UPDATED CCR FEASIBILITY NOTE February 2014 DAMHEAD CREEK 2 CCGT POWER STATION

Transcription

1 UPDATED CCR FEASIBILITY NOTE February 2014 DAMHEAD CREEK 2 CCGT POWER STATION

2 Name Job Title Signature Date Prepared Roberto Carnero Performance Engineer Checked Raul Gómez Performance Engineer Approved Ian Mackay Project Manager AMENDMENT RECORD Issue Date Issued Date Effective Purpose of Issue and Description of Amendment A N/A Initial Edition Page 2 of 33

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction General Overview The Purpose of a CCR Feasibility Study Purpose of this Document Legal Context and Methodology Proposed Development Damhead Creek 2 - The Site Damhead Creek 2 - The Proposed Configuration and CO2 Output Estimation of the size of the CCS Chain Proposed Carbon Capture Plant Technology Technical Assessment CCS Space Requirements Update to the previous CCR Studies Illustrative Site Layout Technical Assessment Retrofitting and Integration of CCS Technical Assessment CO2 Storage Areas Proposed Storage Areas Technical Assessment CO2 Transport Economic Assessment Requirement for Hazardous Substances Consent Conclusions Page 3 of 33

4 Table: Table 3.1: Maximum CO 2 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 CO 2 Storage Requirements of DHC2 Table 7.2: Additional CO 2 Storage Areas in the SNS region Figures: Figure 1: DHC2 Development General Arrangement Plan (2014) Figure 2: Illustrative Site Area For Carbon Capture Page 4 of 33

5 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 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 CO 2 intensity factor of DHC2, i.e. the CO 2 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 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 CO 2 from the proposed power station; The technical feasibility of transporting the captured CO 2 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. Page 5 of 33

6 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 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 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 Page 6 of 33

7 posed by DECC and the Environment Agency (EA) during their processing of the application, and to satisfy the requirements of the final CCR Guidance 1 published in November Consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for DHC2 was granted in January 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 Note 2 ) 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 The Purpose of a CCR Feasibility Study Background On 17 th December 2008, the European Union (EU) agreed the text of a new directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide. On 5 th 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 25 th June 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 (CO 2 ) are available; Transport facilities to transport captured CO 2 to the storage sites are technically and economically feasible; and, It is technically and economically feasible to retrofit for the capture of CO 2. 1 Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR): November 2009). A Guidance Note for Section 36 Electricity Act 1989 Consent Applications (DECC, 2 Damhead Creek 2 Updated CCR Feasibility Note (January 2013) prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff. Page 7 of 33

8 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 CO 2. 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 300MWe 3 (the draft CCR Guidance). The CCR Policy applies to new combustion power plants with an electrical capacity of 300MW or more, with effect from 23 rd April 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 22 nd June The responses from the consultation period were incorporated into the finalised CCR Guidance, which was published in November Following the publication of the CCR Guidance, the indicative CCR space requirement was reviewed by Imperial College, London 4. 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: Page 8 of 33

9 UK Government s CCR Policy Requirements Under the CCR Policy, the CCR Guidance states (at paragraph 7) that applicants will be required to demonstrate: 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 CO 2 from the proposed power station; The technical feasibility of transporting the captured CO 2 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. 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 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 CO 2 output of DHC2 but the CO 2 emission rate per each MWh exported to the grid would be reduced (i.e. the CO 2 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 CO 2 and flue gas flow rates. Page 9 of 33

10 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. Page 10 of 33

11 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. Page 11 of 33

12 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 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 ha 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 CO 2. 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 CO 2 (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. Page 12 of 33

13 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 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 CO 2. 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 CO 2 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 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 CO 2 and flue gas flow rates have been recalculated and presented in this updated CCR Report. Page 13 of 33

14 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 CO 2 are details of the CO 2 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 CO 2 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 CO 2 and flue gas flow rates for DHC2. The CO 2 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 CO 2 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 conditions 6 (-10 C). Accordingly, the power ratio is used to estimate a maximum CO 2 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 CO 2 flow rate. Page 14 of 33

15 Table 3.1: Maximum CO 2 and Flue Gas Intensities for Various Sized CCGT Power Plant Technologies CO 2 Intensity (t/h/mw) Flue Gas Intensity (t/h/mw) Power Ratio Technology A Technology B 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 CO 2 and flue gas flow rates. The storage requirement will be estimated using the average CO 2 and flue gas flow rates. This has been undertaken such that a worst-case scenario is presented in this Document 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 CO 2 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. Page 15 of 33

16 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 CO 2 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. Page 16 of 33

