Strategic UK CCS Storage Appraisal

Transcription

1 Strategic UK CCS Storage Appraisal Nicola Ham Edmonds Den Gammer Andrew Green 2015 Energy Technologies Institute LLP The information in this document is the property of Energy Technologies Institute LLP and may not be copied or communicated to a third party, or used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of Energy Technologies Institute LLP This information Energy is given Technologies in good faith based Institute upon the latest LLP information - Subject available to to notes Energy on Technologies page 1Institute LLP, no warranty or representation is given concerning such information, which must not be taken as establishing any contractual or other commitment binding upon Energy Technologies Institute LLP or any of its subsidiary or associated companies.

2 Agenda 1. Arrival and tea/coffee Introduction, safety and rules for the day AG 3. Introduction to the ETI AG 4. Project background DG 5. Intellectual Property, Third Party Data and Third Party Software Models NHE 6. ETI Project Contract Key Features NHE 7. Project detailed technical requirements DG 8. Project organisation and key roles AG 9. Lunch and networking(*) Project reporting and finance requirements AG 11. Submission, selection and contract negotiating & detailing process AG 12. Open Q&A Tea, networking and depart(*)

3 Rules for the day Opportunity to learn more about ETI and its requirements for this project feel free to ask questions Covering not just technical issues, but financial, legal, commercial etc Q&A sessions after each agenda item Will endeavour to stay to schedule! Opportunity to network with potential participants ETI is not offering to act as marriage brokers Recognise that different consortia may be at different stages of formation Discussions in here today are non confidential Q&A s in the open session will be recorded and made available (without attribution) to all parties registering an interest in the Project Break out room available should any attendees want to hold confidential meetings over lunch or in final session 3

4 INTRODUCTION TO THE ETI 4

5 What is the ETI? ETI members The Energy Technologies Institute (ETI) is a public-private partnership between global industries and UK Government Delivering... Targeted development, demonstration and derisking of new technologies for affordable and secure energy Shared risk ETI programme associate 5.

6 What is the ETI? System level strategic planning Technology development & demonstration Delivering knowledge & innovation 6.

7 ETI Invests in projects at 3 levels Knowledge Building Projects typically... up to 5m, Up to 2 years Technology Development projects typically m, 2-4 years TRL 3-5 Technology Demonstration projects Large projects delivered primarily by large companies, system integration focus typically m+, 3-5 years TRL

8 ETI Invests in projects at 3 levels 9 Technology Programme areas Delivering... New knowledge Technology development Technology demonstration Reduced risk 8.

9 ETI Projects what is different The ETI is an investor in technology, not a grant awarding body The ETI is unique and its mode of operating reflects this: ETI objectives: acceleration of technology Need to meet State Aid requirements ETI can fund up to 100% of project costs ETI member investment How does ETI commission projects? ETI defines the projects it wishes to commission taking input from experts State aid and ETI s constitution require open and transparent process to allocate funding Typically, request for proposals through open call Select against selection criteria: mix of technical and delivery capabilities, commercial requirements including ability to manage IP to ensure that results can be made publically available 9

10 Key requirements/constraints for this Project (1) Project Funding The ETI is commissioning and delivering this Project on behalf of DECC DECC is making available up to 2.5M additional funding to the ETI. This maximum funding is to cover all external costs defrayed by the ETI Project costs All data and software licensing fees Consultancy support to the ETI to oversee the project (maximum 100k) All Project activities (including final reporting) must be completed and costs defrayed within the Financial Year 2015/16 ETI will make no commitments to meet any costs incurred before 5 th April 2015 or beyond 4 th April Will be a short window after 4 th April 2016 to close project, finalise financial claims Significant risk that funding will be withdrawn if not on contract by 1st May

11 Key requirements/constraints for this Project (2) Commissioning and delivery will be according to ETI governance processes DECC funding will be channelled through normal ETI funding processes This is a National Asset Project the ETI will makes results publically available On licensed terms, probably through a third party Critical that the ETI obtains the rights to do this Close attention to IP rights particularly for third party data and software 11

12 ETI CCS PROGRAMME 12

13 CCS: Challenges for the UK Capture = Cost Reduced Capital Cost Reduced Power Penalty 1 4 km CCS System: Cost-effective roll out Operability Incentives to invest Storage = Risk How much is there? Which sites? Monitoring CO 2 12

