1 with higher-rated conductor to Elstree from conductors the Replace London. into flow power the improve will This substations. 400kV John’s St. Wood and work, Elstree including modifying 400kV associated out carry and tunnel, existing the in Wood to Johns St. Elstree from circuit New second 400kV cable transmission the circuits are highly loaded. This will increase the voltage when stability STATCOMs hybrid Cottam. at two Install when the circuits are highly loaded. Staythorpe. This will increase the stability circuits connecting to Grendon, Ryhall and feeder Cottam at capacitors series Install area. the within flow its thermal capacity, supporting future load substationKingsnorth equipment to increase and Grain 400kV the of upgrade Thermal the balance of flows. of balance the to improve to Sundon Wymondley from and to Wymondley Pelham from run that circuits separate two to create Wymondley at circuit Turn-in the to Sundon. Pelham from runs that circuit existing the Modify to Hackney. down House, Rye via London, into flow power the strengthen will This them. and the double circuit route connecting 275kV to 400kV, from uprate substation Cross Waltham and Tottenham Hackney, the thermal rating. increase and sharing flow load better ensure with higher-rated conductor. This would conductor the replace and to it to connect substation, 400kV Elstree the passes currently 2, which circuit to Sundon Elstree Turn-in the
Chapter four
Replace the conductors in the Fleet to Lovedean circuits with a higher-rated ratings. thermal their increase to conductor conductor different have options two The different ratings. provide types that improve the capability control to the conductor higher-rated a with circuits Fleet to ratings. thermal their increase to Provide a new communications system, and other equipment, allow to existing reactive equipment be to switched in or out of service system transmission following very quickly control better allow would This faults. faults. following voltages system of from route transmission new a Construct the south coast south to London, and carry out associatedwork. These works would capacity transmission additional provide between the south of London and the to Pelhamto at the Wymondley 400kV would boosters quad The substation. power flows on the North London circuits. Bramley the in conductors the Replace support dynamic voltage (SVC) Install compensation reactive additional Provide equipment at Bolney and Ninfield substations, acceptable within voltages maintain to network future in limits operational coast. south Install a pair of quad boosters on the Wymondley from running circuits double to Bramley the of upgrade Thermal Fleet circuits allow to them operate to increase and temperatures, higher at rating. thermal their on the south east coast. This would provide maintain help to power post-fault reactive coast. east south the on stability voltage conditions. operating
FLRE/FLR2 reconductoring Lovedean to Fleet Design/development Status: B12 Boundaries B10, SC2, affected: SC1, SCN1/SCN2 SCN1/SCN2 400kV route transmission New the and London south between SEEU SEEU protective compensation Reactive schemeswitching Design Status: B12 Boundaries B10, SC2, affected: SC1, South Coast (there are two option) this for designs alternative Status: Project not started Boundaries B10, SC2, affected: SC1, B12, B15 BNRC Bolney and Ninfield additional compensation reactive Status: Project not started B12 Boundaries B10, SC2, affected: SC1, SCRC South East coast reactive compensation Scoping Status: Boundaries B15 SC2, affected: SC1, BFRE reconductoring Fleet to Bramley Status: Project not started SC1 Boundary affected: BFHW circuits Fleet to Bramley WYQB WYQB boosters quad Wymondley Status: Project not started LE1 B14e, B14, Boundaries affected: thermal thermal uprating Status: Project not started option Reduced build SC1 Boundary affected: 74 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Proposed optionsProposed Boundaries affected:Boundaries B13, SC1 started not Project Status: circuit double Taunton to Point Hinkley Reconductor THRE affected:Boundary B13 buildReduced option started not Project Status: circuits thermal uprating Melksham to Point Hinkley HMHW affected:Boundaries B15, SC1, B14 Status: Design/development uprating circuits Kemsley to Littlebrook Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 75 KLRE KLRE
to increase the circuits’ thermal rating. to Taunton circuits with higher-rated conductor Replace the conductors in the Hinkley Point rating. thermal at higher temperatures, and increase their to operate them to allow circuits Melksham to Point Hinkley the of upgrade Thermal reconductored with higher-rated conductor. be would Littlebrook to Tee Longfield via Kemsley from running circuits 400kV The
Chapter four
cable sections, increasing the circuit’s circuit’s the increasing sections, cable thermal rating. to increase the circuits’ thermal rating. thermal circuits’ the increase to Pentir Trawsfynydd to 1 circuit with large Replace the conductors in part of the circuits between Pentir and Trawsfynydd remaining the in conductors the Replace parts of the circuits between Pentir and conductor higher-rated with Trawsfynydd rating. thermal circuits’ the further increase to Replace the conductors in the sections sections the in conductors the Replace between Pentir and Bodelwyddan on the Pentir Bodelwyddan to Connah’s to Quay conductor higher-rated with circuit double Create a second Pentir Trawsfynydd to 400kV circuit using by the existing circuit including corridor, and infrastructure sections. cable new constructing the of sections cable Replacing a Construct conductor. higher-rated with section cable phase per core single second on these circuits. These two activities would rating. thermal circuits’ the increase Replace the conductors in the sections sections the in conductors the Replace Connah’s Bodelwyddan and between Quay on the Pentir Bodelwyddan to to Connah’sto Quay double circuit with higher-rated conductor to increase the the increase to conductor higher-rated rating. thermal circuits’
Reinforcement options – Wales and – Wales options Reinforcement PTRE Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuits – overhead remaining the reconductor sectionsline Status: Project not started NW2 Boundary affected: PTC2 Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 and 2 cables – second core per phase and reconductor of an overhead Pentir existing the on section line Trawsfynyddto circuit Status: Project not started NW2 Boundary affected: PTC1 Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 cable replacementsingle – core per phase Status: Project not started NW2 Boundary affected: PTNO Pentir to Trawsfynydd second circuit Status: Project not started NW2 Boundary affected: West Midlands region Midlands West legs of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay 1 and 2 circuits Status: Project not started NW3 Boundary affected: PBRE Reconductor Pentir legs of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay 1 and 2 circuits Status: Project not started NW2/NW3 Boundaries affected: BCRE Reconductor the Connah’s Quay 4.4 76 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter four Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 77 Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 78 Chapter five
Investment recommendations 79 Chapter five Investment recommendations Investing £21.57m this year Investing £21.57m thisyear £21.57m steps for in region. each works required next options the recommended and our preferred identify to us investment enable forand scenario, each strategy give results The economic the most analysis. our economic our investment from Chapter 5presents recommendations 5.1 1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 79 For more information about the NOA the about information more For We recommend deferringthedeliveryof are possiblefrom deferringexpenditure. changes and,asaresult, significantsavings necessary astheenergylandscape Our analysisconsidered whatistruly 22 optionshaveaProceed recommendation. Of the76optionssubmittedforevaluation, almost £3.24billionovertheirlifetime. options thathaveatotalinvestmentof to invest£21.57milliononreinforcement In 2018/19theTOsare recommended Key statistics Introduction Committee, please refer to Chapter 2–Methodology. toChapter refer please Committee, Through 22 options 22
economical andcoordinated way. energy landscapeinanefficient, supporting thetransitiontofuture GB transmissionnetworkcancontinue This willensure thatdevelopmentofthe by ournewlyestablishedNOACommittee which havebeensubjecttofurtherscrutiny based onrobust economicanalysisresults Our £8.55 millionofspendthisinvestmentyear. four projects thatmayhavecommittedover NOA 2017/18recommendations are £3.24bn Total worth of£3.24bn
1 .
Chapter five
Do not start progressing Stop progressing non-optimal options is no longer optimal with one option that with the remaining 20with the remaining
23 options non-optimal one option the delivery of withProceed One option to be put on hold for SWW assessment
put on hold decisions 30 options be 31 options’ considered non-critical with theProceed delivery of one option
76 options submitted for economic analysis76 options submitted
at least one scenario 53 options optimal under53 options optimal critical two options decisions 22 options’ of considered with theProceed Delay the delivery delivery of 20 options 80 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Figure 5.1 through the process How the options went Chapter five Investment recommendations certainty in the future. the in certainty greater is there until hold on put be can then the option is non-critical and a decision EISD its than later are option an of dates delivery optimum the scenarios all under If date. delivery optimum the to meet able to be year this TOs by the made be must decision investment an considered a critical option. This is because is it then scenario one least at in (EISD) Date Service In Earliest current its is date delivery option’s optimum an If are. years completion optimum their when also but scenario, that under economic most the to be considered are The optimal path not only shows which options paths. optimal any in appear not does it if time this at non-optimal is it contrast In scenario. one least at of path optimal the in included is it if consumers. An option is only deemed optimal GB for benefits the to maximise sequence acertain in delivered be should options of aselection where path, optimal an of form the in found is strategy investment optimal an scenario, four future energy scenarios. Under each combinations of reinforcement options across to different respect with terms economic in benefits of transmission network solutions the investigates analysis cost–benefit The Optimal path and optimum delivery date by the underpinned results. recommendations our investment and results including analysis the economic explains section This how to the NOA interpret 5.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 81 best strategywill havearegret of zero, scenario. Therefore ineach scenariothe the benefitof beststrategyforthat difference in benefit for that strategy against investment strategyisdefinedas the In economicanalysisthe‘regret’ ofan Economic regret Interpretation of the NOA of the Interpretation
please seeChapter 2–Methodology. across all scenarios.Formore information, choose thestrategy withtheleastregret compare tothebeststrategy. We always levels ofregret depending howthey and theotherstrategieswillhave different or are considered to be sensitive. sensitive. to be considered are or factor, or scenario by asingle driven are indicated by the economic analysis, the marginal options where recommendations additional scrutiny. Attention is focused on NOA to the presented are results the analysis, regret least year single and analysis cost–benefit the Following Investment recommendations the right recommendation really is being made. that to ensure further option that behind drivers the investigate will we then scenario by asingle driven being is option an If scenarios. all across regret of levels the minimises that options, recommend the option, or combination of critical options. For each region, we will always with delivering combinations different of associated regret the compare we then options delivering it. If a region has multiple critical each critical option against the regret of not delivering with associated regret the compares and measures This analysis. regret least year single our onto advance so and year this All critical options must have a decision made least regret analysis options’Critical single year outcomes outcomes outcomes Committee for
Chapter five ,
) in 2 and value’ ‘high for major network major for process. process. ‘separable’ , , the development of the CATO 3 ‘new’ have provided, which are scrutinised as scrutinised are which provided, have part of our NOA the capex for the assets which meet the the meet which assets the for capex the million £100 is criteria separable and new or more. use We the costs that the TO(s) To assess whether the option meets the the meets option the whether assess To against options the test we criterion, ‘new’ implementation the involve they whether of completely new assets or the complete asset. transmission existing an of replacement the meets option the whether assess To options the test we criterion, ‘separable’ be can assets new the whether against clearly delineated from other (existing) assets. the meets option the whether assess To whether assess we criterion, value’ ‘high Eligibility for onshore competition onshore Eligibility for ‘Extending on decision their published Ofgem (ECIT Transmission’ In Competition November 2016 which set the future direction direction future the set which 2016 November electricity onshore in competition for travel of Appointed Competitively the under transmission However, model. (CATO) Owner Transmission following Ofgem’s latest update on ECIT in June 2017 • • • reinforcement options. This includes options options includes This options. reinforcement we recommend proceed to this year and SWW projects with Needs Case initiated, regime has now been deferred due a delay to is Ofgem legislation. relevant introducing in during forms alternative in competition pursuing it that indicated has it but period, RIIO-T1 the still intends develop to long-term arrangements onshore in competition introducing for broader other with along transmission electricity regulatory frameworks for the period. RIIO-T2 Therefore we believe it is sensible and pragmatic continue to include to an assessment for competition in this NOA as the timescales for delivery of many of these investments now fall into the timeframe. RIIO-T2 three use we assessment, competition the In criteria: proposed Ofgem by in the November 2016 option an that indicators as publication, ECIT option The competition. onshore for eligible is must fulfil all criteria in orderto be considered.