17 Table 3.2: Sizing of CCS Chain for Option A CCS Chain Component Units Amount Average (Max.) CO 2 Generated kg/s (122.8) CO 2 Loss in Gas-Gas Re-Heater (assuming 3% loss) CO 2 Captured (assuming 90% capture) CO 2 Stored (Assuming 75% lifetime capacity factor 7 ) Total CO 2 Stored (Assuming 35 years of carbon capture) kg/s 3.5 (3.7) kg/s (107.2) t/hr (385.8) t/day 8,793 (9,259) Mt/year 2.4 Mt 84.3 Therefore, for operation under Option A, the carbon capture plant / equipment should be capable of handling a CO 2 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 CO 2 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 CO 2 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 CO 2 storage requirement assuming operation for the entire lifetime of DHC2, it is considered that a worstcase 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%. Page 17 of 33

18 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. Page 18 of 33

19 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, London 8. 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: Page 19 of 33

20 Table 5.1: Summary of CCR Space Requirement for DHC2 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) Current Assumptions for CCGT power plant (January 2013) Updated Assumptions for CCGT power plant (February 2014) 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 CO 2. Page 20 of 33

21 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 CO 2 compression equipment; The location of the chemical storage facilities; and, The exit point for the CO 2 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. Page 21 of 33

22 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. Page 22 of 33

23 7. Technical Assessment CO2 Storage Areas 7.1. Proposed Storage Areas In order to determine potential CO 2 storage areas, it is necessary to have an idea of the CO 2 storage requirements of DHC2. In line with the calculations detailed in Table 3.2 for Option A, the CO 2 storage requirements of DHC2 would be up to a maximum of approximately 84.3Mt of CO 2. 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 CO 2 and the Leman gas field has a capacity of 1203Mt CO 2. Accordingly, Table 7.1 illustrates the percentage CO 2 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 CO 2 Hewet (L Bunter) 237Mt CO 2 Leman Gas Field 1203Mt CO % 7.0% It is noted that in the future it is likely there may be competing interest for these identified CO 2 storage areas as other CCS projects become operational. However, there are clearly a large number of additional CO 2 storage areas which exist in the same region that are capable of meeting the CO 2 storage requirements of DHC2. Table 7.2 lists a number of these additional CO 2 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). Page 23 of 33

24 Table 7.2: Additional CO 2 Storage Areas in the SNS region Field Name CO 2 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 CO 2 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 CO 2. 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 CO 2 Network in the region such that CO 2 from DHC2, and other power plants in the region, would be delivered to a central hub. From this central hub, the captured CO 2 would be delivered to a number of storage sites. Page 24 of 33

25 8. Technical Assessment CO2 Transport No changes or supplementary information are deemed necessary. Page 25 of 33

26 9. Economic Assessment No changes or supplementary information are deemed necessary. Page 26 of 33

27 10. Requirement for Hazardous Substances Consent No changes or supplementary information are deemed necessary. Page 27 of 33

28 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 CO 2 output of DHC2 but the CO 2 emission rate per each MWh exported to the grid would be reduced (i.e. the CO 2 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: 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 CO 2 from the proposed power station; The technical feasibility of transporting the captured CO 2 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. Page 28 of 33

29 FIGURES Page 29 of 33

30 Figure 1: DHC2 Development General Arrangement Plan (2014) Page 30 of 33

31

32 Figure 2: Illustrative Site Area For Carbon Capture Page 32 of 33

33 RAMPA DE FUEL GAS AP BP RF RC A A KEY OVERALL SITE BOUNDARY ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION AREA NEW ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION AREA B Track PONDS B CARBON CAPTURE SITE FOR FUTURE PROPOSED ROAD DEVELOPMENT LAYOUT C C Track LEGEND 01 COOLING AREA 10 NG GAS/GAS HEAT EXCHANGER BLOWER D GAM MA ROAD S DIRECT CONTACT COOLER ABSORBER STRIPPER RECLAIMER D SOLVENT STORAGE TANK C02 COMPRESSOR HOUSE St Vincent's 10 C02 BATTERY LIMIT E Chy E F F Tanks MHW Tks Tanks 06 Tks G PARKING G Works H 332 H Chy Chy Track J Tanks J DAMHEAD CREEK I FENCE K K L REV. DATE Drawn Prep. Checked Approv. REASON. STATUS OF REVISION Class : GENERAL DAMHEAD CREEK 2 L Type : PROJECT File : - ILUSTRATIVE SITE AREA FOR CARBON CAPTURE - Nº : - M SCALE: 0 1 : ,5 M FIRST ISSUE: Drawn Prep. RGLO RGLO Check. Approv. PPN PPN Client : Replaces : 18EL-9-YTG-DA-IICEI-0011 Sheet: - - Next: - Rev : SIZE : 0 A1 M All rights reserved. Total or partial reproduction of this drawing without authorization of the propietor is prohibited