14 ETI CCS Programme Demonstration Development Knowledge Building Storage Appraisal: 4M Capture Economics: 0.2M MMV Landscape: 0.2M Mineralisation: 1.4M Biomass with CCS: 0.8M Hydrogen & Storage: 0.3M CCS Development Scenarios 0.1M CCS System Modelling Toolkit: 3M High Hydrogen: 2M Turbine & Engine Safety Thermal Power with CCS: 2M + Nextgen1: up to 23M Pre Combustion Coal Nextgen 2: up to 20M Post Combustion Gas Aquifer Appraisal: 2M Funding of NG Project MMV: 5M Marine monitoring 13

15 Storage - Appraisal ETI has delivered, through a 4m investment in the UK Storage Appraisal Project: Realistic, defensible & fully auditable assessment of potential CO 2 storage capacity in the UK Overall estimate of capacity Unique & comprehensive GIS storage database Capacity Security of storage Economics Underlying data Database licensed to The Crown Estate and British Geological Survey Launched in 2013, as CO2Stored Available free to academia and by subscription to industry Available free to Project Participants for the purpose of the Project 14

16 PROJECT BACKGROUND 16

17 Learnings from previous work from CO2Stored data In 2012 ETI carried out a high level techno-economic study of offshore networks storing c.100mt/a by 2030 and through to A cost estimation tool for clusters was created for ETI by Element Energy using CO2Stored data CO2Nomica. Outputs used to support CCS Cost Reduction Task Force. Conclusions Scale is essential to keep costs down (new-builds). Punitive diseconomies of scale below 10MT/a not many stores can inject at this rate. Clusters or trunks build scale, provide redundancy and can sustain long term use of infrastructure. Trunks reduce operational costs for stores with declining injectivity. With planning the total investment in offshore transport and storage is containable - 6 hubs, 20 stores, 200 wells - 16bn money of today. Easily fits within a clean power offering of 100/MWh by 2030 (NOAK costs). 16

18 Storage appraisal risk and schedule The costs, risks and schedule in storage appraisal impede full-chain CCS project development and investment. Stores have up to 9 years gestation and appraisal can cost 80M+ for a new aquifer storage play. At Final Investment Decision (FID) the store needs to be appraised and engineered, and provide up to 30 years of storage capacity for a power station. Example 1GW coal c.180mt. Having appraised storage visible to project planners reduces the complexity, schedule, risk and therefore the cost of CCS. Having multiple storage options improves perception of operational robustness and confidence in the decline of future costs as clusters build. ( 100/MWh promise ). Using existing infrastructure reduces upfront investment and its risk premium. 18

19 Target ranges for CCS No explicit government target for the mix of clean power producers, but Policy and obligation to reduce GHG emissions by 80% by 2050, from 1990 levels. Acceptance of CCC conclusion that power sector decarbonises first (based on cost). Gas Generation Strategy decarbonisation of power to 100g CO2/kWh by 2030 needs CCS. DECC published CCS projections in the range 1GW 13GW in scenarios by 2030, 5GW CCS in most recent case. CCC review of 4 th carbon budget 10GW CCS by (summary: thanks to Patrick Dixon) ETI Scenarios Work (2014) Balancing lowest cost pathway solution (which suggests a higher demand for CCS) with a late start, normal individual project schedules and reasonable risk taking, leads us to focus on 10 GW CCS by 2030 (nominally 50 MT/a) 19

20 Three main roll-out scenarios based on policy backdrop Implement Wood s recommendations to coordinate UKCS oil production and increase commercial attractiveness. High CO 2 -EOR policy support (e.g. tax incentives) CO 2 has a value due to the CO 2 -EOR projects Push on all fronts to win support from diverse stakeholders. A variety of regional source clusters Multiple fuel sources Multiple capture technologies There won t be any leading technology Balanced CO 2 -EOR CCS growth Concentrated Geographic concentration around the two competition projects and standardisation to reduce T&S costs and barriers. Dominant role for SNS storage and gas CCS 19

