DOCSLIB.ORG

Workgroup Consultation Responses…………………………….…..3 Code Administrator

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Workgroup Consultation Responses…………………………….…..3 Code Administrator Stage 02:04: WorkgroupCode Administrator Consultation Consultation -Connection Volume and 3 Use of System Code Connection(CUSC) and Use of System Code (CUSC) What stage is this CMP213 Project document at? InitialInitial Written 01 Assessment 02 Workgroup TransmiT TNUoS Consultation WorkgrWorkgroupoup 03 Report Developments 04 Code Administrator Consultation Draft CUSC 05 Modification Report Final CUSC Consultation Responses 06 Modification Report Published on: 10th April 2013 Any Questions? Contents Contact: Adelle McGill 1. Workgroup Consultation Responses…………………………….…..3 Code Administrator About this document adelle.mcgill@ nationalgrid.com This document contains the responses to the Workgroup Consultation which took place between 07 December 2012 and 15 January 2013. 01926 653142 Proposer: Ivo Spreeuwenberg Document Control Company National Grid Version Date Author Change Reference 1.0 10 April 2013 Code Administrator Publication to Industry 1. Workgroup Consultation Responses CUSC Workgroup Consultation Response Proforma CMP213 - Project TransmiT TNUoS Developments Industry parties are invited to respond to this consultation expressing their views and supplying the rationale for those views, particularly in respect of any specific questions detailed below. Please send your responses by 15 January 2013 to [email protected] . Please note that any responses received after the deadline or sent to a different email address may not receive due consideration by the Workgroup These responses will be considered by the Workgroup at their next meeting at which members will also consider any Workgroup Consultation Alternative Requests. Where appropriate, the Workgroup will record your response and its consideration of it within the final Workgroup report which is submitted to the CUSC Modifications Panel. Respondent: Marc Murray e-mail: [email protected] phone: 0131 524 1431 Company Name: Aquamarine Power Please express your views Aquamarine Power is the technology developer of the Oyster regarding the Workgroup Wave Power technology, which captures energy from near shore Consultation, including waves and converts it into clean sustainable electricity. A rationale. Scottish company, based in Edinburgh, we were established in 2005 with a clear mission; to make marine renewable energy (Please include any issues, mainstream through rapid and responsible commercialisation of suggestions or queries) the Oyster wave energy converter technology. Aquamarine Power has secured to date, through its associated development company Lewis Wave Power and its Brough Head Wave Farm Ltd development partner SSE Renewables, grid capacity of over 240MW for a number of projects based on the Scottish Islands. In common with the majority of planned projects (>95%) in the nascent wave industry, cost competitive and viable island connections are intrinsic to establishing the long term potential of this emergent new source of reliable renewable energy. We believe that the CMP 213 objectives of competition, cost reflectivity and reflecting transmission developments has been too narrowly interpreted by the working group and fails to address some of the key challenges facing the emergent wave industry and more generally the Scottish Islands; specifically: • The narrow interpretation of competition fails to take into account how the actions proposed by the workgroup in both the original and amended versions will impact competition between various forms of electrical generation technologies. Both the original and amended proposals create an artificially high barrier to entry to the UK energy market for wave technologies. Fundamentally the proposals are handing an unfair competitive advantage to other generation technologies which are not locational dependent. • Cost reflectivity has been too loosely applied when considering island technologies to “normal” onshore connections, with island connections facing localised charges that would not be charged for an onshore connection. Again artificially raising the barrier to entry for island developments, including wave technologies. There need to be comparable treatment with wider assets. At the very minimum we agree with the suggestion that HVDC connection costs should be treated in the same manner as AC connections (i.e. removal of the HVDC elements that are not included in the locational signal for an AC transmission network) • In terms of reflecting transmission developments, the Scottish Islands have been categorised or treated the same as an offshore wind development (as they both need HVDC connections). We believe that this is unwarranted and that the charging arrangements for the Scottish Islands should be considered separately to the offshore connections. The Scottish Islands need to