Committee, we are in a position Work should continue or continue should Work The option is optimal and critical, critical, and optimal is option The Committee brings expertise from brings Committee The option is non-optimal at this The option is optimal but not critical not but optimal is option The NOA put on hold. Delivery of this option should be delayed at by least one year. time. Delivery of this option should not continued. be Do not start: non-optimal is option The at this time. Delivery of this option should commence. not Stop: commence in order maintain to the EISD. Hold: and so an investment decision should be Proceed: Delay: but it is not economical be to delivered by its EISD. Delivery of this option should be delayed one by year. https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/system/files/docs/2016/11/ecit_november_2016_decision.pdf https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/system/files/docs/2017/06/update_on_extending_competition_in_transmission.pdf 2 3 we recommended proceed to last year may be recommended be to delayed this and year, vice versa. The benefit of the single year least regret analysis is that an ongoing project is revaluated each year ensure to that its planned completion date remains best for the consumer. • It should be noted thatan option we don’t recommend proceed to with can still be considered in the SWW assessment. our changing, is landscape energy our As adapt may option an for recommendations accordingly. Thismeans that an option that • • • • The 82 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network the following outcomes: following the to recommendto a decision for each option. across the SO, including knowledge on knowledge including SO, the across capability network challenges, operability and operations commercial development, insight into future energy landscapes. It then provides a final set of recommendations for endorsement the With options. marginal the from the NOA All options will be allocated one to of Chapter five Investment recommendations • • • recommendations: investment final to our leading ultimately aspects, following the on focus we region each For view of the outcomes. best the for basis this on presented are results analysis economic The two. other the with impact no or little have region one for proposed West Midlands, where reinforcement options and Wales and England, of East and South the England; of North the and Scotland regions: distinct three into separated was network GB the analysis, economic the In competition. onshore followed by for investment eligibility and recommendations of analysis the economic the results presents section This 5.3 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 83 landscape and network. energy to the changes or needs system as Drivers behind our recommendations such recommendations. which produces the ‘Proceed’ and ‘Delay’ associated single year least regret analysis, Critical options from the optimal paths and dates. delivery optimum highlight optimal options and their The optimal paths by scenario, which NOA outcomes
will be recommended to proceed. to proceed. recommended be will combination this up make that options The scenarios. all across regret of value lowest the several combinations, one of which will have are year, there this progressed be could that As there are a number of critical options for that will or be scenario sensitivity highlighted. year delivery optimum no then sensitivity, or ascenario of path optimal the in not is option an If sensitivities. or scenarios different highlighted with different colours for options those for dates delivery optimum the 4) with Chapter in detailed (as codes four-letter in listed are options optimal The regions. three to the 5.1 respect to 5.3 with Tables in illustrated are recommendations, including optimal paths and initial investment The main outputs of the economic analysis,
Chapter five
Some bold. and the combination bold A full list of optimal options for eachA full list of optimal options with descriptions and optimumregion in Appendixdelivery dates can be found in A.1-3. Critical options are as they are marked as ‘N/A’ options are particular scenarionot optimal under that or sensitivity. Results for the top performing our single yearcombinations from analysis can be found in least regret for each regret Appendix A.4-5. The worst combination is in the across with the smallest worst regret . in green scenarios is highlighted energy Committee Committee and Committee the final recommendation for each of the options is available view to to in Tables 5.4 will find You 5.6. differences between initial and final recommendations for some options. Explanations for those are included as part of our regional narratives. In the interests of transparency, minutes from the NOA website. our on published be will meetings The initial recommendations for optimal options options optimal for recommendations initial The from our economic analysis are indicated by different where shadings 5.3 to in Tables 5.1 green is amber ‘Proceed’, is ‘Delay’ and blue is also We found‘Hold’. options 23 that were not optimal under any of the scenarios at this time and are therefore not included in those tables. non- those for recommendation initial The optimal options is either ‘Do not start’ or ‘Stop’ associated any is there whether on depending work already in progress. initial and results analysis economic The further then were recommendations scrutinised the by NOA 84 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations Key Scotland andtheNorthofEnglandregion Table 5.1 5.3.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 85 LDQB TDH1 Reinforcement DWNO EHRE CDRE HPNO E4DC E2DC HAE2 OENO LNRE TURC DNEU ECUP TDH2 NOHW THS1 HNNO ECU2 WLTI HAEU WHT2 WHTI NOR1 CPRE
4 Optimum year indicator for Steady State Steady for indicator year Optimum Power Consumer for indicator year Optimum Progression Slow for indicator year Optimum Two for Degrees indicator year Optimum Scotland and the North of region England the North Scotland and
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Optimum Delivery Date 2024 2025
Non-critical option to ‘Hold’ Critical option to ‘Delay’ Critical option to ‘Proceed’ reached yet not EISD 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Chapter five
they 2016/17. . The agreed EISDs of E2DC, E4DC Some development work has been carried been has work development Some out in the past on ECU2 and ECUP options recommended was project neither and This year the TOs have reviewed the E4DC E2DC, including options, Link Eastern large involve options These TLNO. and and/or onshore construction infrastructure offshore which will trigger the SWW process. review programme detailed more a Following from experience learned on building and delivering similar programmes, it is now recognised that the delivery of these options will come later than anticipated in the last NOA and 2028 and 2030 TLNO are now 2027, NOA last the in whereas respectively; and 2024 2028. were 2024, From our economic analysis, we still see the need have to E2DC and delivered E4DC as early as possible. TLNO is no longer optimal as its EISD is too late. proceedto because the timing for their delivery was not optimal in NOA These projects, which involve upgrades to to upgrades involve which projects, These existing routes, are now both recommended proceedto for delivery in 2023 and 2026 respectively. This is because they are now delivers them with progressing and critical the most benefit. 10 performing combinations for this region this for performing combinations 10 are listed in Appendix A.4. The above results are explained in more detail follows: as We performedWe the single year least regret least The combinations. 256 all on analysis regret strategy is proceed to with all critical options in Scotland and the North of England region with the exception of WHT2. The top • • •
. 5
(WHTI). (DWNO). (HAEU). (CPRE). (TDH1). Committee concluded the final recommendation for LDQB to be ‘Proceed’. NOA reinforcement reinforcement to Padiham and Penwortham to Carrington Torness from Link HVDC subsea Eastern to Hawthorn Pit (E2DC). Denny to Wishaw 400kV Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Norton of 13.75km Reconductor 400kVOsbaldwick (NOR1) circuit double 6 SuperGrid Transformer Harker replacement Turn-in of West Boldon to Hartlepool Hawthorn Pit at circuit Turn-in of West Boldon to Hartlepool (WHT2) Hawthorn Pit at circuit Penwortham of sections Reconductor Drax to Thornton 2 circuit thermal uprating
The EISD and spend profile of option analysis. economic WHT2 the in are different options alternative as to that treated are of WHTI they hence although same; the the scope of work for the two options is exactly The 5 4 • • • • • • • • For Scotland and the North of England region, we identified25 optimal options as illustrated in The optimum delivery 5.1. Table datesfor those for colours different in highlighted are options different scenarios, where ‘Green’ is for Two Degrees, ‘Blue’ is for Consumer ‘Purple’ Power, is for Slow Progression and ‘Amber’ is for Steady State. Among the optimal 25 options, are 12 critical and they could present 4096 different and ‘Proceed’ of combinations possible ‘East options The recommendations. ‘Delay’ (ECU2), upgrade’ 275kV onshore Coast incremental 400kV onshore Coast ‘East reinforcement’ (ECUP), ‘Eastern subsea HVDC Link from Peterhead Hawthorn to Pit’ 400kV East–Neilston ‘Hunterston and (E4DC) years optimum have (HNNO) Reinforcement’ of delivery that are the same as their EISDs for all scenarios. This means that there is no requirement perform to single year least regret progressing as options, four these for analysis them maintain to their EISDs is the optimum course of action under all scenarios. Having taken E4DC account ECUP, of ECU2, and HNNO, this leaves this region with eight different 256 therefore and options critical following the of combinations possible reinforcements: 86 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations • • • • Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 87 be noted that the optimum delivery date for for date delivery optimum the that noted be 2027. in should It delivered is E2DC until hold on it to keep recommend we year this while 2026, of EISD its to maintain year last proceed to recommended was OENO options; Link Eastern the of to that related closely are dates delivery optimum whose options are There process. SWW the in assessed further is it until hold on TLNO put but ECUP and E4DC ECU2 E2DC, with proceed TOs the that recommend we NOA the of aresult As view. system a whole to provide options to other widened be should it year, and this submission Case Needs SWW available for consideration in the upcoming be all should ECU4 and ECU2, ECUP E4DC, E2DC, TLNO, options projects, Link Due the scale and complexity of the Eastern scenarios. energy all across consumers our for to £300m (from £740m) benefit significant create could byit 2026, commissioned be to were options both if that found we more, cost will options two the of delivery the expediting Although EISDs. given the than sooner delivered E2DC E4DC and having of benefit potential the to evaluate conducted was study sensitivity another Hence paths. optimal to the impact great cause will options Link Eastern the that We recognise tripping scheme. affected by the inclusion of the operational Progression. However no critical options are scheme under Consumer Power and Slow longer required due to the operational tripping no or back pushed are LDQB, and THS1 as ofDelivery some smaller reinforcements, such State. Steady of that in found was change no and under-reinforced still is network the as Two of path Degrees optimal the in found was becomes available. However, little change costs during those four years before E2DC constraint reduces significantly capability optimal paths were recreated as the additional The 2026. and 2022 B7aB7 and between B6, boundaries of capability the improve tripping scheme with associated costs to This sensitivity considered a 1 study of an operational tripping scheme. Link options, we conducted a sensitivity Eastern the for need the justify To further
GW operational
, • • • and MRUP is ‘Proceed’. is MRUP and LDQB for recommendation final the that so analysis economic the from results the additional evidence and agreed to overturn the considered Committee The results. the of NOA to the presented were options two These and worth recommending to proceed. ‘critical’ options both make will west to the of flows 100MW i.e. additional opposite, the close to the conditions that would suggest very were options both for recommendation the conditions that would trigger a ‘Proceed’ found and issue the investigated We’ve further reduced. is MRUP and LDQB of benefit the NOA this in prominent more the congestion in the East Coast is found location of the critical limiting fault. As a result the and area England of North the in flows west and east in differences year-to-year the as such reasons by several driven is This hold. on LDQB putting and MRUP of delivery the stopping suggest results analysis year’s this year, while last to proceed recommended both were MRUP and LDQB with CPRE. with analysis results recommending to proceed the supported and evidence the considered NOA to the presented was ‘Proceed’ a rational decision. This option to make 0.7% to happen are likely option the only have to believe the conditions driving we that suggested probability implied The regional generation are deemed credible. for this option. These assumptions on and interconnection are the main drivers that the rapid growth in wind generation found was it scenario, the investigated B7a during 2021 to 2025. Having further built up around B6, boundaries B7 and scenario, where constraint costs are heavily Two by the Degrees driven solely is CPRE options are critical under multiple scenarios. TDH1, These HNNO. NOR1, and HAEU with proceed TOs the that We recommend delayed by one year. by one delayed EISD its with year next resubmitted option this to see expect would we Therefore EISD. current its than later year one only is OENO Committee due to the marginal nature nature marginal to the due Committee Committee which and therefore therefore and
Chapter five
. 5 (ECUP). . 5 . 5 Eastern subsea HVDC Link from Link HVDC subsea Eastern Peterhead to Hawthorn Pit (E4DC). Torness from Link HVDC subsea Eastern to Hawthorn Pit (E2DC). East Coast onshore 400kV incremental reinforcement link Orkney link Isles Western link Shetland Following feedback about NOA 2016/17, chapter 5 so that it we restructured narrative and less rawcontained more data. This data has moved to a new Appendix A. Please tell us your views on how we’ve changed chapter 5. • • • • • • to proceedto this year in Scotland and the North of England region. identified We the competition the meet options following November the in Ofgem by proposed criteria publication: ECIT 2016 Following the above results, we conducted conducted we results, above the Following competition onshore for assessment eligibility for all reinforcements that we recommended The East Coast onshore 400kV incremental incremental 400kV onshore Coast East The reinforcement (ECUP) would have be to split up separability. for criterion competition the meet to It also includes some new assets that might be built earlier for one or more other projects. As a result this could affect the value of ECUP and its as this review will We competition. eligibility for the plans for the network are developed.
Committee reinforcements, projects to connect to the Scottish islands were also assessed for onshore competition. onshore for assessed also were islands Scottish the to connect to projects reinforcements, E2DC meet to its EISD of 2027. meet to E4DC its EISD of 2028. DWNO meet to its EISD of 2028. ECU2 meet to its EISD of 2023. HNNO meet to its EISD of 2023. MRUP meet to its EISD of 2023. ECUP meet to its EISD of 2026. LDQB meet to its EISD of 2020. WHTI meet to its EISD of 2021. CPRE meet to its EISD of 2021. NOR1 meet to its EISD of 2021. HAEU meet to its EISD of 2021. TDH1 to meetTDH1 to its EISD of 2019. for additional scrutiny, which endorsed the endorsed which scrutiny, additional for WHTI. with proceed to recommendation WHTI although supported Degrees Two by driving single a has Progression Slow and Thefactor. low front end cost and high regret values under Degrees the Two scenario this probability implied of the in resulted factor only having likely be to 0.5% happen to maketo ‘Proceed’ a rational decision. This option was presented the to NOA We believe that there could be significant believe that there We benefit of the use of an operational tripping scheme to mitigate the constraint request We reinforcements. ahead of costs tripping schemesthe TOs to bring forward the need and to review this to address possibility of accelerating the asset investment programmes. In addition to the NOA 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • in Scotland and the North of England region. • In conclusion, we recommend that the TOs reinforcements following the with progress • 88 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations Key The Table 5.2a 5.3.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 89 THRE BTNO SCN2 HMHW HWUP TKRE NBRE ESC1 SER2 BFHW BMMS BRRE SER1 WYQB BNRC GKEU SEEU WYTI RTRE CTRE FLR2 KLRE SCRC Reinforcement South andEastofEnglandregionbyenergyscenarios
Optimum year indicator for Steady State Steady for indicator year Optimum Power Consumer for indicator year Optimum Progression Slow for indicator year Optimum Two for Degrees indicator year Optimum The South and East of region England East South and The
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Optimum Delivery Date 2023 2024 2025 2026
2027 Non-critical option to ‘Hold’ Critical option to ‘Delay’ Critical option to ‘Proceed’ reached yet not EISD 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 Chapter five 2032 2031 2030 2029 2028 EISD not yet reached ‘Proceed’ to option Critical ‘Delay’ to option Critical ‘Hold’ to option Non-critical 2027
2026 2025 2024 2023 Optimum Delivery Date Delivery Optimum 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018
Optimum year indicator for LoCon B Optimum year indicator for NoConA Optimum year indicator for NoConB Optimum year indicator for LoCon A
South and East of England region by local sensitivitiesSouth and East of England Reinforcement SCRC KLRE FLR2 CTRE RTRE WYTI SEEU GKEU BNRC WYQB SER1 BRRE BMMS BFHW SER2 ESC1 NBRE TKRE HWUP HMHW SCN2 BTNO THRE Key The Table 5.2b Table 90 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations • • • • • • • • combinations of the following reinforcements: options and therefore 256 different possible BMMS this leaves this region with eight critical and KLRE SCRC, of account taken Having scenarios. all under action of course optimum the is EISDs their maintain to them progressing as options, three these for analysis regret least year single perform to requirement no is there that means This scenarios. all for EISDs their as same the are that delivery of years optimum have (BMMS) Main’ Burwell at ‘225MVAr MSCs and (KLRE) (SCRC), ‘Kemsley to Littlebrook circuits uprating’ ‘South East coast reactive compensation’ and ‘Delay’ recommendations. The options possibledifferent combinations of ‘Proceed’ 2048 present could they and 11 critical are these, Table in 5.2. Among paths optimal the in shown as options optimal 23 identified we region, England of East and South the For Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 91 (option 2) Coast South the and London south between route transmission 400kV New (BTNO). Twinstead and Bramford between circuit double 400kV A new compensation reactive additional Ninfield and Bolney circuit 400kV Wood John’s St to Elstree Second (TKRE). Upgrade Kingsnorth to Tilbury and Grain to Tilbury Wymondley turn-in switching scheme Reactive protective compensation (FLR2). 2) (option reconductoring Lovedean to Fleet (ESC1). (SCN2). (BNRC). (SEEU). (WYTI)
• • • • as follows: detail more in explained are results above The Appendix A.5. in listed are region this for combinations ESC1. 10 except top performing The region England of East and South the in options critical all with to proceed is strategy regret analysis on all 256 combinations. The least regret least year single the We performed the investment recommendations. alter significantly could that interconnection and generation local of amount a large for potential is there because was This backgrounds along the South East Coast. Contracted’ Local ‘No and Contracted’ ‘Local the B’, ‘NoCon representing B’ and ‘LoCon named are sensitivities of set second the backgrounds around the East Anglia area; Contracted’ Local ‘No and Contracted’ ‘Local A’, the A’ ‘NoCon and representing ‘LoCon named are sensitivities of set first and ‘No local contracted’ sensitivities. The contracted’ ‘Local of sets two included also we’ve scenarios, energy four to the addition In results. of sets two a single combined region to avoid getting in considered to be have they hence acrossboundaries those two regions; reinforcement options which benefit multiple ‘the East’ into one region. We have several and South’ ‘the we’ve combined year This is consistent with what we observed last year. last observed we what with consistent is driven by exporting conditions on B14, which is it as to proceed WYTI recommend we year year. to 2020 2021 This this from slipped NOA the in The recommendation was for ‘Delay’ WYTI benefit. maximum 2021of to achieve instead 2020 in delivered be now can it TO so by the reviewed been has KLRE of EISD The to connect. due is capacity interconnector of amount alarge where Coast East South the on required are options year. These last which is the same as our recommendation year this to proceed KLRE and SEEU FLRE), to (alternative FLR2 SCRC, We recommend 2016/17. has EISD its aresult, As
Chapter five
6 2016/17 is much is . Instead, Committee for Committee 2017, the requirement for this 2017, option is multiple boundaries along the South Coast South the along boundaries multiple once SCN2 is built. Therefore we recommend that the proceed TO with TKRE. TKRE is found critical under multiple multiple under critical found is TKRE scenarios. The reinforcement benefits circuit double new Seabank to Point Hinkley (HSNO) was assessed in the NOA and recommended proceed. to This year the option has progressed sufficiently far through the SWW process and Ofgem’s January 2018 in published decision SCN2 has an EISD and of 2027 is required beto delivered its by EISD under Slow Following State. Steady and Progression significant changes in generation mix in the FES mainly driven the by constraints build up in the Thames estuary area as early as 2023. No effective reinforcement is available with the supported They scrutiny. additional SCN2 with proceed to recommendation an earlier EISD to alleviate the congestion the alleviate to EISD earlier an it was referred the to NOA this year for SWW submission. in that part of the network. Delaying the option, this of complexity and scale the option could result in significant regret under Slow Progression and Steady State up to while£103m, the regret proceed to with the option this year of less than £1m lower due the to low front end cost. only We Slow under conditions the believe to have Progression and Steady and State are 1.2% likely happen to 0.7% make to ‘Proceed’ a option This option. this for decision rational construction infrastructure large involves which triggers the SWW process. Due to we have included the option in the base analysis. our for network longer assessed in the NOA confirmed their view that there is a clear is it that case technical and economic beneficial for GB consumers for the project progress.to The project is therefore no • • •
Committee who, who, Committee Committee due to BNRC has an EISD and of 2021 is only requiredbe to delivered on its EISD under Degreesthe Two scenario. The option is of conditions importing by triggered mainly South the to connected interconnectors the Coast in 2022 which significantly contribute theto constraints build up on boundaries and believeSC1 We SC2. the interconnector end front low The credible. are assumptions delaying of regret large considerably and cost the option indicate that we only have to are option the driving conditions the believe likely0.5% happen to make to ‘Proceed’ a marginal another was This decision. rational option presented the to NOA based on the evidence provided, endorsed the recommendation proceed to with BNRC. BTNO has an EISD and of 2025, our analysis recommends that the proceed TO with Local the under it delaying as option the Anglia East the of sensitivity Contracted area will result in significant regret £148m. of The option is optimal under Degrees, Two Progression, Slow and Power Consumer The them. of any for non-critical however Local Contracted sensitivity is a modification Degreesof the Two scenariowhich includes an additional ofoffshore wind 7.4GW from leveltoday’s whereas 2025, by the Two additional an has only scenario Degrees generation, local other with Together 1.25GW. the total installed capacity in the Local Contracted sensitivity is by over 10GW Because2025. of the significant differences and sensitivity Contracted Local the between Degreesthe Two scenario, the sensitivity credible. less seems option the driving conducted then were investigations Further findto out theexact amount of additional ‘Proceed’ a trigger to needed generation 500MW is that and recommendation, above the Degrees level in Two 2025. by regardedWe this as too high be to credible in this timeframe. This option was referred the to NOA considering the and nature, marginal its generation the about presented evidence mix the Committee agreed that the final ‘Delay’. is BTNO for recommendation https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/system/files/docs/2018/01/decision_on_hsb_final_needs_case.pdf 6 • • 92 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations • 2016 publication: ECIT November the in Ofgem meets the competition criteria proposed by which option one We identified region. England of East and South the in year this to proceed recommended we that reinforcements all for eligibility assessment for onshore competition Following the above results, we conducted • • • • • • • • • East of England region: the following reinforcements in the South and In conclusion, we recommend progressing with Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 93 (option 2)(SCN2) (option coast south the and London south between route transmission 400kV New 2021. of EISD its to meet SEEU 2020. of EISD its to meet FLR2 2020. of EISD its to meet KLRE 2021. of EISD its to meet BNRC 2021. of EISD its to meet WYTI 2027. of EISD its to meet SCN2 2025. of EISD its to meet TKRE 2023. of EISD its to meet BMMS 2018. of EISD its to meet SCRC Chapter five 2032 2031 2030 2029 2028 EISD not yet reached ‘Hold’ to option Non-critical
2027 2026 2025 constraints are found in the early 2020s. Therefore we recommend that the hold TO any investment decisions in this region until we have more information in later years. Optimum Delivery Date Delivery Optimum 2024
2023 2022 2021 2020 Wales and West Midlands region Midlands and West Wales
Optimum year indicator Degrees for Two Optimum year indicator for Slow Progression Optimum year indicator for Consumer Power Optimum year indicator for Steady State
PTNO PTC1 PTC2 BCRE PTRE PBRE Reinforcement four optimal paths however 5.3; in Table none of them are critical this The year. results are similar that to of last where year, no significant For Wales and West Midlands region, we identified six optimal options as shown in the Key Wales and West Midlands region and West Wales Table 5.3 Table 5.3.3 5.3.3 94 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations Scotland andtheNorthofEnglandregion Table 5.4 bands cost include also we year This SWW. an give an indication whether an option could be NOA year’s last from In addition, we present the recommendation in NOA assessed for option each the recommendation presents section This 5.4 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 95 ECUP ECU4 ECU2 E4DC E2DC DWNO DREU DNEU CPRE CPR2 CDRE code Option four-letter Recommendation for option each
£100m–£500m Cost band: incremental reinforcement East Coast onshore 400kV reinforcement East Coast onshore 400kV upgrade East Coast onshore 275kV £1000m–£1500m Cost band: Hawthorn Pit to Peterhead from Link Eastern subsea HVDC £500m Cost band: Hawthorn Pit to Torness from Link Eastern subsea HVDC reinforcement 400kV toWishaw Denny split atwo-way torun Thornton replacement to allow Generator circuit breaker Super Grid Transformer 2 400/275kV North Denny Carrington to Penwortham and toPadiham Penwortham Reconductor sections of to Carrington Padiham and Penwortham to Penwortham of sections Reconductor the remaining reconductoring Cellarhead to Drakelow for comparison and to and comparison for (and cost band) Description Description – £1000m 2017/18.