21 Transport and Storage Group - CRTF Two recent publications developing earlier work (available on The Crown Estate website) Delivering Storage at the lowest cost in time to meet the UK s decarbonisation goals Optimising CCS Networks to reduce CCS costs Requirements of new policy CCS location, size. Incentivising pre- FID storage. Incentivising right- sized investment in new trunk lines for optimal networks. Issues with Third Party Access to infrastructure. Funding needed to encourage appraisal beyond Phase 1. Stepping out from early assets is cost effective 21

22 Phase 1 competition and 10GW CCS / 50 MT/a Phase 1 will leave us well short of a 10GW CCS / 50MT/a ambition Project Store Size p90/p50 MT (CO2Stored) Phase 1 Injection MT/a Power GW Pipeline MT/a Peterhead 37/ White Rose 200/ gross 17 Note. 1. The White Rose store has an economic injectivity of around 10MT/a in CO2Stored 2. The DECC Competition work will not de-risk all of the White Rose store capacity 22

23 Cumulative CO 2 (MtCO 2 ) This Project more de-risked storage Downselect storage for assessment Progress de-risking of 5 commercially attractive stores towards readiness for FID in 2020s. Provide options relevant to the needs of different regions 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, Amount of storage which needs to be appraised to provide ~30 years storage c.1500mt 23

24 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, THIRD PARTY DATA & THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE 24

25 Key challenges Effective management of IP is critical to this Project Purpose of Project is to:- Create outputs that are made available publically Bring together existing IP from many homes and new IP All must be done within a very challenging funding window Your proposals to manage IP will be a key part of your submission and key part of Selection Criteria (S3) Early discussions with owners of existing IP will be required and early involvement of your legal support in this area is recommended 25

26 Strategic UK CCS Storage Appraisal Project IP requirements RfP sets out minimum requirements please read carefully. In order to achieve Project aims, the ETI Project Contract will include detailed provisions to deal with IP as follows Arising IP (i.e. newly created during the Project) This will be owned by the ETI The enables the ETI to put in place the arrangements for it to be made publically available This onward sharing may be through licence or assignment ETI s ability to do must be unfettered** Licences to Participants are possible as long as consistent with ETI s objectives to make available Academic rights Commercial rights Access to main outputs, e.g. database may be through third party provider 26

27 Strategic UK CCS Storage Appraisal Project IP requirements Background IP (i.e. your own IP, existing already or created separately) ETI s standard approach to Background IP applies Ownership of Background IP remains the same Licences to be made available by Participants For the Project, as necessary between any Participants and Subcontractors in order to deliver the Project (royalty free basis) Post Project, in relation to Background IP incorporated into any outputs/deliverables in order for ETI to transfer, licence etc freely the Arising IP. In this case, costs, if any, should be included in up front Project Costs For your Proposal, identify any such Background IP and how it will be made available (i.e. compliant with RfP requirements or otherwise) 27

28 Strategic UK CCS Storage Appraisal Project IP requirements Third Party IP (i.e. existing IP owned by a third party) Broadly the approach for Third Party IP mimics that for Background IP For each constituent Third Party IP, the ETI is flexible as to whether it ultimately enters into a specific licence directly (and sublicences to Participants) or whether it receives its rights through a sublicence from a Participant who has the direct licence of Third Party IP Risk remains with Participants you must identify what Third Party IP is necessary in your Proposal and in the Project and manage it so the ETI is licensed to use anything contained in any Deliverables It is desirable to deal with this as much as possible pre-contract to mitigate risk to delivery of the Project (including within the funding window) The ETI will want to approve the terms of each licence for certainty Costs for usage of Third Party IP ought to be included in up front Project Costs note the maximum funding available needs to include IP costs 28

29 Finally Effective management of IP could make/break this Project Third Party IP existing/standard terms are unlikely to be set up to provide the usage and rights required by ETI/DECC Negotiation time in relation to Third Party IP needs to be built in to proposal planning and started as early as possible Due diligence on Background IP and Third Party IP will be a material task ETI is happy to work with Respondents/Project Participants in relation to Third Party IP from down-selection: collaboration will be key to success 29

30 PROJECT CONTRACT: OTHER KEY ASPECTS 30

31 Project Contract State Aid ETI s funding is public sector, so Project Funding must comply with EU state aid rules ETI s State Aid Clearance The Project will fall within ETI s existing clearance Manage State Aid issues through the Technology Contract Stipulation of category of participant at outset for State Aid purposes Requirement for this categorisation to be updated periodically Milestones/project plan will break down work into different categories Arising IP rights and Profit can t have both 100% return of state funding in certain, limited circumstances, for example: withdrawal of a participant without consent corruption or fraud failure to comply with State Aid requirements (EU law requirement) 31