be treated as the exception to the rule, taking into account their special circumstances. The islands should be treated as a strategic asset that requires a connection solution that encourages renewable connections on the islands, rather than creating a barrier to development. The distinct message is that the CMP 213 has failed to find a solution to the Scottish Island connection issue; instead the proposals more generally raise the barrier to achieving a sustainable solution to connecting the islands. • Finally we believe that other fundamental considerations should have been taken into account, such as security of supply and sustainability, which, although key criteria for both National Grid and Ofgem, have been given much less weighting than the heavy focus on locational cost reflectivity. A long term cost effective solution needs to be identified for the islands (without reliance on temporary support mechanisms such as ROCs or capping), which the workgroup has failed to address. Do you believe that the As stated before we believe that both proposals are inadequate proposed original better to address the Scottish Islands solution; specifically: facilitate the Applicable CUSC (a) Both methodologies present an artificial barrier to wave Objectives? Please include technologies to effectively compete within the UK generation your reasoning. market, with the resultant effect of reducing the UK’s security of supply. (b) The locational element in both charging methodologies has effectively “double accounted” transmission assets for island connections – effectively over charging on locational elements – we disagree with the over emphasis on locational charging and specifically seek more elements of the islands connections to be socialised (recognising it as a national asset, rather than a company asset which an offshore connection would be) Do you support the proposed For the Scottish Islands elements, we do not support either implementation approach? If approach. Instead a more fundamental solution to the Scottish not, please state why and Islands connections needs to be implemented, including the provide an alternative consideration of socialising the HVDC connection as part of the suggestion where possible. wider UK asset infrastructure (i.e. being the exception to the rule that treat connections beyond the nearest MITS station as local works) Specific questions for CMP213 Q Question Response 1 Do you believe that the Workgroup No, we believe that the scope of the review was too has fully considered the range of narrowly interpreted by the workgroup. In essence all options for addressing how charging that was considered was how Scottish renewable and structures should be applied English base loads interacted, failing to address/ geographically to areas dominated investigate the impact of diversity of generation types. by one type of generation, including The amended version effectively heightens the barrier on local circuits? If not, what other to Scottish Island connections. options would you like the Workgroup to consider and why? In addition the ability of different generation technologies being able to share the same transmission infrastructure (e.g. wave and wind) based on the intermittency of the generation characteristics needs to be considered (particularly on the local island networks). Q Question Response 2 Do you believe that the Workgroup has sufficiently reviewed all the necessary options on how a sharing factor (i.e. ALF) could be calculated. Are there any areas that you think may need further development? If so, please specify along with an associated justification. 3 On the subject of whether intermittent generation should be exposed to a Peak Security element of the tariff, do you have any views in addition to those discussed by the Workgroup? 4 Do you consider that the Workgroup As question 1 has adequately set out and considered all relevant options and potential alternatives on the sharing aspect of this modification proposal? If not, what other options would you like the Workgroup to consider and why? 5 What are your overall views on how best to reflect the differential impact of generators with distinct characteristics on incremental network costs into the TNUoS charging methodology? 6 Do you believe that the Workgroup has considered all relevant options and potential alternatives for how the expansion factor (i.e. unit cost) for an HVDC circuit paralleling the AC network should be calculated for inclusion in the TNUoS charging calculation? If not, please provide suggestions with an associated justification. Q Question Response 7 Do you believe that the Workgroup has satisfactorily considered all the options and potential alternatives for how an HVDC circuit paralleling the AC network
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lewis Wave Power Limited