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No
Potential SWW? Potential
bands are highlighted in red. in highlighted are bands These options and their associated cost and that satisfy the competition criteria. for options with a ‘Proceed’ recommendation No decision required Do not proceed not Do No decision required Proceed Proceed No decision required Do not proceed not Do 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not recommendation NOA NOA 2016/17 2016/17
Proceed Do not start not Do Proceed Proceed Proceed Proceed Do not start not Do Hold Proceed Do not start not Do Hold recommendation NOA 2017/18 2017/18
Chapter five 2017/18 NOA recommendation Hold Do not start Do not start Hold Proceed Proceed Hold Do not start Do not start Proceed Do not start Hold Do not start Proceed Hold Proceed Do not start Do not start Do not start
2016/17 NOA recommendation Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Do not proceed Do not proceed Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Do not proceed Not featured in NOA 2016/17 No decision required decision No Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Proceed Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Delay Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Proceed Do not proceed Proceed No decision required decision No Not featured in NOA 2016/17 No decision required decision No Potential SWW? No No No No No No Yes No Yes No No No No No No No No No Yes
Description (and cost band) cost (and Elvanfoot to Harker reconductoring Beauly to Fyrish circuit double 275kV reconductoring to Killingholme Circuit Killingholme to Reconductor the Garforth the Reconductor to KeadbyTee leg of the Creyke Beck to Keadby Harker SuperGrid SuperGrid Harker replacement 5 Transformer Harker SuperGrid SuperGrid Harker replacement 6 Transformer Hunterston East–Neilston East–Neilston Hunterston Reinforcement 400kV New east–west circuit New between the north east and Lancashire Reconductor Harker to Fourstones,Fourstones to Stella West and Harker to circuit 275kV West Stella Uprate Harker to Fourstones, Fourstones to Stella West and Harker to Stella West 275kV circuit to 400kV Lister Drive quad booster quad Drive Lister Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit conductor different a (with type to LNRE) Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit conductor different a (with type to LNR2) Lackenby to Thornton 1 upgrade thermal circuit Uprate the Penwortham to Washway Farm to Kirkby 275kV double circuit to 400kV Thermal uprate 55km of the Norton to Osbaldwick circuit double 400kV Reconductor 13.75km 13.75km Reconductor of Norton to Osbaldwick circuit double 400kV Reconductor 13.75km 13.75km Reconductor of Norton to Osbaldwick number 1 400kV circuit Reconductor 13.75km 13.75km Reconductor of Norton to Osbaldwick number 2 400kV circuit and Lancashireand New east–west circuit New between the north east
Option four-letter Option code EHRE FBRE GKRE HAE2 HAEU HNNO HPNO HSRE HSUP LDQB LNR2 LNRE LTR3 MRUP NOHW NOR1 NOR2 NOR4 NPNO Table 5.4 Table of England region continued Scotland and the North 96 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations Scotland andtheNorthofEnglandregioncontinued Table 5.4 7 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 97 TURC TLNO THS1 TDRE TDH2 TDH1 SPDC RYEU OTHW WLTI OENO WHTI code Option four-letter WHT2 not receiving a ‘Proceed’ recommendation could still be proceeded by the TO(s) if required for other reasons than delivering delivering than reasons other for required if TO(s) the by capability.boundary proceeded be still could option An reasons. of recommendation anumber for be may a‘Proceed’ This receiving not agreements. connection users’ in works enabling as listed be may assessed The NOA recommendations are based on our economic assessment of options to deliver boundary capability. Some options
Tummel at compensation Reactive England AC reinforcement east tonorth Torness Thornton at reactors series Install Thornton double circuit to Drax Reconductor thermal uprating 1circuit toThornton Drax thermal uprating 2circuit toThornton Drax HVDC Link toPadiham West Stella and 225MVAr MSC at Ryhall at MSC 225MVAr and Substation reconfiguration circuit thermal upgrade 1 toThornton Osbaldwick 275kV substation North toDenny turn-in Longannet 275kV circuit Windyhill to Lambhill to reinforcement Central Yorkshire to WHT2) different delivery year a (with Pit Hawthorn at circuit to Hartlepool Turn-in of West Boldon to WHTI) different delivery year a (with Pit Hawthorn at circuit to Hartlepool Turn-in of West Boldon (and cost band) Description Description
No Yes No No No No Yes No No No No No No Potential SWW? Potential Do not proceed not Do Proceed No decision required Do not proceed not Do 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not Do not proceed not Do No decision required Proceed Proceed 2016/17 NOA in featured Not recommendation NOA NOA 2016/17 2016/17
Hold Hold for SWW for Hold Hold Do not start not Do Hold Proceed Do not start not Do Do not start not Do Do not start not Do Hold Hold Proceed Delay recommendation NOA 7
2017/18 2017/18 Chapter five 2017/18 8 NOA recommendation Do not start Do not start Hold Hold Do not start Delay Proceed Proceed Proceed Stop Hold Hold Delay Hold Hold Proceed Hold Hold
2016/17 NOA recommendation Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Do not proceed No decision required decision No Not featuredin NOA 2016/17 Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Proceed Not featured in NOA 2016/17 No decision required decision No Proceed No decision required decision No Not featured in NOA 2016/17 No decision required decision No Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Not featured in NOA 2016/17 Proceed No decision required decision No No decision required decision No Potential SWW? No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No No
Description (and cost band) cost (and Series Compensation south south Compensation Series of Cottam Two hybrid STATCOMS hybrid STATCOMS Two at Cottam Bramley to Fleet circuits circuits Fleet to Bramley uprating thermal of Coryton South to Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor Tilbury circuit Bramley to Fleet reconductoring Second Elstree to St John’s circuit 400kV Wood 225MVAr MSCs at Burwell Main Fleet to Lovedean a (with reconductoring type conductor different to FLRE) Bolney and Ninfield Ninfield and Bolney reactive additional compensation Fleet to Lovedean a (with reconductoring type conductor different to FLR2) of Bramford to Braintree Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor to Rayleigh route Thermal upgrade for Grain Grain for upgrade Thermal Kingsnorth 400kVand Substation A new 400kV double circuit between Bramford and Twinstead Hinkley Point to Melksham uprating thermal circuits Uprate Hackney, Tottenham Tottenham Hackney, Uprate and Waltham Cross 275kV to 400kV Kemsley to Littlebrook Littlebrook to Kemsley uprating circuits Reconductor Bramford Bramford Reconductor circuit Norwich double to of Rayleigh to Tilbury circuit to Rayleigh of Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor
recommendations are based on our economic assessment of options to deliver boundary capability. Some options options Some capability. boundary deliver to options of assessment economic our on based are recommendations South and East of England region South and East of England NOA assessed may be listed as enabling works in users’ connection agreements.not receiving This a ‘Proceed’ may be for a number recommendation of reasons. An option could still be proceededboundary capability. by the TO(s) if required for other reasons than delivering The COSC Option four-letter Option code COVC BFHW CTRE BFRE ESC1 BMMS FLR2 BNRC FLRE BRRE GKEU BTNO HMHW HWUP KLRE NBRE RTRE 8 Table 5.5 Table The 98 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Investment recommendations The Table 5.5 9 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 99 WYTI WYQB TKRE THRE SER2 SER1 SEEU SCN1 SCRC code Option four-letter SCN2 not receiving a ‘Proceed’ recommendation could still be proceeded by the TO(s) if required for other reasons than delivering delivering than reasons other for required if TO(s) the by capability.boundary proceeded be still could option An reasons. of recommendation anumber for be may a‘Proceed’ This receiving not agreements. connection users’ in works enabling as listed be may assessed The NOA South andEastofEnglandregioncontinued recommendations are based on our economic assessment of options to deliver boundary capability. Some options
Wymondley turn-in Wymondley quad boosters to Upgrade Kingsnorth Tilbury and toGrain Tilbury to Taunton double circuit double to Taunton Reconductor Hinkley Point turn-in and reconductoring 2 circuitElstree–Sundon reconductoring toSundon Elstree scheme switching protective compensation Reactive design toSCN2) design coast (an alternative London and the south south between route New 400kV transmission compensation South East coast reactive £500m–£1000m Cost band: toSCN1) design coast (an alternative London and the south south between route New 400kV transmission (and cost band) Description Description
No No No No No No No Yes No Yes Potential SWW? Potential Delay No decision required 2016/17 NOA in featured Not Do not proceed not Do 2016/17 NOA in featured Not 2016/17 NOA in featured Not Proceed Do not proceed not Do Proceed Do not proceed not Do recommendation NOA NOA 2016/17 2016/17
Proceed Hold Proceed Hold Hold Hold Proceed Do not start not Do Proceed Proceed recommendation NOA 2017/18 2017/18 9 Chapter five 2017/18 NOA recommendation Hold Hold Hold Hold Hold Hold 2016/17 NOA recommendation No decision required decision No Do not proceed No decision required decision No No decision required decision No No decision required decision No Do not proceed Potential SWW? No No No No No No
Description (and cost band) cost (and Reconductor the Connah's Connah's the Reconductor Quay legs of the Pentir to Connah’s to Bodelwyddan Quay 1 and 2 circuits Reconductor Pentir legs of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay 1 and 2 circuits Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 single – replacement cable phase per core Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 and 2 cables – second core per phase and reconductor of section line overhead an on the existing Pentir to circuit Trawsfynydd Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuit second line sections line Pentir to Trawsfynydd reconductor – circuits overhead remaining the
Option four-letter Option code BCRE PBRE PTC1 PTC2 PTNO PTRE Table 5.6 Table Midlands region and West Wales 100 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter five Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 101 Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 102 Chapter six
Interconnection analysis 103 Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection To achieve this market signal it is necessary necessary is it signal market To this achieve costs. constraint and reinforcements, network and capacity interconnection the both of costs Social Economic Welfare (SEW), capex optimal level of interconnection based on the of assessment network and a market The The viability. a project’s on impact any have or determine not does information and the output of the analysis project-specific any provide not does it to socioeconomic benefits of interconnection; as indication an provides analysis The market. GB the with capacity interconnector efficient of development the to facilitate signal market interconnection, with the goal of providing a future of benefits potential the of industry the to inform undertaken is analysis The 6.1.1 system. transmission electricity economical and coordinated of efficient, an part as toaims facilitate the development of interconnector capacity which our analysis, latest interconnection Chapter 6presents 6.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 103 NOA Introduction The purpose of this analysis purpose The for Interconnectors ( Interconnectors for NOA IC) is is IC)
the outcome of this interconnector analysis. on based decisions investment any make not does Grid National discussion: facilitate NOA the of purpose The projects. future and current specific of independent largely are insights final The costs. capex and constraints system greatest balance of socioeconomic welfare, on optimal capacities, it will generate the concentrates output the As requirements. connection locations and reinforcement potential interconnection capacities, network then be incrementally adjusted to identify can which case abase to establish IC is to inform and and to inform is IC
Chapter six
IC analysis: this analysis: IC IC analysis which we believe believe we which analysis IC as the baseline network reinforcement reinforcement network baseline the as and NOA Additional interconnection to Ireland Additional interconnection both and GB would benefit Europe economically and environmentally and Norway over and above thatand Norway over and above case providesincluded within the base opportunity for the least regret consumers. GB and European interconnection. increased from • • We haveWe also used the output from this year’s NOA NOA the for assumptions provides greater consistency between the NOA will be of added value our to stakeholders.
GW between GB and GB consumer can benefit from more from GB consumer can benefit Cap and beyond the interconnection The analysis demonstrates that theThe analysis demonstrates This year’s interconnection analysis interconnection This year’s suggests that a total interconnection capacity of 17.4 provide markets by 2030 would European the lowest risk for GB consumers. Floor window 2 projects. • Key statistics • 104 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network For this year’s analysis we have undertaken methodology, the to further improvements which were approved Ofgem. by have We GB the on impacts locational included welfare the to addition in network transmission year. last considered implications cost capital and Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection market participants as a result of increased increased of aresult as participants market by seen detriments and benefits financial the captures SEW analysis, this In taken. option the of aresult as money lose may society within groups some so – benefits parties’ multiple of aggregate an is It action. of course given a from society to terms, monetary in benefit, overall the captures It interest. public of projects of analysis cost–benefit in used indicator acommon is (SEW) Welfare Economic Socio • • • (FES) Future Scenarios Energy our however markets, ~4 electricity between nations. Currently GB has Electricity interconnectors allow the transfer of 6.2 of ways: anumber in consumers and industry to both benefits deliver can interconnection in Increases Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 105 in Steady State and 19 and State Steady in 15.9 to capacity interconnection GB total the take 2would window Floor and Cap Ofgem’s 2030. Socio Economic Welfare. as measured are benefits These financially. to benefit markets both in participants some leads to increased competition allowing to cheaper generation and more consumers access –increased competition Increased domestic non-renewable generation. generation, consequently displacing increased access to intermittent renewable Greater access to renewable energy secure their energy needs. to generation of levels increased access can markets –both supply of security Greater GW of interconnection with other European European other with GW interconnection of
W y 2025. by GW 2017 see an increase to between 10 to between 2017 increase an see Interconnection theory Interconnection GW in Two Degrees by by TwoGW in Degrees GW GW –
interconnection are at amaximum. at are interconnection from derived benefits the as optimised as We then consider the interconnection capacity benefit. no brings interconnection further until to converge begin markets two the between prices gained, consequently is SEW and markets suitable two between increased is associated reinforcement costs. As capacity increased interconnection capacity and any the of delivery the of costs capital the against balanced be also must SEW in increase The • willparticipants face: market some that detriments associated the capture also must SEW addition, In • • • • attained through the following benefits: interconnection. Increased SEW is primarily with more consumers. share their access to cheaper generation now –they market cheaper the in Increased price for consumers overseas generation. now competing against cheaper in the higher priced market Reduced revenue for generators across their interconnectors. capacity selling from generated – income Revenue for interconnector businesses customers. more access lower priced market Increased revenue for generators in the the higher priced market Reduced price for consumers in renewable generation. to cheap access increased have – generators can now now can –generators – suppliers – suppliers –
Chapter six
Total 4 15.9 Spain 0 0 Norway 0 2.8 Netherlands 1 1 Ireland 1 1.5 Following stakeholder feedback, due the to unique properties of the Icelandic market, results generation renewable plentiful whereby any price, electricity wholesale very low a in FES the within appears that interconnection is treated as a generator. Further Icelandic process. the from excluded was interconnection It can be seen that if all the projects included connect successfully do case base the within on time, then this will represent roughly a capacity interconnection GB in quadrupling over the next eight years.
