dhc2 updated ccr feasibility note february 2014 reva ... - scottish power · dhc2 updated ccr...

UPDATED CCR FEASIBILITY NOTE

February 2014

DAMHEAD CREEK 2 CCGT POWER STATION

DHC2 Updated CCR Feasibility Note (February 2014) Rev: A 05 February 2014

of 33

Name Job Title Signature Date

Prepared Roberto Carnero Performance

Engineer

05.02.2014

Checked Raul Gómez Performance

Engineer

05.02.2014

Approved Ian Mackay Project Manager

05.02.2014

AMENDMENT RECORD

Issue Date Issued Date Effective Purpose of Issue and Description of Amendment

A 05.02.2014 N/A Initial Edition


of 33

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................ 5

1. Introduction ...................................... ............................................. 6

1.1. General ........................................... ................................................ 6

1.2. Overview .......................................... .............................................. 6

1.3. The Purpose of a CCR Feasibility Study ............ ......................... 7

1.4. Purpose of this Document .......................... .................................. 9

2. Legal Context and Methodology ..................... ........................... 11

3. Proposed Development .............................. ................................ 12

3.1. Damhead Creek 2 - The Site ........................ ............................... 12

3.2. Damhead Creek 2 - The Proposed Configuration and CO 2

Output ............................................ .......................................................... 13

3.3. Estimation of the size of the CCS Chain ........... ........................ 15

4. Proposed Carbon Capture Plant Technology .......... ................. 18

5. Technical Assessment – CCS Space Requirements...... .......... 19

5.1. Update to the previous CCR Studies ................ ......................... 19

5.2. Illustrative Site Layout .......................... ...................................... 21

6. Technical Assessment – Retrofitting and Integration of CCS 22

7. Technical Assessment – CO2 Storage Areas .......... ................. 23

7.1. Proposed Storage Areas ............................ ................................ 23

8. Technical Assessment – CO2 Transport .............. .................... 25

9. Economic Assessment ............................... ................................ 26

10. Requirement for Hazardous Substances Consent ...... ............. 27

11. Conclusions ....................................... .......................................... 28


of 33

Table: Table 3.1: Maximum CO2 and Flue Gas Intensities for Various Sized CCGT Power Plant Technologies

Table 3.2: Sizing of CCS Chain for Option A

Table 5.1: Summary of CCR Space Requirement for DHC2

Table 7.1: Percentage CO2 Storage Requirements of DHC2

Table 7.2: Additional CO2 Storage Areas in the SNS region

Figures: Figure 1: DHC2 Development General Arrangement Plan (2014)

Figure 2: Illustrative Site Area For Carbon Capture


of 33

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following discussions with Original Equipment Manufacturers, and taking into account the latest gas

turbine technology, the output of Damhead Creek 2 (DHC2) has the possibility of being increased to

around 1200MW of power generation capacity with improved efficiency.

ScottishPower (DCL) Ltd. are applying for a variation to the Section 36 Consent from the Department of

Energy and Climate Change by to increase the electrical output from current 1098MW to 1200MW (at

ISO conditions). The variation application is undertaken in accordance with The Electricity Generating

Stations (Variation of Consents) (England and Wales) Regulations 2013 which came into force in July

2013.

If implemented, the increase in electrical capacity output would ultimately include the installation of

higher capacity gas turbine units with higher efficiency ratings which would reduce the CO2 intensity

factor of DHC2, i.e. the CO2 production per each MWh exported to the grid.

This Document has been prepared to highlight the potential impact of this change / modification and

demonstrate the ongoing compliance with the requirements of both the EU Carbon Capture and Storage

(CCS) Directive and the UK Government’s Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR) Guidance.

This Document largely follows the sequence of the previous CCR Studies submitted by ScottishPower in

June 2009, May 2010 and January 2013. This Document constitutes an update of the last report, the

January 2013 “Updated CCR Feasibility Note”.

This Document taken together with these previous CCR Studies has demonstrated the following:

• “That sufficient space is available on or near the site to accommodate carbon capture

equipment in the future;

• The technical feasibility of retrofitting their chosen carbon capture technology;

• That a suitable area of deep geological storage off shore exits for the storage of captured CO2

from the proposed power station;

• The technical feasibility of transporting the captured CO2 to the proposed storage area; and,

• The likelihood that it will be economically feasible within the power station’s lifetime, to link it to

the full CCS chain, covering retrofitting of carbon capture equipment, transport and storage”.