    Lewis Wave Power Limited 40MW Oyster Wave Array North West Coast, Isle of Lewis Environmental Statement Volume 1: Non-Technical Summary March 2012 40MW Lewis Wave Array Environmental Statement 1. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction This document provides a Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the Environmental Statement (ES) produced in support of the consent application process for the North West Lewis Wave Array, hereafter known as the development. The ES is the formal report of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken by Lewis Wave Power Limited (hereafter known as Lewis Wave Power) into the potential impacts of the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning of the development. 1.2 Lewis Wave Power Limited Lewis Wave Power is a wholly owned subsidiary of Edinburgh based Aquamarine Power Limited, the technology developer of the Oyster wave power technology, which captures energy from near shore waves and converts it into clean sustainable electricity. Aquamarine Power installed the first full scale Oyster wave energy convertor (WEC) at the European Marine Energy Centre (EMEC) in Orkney, which began producing power to the National Grid for the first time in November 2009. That device has withstood two winters in the harsh Atlantic waters off the coast of Orkney in northern Scotland. Aquamarine Power recently installed the first of three next-generation devices also at EMEC which will form the first wave array of its type anywhere in the world. 1.3 Project details The wave array development will have the capacity to provide 40 Megawatts (MW), enough energy to power up to 38,000 homes and will contribute to meeting the Scottish Government’s targets of providing the equivalent of 100% of Scotland’s electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquamarine Power – Oyster* Biopower Systems – Biowave
    Wave Energy Converters (WECs) Aquamarine Power – Oyster* The Oyster is uniquely designed to harness wave energy in a near-shore environment. It is composed primarily of a simple mechanical hinged flap connected to the seabed at a depth of about 10 meters and is gravity moored. Each passing wave moves the flap, driving hydraulic pistons to deliver high pressure water via a pipeline to an onshore electrical turbine. AWS Ocean Energy – Archimedes Wave Swing™* The Archimedes Wave Swing is a seabed point-absorbing wave energy converter with a large air-filled cylinder that is submerged beneath the waves. As a wave crest approaches, the water pressure on the top of the cylinder increases and the upper part or 'floater' compresses the air within the cylinder to balance the pressures. The reverse happens as the wave trough passes and the cylinder expands. The relative movement between the floater and the fixed lower part is converted directly to electricity by means of a linear power take-off. BioPower Systems – bioWAVE™ The bioWAVE oscillating wave surge converter system is based on the swaying motion of sea plants in the presence of ocean waves. In extreme wave conditions, the device automatically ceases operation and assumes a safe position lying flat against the seabed. This eliminates exposure to extreme forces, allowing for light-weight designs. Centipod* The Centipod is a Wave Energy Conversion device currently under construction by Dehlsen Associates, LLC. It operates in water depths of 40-44m and uses a two point mooring system with four lines. Its methodology for wave energy conversion is similar to other devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Technology Feature: the Oyster 16
    ISSUE Technology Feature: The Oyster 16 April 2013 Featuring: Aquamarine Power In the latest edition of our newsletter, LRI interviewed Martin McAdam, CEO at Aquamarine Power. Their wave-powered energy converter - Oyster - is among the leading technologies in About Us the UK’s burgeoning marine energy sector. A commercial scale demonstration project is currently operational, and the sites for GreenTechEurope.com Aquamarine Power’s prospective wave farms have been secured (GTE) is a production of and fully permitted. The company is currently looking for London Research corporate equity investors to provide £30m to complete their International (LRI), a global commercialisation program. research and consulting firm with expertise in the Sooner than you think: utility scale marine energy The Oyster wave power device is a buoyant, hinged flap energy, environment, and Who is Aquamarine Power? which is attached to the seabed at depths of between 10 infrastructure sectors. GTE Aquamarine Power is an Edinburgh based wave and 15 metres, around half a kilometre from the shore. is a video-based energy technology and project developer which technology platform Oyster's hinged flap - which is almost entirely underwater conducts their R&D with Queen’s University Belfast - pitches backwards and forwards in the near-shore showcasing innovative and demonstrates their technology in the Orkney waves. The movement of the flap drives two hydraulic technologies from Europe. Islands, Scotland. Their unique approach to pistons which push high pressure water onshore via a developing both the technology and the project site The GTE Newsletter subsea pipeline to drive a conventional hydro-electric is aimed at easing the obstacles within the process turbine.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economics of the Green Investment Bank: Costs and Benefits, Rationale and Value for Money