2016 Germany 0 1.4 France 2 6.8 . 2017, interconnection interconnection 2017, 1 Denmark 0 1.4 Belgium 0 1
Current and interconnection potential The Aquind interconnector was not included within the baseline for this year’s report, as at the time of setting the base case level of interconnection Aquind had not received a formal exemptionAquind’s pursuant application to Regulation for exemption (EC) no 714/2009. Subsequently has been formally acknowledgedFrance) by Ofgem and the and assessment CRE (Regulatory is ongoing. Commission would We expect of Energy Aquind for to be includedshould within Ofgem the approve base Aquind’s case for request next year’s for analysis, an exemption, as Aquind will methodology. thencurrent satisfy the regulatory certainty criteria within the 2017 Capacity (GW) 2025 Base Case (GW) 1 Current interconnection capacities and 2025 base case Current interconnection capacities and 2025 base Table 6.1 Table As stated within the FES scenarios, four all in capacity increases although it is lower than stated in the FES 6.3 as a result of stakeholder feedback. 6.1 Table interconnection planned and current the shows levels which have formed the basis for this This capacity. interconnection base study’s commissioned interconnectors, included Floor and Cap Ofgem’s within included projects C&F within included projects 1, window (C&F) window 2 that Ofgem are minded grant to a cap and floor regimeto in principle and projects with an approved exemption 106 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection least worst regret after each iteration to identify to identify iteration each after regret worst least used have we year this scenario: energy future interconnection development path for each year’s methodology produced the optimal NOA the between analysis: this provides greater consistency reinforcement assumptions for the NOA NOA year’s this from recommendations the used also We have be built to accommodate the interconnector. to required reinforcement onshore of level the and network GB the on interconnector the of location of impact the modelled have cost implications considered last year, we capital and welfare to the year, addition in This 6.4.1 6.4.1 Table in 6.1 shown for markets European interconnection capacity across the eight of level optimal the to identify aims analysis with our stakeholders.Theinterconnection The methodology was developed in consultation 6.4 2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 107 https://www.nationalgrid.com/sites/default/files/documents/NOA%20for%20IC%20methodology%20final.pdf Methodology Developments toDevelopments methodology and NOA and as the baseline network IC analysis. Last Last analysis. IC IC IC
a high-level overview of the process. the of overview a high-level be implemented. Figure 6.1 provides the additional interconnection should where directed then process iterative An 15.9 totalling certainty regulatory with current interconnection levels and projects with a base level of interconnection, including process, where the market was modelled astep-by-step involved studies The BID3. marketour electricity modelling software interconnection levels using studies within NOA year’s this For path. asingle in results This which option should be taken forward. taken are available on the NOA the on available are taken methodology and the rationale for the approach the of details further and years study markets, of choice the of Details years. study of a selection IC, like last year, we modelled GB GB year, modelled we last IC, like website
GW.
2 .
Chapter six
,
GW of capabilityGW cases 2. Create test + reduction in GW of interconnectionGW was of each option constraint costs option sequentially option = SEW - capital costs 3. Simulate European European Simulate 3. 4. Calculate net benefit markets for all four FES running each interconnector interconnector each running Create test cases test the effectTo of additional capacity for each market, 1 added in each of the European markets interconnection. of level base the to connection GB country, of options 30 modelled. were reinforcement and zone For each country’s additional interconnector, interconnector, additional country’s each For a small number of zones and reinforcement combinations were studied. In total upgrade reinforcement a where options In is selected, an additional 1 is added the to relevant boundary. These Additional 6.2. table in shown are options in connect to modelled is interconnection and 2027 2025, 2030, in order understand to varying dates commissioning of effects the on SEW and attributable constraint costs. 2) IC
(if included) (if by performing by interconnection 1. Set1. base level 5. Identify optimal and reinforcement reinforcement and Least Worst Regret 6. Update baselevel
optimal interconnector optimal interconnector solution interconnector interconnection to include include to interconnection Set base level of interconnection the was interconnection of level base The total capacity GB has with each of the eight studied markets at the start of the iteration. All interconnectors that are in the NOA baseline are included within the model. the within included are baseline The selected method of arriving at a is capacity development for recommendation an iterative optimisation including a ‘least worst scenarios. four all across calculation regret’ The iterative optimisation approach attempts maximiseto the present value, equal SEW to Costs Constraint Attributable less CAPEX less The(ACC). iterative process is as follows: 1) Figure 6.1 optimisation Iterative process for interconnection 108 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection 5) 4) 3) Interconnector connectingcountry, zoneandreinforcementoptions Table 6.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 109 Interconnected Country Interconnected The Netherlands The Netherlands The Netherlands The Netherlands Spain Spain Norway Norway Norway Norway Ireland Ireland Ireland Ireland Germany Germany Germany France France France France France Denmark Denmark Denmark Belgium Belgium Belgium Belgium None (base) options of country, GB connection zone 30 all for Regret Worst Least Perform solution optimal Identify connecting year for each scenario. GB connection zone, reinforcement and country, of option each for Costs Constraint –Attributable –CAPEX = SEW PV Calculate combination each of benefit net Calculate and constraint attributable costs. for all European countries then calculate SEW 2017 each for FES combinations 30 all Run markets European Simulate
GB connection zone 6 6 4 4 5 5 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 7 4 4 6 6 5 5 5 7 4 4 6 6 4 4 None 6) 500 further of a benefit any is there whether to 500 reduced be will capacity Once this result is achieved, the incremental ‘None’ is the option with the least worst regret. when is that converged, to have deemed is it when finishes process iterative The 3to 6. steps repeat and interconnection Add optimal solution to base level of interconnection level base Update commissioning in 2025, 2027 and 2030). across three time periods (interconnectors FES four all across reinforcement and
MW of interconnection. Reinforcement on boundary SC1+B15 None None EC5 SC1 None None B8 None B6+B8 SW1 None None B8 None None EC5 SC1 None SC1+B15 SC1 None None None EC5 SC1+B15 None None EC5 None MW to analyse to analyse MW and and Chapter six
. Generic reinforcements were created created were reinforcements Generic . NOA Estimation of network Estimation of costs reinforcement The network has been divided into sevenhigh by determined been have which zones level areas of significant constraints on the network are These interconnection. high of areas or 6.2. Figure in illustrated The baseline boundary capabilities were were boundary capabilities baseline The in published outputs the using by determined this for each boundary, using costs from NOA and ACER as a guide. 2016/17 , 3
8 EC5 B B15
6 4
B 6
7
2 5
3
1
1 W C N S http://www.acer.europa.eu/Official_documents/Acts_of_the_Agency/Publication/UIC%20Report%20%20-%20Electricity%20 infrastructure.pdf based on surveys carried out on a range of of approximations and projects, European lengths. cable possible median 3 Figure 6.2 GB network high level zones and boundaries Estimation of interconnectionEstimation of construction costs capacity interconnection building of cost The varies significantly between different projects, technology, converter including drivers key with cable length and capacity of cable. Estimating between interconnectors generic for costs European markets and GB is therefore derived were costs capital The challenging. from a publicly available ACER (Agency for the document Regulators) Energy of Cooperation 110 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection • • • • • • context of the methodology undertaken: the in results the to interpret important is It SEW. to maximise order in in, to connect years the and necessary was network GB the of markets to connect to, whether reinforcement the shows result final The interconnection. of development the through SEW European This section explores the optimal creation of 6.5.1 parts: four in presented is output The a whole. as Europe to and consumer, GB the to a benefit presents where future interconnection was section This analysed. were that cases base and options test the of each for SEW generated undertaken were that studies market The 6.5 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 111 outside the scope of this study. this of scope the outside are network GB to the services ancillary providing interconnection of benefits Potential SEW. of levels of interconnection and generate similar level total ahigher in result could pathways to optimise interconnection, but other way efficient most the is path optimal The projects. of attractiveness the on impact amajor have will costs construction Variations in network constraint and beyond. and decade next the outcome for interconnection over the influence will factors other many a forecast: as interpreted be not should results The in future market conditions. opportunities lie, due to the uncertainty best the to where as uncertainty is there varies across the Consequently scenarios. markets different of attractiveness The study. this in made assumptions the on based beneficial most the not simply but beneficial, be well may paths optimal the in not are that to markets Projects Outcome Optimal Path for SEW European
iterations are shown in Table 6.3 options. The optimal solutions from the two constraint savings across the interconnector the in areduction in results broadly analysis IC network reinforcement assumptions in the NOA NOA year’s this from output 0.5 1 and interconnection capacity: 1 1.5 additional an in resulted This case. base the than value present overall a higher iterations: no capacity further alterations yielded two after finished process iterative The interconnectionfurther can bring. potentially diminish the level of additional SEW case base the form that interconnectors the markets, European and GB between differential additional interconnection depends on the price by generated SEW the As modelling. the within seen as Europe mainland and GB between which causes considerable price convergence quadrupling of existing interconnection capacity, 15.9 of interconnection of level case base This certainty. regulatory of level ahigh have or operation in already shown in Table 6.1 include projects that are The starting interconnection capacities 2. 1. 4. 3.
Benefits of overall increase in interconnection. in increase of overall Benefits
Optimal Path for European SEW. European for Path Optimal Interaction of interconnectors and constraints. GB consumer benefit. GW from iteration 2. The use of the the of use 2. The iteration GW from GW represents a near anear GW represents
GW from iteration for the baseline GW of GW of
Chapter six
Spain
Connection Year Connection 2030 2025 Norway GW betweenGW GB and Connecting Zone Connecting Zone 2 Zone Zone 1 Zone Netherlands Ireland flows generate welfare. These effects result in Irish exports Britain to exports British and curtailment, wind avoid to Irelandto exploit to arbitrage. Both sets of much Irish demand can be met wind. by where there is an imposed limit on how of interconnection of 17.4 European markets 2030. by Figure 6.3 presents each to interconnection of level optimal the European market for the optimal path. Reinforcement None B6 + B8
Current
Germany
Country Ireland Norway France MW Denmark GW interconnection interconnection GW
Capacity 1000 500 MW
Belgium Current + Planned + Optimal GW, resultsGW, in a combined optimal level
2 1 3 0 8 5 4 7 6 Capacity of Interconnection (GW) Interconnection of Capacity Iteration 1 2 The optimisation analysis for iteration 1 resulted resulted 1 iteration for analysis optimisation The in Ireland representing the most beneficial The interconnection. increased for market as modelled is price wholesale Irish average mechanism second A GB. than higher generally of alleviation the is welfare generates which constraint, generation synchronous Ireland’s capacity from the two iterations, combined iterations, two the from capacity with the base case interconnection capacity interconnection case base the with of 15.9 Figure 6.3 market Optimal level of interconnection to each European The additional 1.5 additional The Table 6.3 Table in addition to the base case level Optimal interconnection 112 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection market for increased interconnection. beneficial most the representing Norway in The optimisation analysis for iteration 2 resulted the Belgium options are also marginally positive. of two although costs, estimated outweighing benefits welfare shows clearly that market only scenario and connection year Ireland is the particular this for 6.4 that Figure from seen be can It option. each for value present net lowest to by highest ordered been have results The and interconnectoroptionsconnectingin2030 Net PresentValue relativetobasecaseforIteration1,Two Degreesscenario Figure 6.4 is only, that scenario one 1for iteration of results the of asample 6.4 shows Figure Millions (£) Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 113 ttr ta e e are Cape
e re a e re a e e re a e re a e e e e
ttr ta e C tra t C e e a e r a e C he ether a e e he ether a e
e r a e C ra e e C ra e e C he ether a e attributable constraintattributable costs. and associated reinforcements boundary on shows the impact of GB interconnection zone also chart The case. base the to relative benefits positive attributable welfare and constraint costs show markets other of anumber However connecting in 2030. options interconnector the for and Two Degrees C ra e e e er a e C er a e C e ar e e e ar e C pa e C e e e er a e e e ar e e r a e
r a e e ra e e e ra e e e he ether a e e pa e e e e
Chapter six
r a e e r a
e ra e e e e ra e
e e e e e e
e he ether a e e ether a e he
C ra e e e C ra e
e e r a
C e ar e e C e ar
e e ar e e e e ar e er a e e e er a
as the baseline network network baseline the as e e ar e e e e ar
C er a e e C er a
e er a e e e er a
e pa e e e pa
C he ether a e e ether a C he
C pa e e C pa recommendations the uses analysis IC re a e e re a
options negative. This is because this year’s NOA from this year’s NOA Progression and for the interconnector options options interconnector the for and Progression 2025. in connecting lower to leading assumptions, reinforcement additional from savings constraint additional for that shows also 6.5 Figure interconnection. welfare attributable the cases of majority the relative the to base case is negative, indicating that there is no additional welfare benefit for those in interconnector additional an adding options. particular e he ether a e e ether a e he
e ra e e e e ra e
C e e e C e
e C ra e
e e e e e e
e r a e e e r a
re a e e re a
e re a e e e re a
e re a e e e re a ttr ta e C tra t
C ra e e e C ra e
C he ether a e e ether a C he
a e
C e e e C e r a e e r a
Cape ttr ta e e are
Millions (£) Millions Although the option of Norway interconnector interconnector Norway of option the Although with additional reinforcement of the B6 and B8 boundaries results in the largest capex costs, this is more than offset the by significant increase in offers. interconnector the that savings constraint The chart also shows that apart from the additional with interconnector Norway of option reinforcement of the B6 and B8 boundaries, the constraint savings relative the to base case are often very small, and for some Figure 6.5 Figure 6.5 shows a sample of the results 2, Slow Progression scenario relative to base case for Iteration Net Present Value of iteration 2 for one scenario that only, is Slow connecting in 2025 and interconnector options 114 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection SEW forGBandconnectingcountryonlyIteration1,ConsumerPowerscenario Figure 6.6 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 115 welfare benefit of Ireland being able to access access to able being Ireland of benefit welfare consumer the shows clearly It instances. GB and the connecting in country all nearly case. It shows there is additional welfare for each interconnector, relative to the base only GB and the connecting for country for welfare of levels the 6.6 shows Figure Total Welfare (£ millions) -1,500 -1,000 1,000 1,500 2,000 -500 500 Sum ofIC 0
Norway Ireland Sum ofConsumer Belgium
Denmark Sum ofProducer driven by markets other than GB. than other by markets driven being are 6.5 Figure in values welfare negative the that shows This market. GB the to access Norwegian and Spanish generation being able cheaper of benefit welfare producer the shows cheaper electricity within the GB market and Germany Netherlands Total welfare France Spain Chapter six
2037 2036 2035 Consumer Power 2034 2033 2032 Steady State with the associated continued reduction in reduction continued associated the with from cheaper renewable power imported power renewable cheaper from from European markets. These benefits are rapidly eroded under Degrees, Two and to a lesser extent under Slow Progression, as assets generation renewable domestic GB’s as However, thesegrow. renewable sources of generation continue grow to in subsequent years, particularly within Degrees, Two and opportunity the drives this price, wholesale GB Europe. to supplies exporting for 2031 2030 2029 2028 Slow Progression 2027 2026
GB benefit consumer 2025 Two Degrees 6 4 2 0
-6 -8 -2 -4
-10 Price difference (£/MWh) difference Price Figure 6.7 shows the average wholesale price wholesale average the shows 6.7 Figure difference between GB and European markets for all four scenarios and for the B6+B8 Norway Zone 1 option for iteration GB and 2. European prices have been demand weighted. The chart shows that the price difference between the markets is lower than in last year’s analysis as interconnection more contains case base the between convergence greater drives that the markets. Steady State shows the most consistent higher price within the GB market, suggesting that GB consumers would benefit Figure 6.7 between GB and European markets. price difference Average The GB consumer gains from interconnection interconnection from gains consumer GB The markets. electricity wholesale cheaper to 6.5.2 116 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection is able to displace more expensive generation. average European price as cheaper generation The additional interconnection drives down the 6.5.4.1 power. renewable of use wholesale energy prices and greater lower of terms in both consumers, European and GB to benefits significant Increased levels of interconnection bring 6.5.4 hinder or help either may to GB interconnection balancing option. The inclusion of additional another with Operator System the provides constraint. Interconnection to different markets elsewhere on the system to alleviate the generation on offer and to output able not costs to turn down the generation which is Operator will incur balancing mechanism System the event, this In restrictions. network to due outputting from limited is order merit on the network when power within the interconnector. Constraint costs are incurred the to accommodate built reinforcement onshore of level the and network GB the on dependent on the location of the interconnector is costs constraints GB on impact The 6.5.3 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 117 Benefits Benefits of in interconnection overall increase Interaction constraints of and interconnectors Overall impact on wholesale prices Overall impact onwholesale
constraints when exporting. constraints and when importing exacerbate network reduce may England of south to the to GB. Conversely interconnectors connected GB and increase constraints when importing help alleviate constraints when exporting from Interconnectors connected in the may north south. the in demand of levels to high north the in generation of levels high from flowing as summarised be can network GB the across Flows case. base to the relative costs constraint attributable negative and positive of range wide by the 6.5 6.4 and Figures in seen be can This boundaries are strained further or relieved. costs increase or decrease as network system balancing, as balancing mechanism
Chapter six 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 Consumer Power 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 Steady State highest lowest to in each scenario. It can produce options some while that seen be significant positive welfare relativeto the base case, the majority produce less. This is a result already interconnection of level high the of included within the base case. additional SEW benefits are reduced. This is increase shows which 6.8, Figure in shown in welfare for all interconnector options and scenarios, relative the to base case. 14 13 12
11 Interconnector options 10 9 8 7 Slow Progression 6 5 4 3 2
1 0 Two Degrees
100 400 300 200
-100 -200 -300 Attributable Welfare (£ millions) (£ Welfare Attributable Figure 6.8 shows the total European welfare relative the to base case for all 29 interconnector options for all four scenarios, with the 2025. in connecting options interconnector interconnector 29 the axis shows horizontal The options from 6.2 (excluding Table the base case). The results have been ordered from Combined increases in welfare for all years, all Europe Combined increases in Figure 6.8 These price changes drive increases in increases changes drive These price European welfare. However as stated prices increased, is capacity as previously, between the two markets converge and 118 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection Figure 6.9 shows the annual CO annual the 6.9 shows Figure Reduction inCO 6.9 Figure how 6.9 shows Figure fuels. fossil use well may more expensive sources of generation, which replace may power exported The curtailed. than rather exported, to be power surplus allows renewable sources of power. Interconnection to access increase also can Interconnectors 6.5.4.2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 119 Ireland and Norway, and for the base case for for case base the for and Norway, and Ireland inclusion of the additional interconnectors to the 2with iteration from path optimal the for CO2 (millions of tonnes) 1000 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 0 SS It1Basecase 2025
Environmental implications Environmental 2026 2 outputovertheoptimalpath 2027 2028 SS It2B6+B8NorwayZone1 2 emissions emissions 2029 2030 capacity increases. energy sources is reduced as interconnection as the requirement to curtail clean renewable study, the of length the over output dioxide carbon of level the in areduction is there tonnes over the thirteen-year period modelled. million 550 over of emissions CO2 in reduction interconnection results in an increased iteration 1 that includes neither. The additional 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
2037 Chapter six
8,387 35,384 203,550 523,105 2037 RES curtailment (MWh) RES much greater levels of renewable generation. generation. renewable of levels greater much The Two DegreesThe Two optimal path results in a RES curtailment reduction of over MWh. million 6
1,561,370 3,511,188 6,794,181 29,824 2025
Consumer Power It2 B6+B8 Norway Zone 1 Slow Progression It2 B6+B8 Norway Zone 1 DegreesTwo It2 B6+B8 Norway Zone 1 Steady State It2 B6+B8 Norway Zone 1 Scenario & option & Scenario Table 6.4 shows 6.4 Table the reduction in RES interconnector optimal the within curtailment reduction The scenarios. four all for solution in RES curtailment considerably is higher RES in within Degreesthe Two scenario due the to Table 6.4 Table Energy Source (RES) curtailment Reduction in Renewable 120 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter six Interconnection analysis Interconnection 1.5 developers. The analysis added an additional for generators and income for interconnector profits increased consumers, for to savings dispatch of generation across Europe, leading efficient more the enables Interconnection Europe, both economically and environmentally. and GB for value creating for opportunity an to present continue interconnection of The analysis shows that increased levels 6.6 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 121 this analysis will influence the outcome for for outcome the influence will analysis this of scope the outside factors other many as aforecast, not is this that to restate important GB interconnection capacity of 4 of capacity interconnection GB This is more than a quadrupling of existing 17.4 of capacity interconnection total interconnection base case, resulting in a 15.9the Interconnectors consultationin2018. to yourinvolvementintheNOAfor ancillary services.We lookforward offer, includingtheprovision of and solutionsinterconnectors can investigate theoperabilitychallenges Interconnectors 2018/19weintendto increase itsvaluetoyou.ForNOAfor continue toimprove thisanalysisto We alsowanttoknowhowwecan your feedbackonthisyear’s analysis. stakeholder feedback.We wanttohear Interconnectors methodologybasedon This yearwedevelopedtheNOAfor GW of interconnection capacity to to capacity GW interconnection of Summary GW already included within the the within included GW already GW. It is GW. is It
GW.