In conclusion, it is both technically and economically feasible to retrofit a CCS Chain to DHC2 within its

35 year operating lifetime.


of 33

1. Introduction

1.1. General

This Updated Carbon Capture Ready (CCR) Feasibility Note has been undertaken by Iberdrola

Engineering and Construction (IEC) on behalf of ScottishPower (DCL) Ltd. (ScottishPower) to support

the application for consent variation for the proposed Damhead Creek 2 Combined Cycle Gas Turbine

(CCGT) Power Station (DHC2) in accordance with The Electricity Generating Stations (Variation of

Consents) (England and Wales) Regulations 2013 which came into force in July 2013.

This Document largely follows the sequence of the previous CCR Studies submitted by ScottishPower:

• Damhead Creek 2 CCR Feasibility Study (June 2009) prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff

• Damhead Creek 2 Consolidated CCR Feasibility Study (May 2010) prepared by Parsons

Brinckerhoff

• Damhead Creek 2 Updated CCR Feasibility Note (January 2013) prepared by Parsons

Brinckerhoff

This Document constitutes an update of the last report submitted by ScottishPower, the January 2013

Updated CCR Feasibility Note. The structure of this preceding report has been maintained for clarity and

to maintain continuity.

1.2. Overview

In June 2009, ScottishPower submitted an application for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act

1989 to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to construct a Combined Cycle Gas

Turbine (CCGT) power plant to be known as Damhead Creek 2 (DHC2). In addition, a direction that

planning permission be deemed to be granted under Section 90 of the Town and Country Planning Act

1990 was also sought.

The application was accompanied by, amongst other documents / studies, a Carbon Capture Ready

(CCR) Feasibility Study (the June 2009 CCR Feasibility Study).

Further to the June 2009 CCR Feasibility Study, in May 2010 a consolidated CCR Feasibility Study (the

May 2010 CCR Feasibility Study) was prepared to provide additional information to address questions


of 33

posed by DECC and the Environment Agency (EA) during their processing of the application, and to

satisfy the requirements of the final CCR Guidance1 published in November 2009.

Consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for DHC2 was granted in January 2011. In the time

since the original consent was granted additional capacity has been afforded to the project by DECC

which will result in increased output from 1000MW to 1098MW (at ISO conditions). Consent to increase

the output to 1098MW was granted in July 2012 by DECC.

The request for an increase in permitted generation capacity of DHC2 from 1000MW to 1098MW to

DECC was accompanied in January 2013 by the updated report Updated CCR Feasibility Note (the

January 2103 Updated CCR Feasibility Note2) to demonstrate the potential changes / modifications

would remain fully compliant with the requirements of both the EU CCS Directive and the UK

Government’s CCR Guidance.

Accordingly, that document largely followed the sequence of the June 2009 and May 2010 CCR

Feasibility Studies. The revised Carbon Capture Readiness report with regard to the 1098MW power

output was approved by DECC in March 2013.

1.3. The Purpose of a CCR Feasibility Study

Background

On 17th December 2008, the European Union (EU) agreed the text of a new directive on the geological

storage of carbon dioxide. On 5th June 2009, this text was published as the Directive on the geological

storage of carbon dioxide (Directive 2009/31/EC) (the Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Directive) in

the Official Journal of the European Union and came into force on 25th June 2009.

The CCS Directive requires an amendment to Directive 2001/80/EC (commonly known as the Large

Combustion Plants Directive (LCPD)) such that Member States are to ensure that operators of all

combustion plants with an electrical capacity of 300 megawatts (MW) or more (and for which the

construction / operating licence was granted after the date of the CCS Directive) have assessed whether

the following conditions are met:

• Suitable storage sites for carbon dioxide (CO2) are available;

• Transport facilities to transport captured CO2 to the storage sites are technically and

economically feasible; and,

• It is technically and economically feasible to retrofit for the capture of CO2.

1 Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR): A Guidance Note for Section 36 Electricity Act 1989 Consent Applications (DECC,

November 2009). 2 Damhead Creek 2 Updated CCR Feasibility Note (January 2013) prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff.


of 33

The assessment of whether these conditions are met is to be submitted to the relevant competent

authority, who use the assessment (and other available information) in their decision-making process. If

the conditions are met, the competent authority is to ensure that suitable space is set aside for the

equipment necessary to capture and compress CO2.