32 Project Contract Other Key Issues Stage Gate Reviews Structured reviews at key points where project progress and business case reviewed Option to stop the project Exit Provisions Suspension Termination breach and for convenience. Termination by mutual consent Withdrawal of participant can withdraw if all other participants and ETI agree. Conditions likely to be imposed. 32

33 Project Contract Other Key Issues Confidentiality Warranties Liabilities ETI funding but exclusions to the cap apply Indemnities third party indemnity ( misdirected claims) IP indemnity Indemnities related to warranties, project by project 33

34 Related Contracts Consortium Agreement: Agreement between participants: ETI to approve Completed prior to Technology Contract Specific arrangements e.g. appointment of Project Manager and Chief Technologist internal organisation of Research Consortium regular project meetings use of facilities and equipment financial provisions amongst participants Subcontractors Access to Third Party Data and Software will require ETI approval Other key subcontracts may need approval Funding contracts (if relevant) 34

35 Summary: key issues for review before you bid Arising IP ETI to own What Background IP and Third Party IP will you need, have preliminary discussions, set out detail in bid Rest of contract State Aid return of funding (non-negotiable/legal requirement) Third Party IP risk warranties and indemnity Liability (especially in consortium and your expected flow down to subs) Payment within funding window Acceptance process Reporting (make sure you price it in) Stage Gates Make sure you have buy in of each proposed consortium member and any key subcontractors All comments in single collated list/mark up 35

36 PROJECT TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS 36

37 Project Objectives and Outcomes To sustain a storage development trajectory that services 10GWe - 50Mt/a of storage operational in To down select a portfolio of 5 stores for detailed de-risking. Build on Phase 1 infrastructure. To bring some of the selected capacity to end of Appraisal, providing options that will support Phase 1 decisions and early Phase 2 options. With the balance of the selected capacity,develop commercial scale, low cost and risk options towards full appraisal in the period ( and hence operation 2030). Estimate and schedule and resources needed to get down selected stores fully appraised and then operational. Make results available to current and potential future stakeholders. 37

38 Work Packages - highlights Package Highlights Comments WP1 WP2 Framework for screening, selection, appraisal Consortia requirements for information Tested methods preferable Possible rate determining activity WP3 Initial Screening Portfolio approach WP4 Final down -select Some capacity ready for deep study preferred WP5 Maturation Sustain 5 targets if casualties occur. WP6 Options for UK Storage Development Include Phase 1,2 and EIS etc in an overall spatial plan WP7 Management and Stakeholders Engage the O&G and storage community 38

39 Project Deliverables A methodology for store screening, selection and appraisal. A database from the project that can be freely licensed on to others. Models (where necessary) and assessments arising from WP 4 and 5 A comprehensive report on the Project activities and findings - the de-risking exercise - a graded spatial plan with options - a cost and schedule to complete the down-selected stores (to operation) A publishable report of key outcomes for stakeholders 39

40 Resources CO2Stored ETI Scenario work CO2Nomica Third Party Publications - DECC No1 - Regional Studies eg Yorkshire etc 40

41 PROJECT ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE 41

42 Contractual Structure Consortium Each Participant in contract with ETI Consortium Agreement covering interactions within Consortium (requires ETI approval before main contract is signed) Lead Coordinator acts as primary interface with the ETI Prime Contractor Single entity in contract with the ETI Other participants act as subcontractors Appointment and use of Subcontractors requires ETI approval ETI has right to view and approve subcontracts Overall No strong preference on structure provided Respondents justify their approach as best way to deliver The ETI will only select Respondents who have the required skills, experience and capability (either themselves or within their Subcontractors/Consortium) to complete all parts of the Project 42

43 ETI Typical Project Structure ETI Board ETI PAG ETI Executive ETI CCS SAG ETI Communications Advisory Group Project Steering Group ETI Project Manager Project Project Manager ETI Legal ETI Finance ETI Programme Management Office Project Chief Technologist Project Team 43