still remain for additional GB interconnection. analysis does show that potential opportunities of the future of GB interconnection, but the snapshot apartial represent only can study creating value from interconnection mean this energy landscape and opportunities further for Europe’s of make-up the network, physical regarding developmentsUncertainty in the future interconnection. on impact an have will which variables the of some just are network GB to the services ancillary providing interconnection of benefits and construction costs and potential additional conditions, variations in network constraint and beyond. in future Uncertainty market GB interconnection over the next decade
Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 122 Chapter seven
Stakeholder engagement 123 Chapter seven Stakeholder engagement know what you need. in our 2018 we so programme engagement stakeholder publication, your and help to improve take Please it. part We’d like your this on NOA comments feedback and 7.1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 123 Introduction Introduction
Chapter seven
. for 2016/17, Committee which we list again here: again list we which process? NOA and use implied probabilities to strengthen strengthen to probabilities implied use and the methodology. How did you find the explanations for these new partsof the This year we developed the NOA on based methodology Interconnectors stakeholder feedback. want We hear to continue improve to this analysis to increase its value you. to We’ve broughtWe’ve in the NOA NOA about feedback Following your feedback on this year’s analysis. alsoWe want know to how we can we restructured chapter 5 so that it contained more narrative and less raw data. This data has moved a new to appendix A. Please tell us your views on changed how we’ve chapter 5. • • • spring and your views will be important in publication. the after and before that shaping willWe also publish results of the trials throughout the year as they emerge and your views will help shape how the extended approach is built into the annual NOA publishing a long-term roadmap in the the in roadmap long-term a publishing process. will We be sharing and testing the developments with a wide range of industry participants. If you would like get to involved or for a member of the team attend to an event talkto about them please get in contact via the email address on the following page We haveWe sought your views at various points through this NOA
in March . We will. We be publication. publication. . And because the two annual review process will help us Continuous development and the ETYS , andsince then feedback has been very NOA telling you how your views have been have views your how you telling considered, and reporting back on the process. engagement identifying and understanding ouridentifying understanding and opinions and views stakeholders’ constructive for opportunities providing process the throughout debate creating open and two-way communication discuss to stakeholders our with and outputs; and drivers assumptions, • The • • • Your feedbackYour is an important part of the the developing and revising continue we way NOA 7. 2 124 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network to developto the publication. encourage We’ll all interested parties get to involved, which will help us improve the publication every year. After we published the first NOA we can improve the NOA 2016 we received2016 some very helpful feedback. usedWe this make to changes the to second NOA design. report’s the about less and specialised Having explained more about the cost–benefit process in our methodology chapter we have looked improve to this area further. wouldWe like hear to more about how documents are closely related, make we’ll sure that the way we communicate and consult with you reflects this.makeWe’ll sure that the NOA publication continues add to value by: number of developments planned drive to further value from the NOA As mentioned in we have Chapter a 1, Chapter seven Stakeholder engagement ETYS/NOA stakeholderactivitiesprogramme Figure 7.1 methodology’s higher level aspirations already. the of some on started have and ahead further looking May, in been have we starts process NOA the of part some Because contents. its methodology, as well as the publication and the cover will 2018. consultation to June This now from you with conversations to having forward looking are we and process, review NOA the that Now • • • • views: to your to listen happy always We are 3 7. Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 125 published Jan through any means convenient for you. for convenient means any through at bilateral stakeholder meetings; and [email protected] through responses to customer seminars at consultation events such as our 2017/18 2017/18 Report Report NOA NOA Stakeholder engagement (end January to early May) to early January (end
Feb Stakeholder comments is published we’ll start the the we’ll start published is Internal review Mar
Apr
May published FES Jun 2018 2018 of the document. readability improves it if and changes We welcome your views on these A. appendix to data detailed more the of some moved also We have narrative. and content visual more has It the investment recommendations. Chapteramended 5, which describes and feedback of account taken We have Jul and form to Ofgem form and NOA Aug methodology Sep Oct ETYS published
2018 2018 Nov
Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018 126 Chapter eight
Appendix A – Economic analysis results Appendix B – SWW projects Appendix C – List of four-letter codes Appendix D – Meet the team Appendix E – Glossary Disclaimer Chapter eight Optimum DeliveryDates–ScotlandandtheNorthofEnglandregion Table A.1 andacross sensitivities. scenarios different optimal options with optimum dates delivery highlight results The analysis. cost–benefit our from results the A.1–3Tables present results Economic analysis A Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 127 CDRE CPRE DNEU DWNO E2DC E4DC ECU2 ECUP EHRE HAE2 HAEU HNNO HPNO LDQB LNRE NOHW NOR1 OENO TDH1 TDH2 THS1 TURC WHT2 WHTI WLTI Code Option Cellarhead to Drakelow reconductoring Padiham and Penwortham to Carrington Reconductor sections of Penwortham to Denny North 400/275kV Super Grid Transformer 2 Transformer Grid Super 400/275kV North Denny Denny to Wishaw reinforcement 400kV to Hawthorn Pit Hawthorn to Eastern subsea HVDC Link from Torness to Hawthorn Pit Hawthorn to Eastern subsea HVDC Link from Peterhead East Coast onshore 275kV upgrade reinforcement incremental 400kV onshore Coast East Elvanfoot to Harker reconductoring toHarker Elvanfoot Harker SuperGrid Transformer 5 replacement Harker SuperGrid Transformer 6 replacement Hunterston East–Neilston reinforcement 400kV east and Lancashire north the between circuit east–west New Lister Drive quad booster Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit circuit 400kV single toNorton Lackenby Reconductor to Osbaldwick 400kV double circuit Norton the of 55km uprate Thermal 400kV double400kV circuit Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick Central Yorkshire reinforcement Drax to Thornton 2 circuit thermal uprating uprating thermal 2circuit Thornton to Drax Drax to Thornton 1 circuit thermal uprating thermal 1circuit toThornton Drax Install series reactors at Thornton at reactors series Install Reactive compensation at Tummel compensation Reactive at Hawthorn Pit (with a different delivery year to year WHTI) delivery adifferent (with Pit Hawthorn at circuit Hartlepool to Boldon West of Turn-in at Hawthorn Pit Hawthorn at circuit Hartlepool to Boldon West of Turn-in turn-in to Denny North 275kV substation 275kV North toDenny turn-in Windyhill to Lambhill to Longannet 275kV circuit Description Description
Critical options are in bold the same as their EISD are deemed 'critical'. is that date delivery optimum an with Options 2021 2021 2021 2028 2027 2028 2023 2026 2023 2022 2021 2023 2027 2020 2021 2019 2021 2026 2019 2019 2022 2022 2022 2021 2021 EISD Degrees Two 2028 2021 2026 2028 2027 2028 2023 2026 2029 2027 2029 2023 2028 N/A 2025 2024 2021 2027 2019 2025 2023 2026 N/A 2021 2023
Progression Slow 2028 N/A N/A 2028 2027 2028 2023 2026 2028 2027 2021 2023 2028 2021 2026 2025 2021 2027 2019 2026 2023 N/A N/A 2021 2023 Optimum Delivery Date . Power Consumer 2028 N/A N/A 2028 2027 2028 2023 2026 2028 2027 2021 2023 2028 N/A 2026 2025 2021 2027 2020 2026 2023 N/A 2022 N/A 2023 State Steady N/A N/A N/A 2030 N/A 2028 2023 2026 N/A N/A 2021 2023 N/A N/A 2028 N/A 2023 N/A N/A N/A 2028 N/A 2023 N/A 2023
Chapter eight
Contracted B Contracted No Local Local No
2023 2023 2022 2023 2027 2021 2022 2020 2021 2028 2025 2020 2024 2021 N/A
Contracted A Contracted No Local Local No
2023 2023 2022 2023 2027 2021 2022 2020 2021 2028 2025 2020 2024 2021 N/A
Contracted B Contracted Local Local
2023 2023 2022 2023 2028 2021 2022 2020 2021 2029 2025 2020 2024 2021 2027
Contracted A Contracted Local Local
2023 2023 2022 2022 2025 2021 2022 2020 2021 2027 2025 2020 2024 2021 2027 Steady State Steady
N/A 2023 N/A 2023 N/A 2021 2032 2023 2026 2025 N/A 2020 2024 2021 2027
Optimum Delivery Date Delivery Optimum Power Consumer Consumer
N/A 2023 N/A 2023 2029 2021 2025 2020 2021 2021 2026 2020 2024 2021 N/A
Progression Slow Slow
2023 2023 2023 2023 2030 2021 2025 2020 2021 2029 2026 2020 2024 2021 2027 Two Degrees Two 2023 2023 2022 2023 2027 2021 2022 2020 2021 2029 2025 2020 2024 2021 N/A EISD 2019 2023 2022 2020 2025 2019 2022 2020 2020 2019 2023 2020 2021 2020 2027
Bramley to Fleet circuits circuits Fleet to Bramley uprating thermal Description 225MVAr MSCs at Main Burwell Bolney and Ninfield Ninfield and Bolney reactive additional compensation Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor of Bramford to Braintree to Rayleigh route A new 400kVdouble between circuit and Bramford Twinstead Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor of Coryton South to Tilbury circuit Second Elstree to St John's Wood 400kV circuit Fleet to Lovedean (with reconductoring different conductor a type to FLRE) Thermal upgrade for for upgrade Thermal Kingsnorth and Grain 400kV substation Hinkley Point to circuits Melksham uprating thermal Uprate Hackney, Hackney, Uprate Waltham and Tottenham Cross 275kV to 400kV Kemsley to circuits Littlebrook uprating Reconductor Bramford Bramford Reconductor Norwich double to circuit Reconductor remainder remainder Reconductor of Rayleigh to Tilbury circuit New 400kV 400kV New route transmission south between London and the south coast ( an alternative design to SCN1 ) BFHW Option Code BMMS BNRC BRRE BTNO CTRE ESC1 FLR2 GKEU HMHW HWUP KLRE NBRE RTRE SCN2 Table A.2 Table – the South and East of England region Optimum Delivery Dates 128 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight Optimum DeliveryDates–theSouthandEastofEnglandregioncontinued Table A.2 results Economic analysis A Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 129 WYTI WYQB TKRE THRE SER2 SER1 SEEU SCRC Code Option Wymondley turn-in boosters Wymondley quad Upgrade Kingsnorth to Tilbury and Grain to Tilbury circuit double toTaunton Point Reconductor Hinkley reconductoring circuit turn-in and 2 Elstree–Sundon reconductoring toSundon Elstree scheme switching protective compensation Reactive compensation coast reactive South East Description
2021 2021 2025 2021 2021 2021 2021 2018 EISD 2021 2022 2025 N/A 2022 2022 2021 2018
Two Degrees 2021 2022 2025 2032 2025 2022 2021 2018
Slow Progression 2021 2022 2025 N/A 2025 2022 2021 2018
Consumer
Power Optimum Delivery Date 2023 2024 2027 2027 2032 2024 2022 2018
Steady State 2021 2022 2025 2029 2022 2022 2021 2018
Local Contracted A 2021 2022 2025 2030 2022 2022 2021 2018
Local Contracted B 2021 2022 2025 N/A 2022 2022 2022 2018
No Local Contracted A 2021 2022 2025 N/A 2022 2022 2022 2018
No Local Contracted B Chapter eight Steady State Steady N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Consumer Consumer Power 2032 N/A 2030 2031 2030 N/A Optimum Delivery Date Delivery Optimum Slow Progression 2030 N/A 2028 2029 2028 N/A TwoDegrees 2029 2031 2028 2028 2028 2030 2021 2021 2022 EISD 2024 2024 2024
1 and 2 circuits Reconductor the Connah's Quay legs legs Quay Connah's the Reconductor of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay 1 and 2 circuits Reconductor Pentir legs of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 cable replacement – single core per phase Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 and 2 cables – second core per phase and reconductor of an overhead Description line section on the existing Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuit Pentir to Trawsfynydd second circuit Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuits – remaining the reconductor overhead line sections line overhead BCRE PBRE PTC1 PTC2 Option Code PTNO PTRE Table A.3 Table Midlands region and West – Wales Optimum Delivery Dates 130 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight Regrets for Scotland and the North of England region options Regrets forScotlandandtheNorthofEnglandregionoptions Table A.4 and sensitivities. The best strategy with the regretseconomic across scenarios different their with listed are strategies investment 10 top The analysis. regret least year single our from results the present A.4–5 Tables results Economic analysis A Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 131 Combination except WHT2 except (1) Progress all critical options except WHT2 and TDH1 and WHT2 except (2) Progress all critical options except TDH1 except (3) Progress all critical options except HAEU (4) Progress all critical options (5) Progress all critical options except HAEU and TDH1 and HAEU except except HAEU, CPRE and WHT2 and CPRE HAEU, except (6) Progress all critical options except HAEU and CPRE and HAEU except (7) Progress all critical options except CPRE except (8) Progress all critical options HAEU, TDH1, CPRE and WHT2 and TDH1, CPRE HAEU, (9) Progress all critical options except except HAEU, TDH1 and CPRE and TDH1 HAEU, except (10) Progress all critical options
Two Degrees Two £0.05m £0.71m £0.74m £0.03m £0.69m £30.73m £30.76m £30.81m £31.39m £31.42m Progression Slow £1.12m £1.11m £0.81m £15.58m £15.58m £15.67m £15.37m £0.59m £15.67m £15.36m no result for the region is presented. is region the for result no Wales and West Midlands region, hence There is no critical option found for the green in highlighted is regret worst least Power Consumer £0.22m £6.18m £6.20m £6.10m £12.06m £5.86m £5.89m £0.03m £11.82m £11.84m Steady State £3.47m £3.36m £3.36m £10.66m £10.55m £10.44m £10.45m £3.25m £10.33m £10.33m Worst regret £3.47m £6.18m £6.20m £15.58m £15.58m £30.73m £30.76m £30.81m £31.39m £31.42m
.