    The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money Report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills Final report October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 2 Acknowledgements This report was commissioned by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Vivid Economics would like to thank BIS staff for their practical support in the review of outputs throughout this project. We would like to thank McKinsey and Deloitte for their valuable assistance in delivering this project from start to finish. In addition, we would like to thank the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the Carbon Trust and Sustainable Development Capital LLP (SDCL), for their valuable support and advice at various stages of the research. We are grateful to the many individuals in the financial sector and the energy, waste, water, transport and environmental industries for sharing their insights with us. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors and not those of BIS or any other party, and the authors take responsibility for any errors or omissions. An appropriate citation for this report is: Vivid Economics in association with McKinsey & Co, The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money, report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 3 Executive Summary The UK Government is committed to achieving the transition to a green economy and delivering long-term sustainable growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Energy Bill: Pre–Legislative Scrutiny
    House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee Draft Energy Bill: Pre–legislative Scrutiny First Report of Session 2012-13 Volume III Additional written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 24 May, 12, 19 and 26 June, 3 July, and 10 July 2012 Published on Monday 23 July 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited The Energy and Climate Change Committee The Energy and Climate Change Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department of Energy and Climate Change and associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Tim Yeo MP (Conservative, South Suffolk) (Chair) Dan Byles MP (Conservative, North Warwickshire) Barry Gardiner MP (Labour, Brent North) Ian Lavery MP (Labour, Wansbeck) Dr Phillip Lee MP (Conservative, Bracknell) Albert Owen MP (Labour, Ynys Môn) Christopher Pincher MP (Conservative, Tamworth) John Robertson MP (Labour, Glasgow North West) Laura Sandys MP (Conservative, South Thanet) Sir Robert Smith MP (Liberal Democrat, West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) The following members were also members of the committee during the parliament: Gemma Doyle MP (Labour/Co-operative, West Dunbartonshire) Tom Greatrex MP (Labour, Rutherglen and Hamilton West) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquamarine Power Response
    Strengthening strategic and sustainability considerations in Ofgem’s decision making Aquamarine Power’s response 1. Introduction “With a quarter of the UK’s generating capacity shutting down over the next ten years as old coal and nuclear power stations close, more than £110bn in investment is needed to build the equivalent of 20 large power stations and upgrade the grid. In the longer term, by 2050, electricity demand is set to double, as we shift more transport and heating onto the electricity grid. Business as usual is therefore not an option.i” Department of Energy and Climate Change, 2010 The coming decades will see a radical shift in the way in which electricity is generated and how it is paid for, and we welcome this discussion paper. We believe marine energy – wave and tidal power – offers a potential new energy source which can make a significant contribution to the UK and global energy mix in the decades ahead. But we are concerned the current charging regime fails to take account of the particular economic challenges faced by these early stage technologies, and as a consequence there is a danger that wave and tidal energy will be ‘locked out’ of any future energy scenario. This would mean UK consumers would miss out on a new form of energy which has the potential to drive down consumer bills in the long term, and also that UK would miss out on a major economic opportunity to become a global leader in new technologies. As project Discovery stated, the lowest domestic fuel bills would be likely to be realised under the ‘Green Stimulus’ scenario in which the UK reaches its 2020 renewable energy targetii.