It should also be noted that the requirement for the assessment is also included in the more recent

Directive on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (Directive 2010/75/EU)

(the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED)).

In the UK the relevant competent authority (in respect of energy matters) is the Department of Energy

and Climate Change (DECC). DECC must ensure the requirements of the relevant EU Directives are

implemented.

UK Government’s CCR Policy

In June 2008, the UK Government published a consultation document “Towards Carbon Capture and

Storage” to seek views on the steps it could take to prepare for and support both the development and

deployment of carbon capture technologies. A response to this consultation was published in April 2009,

alongside information on the UK Government’s CCR Policy and draft Guidance for applicants seeking

consent for new combustion power plants at or over 300MWe3 (the draft CCR Guidance).

The CCR Policy applies to new combustion power plants with an electrical capacity of 300MW or more,

with effect from 23rd April 2009. Under the CCR Policy, all combustion power plants with an electrical

capacity of 300MW or more must be CCR and must set space aside to accommodate future carbon

capture equipment.

The draft CCR Guidance was subject to an eight week consultation period which ended on 22nd June

2009. The responses from the consultation period were incorporated into the finalised CCR Guidance,

which was published in November 2009.

Following the publication of the CCR Guidance, the indicative CCR space requirement was reviewed by

Imperial College, London4. The Imperial College, London review resulted in the reduction of the

indicative CCR space requirement for a CCGT power plant with post-combustion capture by 36%.

Further information is provided in Section 5 (‘Technical Assessment – CCS Space Requirements‘).

3 Guidance on Carbon Capture Readiness and Applications under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 (DECC, 2009) 4 Available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/meeting_energy/consents_planning/electricity/electricity.aspx


of 33

UK Government’s CCR Policy Requirements

Under the CCR Policy, the CCR Guidance states (at paragraph 7) that applicants will be required to

demonstrate:









Further to this: “if Applicant’s proposals for operational CCS involves the use of hazardous substances,

they may be required to apply for Hazardous Substances Consent (HSC). In such circumstances they

should do so at the same time as they apply for Section 36 Consent”.

1.4. Purpose of this Document

In recent years, the gas turbine Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) have introduced to the

market advanced models of gas turbines with larger capacity and higher efficiency ratings. Following

discussions with OEMs, taking into account the latest enhancements in these gas turbine models, the

output of DHC2 has the possibility of being increased to around 1200MW of power generation capacity

with higher efficiency.

In order to not restrict this potential alternative at the time the CCGT power plant is being contracted, a

variation to the Section 36 Consent is being sought from DECC by ScottishPower for a potential

increase in the electrical capacity output range of DHC2 from current 1098MW to 1200MW (at ISO

conditions). The potential change / modification as a result of increasing electrical output to 1200MW

can be summarised as:

• If implemented, the increase in electrical capacity output would ultimately include the installation

of higher capacity gas turbine units with higher efficiency ratings which would increase the total

CO2 output of DHC2 but the CO2 emission rate per each MWh exported to the grid would be

reduced (i.e. the CO2 intensity factor would be lower). For the purposes of this Document, a

‘worst case’ scenario is presented based on the original gas turbine units and efficiency ratings

applied to the maximum theoretical electrical output of DHC2, yielding the maximum possible

CO2 and flue gas flow rates.


of 33

This Document seeks to demonstrate the new potential increase in power capacity would remain fully

compliant with the requirements of both the EU CCS Directive and the UK Government's CCR

Guidance.

This Document has been prepared to highlight the potential impact of this potential change / modification

and to demonstrate that it could still be both technically and economically feasible to retrofit a CCS

Chain to DHC2 within its 35 year operating lifetime. Accordingly, this Document largely follows the

sequence of the June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies and the more recent January 2013

Updated CCR Feasibility Note. Where no changes or supplementary information are deemed

necessary, this is stated at the beginning of the section.


of 33

2. Legal Context and Methodology

There has been no change to the legislative framework since consent was granted for DHC2 and

therefore no changes or supplementary information are required for this section.


of 33

3. Proposed Development

3.1. Damhead Creek 2 - The Site

Consented DHC2 Site

The Section 36 and deemed planning permission for DHC2 identified the following areas as forming the

consented development site:

Area 1. 6.2 hectares (ha) of land lying to the east of the existing Damhead Creek CCGT

Power Station. This area is the location of the proposed DHC2.