Chapter eight Worst regret Worst
£0.02m £0.03m £0.84m £0.85m £6.94m £6.95m £7.74m £7.76m £10.59m £10.61m
Contracted B Contracted No Local Local No
£0.01m £0.00m £0.84m £0.85m £0.00m £0.01m £0.84m £0.85m £2.65m £2.66m
Contracted A Contracted No Local Local No
£0.00m £0.03m £0.80m £0.77m £0.03m £0.00m £0.80m £0.77m £6.91m £6.93m
Contracted B Contracted Local Local
£0.01m £0.00m £0.82m £0.83m £6.94m £6.95m £7.74m £7.76m £10.59m £10.61m
Contracted A Contracted Local Local
£0.02m £0.00m £0.75m £0.77m £4.24m £4.26m £4.99m £5.01m £9.64m £9.66m Steady State Steady
£0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m £0.00m
Power Consumer Consumer
£0.00m £0.00m £0.02m £0.02m £4.18m £4.18m £4.20m £4.20m £0.00m £0.00m
Progression Slow Slow
£0.00m £0.00m £0.62m £0.62m £1.39m £1.39m £1.93m £1.93m £0.00m £0.00m Two Degrees Two £0.01m £0.00m £0.21m £0.21m £2.34m £2.34m £2.54m £2.55m £7.20 m £7.21m
Combination options critical all Progress (1) except ESC1 (2) Progress all critical options critical all Progress (2) (3) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (3) except WYTI (4) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (4) except WYTI and ESC1 (5) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (5) except SEEU (6) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (6) except ESC1 and SEEU (7) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (7) except WYTI SEEU (8) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (8) except WYTI, ESC1 and SEEU (9) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (9) except BNRC (10) Progress all critical options options critical all Progress (10) except BNRC and ESC1 Table A.5 Table East of England region optionsRegrets for the South and 132 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight • • • in developing the options include: account into taken factors The Island. Shetland the on supply of security the to improve help The Shetland link reinforcement would also facilitate the connection of the island generation. to mainland Scottish the and Shetland between considered to provide transmission capacity been have options reinforcement of A number 2. MITS. GB the into export facilitate to required be will mainland Scottish to the alink projects these of aconsequence As to 105 up of projects energy wind onshore of developers from interests further are There Voe Terminal. 15 and Station 67 contracted for connection. This excludes 496 of atotal is There (MITS). System Transmission Shetland and the GB Main Interconnected between connection no is there At present, toseeking invest in onshore wind projects. targeted, have developers that resources renewable attractive possesses Shetland 1. 8.1 Projects SWW B Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 133 Background Option development Option on the island). renewables in growth future for potential Capacity (MW rating including the Current (AC) technology). (HVDC) technology versus Alternating Technology (High Voltage Direct Current mainland). UK the on MITS the and Shetland Corridor (the geographical route between MW of diesel generation at Lerwick Power Power Lerwick at generation diesel of MW Shetland Link Shetland MW of generation connected and and connected generation of MW MW. MW of export from the Sullom Sullom the from export of MW
converter at Blackhillock. a 600 and Kergord at converter a600 and substation a132kV AC GIS includes work The and the Blackhillock substation in Moray. connection between Shetland (at Kergord) 600 a343km, Construct 450 a and a 132kV substation AC GIS includes work The scheme. HVDC a three-terminal to form Caithness) (in Head Noss at Station Switching 2018 HVDC in the via completed be to due link HVDC to Moray Caithness the and connection between Shetland (at Kergord) 450 a278km, Construct (b) a 600 Insulated Switchgear (GIS) substation and a132kV AC Gas includes work The scheme. HVDC athree-terminal to form Caithness) (in Head Noss at Station Switching HVDC the via 2018 in completed to be due link HVDC Moray Shetland (at Kergord) and the Caithness to Converter (VSC) HVDC connection between 600 a278km, Construct (a) Options 2.1 given below. are considered options the of Details (c) 450 to Shetland Caithness 600 to Shetland Caithness 600 to Shetland Moray MW VSC HVDC converter at Kergord. at converter HVDC VSC MW MW VSC HVDC converter at Kergord. at converter HVDC VSC MW MW VSC HVDC HVDC VSC MW MW VSC HVDC HVDC VSC MW MW Voltage Sourced Sourced Voltage MW MW VSC HVDC HVDC VSC MW MW subsea link subsea MW MW subsea link subsea MW MW subsea link subsea MW MW MW
Chapter eight
Progression of key planning and planning key of Progression consenting activities. submission. Case Needs a of Preparation engagement. stakeholder of Continuation engineering design. of Completion outstanding Commencement of procurement. 2.3 Status the UK Government OctoberOn 12 2017, confirmed the intentionto include remote the in schemes generation Island Scottish for Contracts technologies emerging next Difference auction It is expected in 2019. that the results of this auction will be known by allowingOctober 2019, approval of the Needs contract construction the of award and Case in the first quarter 2020. of Construction would be expected be to complete towards the end of and 2023, the option in service the by first quarter Over the of 2024. next six months the key activities on this project include: • • • • •
MW HVDC link is MW HVDC link option MW HVDC subsea linkoption MW HVDC link reinforcement is more would leave too much generation being generation much too leave would penetration large a is there when constrained identified as the least worst regret option. 2.2 option Currentlead was that exercise optioneering an Following undertaken identify to the mosteconomic, efficient and coordinated option, the Caithness Shetlandto 600 was identified as the lead option. This is because there are high wind load factors on Shetland and the 450 than recovered reductions by in constraint scenario penetration wind high the under costs and therefore the 600 of wind on the islands. The additional cost of the 600 134 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight generation to the MITS. facilitate the connection and export of the to mainland Scottish to the Orkney from link Transmission is proposing a new transmission SHE commitment, this of aconsequence As as a consortia. applied to SHEPD for connection number of embedded generators that have a been have there addition, In MITS. to the generation that is contracted for connection 461 of atotal is There capacity. full at operating now is scheme ANM The cables. 33kV the of limit 'firm' the beyond generation This has enabled connection of additional Active Network Management (ANM) scheme. an through island the on solution a flexible operates SHEPD (MITS). System Transmission Point on the GB Main Interconnected cable connections from Thurso Grid Supply subsea 33kV two via (SHEPD) Distribution Power Electric Hydro by Scottish supplied is island the and Orkney on infrastructure transmission no is there At present projects. in in particular marine and onshore wind to invest seeking developers with resources The Orkney archipelago is rich in renewable 1. 8.2 Projects SWW B Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 135 Background Orkney Link Orkney
MW of of MW • • • • • • considered in developing the options include: criteria The island. to the supply power of security the to improve help also would island, the from generation new of export and reinforcement, while providing connection the islands’ generation. The Orkney Link mainland to facilitate the connection of Scottish the and Orkney between capacity considered to provide additional transmission Several reinforcement options have been Option2. development on the islands). renewables in growth future for potential Capacity (MW rating including the Current (AC) technology). (HVDC) technology versus Alternating Technology (High Voltage Direct Current offshore considerations). and onshore both include (this consent Environmental considerations and planning mainland). UK the on MITS the and Orkney Corridor (the geographical route between Alternative commercial arrangements. Stakeholder Engagement.
Chapter eight
Continuation of stakeholder engagement. stakeholder of Continuation analysis cost–benefit of Conclusion with the SO. Submission of the SWW Needs Case 2018. in Q1 alternative on consultation Public and planning key of Continuation consenting activities. SWW Project Assessment submission commercial arrangements 2018. in Q1 in Q2 2018. 2.2 Current lead option assessment route carrying the After out the SHE Transmission preference is for the link subsea Finstown Orkney, to Dounreay route option. A further optioneering exercise exercise further optioneering A option. route is being carried out investigate to the impact of the design, timing and capacity of the link. proposed 2.3 Status In order meet to the Orkney link target completion date it of 2022, is expected that the submission of the SWW Needs Case followedwill be 2018 a Project by in Q1 work construction The Q3. in Assessment would be expected start to in Over 2020. the next six months the key activities include: • • • • • •
MW 220kV cable HVAC link MW 220kV cable HVAC link Details of the preferred options considered are given below. 2.1 Options link subsea Finstown Orkney, to Dounreay (a) Install a 220 at Finstown the cable will connect a new to double132kV busbar SGT. via a 220/132kV double 132kV substation Finstown The busbar will interface with the new 132kV facilitate to infrastructure transmission local from export and connection generation island. the (b) Dounreay Orkney, to Orphir subsea link Install a 220 at Orphir the cable will connect a new to double132kV busbar SGT. via a 220/132kV The Orphir substation double 132kV busbarwill transmission local 132kV new the with interface connection generation facilitate to infrastructure and export from the island. approximately 70km in length (55km subsea and land) 15km between Dounreay and landfall with Island Orkney the in Finstown around Billia Croo on the west cost of Orkney. DounreayAt the 220kV cable is proposed to 275/220kV a via busbar 275kV the on connect similarly and (SGT) Transformer SuperGrid approximately 60km in length (46km subsea land)and 14km between Dounreay and Orphir around landfall with Island Orkney the in Rackwick Dounreay At Bay on Hoy. the 220kV cable is proposed connect to on the 275kV busbar via and a 275/220kVSGT similarly 136 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight • • • connection to the Scottish mainland 132kV arestricted with operates system Isles Western existing the At present projects. toseeking invest in wind and marine generation resources which developers have targeted, renewable attractive possess Isles Western The 1. 8.3 Projects SWW B Appendix 1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 137 the link reinforcement options include: The factors taken into account in developing generation facilities currently in place. requirement on two stand-by diesel the reduce and Isles Western the on supply of security the to improve help also would reinforcement link Isles Western The the connection of the island generation. to facilitate order in mainland Scottish the and Isles Western the between capacity developed to provide additional transmission been have options reinforcement of A number 2. System (MITS). onto the GB Main Interconnected Transmission willmainland be required to facilitate export Scottish to the link capacity ahigher projects generation these of aconsequence As for connection. of generation either connected or contracted 431 of capacity generation Single circuit connection from Fort Augustus which includes a 33kV subsea cable section between Ardmore and Harris. Background Option development Option on the island). renewables in growth future for potential Capacity (MW rating including the Current (AC) technology). (HVDC) technology versus Alternating Technology (High Voltage Direct Current UK mainland). the on MITS the and Isles Western Corridor (the geographical route between Western Link Isles MW is made up up made is MW 1
. A total . Atotal
infrastructure via a 132kV GIS substation. Lewis local the with interface will circuit the At Arnish substation. GIS a400kV via (MITS) Main Interconnected Transmission System GB the with interface will circuit the At Beauly, Arnish. and Beauly at located be will stations 450 The cable. Arnish) and and offshore cable (79km between Dundonnell Dundonnell) and Beauly between (77km cable onshore of amix be will circuit The Scotland. of coast west the on Dundonnell via Lewis of Isle the of coast east the on Arnish and Inverness) of west north (located mainland Scottish the on Beauly between a450 Construct HVDC Link (b) infrastructure via a 132kV GIS substation. Lewis local the with interface will circuit the At Gravir substation. GIS a400kV via MITS GB the with interface will circuit the At Beauly, Gravir. and Beauly at located be will stations 450 The Gravir). and Dundonnell between (80km cable offshore and Dundonnell) and Beauly between (77km cable onshore of amix be will circuit The Scotland. of coast west the on Dundonnell via Lewis of Isle the of coast east the on Gravir and Inverness) of west north (located mainland Scottish the on Beauly Converter (VSC) HVDC connection between a450 Construct HVDC Link (a) Options 2.1 given below. are considered options the of Details 450 Arnish Isles, to Western Beauly 450 Gravir Isles, to Western Beauly MW VSC HVDC connection connection HVDC VSC MW Sourced Voltage MW MW converter converter MW MW converter converter MW
MW MW MW MW
Chapter eight
Conclusion of tender negotiations and negotiations tender of Conclusion appointment of a Preferred Contractor. and planning key of Progression consenting activities. submission. Case Needs of Preparation engagement. stakeholder of Continuation 2.3 Status the UK Government OctoberOn 12 2017, confirmed the intentionto include remote next the in schemes generation Island Scottish Difference for Contracts technologies emerging auction It is expected in 2019. that the results of this auction will be known October by allowing2019, approval of the NeedsCase and award of the construction contract in the first quarter 2020. of Construction would be expected be to complete in early and 2023, the option in service theby end of that Over year. the next six months the key activities include: • • • •
MW MW HVDC Link to MW converter stations MW VSC HVDC connection Beauly Western to Isles, Arnish 600 (c) HVDC Link HVDC Construct a 600 between Beauly on the Scottish mainland (located north west of Inverness) and Arnish on the east coast of the Isle of Lewis via Dundonnell on the west coast of Scotland. The circuit will be a mix of onshore cable (77km between Beauly and Dundonnell) and Dundonnell between (79km cable offshore and Arnish). The 600 will be located at Beauly and Arnish. Beauly, At the circuit will interface with the GB MITS via a 400kV GIS substation. Arnish At the circuit will interface with the local Lewis infrastructure GISvia substation. a 132kV 2.2 Current lead option undertaken was exercise optioneering An identifyto the most economic, efficient and Based option. development coordinated on the initial cost–benefit analysis, the current lead option is the 450 Arnish. The is TO currently progressing a retender exercise for provision of the HVDC Link. The optioneering work will need be to may This concluded. is this when revisited result in an alternative least worst regret option. 138 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight with the NETS SQSS NETS the with accordance in capability transfer the improve to proposed are reinforcements of A number (B6). NGET and (SPT) Transmission SP between and (B4) Transmission SP and boundaries between SHE Transmission key includes This Scotland. in generation area arising from predominantly new renewable National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) B7a and the area in Transmission) (SHE in the Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission Transmission system between boundaries B1 England northern and Scottish the of coast east the on capability transfer to south north the B7,B6, to increase is B7a. objective The B1, B1a, boundaries B2, B5, B4, MITS the of projects increase capability on one or multiple as onshore reinforcement. These reinforcement region includes offshore HVDC links as well northern the in network eastern the for included reinforcements the of scope The 1. 8.4 Projects SWW B Appendix 3 2 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 139 boundaries B6 down to B7a. down B6 boundaries on capability transfer B7a. increases E2DC to B1 down boundaries on capability transfer E4DC increases link. the of end either on works 2 Both options involve the construction of a (E2DC). Pit to Hawthorn Scotland east south in Torness from (E4DC), other the England east north in Pit to Hawthorn Scotland east north in Peterhead from –one links HVDC subsea eastern offshore two are there transmission licences. Of these reinforcements, Transmission Owners’ obligations in their The Required Transfer figures shown take into account interconnectors connecting to the GB Transmission system in the 2016 the in system GB the Transmission to connecting 2017 and Future Energy Scenarios interconnectors account into take shown figures Transfer Required The Owners have licence obligations to develop their transmission systems in accordance with the NETS SQSS. The NETS SQSS is the National Electricity Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard. GB Transmission GW HVDC link and associated AC onshore AC onshore associated and link GW HVDC Background Eastern Network Reinforcement Network Eastern 2 and pursuant to the to the pursuant and .