44 Key Roles Project Manager managing and progressing the project team and programme to time and cost handling information flows and commercial issues ensuring effective team-working and the continued engagement and support of key stakeholders. To make sure that the ETI benefits from a result at the end of the programme of work that meets the agreed outcomes within time and cost. Chief Technologist responsible for the technical quality and content of the work ensuring the competence of key technical staff allocated to individual work packages effective review of key outputs and the effectiveness of detailed technical planning to ensure that the emerging results of work are fed back into the forward plan To assure the technical quality of the project and its outcomes Strong industrial (rather than academic) focus 44

45 Key Roles Identify individuals Include CVs Identify how much resource Realism regarding likely availability for project 45

46 PROJECT REPORTING AND FINANCE REQUIREMENTS 46

47 Reporting Principles ETI takes hands on, collaborative approach to management of project Regular, informal contact expected (e.g. weekly catch up calls) Maximise chance of success by sharing risks and issues ETI reports regularly to its members (including DECC) Project needs to provide monthly reports Proforma reports ETI needs monthly finance updates Ensure that the ETI meets State Aid regulations Ensuring the ETI has the cash to meet its commitments (works on cash call from Members) Technical quality of deliverables is paramount Payments will be contingent on acceptance of deliverables against agreed acceptance criteria Key deliverables will be reviewed by ETI expert advisors Make sure you budget enough time to meet requirements! 47

48 Types of Reports Monthly Report Project Management Finance Milestone Report Brief report outlining the deliverables and why the Consortium believes the acceptance criteria have been met Identify Arising IP generated under, or in connection with, the production of each deliverable should also be disclosed Milestone Cost Report Cost report for each participant in relation to the relevant payment milestone Generated from the Finance Monthly Report Independent Accountants Report for some milestones (see draft contract) Deliverable/Technical Report Not prescriptive in terms of format and structure Some minimum standards 48

49 Reporting additional requirements Ability of ETI and members (including DECC) to attend meetings End of year financial report Additional reporting and inspection obligations ETI has right to have projects audited by external auditors and experts Obligations on project participants to archive materials 10 years = State Aid obligation 20 years = patent prosecution and protection 49

50 Project Funding The Project Funding is a maximum amount Capped Cost Fixed Price (exceptional circumstances) Require transparency of cashflow & cost breakdown in either case Project will be broken down into milestones payment will be against milestones Payment Actual costs Eligible costs 100% FEC for HEIs Acceptance Process Technical Cost Detailed spreadsheets required to manage costs Stipulated payment mechanism with independent accountant s report(s) at set stage 50

51 Payment Milestones, Deliverables and Acceptance Criteria Payment Milestones are key points in project where value is delivered to the ETI One or more Project Deliverables provided Formal review of Deliverables against Acceptance Criteria Agreed acceptance Criteria set out in Project Contract ETI uses Project Advisors to review deliverables ETI can and often does initially reject deliverables which do not meet the Acceptance Criteria Details for review procedure set out the Project Contract Payment only approved when Deliverables are agreed by the ETI 51

52 Accountants Reports ETI requires Accounts Reports at key milestones, dependent on level and funding and participant type Apart from HEI s this is not an eligible cost Milestone Payments* Total Funding for First, Last and Each 500k First, Last First & Last Each Participant Cumulative Payment** & Anniversary Last Only > 2m YES > 500k - 2m YES > 250k-500k YES > 50k - 250k HEIs > 100k YES YES 52

53 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 53

54 Timetable for Submission Deadline for signed NDA/Intention to submit: 29 th January 2015 Submission deadline: 5 th February 2015, 12 noon: Word and PDF 3x hard copies within 3 working days 54

55 Submission Requirements Detailed Proposal Supporting information CVs of key staff Risk Register Due Diligence Statement of Compliance Signed by Prime Contractor or each member of Consortium Include exceptions on Project Contract ideally consolidated mark up LINE UP YOUR LEGAL/CONTRACT STAFF TO REVIEW 55

56 Selection Process Selection Panel 19 th February 2015 Selection Panel Members Group providing appropriate technical & commercial expertise ETI staff Experts from ETI Members (public/private sector) Third party experts as appropriate Process Panel members individually consider proposals against Selection Criteria Respondents may be invited to provide presentation to the panel Meeting to discuss and agree recommendations to ETI Executive ETI Executive approves which proposal(s) if any should go forward, based on recommendations of panel All Respondents (successful or not) given feedback on strengths and weaknesses of bid Successful bidder(s) notified by 3 rd March 2015 May decide to invite more than one consortium through and hold a second selection panel 56