Area 2. 3.6ha of land lying to the north-west of the existing Damhead Creek CCGT Power

Station. This area was the original location of the proposed 400kV electrical substation

(this solution has been ruled out)5.

Area 3. 14ha of land lying to the north-east of the existing Damhead Creek CCGT Power

Station. Approximately 7.5ha of this land to be used temporarily for car parking and

the storage of materials / equipment during construction, and will subsequently be set

aside for the equipment necessary to capture and compress CO2. The remainder of

the land to be dedicated to ecological mitigation, including additional ponds and

habitat enhancement.

In addition, an extensive area of ecological mitigation land (approximately 26ha) which has been

established and maintained as part of the existing Damhead Creek CCGT Power Station development

adjoins the DHC2 development site.

Current proposal 2014

Following the granting of Section 36 Consent, and further technical assessment of the development

progressed, ScottishPower considered a modification / change in the area set aside for the equipment

necessary to capture and compress CO2 (i.e. changes / modifications to Area 3).

The existing area of ecological mitigation known as the Wildlife Creation Area (WCA), effectively

separated the DHC2 site (Area 1) from the laydown and construction area which would ultimately

become the CCR area (Area 3). It was recognised that including the WCA as part of the development

site for DHC2 and CCR land would allow for a simpler construction of DHC2 by allowing movement and

operations directly between these two areas. ScottishPower therefore sought to change the use of the

WCA to include this area as part of the development site for DHC2.

5 The electricity generated in this case will be exported to the National Grid via the existing Kingsnorth substation lying to the

south west of the existing Damhead Creek CCGT Power Station.


of 33

The WCA was originally part of a Section 106 agreement associated with the construction of the now

operational Damhead Creek CCGT Power Station. These design modifications have emerged through

the detailed design process that has been undertaken in the time since DHC2 was originally consented

in 2011, and represent minor revisions that better allows for the construction of DHC2.

A Planning Application for Change of Use and supporting information was submitted to Medway Council

in September 2012 and planning permission for a change of use of the WCA was granted by Medway

Council to ScottishPower in July 2013. This allowed an additional 2.4ha of land to be available for DHC2

and the CCR land as necessary.

A consequence of changing the use of the WCA, was that suitable compensatory mitigation land

required to be provided by ScottishPower. Therefore part of Area 3 was identified for additional

ecological mitigation resulting in approximately 5.37ha being available for use as temporarily for car

parking and the storage of materials / equipment during construction, and then would subsequently be

set aside for the equipment necessary to capture and compress CO2. This represented a reduction of

2.13ha to CCR area.

In addition to this, ScottishPower retains an additional strip of land extending to approximately 0.7ha that

it is located between Area 1 and Area 3 that can also be utilised for CCR purposes.

Currently therefore the total space within Area 3 to be dedicated for the equipment necessary to capture

and compress CO2 would be approximately 6.1ha comprising 5.37ha within Area 3 and the additional

0.7ha strip of land.

The general arrangement plan can be seen in Figure 1.

3.2. Damhead Creek 2 - The Proposed Configuration and

CO2 Output

Subsequent to the June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies and recent January 2013 Updated

CCR Feasibility Note, ScottishPower have considered a potential increase in the electrical capacity

output range of DHC2 from 1098MW to 1200MW (at ISO conditions), and have submitted an application

under Section 36C of the Electricity Act 1989 to seek to raise the generated output of the CCGT to

1200MW. Based on this potential increase in capacity of the CCGT, the estimated CO2 and flue gas flow

rates have been recalculated and presented in this updated CCR Report.


of 33

As carbon capture technology is essentially blind to the details of the upstream power generation

process, the only output required for the sizing of the equipment necessary to capture and compress

CO2 are details of the CO2 and flue gas flow rates and the temperature of the flue gas.

There are two OEMs that commercialise gas turbine units in the range for the new proposed electrical

output of DHC2. Internal calculations have been performed from the information provided by these

OEMs in order to determine the CO2 and flue gas intensity factors for their proposed CCGT power plant

technologies. These intensity factors have been used in this updated CCR Feasibility Report to estimate

maximum and average CO2 and flue gas flow rates for DHC2.