2017 2017 2016 the in and scenarios four the for B6 and B4 further networkfurther reinforcement. for arequirement shows capability network the difference between the Required Transfers and The reinforcements. approved for increases capability as well as boundaries two the across also show the current network capabilities 8.2 show the Required Transfers Required the show 8.2 and in the of Firth Forth. Figure 8.1 and Figure Firth Moray the in situated windfarms offshore SHE Transmission and SPT areas, including of predominantly renewable generation in the growth by the fundamentally driven is network The requirement to reinforce the transmission • • • • in-service date (EISD): date in-service earliest the to maintain year this region northern the in network eastern the for reinforcements NOA The recommendation from the 2017 400kV. at to operate will be delivered by uprating these circuits capacity in uplift 275kV. at Further capability their augmenting B1a, by initially B4 and B2 Blackhillock and Kincardine that cross of the eastern onshore circuits between reinforcements involves increasing the capacity The scope of the eastern onshore E4DC – EISD of 2028. of E4DC – EISD 2027. of –EISD E2DC 2026. of –EISD (ECUP) reinforcement East Coast onshore 400kV incremental 2023. of EISD East Coast onshore 275kV upgrade (ECU2) – process is to progress the following Future Energy Scenarios (FES) Scenarios Energy Future 3 for boundaries . The figures figures . The
Chapter eight 2041 2041 2039 2039 2037 2037 2035 2035 2033 2033 Base Capability Slow Progression 2017 No Progression 2016 Base Capability Slow Progression 2017 No Progression 2016 2031 2031 2029 2029 2027 2027 Two Degrees 2017 Two Degrees 2017 2025 2025 Consumer Power 2017 Consumer Power 2017 Slow Progression 2016 Slow Progression 2016 2023 2023 2021 2021 2019 2019
2017 0 2017 0 Gone Green 2016 Consumer Power 2016 Steady State 2017 Gone Green 2016 Consumer Power 2016 Steady State 2017
2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000
8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000
10,000 12,000 MW 14,000 12,000 10,000 16,000 MW Figure 8.2 capability Boundary B6 (SPT/NGET) required transfer and Figure 8.1 SPT) required transfer and capability Boundary B4 (SHE Transmission/ 140 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight across boundaries B1, B1a, B4. boundaries and B2 across provides additional transmission capacity at Longannet. This reinforcement option and Longannet, and uprate the cable sections Westfield Tealing, between 275kV circuits the re-profile Blackhillock, at transformers shifting Kincardine for 400kV operation, install phase- and Alyth Fetteresso, Kintore, Rothienorman, the 275kV circuits between Blackhillock, re-insulate Alyth, and Kintore Rothienorman, Establish new substations 400kV at (ECU4) (c) East Coast onshore 400kV reinforcement B1, B1a, B4. boundaries and B2 across provides additional transmission capacity Blackhillock. This reinforcement option transformers and at install phase-shifting operation 400kV for Kincardine and Alyth Rothienorman,Blackhillock, Kintore, Fetteresso, re-insulate the 275kV circuits between uprate substation Alyth for 400kV operation, Kintore, and Rothienorman at substations Following ECU2, establish new 400kV (ECUP) reinforcement (b) East Coast onshore 400kV incremental B4. and B1, B1a, boundaries B2 across capacity option provides additional transmission Kincardine and Longannet. This reinforcement at sections cable the uprate and Longannet, and Westfield Tealing, and Kincardine, and Alyth Kintore, between 275kV circuits the re-profile transformers, phase-shifting two extend Tealing 275kV substation and install including shunt reactive compensation at Alyth, Alyth, at 275kV substation anew Establish (a) East Coast onshore 275kV upgrade (ECU2) Options 2.1 consider onshore and offshore solutions. B1 to B7a. options These boundaries across capability boundary to improve region northern the in network eastern the for developed been have options reinforcement of A number Option2. development Projects SWW B Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 141
across boundaries B6, B7 and B7a. B7 B6, and boundaries across option provides additional thermal capacity equipment where required. This reinforcement east England, providing additional substation circuit into a suitable connection point in north border. Continue construction of the double SPT/NGET to the area Torness the from circuit east England. Construct a new 400kV double point on the transmission system in north substation in the Torness area to a connection 400kV anew from circuit double anew Install (TLNO) AC reinforcement England east to north Torness Link: to England Scotland Eastern (f) B7a. B7 B6, and boundaries across provides additional transmission capacity option reinforcement This area. the in works reconfiguration circuit associated and circuit substation, uprating of the Hawthorn Pit–Norton GIS Pit Hawthorn 400kV anew include Pit Hawthorn at works ACStation’. onshore The provide connection to the ‘Branxton Converter to bays GIS 400kV by two substation’ 400kV ‘Branxton pre-existing the of extension include end Torness the of vicinity the in works onshore AC The Pit. Hawthorn and Torness at works AC associated and stations converter AC/DC including Pit, to Hawthorn area Torness the from 2 offshore a new Construct (E2DC) HVDC Offshore Pit to Hawthorn Torness Link: to England Scotland (e) Eastern B1, B1a, B2, B7, B6, B5, B4, B7a. and transmission capacity across boundaries This reinforcement option provides additional area. the in works reconfiguration circuit Hawthorn Pit–Norton circuit and associated the of uprating substation, GIS Pit Hawthorn 400kV anew include Pit Hawthorn at works route to 400kV operation. The AC onshore Blackhillock–Rothienorman–Peterhead the upgrade of the 275kV circuits along the include end Peterhead the at works onshore AC The link. the of ends Pit Hawthorn and Peterhead the at works AC onshore AC/DC converter stations and associated to Hawthorn Pit (north of England), including Scotland) of east (north Peterhead from link 2 offshore anew Construct (E4DC) Pit to Hawthorn Peterhead from Link HVDC subsea Eastern (d) GW HVDC subsea link link subsea GW HVDC GW HVDC subsea subsea GW HVDC
Chapter eight
options options that the construction of the HVDC the of construction the that NOA 3. Status3. A joint team hasbeen established among the three onshore take TOs to the NOA and examine them in more detail as part of the preparation of a SWW initial Needs Case submission the to regulator. This team has been organised initially consider to system requirements and project delivery. The TOs are working with the who SO, will undertake a cost–benefit analysis of the reinforcement options in moredetail, help to identify optimum sequence and delivery dates for the reinforcements. Current plans are for preliminary subsea cable routeing and survey work carried out some technical Further refreshed. be to ago time required. be will surveys environmental and planningFor E4DC, permission for the 400kV substation at Peterhead has been granted and a preferred location for the convertor station at Peterhead has been identified. Design checks will be required for increasing the operating Peterhead between line overhead the of voltage and Blackhillock. For and E4DC E2DC, further preliminary works at the Hawthorn Pit end of details establish the to required be will link the of requirements in the area. It is expected in this for earlier delivery in the period 2023 for the works275kV and 2026 for the 400kV uprate. projects will take place between and 2025 The2028. onshore projects in the SHE scheduled are areas SPT and Transmission
.
,
2017/18 and Power Consumer 2017 generation background, background, generation 2017 scenarios this year and it is critical. FES E4DC isE4DC identified in the optimal path and critical in all four scenarios. It can provide boundary capabilities across B7a, to B1 2.2 Current lead options ECU2 In the E2DC, ECUP, NOA3, E4DC, and DWNO have been identified as the most efficient and economical reinforcements. Eastern(a) subsea HVDC Link from Peterhead Hawthornto Pit (E4DC) Based on FES which helps transfer renewable energy renewable transfer helps which a has It England. north east to surplus recommendation. 'proceed' (b) Eastern Scotland England to Link: Torness Hawthornto Pit Offshore HVDC(E2DC) E2DC is in optimal path forTwo Degrees 142 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Slow Progression Slow As required it is critical from the EISD 2027, and has a 'proceed' recommendation. across constraints transmission unlocks It boundary working B5 B7a, to together with other reinforcements and B8 area. in the B7a (ECU2) upgrade 275kV onshore Coast East (c) ECU2 has a 'proceed' recommendation in NOA3. It is justified reinforcement in all four It reinforces boundary B6, to especially B1 working well in B4. incremental 400kV onshore Coast East (d) reinforcement (ECUP) ECUP is in the optimal path and critical in all four scenarios. It unlocks system constraints from B6, to especially B1 meeting the needs for the B4 boundary. As per regret analysis, ECUP has a 'proceed' recommendation. Other options that feature in the NOA analysis for Scotland and the north of England threshold SWW the below fall that but region are likely be to considered in the SWW analysis. This is because they are interdependent to boundary improving of need common the meet capability. transfer Chapter eight reach circa 7 circa reach along this transmission route is forecast to the of capacity interconnectors connecting 10 years, next the In interconnector. one by three double circuits and currently connects system GB the of rest to the connected is It Estuaries. Thames and Severn the between England of Coast South the with parallel runs SC1 boundary Coast LE1.and South The SC1, are SC2, B10, B12,boundaries B15 power with continental Europe. The relevant exporting and importing by region the in flows power influences and Coast East South the Interconnection to Europe is present along Estuary. Thames the in generation and London in found demand the of much with generation, and demand power both of The South East region has a high concentration 1. 8.5 Projects SWW B Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 143 NOA3 in the South Coast area. area. Coast South the in NOA3 and circuit uprating, as by recommended compensation reactive by new delivered be will interconnectors. Further increases in capacity the forecast increase in generation and of the circuits connecting the region for levels, and to increase the thermal capability compliance at Coast South the in voltage the to maintain order in network the develop Reinforcements are therefore required to transfer capacity. boundary the limits This interconnectors. or unless the SO constrains generation and/ system faults occur collapse should certain and voltage to low lead will level transfer high at circuits long these in losses the time, over as other new generation capacity increases well as interconnectors of number the As Grain and Kingsnorth. Background South East Network Reinforcement Network South East GW, with a further 4 GW, afurther with GW at GW at
operational intertrip schemes. to investigate alternative options including continue TO will and SO The developed. sufficiently are TKRE from apart options These • • • • earliest in-service date (EISD): date in-service earliest the to maintain year this region Coast the following reinforcements for the South NOA the from recommendations other stage, early avery at is While the consideration of a new double circuit Options 2.1 compensations. reactive and route new transmission route, uprating existing a B12, consider B15 LE1. options and These SC1, SC2, B10, boundaries across capability boundary to improve region East South the in developed for the South East Coast network been have options reinforcement of A number 2. Option development Option Upgrade (TKRE) – EISD: 2025. –EISD: (TKRE) Upgrade toTilbury Grain to and Tilbury Kingsnorth 2020. –EISD: (FLRE/FLR2) Fleet to Lovedean reconductoring 2020. –EISD: (KLRE) Kemsley to Littlebrook circuits uprating 2018. –EISD: (SCRC) South East Coast reactive compensation process include progressing
Chapter eight
Status
2.2 Current lead option route transmission cost-effective new A East South the and London south between (option SCN2) has 2, been recommended to thermal and depression voltage the improve capacity in accordance with the NETS SQSS Owner’s Transmission the to pursuant and of consists reinforcement The obligations. circuit 400kV double new a constructing from the South Coast area south to London. SCN2 will increase the transfer capability on andLE1. B15 B12, boundaries B10, SC2, SC1, 3. 144 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network for the new transmission route between between route transmission new the for Coast East South the and London south (option National SCN2). 2, Grid will work with stakeholders in advance of an SWW submission. Case Needs Initial There has been limited work carried out out carried work limited been has There Chapter eight code Four-letter or has never been given the recommendation and/ new is option the if instance for numbers, available. Some options do not have scheme included the scheme number where it is order. We’ve alphabetical in is below list The throughout the in report tables and charts. four-letter codes. The four-letter codes appear NOA this in assessed options the of is below list The of four-letterList codes C Appendix BCRE BMMS BFRE BFHW BNRC BRRE BTNO CTRE CPR2 CPRE COVC COSC CDRE DWNO DREU DNEU E2DC E4DC ECU2 ECU4 ECUP EHRE FBRE ESC1 Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 145 publication together with their Description Quay 1and2circuits Reconductor theConnah'sQuaylegsofPentirtoBodelwyddanConnah’s 225MVAr MSCsatBurwellMain Bramley toFleetreconductoring Bramley toFleetcircuits thermaluprating Bolney andNinfieldadditional reactive compensation Reconductor remainder ofBramford toBraintree toRayleighroute A new400kVdoublecircuit betweenBramford andTwinstead Reconductor remainder of Coryton South to Tilbury circuitReconductor remainder ofCorytonSouthtoTilbury to Carrington Reconductor theremaining sectionsofPenworthamtoPadiham andPenwortham Reconductor sectionsofPenworthamtoPadihamandCarrington Two hybridSTATCOMS atCottam Series CompensationSouthofCottam Cellarhead toDrakelowreconductoring Denny to Wishaw 400kVreinforcementDenny toWishaw Generator circuit breaker replacement toruntwo-waysplit toallowThornton Denny North400/275kVSuperGridTransformer 2 Eastern subsea HVDCLinkfromEastern Torness Pit toHawthorn Eastern subseaHVDCLinkfrom Pit Eastern PeterheadtoHawthorn East Coastonshore 275kVupgrade East Coastonshore 400kVreinforcement East Coastonshore 400kVincremental reinforcement Elvanfoot toHarkerreconductoring Beauly toFyrish275kV doublecircuit reconductoring Second Elstree toStJohn'sWood 400kVcircuit
Instruction number and applies in Scotland. is the Transmission Owner Reinforcement NOA for benefit a boundary provide not do they if omitted are numbers option. Some options that might have scheme where schemes have been combined for an options have more than one scheme number Other assessments. previous in to proceed . The TORI number number TORI . The number TORI orscheme 32018L1 33452 33698, 33699 33458 20834_2A, 20834-2Q 20834-2, 20834-2C, 20834-5, 20834-6, 20834-4, 20834-3, 21847, 20834-1, 21850-1 SPT-RI-003 SPT-RI-126 025c, SHET-RI-025d RI-025b, SHET-RI- SHET-RI-025a, SHET- SHET-RI-009 SHET-RI-026 Variant ofSHET-RI-093, RI-026 SHET-RI-093, SHET- SPT-RI-231 RI-058 toSHET-Alternative
Chapter eight 31338, 31339, 21497-5 31832-2, 31832-3 21850-1 33712 30311, 30311-1L, 30311-1S, 30311-2, 30311-3C, 30311-6 33708 33711 32018L2 33705 20640 11630, 11630I, 11630F 20669 21590 20846-4 31671-2 TORI or scheme number New 400kV transmission route between south London and the south coast New 400kV transmission route (outline option 2 ) compensation South East coast reactive Substation reconfiguration and 225MVAr MSC at Ryhall and 225MVAr Substation reconfiguration between south London and the south coast New 400kV transmission route two alternative designs for this option) are (there Reconductor remainder of Rayleigh to TilburyReconductor remainder circuit Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuits – reconductor the remaining overhead line sections the remaining – reconductor circuits Pentir to Trawsfynydd Pentir to Trawsfynydd second circuit Pentir to Trawsfynydd Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 and 2 cables – second core per phase and reconductor per phase and reconductor 1 and 2 cables – second core Pentir to Trawsfynydd circuit of an overhead line section on the existing Pentir to Trawsfynydd Pentir to Trawsfynydd 1 cable replacement – single core per phase – single core 1 cable replacement Pentir to Trawsfynydd Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick number 2 400kV circuit Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick number 2 400kV between the north east and Lancashire New east–west circuit reinforcement Central Yorkshire thermal upgrade Osbaldwick to Thornton 1 circuit Reconductor Pentir legs of the Pentir to Bodelwyddan to Connah’s Quay 1 and 2 circuits Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick number 1 400kV circuit Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick number 1 400kV Thermal uprate 55km of the Norton to Osbaldwick 400kV double circuit Thermal uprate 55km of the Norton to Osbaldwick 400kV double circuit Reconductor 13.75km of Norton to Osbaldwick 400kV double Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit (alternative conductor) Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit thermal upgrade Lackenby to Thornton 1 circuit to 400kV double circuit Farm to Kirkby 275kV Uprate the Penwortham to Washway to Norwich double circuit Reconductor Bramford Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit Reconductor Lackenby to Norton single 400kV circuit Lister Drive quad booster Fleet to Lovedean reconductoring (alternative conductor) Fleet to Lovedean reconductoring Kingsnorth 400kV substation Thermal upgrade for Grain and to Keadby Beck to Keadby leg of the Creyke Reconductor Garforth Tee to Killingholme Circuit 5 replacement Harker SuperGrid Transformer 6 replacement Harker SuperGrid Transformer thermal uprating Hinkley Point to Melksham circuits reinforcement Hunterston East–Neilston 400kV between the north east and Lancashire New east–west circuit and Harker Fourstones to Stella West Reconductor Harker to Fourstones, 275kV circuit to Stella West West and Harker to Stella Uprate Harker to Fourstones, Fourstones to Stella West to 400kV 275kV circuit 275kV to 400kV Cross and Waltham Tottenham Uprate Hackney, uprating circuits Kemsley to Littlebrook Fleet to Lovedean reconductoring Description SCN2 SCRC RYEU SCN1 RTRE PTRE PTNO PTC2 PTC1 NOR4 NPNO OENO OTHW PBRE NOR2 NOHW NOR1 LNR2 LTR3 MRUP NBRE LNRE LDQB FLR2 GKEU GKRE HAE2 HAEU HMHW HNNO HPNO HSRE HSUP HWUP KLRE FLRE Four-letter Four-letter code 146 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight code Four-letter of four-letterList codes C Appendix SEEU THS1 THRE TDRE TDH2 TDH1 SPDC SER2 SER1 TURC TLNO TKRE WHTI WLTI WHT2 WYQB WYTI Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 147 Description Reactive compensationprotective switchingscheme Install seriesreactors atThornton Reconductor HinkleyPointtoTaunton doublecircuit doublecircuitReconductor DraxtoThornton 1circuitDrax toThornton thermaluprating 2circuitDrax toThornton thermaluprating Stella West toPadihamHVDCLink Elstree–Sundon 2circuit andreconductoring turn-in Elstree toSundonreconductoring Reactive compensationatTummel Torness tonortheastEnglandACreinforcement toKingsnorthUpgrade toGrainandTilbury Tilbury Turn-in ofWest BoldontoHartlepoolcircuit Pit atHawthorn 275kV substation toLambhillLongannet275kVcircuit toDennyNorth turn-in Windyhill (delivered ayearlaterthanWHTI) Turn-in ofWest BoldontoHartlepoolcircuit Pit atHawthorn Wymondley quadboosters Wymondley turn-in number TORI orscheme 33702 33506 SHET-RI-69 21898-1 SPT-RI-004 32581S 32586S Chapter eight
at: SP Transmission SP customers. our SHE Transmission SHE • • Don’t forget you can also email • us with your views on NOA Hannah Kirk-Wilson Hannah Manager Assessment Economic Technical [email protected] Cost–benefit analysis and the [email protected] Nicholas HarveyNicholas Development Network of Head [email protected] The Network Development team is ensure to the development of an efficient and operable transmission electricity offshore and GB capabilities understanding present by system and working out the best options meet to energy future that requirements possible the happen. might show scenarios Network Assessment Options Vincent Marc Manager Team Economics [email protected] Network requirements and the Ten Electricity StatementYear Whiteford James GB System Capability Manager [email protected]
.