    [Show full text]
  • No2nuclearpower 1 1. Sellafield
    No2NuclearPower No.59 February 2014 1. Sellafield - poor progress, missed targets, escalating costs, slipping deadlines and weak leadership 2. Plutonium – no clear strategy 3. European Commission State Aid Investigation 4. European Targets 5. Horizon – GDA 6. NuGen – an AP1000 in 4 years? 7. Day of the Jellyfish 8. NDA’s intermediate-level waste plans 9. Waste Transport 10. ECO disaster 11. Solar Prospects 12. Nuclear Innovation nuClear news No.59, February 2014 1 No2NuclearPower 1. Sellafield - poor progress, missed targets, escalating costs, slipping deadlines and weak leadership Nuclear Management Partners – the consortium overseeing the clean-up of Sellafield – should have their contract terminated if performance does not improve, says Margaret Hodge, Chair of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC). The bill for cleaning up Sellafield has risen to more than £70bn, according to a report from the public accounts committee. A new report (1) from the Committee says progress has been poor, with missed targets, escalating costs, slipping deadlines and weak leadership. The MPs made a series of recommendations focusing on the role of Nuclear Management Partners (NMP). The report concluded that the consortium was to blame for many of the escalating costs and the MPs said they could not understand why the NDA extended the consortium's contract last October. (2) Damning criticism of the consortium was also revealed in a series of hostile letters written by John Clarke, head of the NDA. Mr Clarke accused Nuclear Management Partners (NMP) of undermining confidence and damaging the entire project’s reputation, as well as criticising Tom Zarges, the consortium chairman, of setting “unduly conservative” targets.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing the Marine Energy Sector in Scotland: a View from the Islands Thomas Neal Mcmillin University of Mississippi
    University of Mississippi eGrove Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors Theses Honors College) 2014 Developing the Marine Energy Sector in Scotland: A View from the Islands Thomas Neal McMillin University of Mississippi. Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis Part of the American Studies Commons Recommended Citation McMillin, Thomas Neal, "Developing the Marine Energy Sector in Scotland: A View from the Islands" (2014). Honors Theses. 912. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/912 This Undergraduate Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College) at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DEVELOPING THE MARINE ENERGY SECTOR IN SCOTLAND: A VIEW FROM THE ISLANDS _____________________ NEAL MCMILLIN DEVELOPING THE MARINE ENERGY SECTOR IN SCOTLAND: A VIEW FROM THE ISLANDS by Thomas Neal McMillin, Jr. A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College. Oxford 2014 Approved by _________________________________ Advisor: Dr. Andy Harper _________________________________ Reader: Dr. Jay Watson _________________________________ Reader: Dr. John Winkle 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS If you need an idea, you may be wise to take a hot shower. I conceived the genesis of this project during one of these. I realized that to apply for the Barksdale Award, I needed to focus on something which I had both experienced and cared about. From that thought, I realized that Scotland and water were my two topics to research.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Energy Electrical Architecture
    Marine Energy Electrical Architecture Report 1: Landscape Map and Literature Review September 2015 Marine Energy Electrical Architecture PN000083-LRT-006 Document History Field Detail Report Title Marine Energy Electrical Architecture Report Sub-Title Report 1: Landscape Map and Literature Review Client/Funding CORE Status Public Project Reference PN000083 Document Reference PN000083-LRT-006 Prepared Revision Date Checked by Approved by Revision History by R0 April 2015 Alan Mason Stephanie Hay Rachel Hodges First Release August R1 Alan Mason Stephanie Hay Rachel Hodges Second Release 2015 Disclaimer: The information contained in this report is for general information and is provided by TNEI. Whilst we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, neither ORE Catapult nor TNEI make any representations or warranties of any kind, express, or implied about the completeness, accuracy or reliability of the information and related graphics. Any reliance you place on this information is at your own risk and in no event shall ORE Catapult or TNEI be held liable for any loss, damage including without limitation indirect or consequential damage or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from reliance on same. ORE Catapult Marine Energy Electrical Architecture PN000083-LRT-006 Contents 1 Executive summary ................................................................................................ 5 2 Introduction............................................................................................................. 8 3 MEC Overview......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Wave Energy Technologies and the Necessary Power-Equipment
    Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 27 (2013) 413–434 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rser Review of wave energy technologies and the necessary power-equipment Iraide López a,n, Jon Andreu a, Salvador Ceballos b, Iñigo Martínez de Alegría a, Iñigo Kortabarria a a Department of Electronics Technology, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Spain b Tecnalia Research and Innovation, Derio 48160, Spain article info abstract Article history: The wave energy is having more and more interest and support as a promising renewable resource to Received 13 May 2013 replace part of the energy supply, although it is still immature compared to other renewable Received in revised form technologies. This work presents a complete analysis of the wave energy technology, starting with the 4 July 2013 characterisation of this global resource in which the most suitable places to be exploited are showed, and Accepted 5 July 2013 the classification of the different types of wave energy converters in according to several features. It is Available online 31 July 2013 also described in detail each of the stages that are part in the energy conversion, that is, from the capture Keywords: of the energy from the waves to the extraction of a proper electrical signal to be injected to the grid. Wave energy Likewise, existing offshore energy transmission alternatives and possible layouts are described. Wave power & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Wave energy converter Power electronics Power transmission Contents 1. Introduction........................................................................................................ 413 2. Global wave energy resource .