The CO2 and flue gas intensity factors were calculated assuming a power plant configuration of one (1)

multi-shaft CCGT units assuming value for two (2) gas turbines, one (1) steam turbine with a triple

pressure reheat steam cycle and one (1) Air Cooled Condenser (ACC). However, the values basically

will be the same for alternative power plant configuration of two single shaft CCGT units for the same

electrical power output. The decision about the configuration of the CCGT power plant, either multi-shaft

or two (2) single-shafts, is not relevant with regard to the environmental impact and specifically the

carbon emission; it is principally a decision based on different parameters e.g. promoter’s previous

operational experience and layout restrictions or other specific operational considerations. The drawings

of the CCGT power plant layout are based on the multi-shaft configuration.

However, it should be noted that as full details of the final design of DHC2 are not yet available, as a

vendor has not yet been chosen and the gas turbine model is not selected, estimation was undertaken

using a range of different turbine technologies currently available. In addition it should be noted that the

power plant configuration assumed may not be that used in the final design of DHC2.

Table 3.1 below indicates the CO2 and flue gas intensity factors and power ratios for the various sized

CCGT power plant technologies available in the power output range.

The power ratio is used to determine the maximum and average flow rates. The power ratio is the ratio

between the total electrical output of DHC2 at typical site rated conditions (11.3°C) and the total

electrical output of DHC2 under reduced atmospheric temperature conditions6 (-10°C). Accordingly, the

power ratio is used to estimate a maximum CO2 flow rate which could be expected from DHC2 under

worst case conditions.

6 A lower atmospheric temperature will increase the total electrical output of power generating plant and with this comes a

corresponding increase in CO2 flow rate.


of 33

Table 3.1: Maximum CO 2 and Flue Gas Intensities for Various Sized CCGT Po wer Plant

Technologies

CO2 Intensity Flue Gas Intensity Power Ratio

(t/h/MW) (t/h/MW)

Technology A 0.341 5.27 1.030

Technology B 0.342 5.25 1.038

The sizing of the carbon capture plant / equipment will be undertaken using the maximum values of the

parameters in Table 3.1, as applied to the maximum theoretical electrical output of DHC2, yielding the

maximum possible CO2 and flue gas flow rates. The storage requirement will be estimated using the

average CO2 and flue gas flow rates. This has been undertaken such that a worst-case scenario is

presented in this Document.

3.3. Estimation of the size of the CCS Chain

Options Considered

The June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies noted that there were two main Options which

will influence the sizing of the CCS Chain for DHC2. These were referred to as Option A and Option B,

and were related to the way steam is generated for the carbon capture plant / equipment. In brief:

• Option A: Steam for the carbon capture plant / equipment is taken from the steam cycle of the

DHC2.

• Option B: Steam for the carbon capture plant / equipment is generated by auxiliary boilers.

Option A would impose greater requirements in terms of retrofitting if carbon capture plant / equipment is

installed. For example if a largely standard CCGT power plant design is installed, then after retrofitting

carbon capture plant / equipment, the CCGT power plant may be less efficient than had a ‘non-standard

carbon capture-optimised’ CCGT power plant design been originally installed. However, a ‘non-standard

carbon capture-optimised’ CCGT power plant design would likely incur an efficiency penalty during

CCGT-only operation.

Option B would require minimal changes to be made in terms of retrofitting if carbon capture plant /

equipment is installed. However, additional gas would be required for the auxiliary boiler, which could in

turn increase the size of the CCS Chain if the additional CO2 in the auxiliary boiler flue gases was

combined with the flue gases from the CCGT power plant flue prior to entering the carbon capture plant /

equipment.


of 33

Whilst both Option A and Option B are available for DHC2, Option A was the main focus of the June

2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies and the more recent January 2013 Update CCR Feasibility

Note, following discussions with the Environment Agency. Option A remains the main focus of this

Document.

Size of the CCS Chain

It is expected that the carbon capture plant / equipment installed would capture up to 90% of the CO2 in

the flue gases. However, the actual amount will be dependent upon the temperature of the carbon

capture plant / equipment and the amount of process cooling available.