team we are against models of the GB requires support and information Network Assessment Options Asset Management Asset National Grid Electricity Transmission Transmission Electricity Grid National Developing strategies to enable a secure and secure a enable to strategies Developing the in network transmission GB operable development network the against term long background. industry evolution and NETS to identify potential transmission transmission potential identify to NETS requirements and publish in the ETYS Supporting Needs Case studies of reinforcement options as part of the SWW process. Supporting cost–benefit studies of different designs. connections Testing theTesting FES from many people. Parties who provide of the NOA our makes that support information and include: possible work • Strategic network planning and production production and planning network Strategic Supporting parties • can contactYou us discuss to about: The • • • Network Development Julian Leslie Julian Electricity Capability, Network of Head [email protected] team (Electricity) Capability Network The engineering challenges the addresses Meet the NOA the Meet studying by operability network electricity of from the investment options stage in a to through landscape energy changing networkaccess just a day ahead of real time. Appendix D 148 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network In addition publishing to the NOA strategy holistic a developing for responsible for theNETS. This includes performing the activities: key following Chapter eight GB GWh GW FES ETYS EISD DNO CBA BID3 BEIS ACS Acronym Glossary E Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 149 Embedded generation line Double circuit overhead Contracted generation capacity Boundary transfer Boundary allowance Great Britain Gigawatt hour Gigawatt Scenarios Future Energy Statement Electricity Ten Year Earliest InServiceDate Operator Distribution Network Cost–benefit analysis Industrial Strategy Business, Energy& Department of Average coldspell Word Scotland andWales. A geographical,socialand economicgrouping of countries thatcontainsEngland, 1,000,000,000 watthours, aunitofenergy 1,000,000,000 watts,ameasure ofpower future operabilitychallengesandpotentialsolutions. point foralltransmissionnetworkandinvestment planning,andare used to identify and are usedtoframediscussionsandperformstress tests.Theyformthestarting the energyindustry. Theyare asetofscenarioscoveringtheperiodfrom nowto2050, The National ElectricityTransmission Systemcapability, future needs andopportunities. The demand ontheNationalElectricityTransmission System. National ElectricityTransmission SystemOperator (NETSO).Theyreduce electricity Power generatingstations/unitsthatdon’t haveacontractualagreement withthe in theproject wasstartedimmediately. The earliestdatewhentheproject couldbedelivered andputintoservice,ifinvestment Distribution networkoperatorsownandoperateelectricitydistributionnetworks. one span. a transmissionlinewhichconsistsoftwocircuits sharingthesametowersforatleast in SPTransmission system.Inthecaseofan offshore transmissionsystem,thisis Transmission's systemorNGET’s transmissionsystemorforatleasttwomiles consists oftwocircuits sharingthesametowersforatleastonespaninSHE In thecaseofonshore transmissionsystem,thisisalinewhich a transmissionentrycapacity(TEC)figure asa requirement ofsaidcontract. with theNationalElectricityTransmission System (NETS)onagivendatewhilehaving A termusedtoreference anygeneratorwhohasentered intoacontracttoconnect This toolcanhelptoprovide acomparativebaseforallprojects tobeconsidered. A methodofassessingthebenefitsagivenproject incomparisontothecosts. one ofarangedifferent faults. ensuring acceptabletransmissionsystemoperatingconditionswillexistfollowing on onesideofaboundarytotheregion ontheothersideofboundarywhile The maximumpre-fault powerthatthetransmissionsystemcancarryfrom theregion standards (SQSS). empirical methoddescribedinAppendixFofthesecurityandqualitysupply variations inlevelsofgenerationanddemand.Thisallowanceiscalculatedbyan NETS SQSSeconomyplannedtransfercondition,totakesomeaccountofyear-round An allowanceinMWtobeaddedwholeorparttransfersarisingoutofthe post-gate closure. System Operatortocalculateconstraintcostsitwouldincurbalancethesystem, for NationalGridtomodeltheimpactofelectricitynetworksinGB,allowing impact ofinterconnection betweenmarkets.BID3hasbeenspecificallydeveloped Consulting. ItcansimulateallEuropean powermarketssimultaneouslyincludingthe BID3 isaneconomicdispatchoptimisationmodelsuppliedbyPöyryManagement (DECC) whichclosedinJuly2016. were formerlytheresponsibility oftheDepartmentEnergyandClimateChange supplies andpromoteactiontomitigateclimatechange.Theseactivities international Strategy (BEIS)workstomakesure theUKhassecure, clean,affordable energy department.TheDepartmentofBusiness,Energy&Industrial A UKgovernment definitions ofACSpeakdemandfordifferent purposes. of beingexceededasaresult ofweathervariationalone.There are different which givesrisetoalevelofwinterpeakdemandhas50%chance Average coldspellisdefinedasaparticularcombinationofweatherelements Description FES isarangeofcredible futures whichhasbeen developedinconjunctionwith Electricity Ten Year StatementisanannualpublicationbyNationalGridillustrating
Chapter eight
Energy Scenarios (FES). is the process for assessing options for reinforcing the National Electricity for assessing options for reinforcing NOA is the process the most common form of electricity transmission and distribution, since it allowsthe most common form of electricity Description the voltage varies in a sinusoidal fashion,Electric power transmission in which is presently HVAC reverses direction. flow that periodically in a current resulting using a transformer. lowered the voltage level to be raised or as opposed continuous voltage and current The transmission of power using commonly used for point to point long-distanceto alternating HVDC is current. between markets. and allow suppliers to trade electricity to Europe by the peak power output over a period of time. The average power output divided wave technologies. Tidaland energy from tidal lagoons streams, of power. 1,000,000 watts, a measure hour. of power usage or consumption in 1 1,000,000 watt hours, a measure list of generators, sorted by the marginal cost of generation. An ordered transmission system This comprises all the 400kV and 275kV elements of the onshore operated transmission system and, in Scotland, the132kV elements of the onshore and/or subsea connections. HVDC offers various advantages over HVAC transmission, various advantages over HVAC offers and/or subsea connections. HVDC at each end to change the converters the use of costly power electronic but requires AC. voltage level and convert it to/from that connect the GB market transmission assets are Electricity interconnectors transmission system in parallel with the supergrid, and any elements of an offshore transformer circuits, operated in parallel with the supergrid, but excludes generation between the onshore connections to lower voltage systems, external interconnections systems transmission transmission system and external systems, and any offshore transmission system via single interface points. radially connected to the onshore and offshore System comprises the onshore The National Electricity Transmission and Scotland. It transmits high-voltage transmission systems of England, Wales the country. it is needed throughout to where it is produced where electricity from Britain that extend across The system is made up of high-voltage electricity wires transmission waters. It is owned and maintained by regional and nearby offshore system operator (SO). companies, while the system as a whole is operated by a single the Britain while owning National Grid acts as the NETSO for the whole of Great owned In Scotland, transmission assets are transmission assets in England and Wales. in the north of the Ltd (SHE Transmission) Electricty Transmission by Scottish Hydro in the south. SP Transmission country and Scottish Power Transmission used in the planning and operation of the National Electricity A set of standards Britain. For the avoidance of doubt the National Electricity System of Great Transmission transmission system and the System is made up of both the onshore Transmission transmission systems. offshore office plc (No. 2366977) whose registered National Grid Electricity Transmission is 1-3 Strand, London, WC2N 5EH the spring, summer andMaintenance and system access is typically undertaken during is favourable. Withautumn seasons when the system is less heavily loaded and access The planning and equipment unavailable the integrity of the system is reduced. circuits system security is maintained. to ensure controlled of the system access is carefully The that the sytem operator (SO) System (NETS) to meet the requirements Transmission its analysis of the Future finds from a non-ministerial government independent National Regulatory Authority, The UK’s of existing and future the interests department. Their principal objective is to protect electricity and gas consumers. waters. This term means wholly or partly in offshore which breakers circuit transmission system between two or more Part of an offshore cables, overhead lines and DC converters includes, for example, transformers, reactors, transmission circuits. but excludes busbars and onshore High voltage alternating current High voltage direct current Load factor Marine technologies Megawatt Megawatt hour Merit order Main Interconnected System Transmission Word Interconnector National Electricity System Transmission National Electricity System Transmission Operator National Electricity System Transmission Security and Quality of Supply Standards National Grid Electricity plc Transmission Network access Network Options Assessment Office of Gas and Electricity Markets Offshore transmission Offshore circuit HVAC HVDC MW MWh MITS Acronym NETS NETSO NETS SQSS NGET NOA OFGEM 150 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight SOF SGT PV Acronym Glossary E Appendix Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 151 System operability Switchgear Supergrid Summer minimum SP Transmission plc SHE Transmission Seasonal circuit ratings Real power Reactive power Ranking order generation background) background (aka Power supply Planned transfer Peak demand Operational intertripping circuit Onshore transmission Onshore Framework System Operability Supergrid transformer Photovoltaic Word of future electricitynetworksandidentifiesmeasures toensure thefuture operability. The parameters withinpre-defined limitssafely, economicallyandsustainably. The abilitytomaintainsystemstabilityandallof theassetratingsandoperational circuit breakers. switching activities.Thiscaninclude,butisnot limitedto,isolators/disconnectorsand The termusedtodescribecomponentsofasubstation thatcanbeusedtocarryout range. A termusedtodescribetransformersontheNETS thatoperateinthe275–400kV of 275kVandabove. That partoftheNationalElectricityTransmission Systemoperatedatanominalvoltage and September. Minimum demandtypicallyoccursataround 06:00amonaSundaybetweenMay The minimumpowerdemandoff thetransmissionnetworkinanyonefiscalyear: TechnologyOchil House,HamiltonInternational Park,Hamilton,G720HT. A companyregistered inScotlandwithnumberSC189126whoseregistered officeisat is situatedatInveralmondHS,200DunkeldRoad,Perth,Perthshire PH13AQ. Scottish Hydro-Electric Transmission (No.SC213461)whoseregistered office 400kV overheadlinemaybe20%lessinthesummerthanwinter. seasons asthecircuit’s capabilitytodissipateheatisreduced. Theratingofatypical The current carryingcapabilityofcircuits. Typically, thisreduces duringthewarmer power factorotherthan1. to aload.InanACsystem,real powerisaccompaniedbyreactive powerforany This term(sometimesreferred toas'activepower')provides theusefulenergy are saidtogeneratereactive power. are saidtoabsorbreactive power;thosewhichstore energybyvirtueofelectricfields Devices whichstore energybyvirtueofamagneticfieldproduced byaflowofcurrent and magneticfields.Thesefieldsstore energywhichchangesthrough eachACcycle. currentmovement inanalternating (AC)systemarisingfrom theproduction ofelectric Reactive powerisaconceptusedbyengineerstodescribethebackground energy and usedbytheNETSSQSS. A listofgeneratorssortedinorder oflikelihoodoperationattimewinterpeak The sources ofgenerationacross Great Britaintomeetthepowerdemand. boundary capability. A termtodescribeapointatwhichdemandissettheNationalPeakwhenanalysing materials. A methodofconvertingsolarenergyintodirect current electricityusingsemi-conducting of peakdemandare usedfordifferent purposes. at around 5:30pm on a week-day between December and February. Different definitions The maximumpowerdemandinanyonefiscalyear:Peaktypicallyoccurs frequency conditionsforanysecured event. It doesnotprovide additionaltransmissioncapacityandmustnotleadtounacceptable The automatictrippingofcircuit breakers toremove generatingunitsand/ordemand. busbars, generationcircuits andoffshore transmissioncircuits. includes, forexample,transformers,reactors, cablesandoverheadlinesbutexcludes Part oftheonshore transmissionsystembetweentwoormore circuit breakers which This termrefers toassetsthatare whollyonland. Description operation SOF identifiesthechallengesandopportunitieswhich existintheoperation
Chapter eight
entry point (which can be either onshore or offshore). This will be the maximum or offshore). entry point (which can be either onshore station, minuspower deliverable by all of the generating units within the power any auxiliary loads. of the transmission system. caused by the electrical resistance Power losses that are within transmission asset owners A collective term used to describe the three Scottish Hydro-Electric Britain, namely National Grid Electricity Transmission, Great Limited. Limited and SP Transmission Transmission gas or powerAn entity entrusted with transporting energy in the form of natural or national level, using fixed infrastructure. on a regional passes the substation without At some substations, a transmission circuit and circuit connecting to that substation. A turn-in the transmission breaks control settlement. control circuit. transmission offshore or an transmission circuit This is either an onshore power deliverable by a power station at its gridThe maximum amount of active diverts it into the substation. the electricity transmission system in Scotland, which is owned by Scottish Hydro in Scotland, which is owned by Scottish Hydro the electricity transmission system and Scottish Power. Electricity Transmission With and a tendency for higher system voltages during power demand reduced will operate and those that do run could bethe summer months, fewer generators the dynamic has a tendency to reduce power factor output. This condition at reduced analysis is usually performed for network stability stability of the NETS. Therefore the limiting period. as this represents summer minimum demand conditions that allows TOs part of the RIIO-T1 price control This is a funding mechanism as not been funded in the price that have large investment projects to bring forward not necessarily own the assets concerned.not necessarily own the assets For example, National Grid operates Description energy in the form of natural gas or powerAn entity entrusted with transporting Unlike a TSO, the SO may infrastructure. or national level, using fixed on a regional Transmission losses Transmission Owners Transmission System Transmission Operators Turn-in Transmission circuit Transmission entry Transmission capacity System stability Strategic Wider Works System Operator Word TO TSO TEC SWW SO Acronym 152 2018 – January 2017/18 Assessment Options Network Chapter eight the National Grid group (nor the directors or the the or directors the (nor group Grid National the it. Neither NGET nor the other companies within use they which for purpose the for suitability and accuracy to its as enquiries own their make should and parties using information within the report of the information contained within the Document completeness and accuracy to the as made is or be can C27, of warranty no requirements the with been prepared and published in accordance Whilst the information within the Document has licence. transmission NGET the of accordance with Standard Condition C27 (‘C27’) in and charge without (‘NGET’) plc Transmission Document’) is published by National Grid Electricity Options Assessment The information contained within this Network Disclaimer Network OptionsAssessment2017/18 –January2018 153 Report document Report (‘the
Designs and Patents Act 1988. Act Patents and Designs Copyright, the of provisions the with accordance in except Grid National of permission written the whether or not transiently or incidentally) without and means electronic or medium any in restoring in any material form (including photocopying and reproduced be may Document this of part No Copyright National Grid 2018, all rights reserved. incurred. losses or damages any for law) by permitted of the information or Document or (to the extent made is which use any for responsibility any accept not does and misrepresentation) fraudulent or misstatement fraudulent than (other to rely seeks or relies Document the of recipient the which on any liability for any error or misstatement or opinion under be shall company) such any of employees
Network Options Assessment 2017/18 – January 2018
Continuing the conversation
Join our mailing list to receive email updates for NOA. www.nationalgrid.com/noa
Email us with your views on NOA at: [email protected] and we will get in touch.
Access our current and past National Grid UK NOA documents and data at: www.nationalgrid.com/noa
Keep up to date on key issues relating to National Grid via our Connecting website: www.nationalgridconnecting.com
You can write to us at: NOA Team Electricity Network Development National Grid House Warwick Technology Park Gallows Hill @nationalgriduk Warwick CV34 6DA
National Grid
NationalGridUK National Grid plc National Grid House, Warwick Technology Park, Gallows Hill, Warwick. CV34 6DA United Kingdom Registered in England and Wales No. 4031152 www.nationalgrid.com