    [Show full text]
  • Ocean Energy: Technologies, Patents, Deployment Status And
    IRENA International Renewable Energy Agency OCEAN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY READINESS, PATENTS, DEPLOYMENT STATUS AND OUTLOOK REPORT AUGUST 2014 Copyright © IRENA 2014 OTEC Patents Unless otherwise indicated, material in this publication may be used freely, shared or reprinted, so long The following table summarises international PCT applications related to OTEC in 2013. as IRENA is acknowledged as the source. Summary of international OTEC PCT applications published in 2013 International Country Applicant Date About IRENA Publication Number of Applicant WO 2013/000948 A2 DCNS 03 Jan 2013 France The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) is an intergovernmental organisation that WO 2013/013231 A2 Kalex LLC 24 Jan 2013 USA supports countries in their transition to a sustainable energy future, and serves as the principal platform WO 2013/025797 A2 The Abell Foundation, Inc. 21 Feb 2013 USA for international co-operation, a centre of excellence, and a repository of policy, technology, resource and financial knowledge on renewable energy. IRENA promotes the widespread adoption and sustainable WO 2013/025802 A2 The Abell Foundation, Inc. 21 Feb 2013 USA use of all forms of renewable energy, including bioenergy, geothermal, hydropower, ocean, solar and WO 2013/025807 A2 The Abell Foundation, Inc. 21 Feb 2013 USA wind energy, in the pursuit of sustainable development, energy access, energy security and low-carbon WO 2013/050666 A1 IFP Energies Nouvelles 11 Apr 2013 France economic growth and prosperity. www.irena.org WO 2013/078339 A2 Lockheed Martin Corporation 30 May 2013 USA WO 2013/090796 A1 Lockheed Martin Corporation 20 Jun 2013 USA Acknowledgements This report was produced in collaboration with Garrad Hassan & Partners Ltd (trading as DNV GL) Salinity Gradient Patents under contract.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2011
    Scottish and Southern Energy plc For further information In producing this report we have chosen production methods which aim to minimise the impact on our about SSE, please contact: environment. The papers used – Revive 50:50 Silk and Kaskad – are manufactured from sustainable sources. Scottish and Southern Energy plc Revive 50:50 Silk also contains 50% recovered waste. Both the paper mills and printer involved in this production are Scottish and Southern Energy plc Corporate Affairs environmentally accredited with ISO 14001. The printer Annual Report 2011 Inveralmond House is also registered as a Carbon Neutral company. 200 Dunkeld Road Perth PH1 3AQ UK T: +44 (0)1738 456000 E: [email protected] www.sse.com Annual Report 2011 Follow the latest news from SSE on Twitter at: www.twitter.com/sse Registered in Scotland No. 117119 STOCK CODE 008235 Contents Financial statements 78 Independent auditors’ report Overview 79 Consolidated income statement 80 Statement of comprehensive income 01 Introduction 81 Balance sheets 02 The energy sector in Great Britain 82 Statement of changes in equity 05 The energy sector in Ireland 84 Cash flow statements 06 SSE – a balanced range of 86 Notes on the financial statements energy businesses 86 1. Significant accounting policies 08 Chairman and Chief Executive 95 2. Reclassification of comparative Questions and answers The stunning photograph amounts used on the cover of this year’s 96 3. Segmental information Strategy 99 4. Other operating income and expense Annual Report was taken at 10 Why invest in SSE? 100 5. Exceptional items and certain SSE’s Drumderg wind farm in remeasurements Perthshire by award-winning Group performance 101 6.
    [Show full text]