In addition (and similar to the previous CCR reports: June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies

and the January 2013 Updated CCR Feasibility Note), this updated CCR Feasibility Study has assumed

that the carbon capture plant / equipment would incorporate a gas-gas re-heater. This is, in effect, a

heat exchanger which cools down the flue gases entering the carbon capture plant / equipment using

the flue gases exiting the carbon capture plant / equipment. This results in a higher ‘clean gas’ exit

temperature, improving dispersion in the air, and lower process cooling requirements of the carbon

capture plant / equipment. However, a gas-gas re-heater may result in some leakage of flue gas from

the incoming side to the exit side. Again similar to the June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies

and the January 2013 Updated CCR Feasibility Note, for the purposes of this updated CCR Feasibility

Study, this leakage has been assumed to be 3% which represents the typical value for such plant /

equipment in a new and clean condition. However, over time, the leakage will increase slightly, resulting

in the carbon capture plant having spare capacity.

Option A

The sizing of the CCS Chain for Option A (including capture, compression / liquefaction, transport and

storage) is based on the information presented in Table 3.2.


of 33

Table 3.2: Sizing of CCS Chain for Option A

CCS Chain Component Units Amount

Average (Max.)

CO2 Generated kg/s 116.6 (122.8)

CO2 Loss in Gas-Gas Re-Heater (assuming 3% loss)

kg/s 3.5 (3.7)

CO2 Captured (assuming 90% capture)

kg/s 101.8 (107.2)

t/hr 366.4 (385.8)

t/day 8,793 (9,259)

CO2 Stored (Assuming 75% lifetime capacity factor7)

Mt/year 2.4

Total CO2 Stored (Assuming 35 years of carbon capture)

Mt 84.3

Therefore, for operation under Option A, the carbon capture plant / equipment should be capable of

handling a CO2 flow rate up to a maximum of approximately 122.8kg/s which may occur whenever

DHC2 is operating at full load. On this basis, the carbon capture plant / equipment should be capable of

processing a CO2 flow rate up to a maximum of approximately 9,259t/day.

The total annual throughput for the CCS Chain will vary, and be dependent upon the operational profile

for DHC2. With a 75% lifetime capacity factor, the CO2 storage requirement for operation under Option

A over the lifetime of DHC2 (expected to be 35 years) would be up to a maximum of approximately

84.3Mt.

Accordingly, based on the information presented in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 coupled with the sizing of

the carbon capture plant / equipment using the maximum possible parameters and the sizing of the CO2

storage requirement assuming operation for the entire lifetime of DHC2, it is considered that a worst-

case scenario is presented in this Document. In reality, the requirements are likely to be reduced.

7 This is the expected operational load on DHC2 over its lifetime. Note this is different to the availability of DHC2 which is

estimated to be 93%.


of 33

4. Proposed Carbon Capture Plant Technology

No change is proposed to the carbon capture plant technology and therefore no changes or

supplementary information are deemed necessary.


of 33

5. Technical Assessment – CCS Space

Requirements

5.1. Update to the previous CCR Studies

Table 1 in the CCR Guidance provides an indicative CCR space requirement based on a 500MW (net)

power plant. For a CCGT power plant with post-combustion carbon capture, the indicative CCR space

requirement was 3.75ha for 500MW. Subsequent to the publication of the CCR Guidance, the indicative

CCR space requirement was reviewed by Imperial College, London8.

The Imperial College, London review resulted in the reduction of the indicative CCR space requirement

for a CCGT power plant with post-combustion capture by 36%. Therefore, the corrected indicative CCR

space requirement is 2.4ha for 500MW.

In addition, it is noted that the Imperial College, London review further detailed additional scope for a

reduction of the indicative CCR space requirement for a CCGT power plant with post-combustion

capture of approximately 50% (including the reduction of 36%) considering technology advances and

layout optimisation (e.g. assuming one carbon capture train per gas turbine train). In addition, it is also

noted that the Imperial College, London review further detailed, at the Appendix A1 – that retrofitting of

carbon capture plant / equipment would be site specific and where limited space is available, efforts may

then require a unique approach to utilise the three-dimensional space available (for example, a study

has demonstrated that vertical utilisation of a smaller space can still accommodate the required carbon

capture plant / equipment in a safe, operable and maintainable manner). However, such a reduction can

only be justified on the basis of a detailed engineering design and it has not been necessary to consider

this approach for the DHC2 CCR space requirements.

Accordingly, based on both the original (superseded) and the corrected indicative CCR space

requirements, Table 5.1 presents a summary of CCR space requirement for DHC2.