57 Selection Criteria (1) S1 Ability of the Participants to deliver the Project, based on evidence provided and presented at the Selection Panel(s). Ability of the Participants to deliver the Project, based on evidence provided and presented at the Selection Panel(s). S1A Technical Experience and availability of the proposed Chief Technologist; Level of experience and completeness of the technical skills amongst the consortium to deliver the Project, including experience in CO2 storage appraisal, and more specifically: Management of the development and sharing of technical documentation across many parties; Interpretation of geological data to give an overview of reservoir attractiveness depositional history, vertical and lateral homogeneity within a boundary, connectivity with more remote parts of the structure, or other structures, cap rock strength Static, dynamic and reservoir simulation modelling on commercial platforms; Geomechanics, geochemistry; Interpretation of data from seismic, wellbore, etc. data sources; Judgement of the need for and value of additional information; Assessment of specific risks integrity of abandoned and accessible wells, faults; Offshore Facility conceptual design options; Cost estimation of offshore installations; 57

58 Selection Criteria (2) S1A Technical (cont) S1B Experience of managing IP, particularly with relation to data and software; Availability and stability of deployable resources with the above skills to mobilise sufficiently rapidly and for sufficient durations; Delivery Experience and availability of the proposed Project Manager; Record and ability in quality, timely and on-budget delivery of projects (of the type requested in this RfP) to the full satisfaction of the main stakeholders; Project management systems and expertise appropriate for this sort of project; Ability and experience in collaborative working; Appropriate health, safety and environmental management systems and experience; Effectiveness of the contracting, organisational, governance and control structures and processes proposed for the participating entities / organisations, including interfacing with ETI as it requires, etc; Project approach and plan, including Gantt chart, suitable Stage Gates & Payment Milestones; Risk Management. Respondents will need to demonstrate clear evidence of a rigorous, riskbased approach to management of the Project. A register identifying the key risks and how they will be managed is required. 58

59 Selection Criteria (3) S2 Value for money with respect to Project Funding: Contributions from Participants and third parties (including funding, in-kind support and making their own IP available to the project, e.g. data, models, previous analysis); Competitiveness of costs; Willingness and capacity to accept the financial risk profile for the Project. S3 Licensing Strategy for Third Party Data and Background IP: Evidence of a robust strategy and management plan for identifying and obtaining licences to enable the Participants to carry out the Project and the ETI to use and license the Database, Software Models and other Deliverables from the Project; Evidence of initial discussions and buy-in from the owners of any Third Party Data identified as critical for the Project at proposal stage; Evidence of a credible management plan to minimise risk of infringement of third party Intellectual Property Rights. 59

60 Selection Criteria (4) S4 Risks associated with reaching acceptable agreement with the ETI within the timescales set out in this RfP: Credible evidence that the Project Contract has been fully reviewed within Respondent organisations; Respondents willingness to materially comply with the terms and conditions of the proposed Project Contract, including the ETI s IP position and the requirements on Third Party IP; Availability and commitment of the necessary technical, legal and financial resources to meet the requirements of ETI s commissioning process. 60

61 Detailing and Negotiation Fixed deadline for responses to requests for clarification 13 th March 2015 Series of fixed meetings Detailing of technical programme, definition of deliverables and acceptance criteria Detailing and agreement of Stage Gates (if appropriate) Negotiation and agreement of the Project Contract Detailed due diligence (Annex A1 Section 2) Agreement and approval by the ETI to terms of other key contractual arrangements e.g. Sub-contracts (including Third Party Data) Consortium Agreement Gaining all necessary Respondent and ETI approvals to undertake the Project Further information or assessment that may be necessary to meet state aid requirements Fixed period of 8 weeks set for this stage Very challenging Respondents must commit to making all technical, legal and finance resources available to meet this target Significant risk that funding will be withdrawn if not on contract by 1 st May

62 OPEN Q&A 62

63 Registered Office Energy Technologies Institute Holywell Building Holywell Park Loughborough LE11 3UZ For all general enquiries telephone the ETI on For more information about the ETI visit For the latest ETI news and announcements The ETI can also be followed on 63