8 Available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/meeting_energy/consents_planning/electricity/electricity.aspx


of 33

Table 5.1: Summary of CCR Space Requirement for DHC 2

Size

(MW)

Available

CCR

Space

(ha)

CCR Space

Requirement

to meet

original

Indicative CCR

Space

Requirements

(ha)

(superseded)

% of CCR

Space

Requirement

(superseded)

CCR Space

Requirement

to meet

corrected

Indicative

CCR Space

Requirements

(ha)

% of CCR

Space

Requirement

Original

Assumptions

for CCGT

power plant

(May 2010)

1000 7.5 7.5 100 4.8 156

Current

Assumptions

for CCGT

power plant

(January

2013)

1098 5.37 8.2 65 5.3 101

Updated

Assumptions

for CCGT

power plant

(February

2014)

1200 6.1 9.0 75 5.8 106

Figure 1 of this report confirms that as a result of the reconfiguration of the general layout as outlined in

Section 3.1, the total area available for the equipment of carbon capture and compression will be

approximately 6.1ha, which is larger than the indicative CCR space requirement (5.8ha).

As a result, there is adequate available CCR space on the DHC2 site which could be set aside for the

equipment necessary to capture and compress CO2.


of 33

5.2. Illustrative Site Layout

In order to demonstrate that space is available and suitable for DHC2 to be considered CCR, an

illustrative site layout has been prepared which indicates:

• The location of the carbon capture plant / equipment;

• The location of the CO2 compression equipment;

• The location of the chemical storage facilities; and,

• The exit point for the CO2 pipeline.

The illustrative site layout can be seen in Figure 2.

However, whilst the illustrative site layout is drawn to scale, it should be noted that this is not a detailed

design specification. Therefore the layout is illustrative only and outlines areas required for major plant /

equipment items and other additional buildings.

The space requirement for the cooling system has been extended in the layout as a conservative

approach. Potential reduction can only be justified on the basis of a detailed engineering design.

In addition, the tender specifications for DHC2 will include requirements to ensure that the power plant is

CCR.


of 33

6. Technical Assessment – Retrofitting and

Integration of CCS

No changes or supplementary information are deemed necessary.

It should be noted that with regards to the Point C6 (Steam Cycle) and Point C7 (Cooling Water

System), no significant alterations to the conclusions of the June 2009 CCR Feasibility Study or May

2010 Feasibility Study are anticipated.


of 33

7. Technical Assessment – CO2 Storage Areas

7.1. Proposed Storage Areas

In order to determine potential CO2 storage areas, it is necessary to have an idea of the CO2 storage

requirements of DHC2. In line with the calculations detailed in Table 3.2 for Option A, the CO2 storage

requirements of DHC2 would be up to a maximum of approximately 84.3Mt of CO2.

Based on the DTI Study 2006 (provided in the CCR Guidance), the Hewet (L Bunter) and Leman gas

fields in the South North Sea Basin (SNS) are potential storage areas. The Hewet (L Bunter) gas field

has a capacity of 237Mt CO2 and the Leman gas field has a capacity of 1203Mt CO2.

Accordingly, Table 7.1 illustrates the percentage CO2 storage requirements of DHC2 on these two gas

fields.

Table 7.1: Percentage CO 2 Storage Requirements of DHC2

Option A

Up to a Maximum of Approximately

84.3Mt CO2

Hewet (L Bunter)

237Mt CO2 35.6%

Leman Gas Field

1203Mt CO2 7.0%

It is noted that in the future it is likely there may be competing interest for these identified CO2 storage

areas as other CCS projects become operational. However, there are clearly a large number of

additional CO2 storage areas which exist in the same region that are capable of meeting the CO2

storage requirements of DHC2. Table 7.2 lists a number of these additional CO2 storage areas,

including those discussed above, in the South North Sea Basin that are identified in the DTI Study 2006

(provided in the CCR Guidance).


of 33

Table 7.2: Additional CO 2 Storage Areas in the SNS region

Field Name CO2 Storage Capacity (Mt)

Amethyst 63

Audrey 53

Barque 108

Clipper 60

Galleon 137

Hewett L Bunter 237

Hewett U Bunter 122

Indefatigable 357

Leman 1203

Ravenspurn N 93

Ravenspurn S 52

V Fields 143

Victor 70

Viking 223

West Sole 143

Total 3064

Whilst the decision as to which specific CO2 storage area to use will not be made until eventual

implementation of CCS, Table 7.2 shows that the potential storage areas in the region have a storage

capacity of in excess of 3000Mt CO2. DHC2 would require less than 3% of this storage capacity over its

35 year lifetime.

Another possibility (already discussed in the previous Studies: June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility

Studies and January 2013 Updated Feasibility Note) is that there will be an available “CO2 Network” in

the region such that CO2 from DHC2, and other power plants in the region, would be delivered to a

“central hub”. From this “central hub”, the captured CO2 would be delivered to a number of storage sites.


of 33

8. Technical Assessment – CO2 Transport



of 33

9. Economic Assessment



of 33

10. Requirement for Hazardous Substances

Consent



of 33

11. Conclusions

Following the granting of consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for DHC2 in January 2011,

ScottishPower have considered potential modification to the original assumptions detailed in the

previous CCR Studies (June 2009 and May 2010 CCR Feasibility Studies and January 2013 Updated

CCR Feasibility Note).

The potential modification can be summarised as:

• An increase in the electrical capacity output range of DHC2 from 1098MW to 1200MW (at ISO

conditions). If implemented, the increase in electrical capacity output would ultimately include

the installation of higher capacity gas turbine units with higher efficiency ratings which would

increase the total CO2 output of DHC2 but the CO2 emission rate per each MWh exported to the

grid would be reduced (i.e. the CO2 intensity factor would be lower).

This Document has been prepared to highlight the potential impact of this change / modification and

demonstrate the ongoing compliance with the requirements of both the EU CCS Directive and the UK

Government’s CCR Guidance.

Accordingly, this Document (taken together with the previous CCR Studies, the June 2009 and May

2010 CCR Feasibility Studies and the January 2103 Updated CCR Feasibility Note) has demonstrated

the following:









In conclusion, it is both technically and economically feasible to retrofit a CCS Chain to DHC2 within its

35 year operating lifetime.


of 33

FIGURES


of 33

Figure 1: DHC2 Development General Arrangement

Plan (2014)


of 33

Figure 2: Illustrative Site Area For Carbon Capture

KEY

OVERALL SITE BOUNDARY

CARBON CAPTURE SITE FOR FUTURE

DEVELOPMENT

LEGEND

GAS/GAS HEAT EXCHANGER

BLOWER

DIRECT CONTACT COOLER

ABSORBER

STRIPPER

RECLAIMER

SOLVENT STORAGE TANK

C02 COMPRESSOR HOUSE

C02 BATTERY LIMIT

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

COOLING AREA

LAYOUT

PROPOSED ROAD

St

Tanks

Chy

GA

MM

A

RO

AD

Track

Trac

k

Vincent's

Tanks

Tks

Works

Track

Tks

MH

W

NG

S

1

A

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

L

M

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

J

K

L

M

- - - - -

--

-

-

--

GENERAL

SCALE:

REV.

SIZE :

Rev :

Type :

Drawn Prep.

Checked Approv.

Sheet: Next:

Nº :

DATE Drawn Prep. REASON. STATUS OF REVISION

FIRST ISSUE:

Check. Approv.

Class :

File :

Client :

All rights reserved. Total or partial reproduction of this drawing without authorization of the propietor is prohibited.

Replaces :PPN PPN

-

RGLO RGLO

- - - - - -

20-01-14

DAMHEAD CREEK 2

AREA FOR CARBON CAPTURE ILUSTRATIVE SITE

18EL-9-YTG-DA-IICEI-0011 0

A1

PROJECT

0

1 : 1400

52,5 M

07

08

06

09

02

0504

03

10

01

Chy

Tanks

Chy

DAMHEAD CREEK I

RA

MP

A D

E F

UE

L G

AS

74

52

53

AP

BP

RF

RC

64

63

71

50

36

+5.625

5 5

20

55

49

338306

49

312

347

305

205

30097

49

300

72

96323

343

203 327

301

300

96

30

325

304

331 203

39329

PARKING

346

326

FENCE

8383

85348 34815

319

349

82319

344

30

345

82

333

332

321

320

314

321

204

81

80

81

80

84

307

320

NEW ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION AREA

ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION AREA

PONDS

dhc2 updated ccr feasibility note february 2014 reva ... - scottish power · dhc2 updated ccr...

Documents