ODIS2009FINAL

Transmission Networks
Offshore Development Information Statement

December 2009
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009
Disclaimer
This Statement, dated December 2009, is produced by National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) acting in its role as National Electricity Transmission Operator (NETSO). It is produced pursuant to Special Condition C4 (Role in respect of the National Electricity Transmission System Operator area located in offshore water) of the licence to participate in the transmission of electricity granted to NGET pursuant to Section 6(1) (b) of the Electricity Act 1989 (as amended by the Utilities Act 2000, the Energy Act 2004 and the Energy Act 2008). The form of this Statement has been approved by the Authority. The Statement and this web site (the Site), which must be used in accordance with the following Terms and Conditions, are governed by the law of and subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales and of Scotland. The information required to be included in this Statement is set out in Special Condition C4 of NGETs licence. This Statement is not intended to imply any legal obligations as regards the future development of the National Electricity Transmission System. This Statement should not be regarded as an indicator of the performance and prospects of National Grid or any other party. Whilst reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of this Statement, no representation, express or implied, is made as to the accuracy or completeness of such information. NGET and members of the National Grid Group do not accept any liability for the accuracy of the information contained herein and, in particular neither NGET nor the Group, nor the directors nor the employees of NGET nor the Group shall be under any liability for any error or misstatement or opinion on which the recipient of this Statement relies or seeks to rely other than fraudulent statements or fraudulent misrepresentation.
Copyright
Any and all copyright and all other intellectual property rights contained in the Statement and in any other Site content (including PDF documentation) belong or have been licensed to National Grid. If you modify or adapt the Statement, the Site content or any such documentation, you acknowledge and accept full responsibility for the accuracy of the modified or adapted Statement, Site content and/or documentation. To the extent that you re-use the Statement, any Site content or documentation in its original form and without making any modifications or adaptations thereto, you must reproduce, clearly and prominently, the following copyright statement in your own documentation: 2009 National Grid plc, all rights reserved. The trade marks, logos and service marks displayed on the document and on the Site are owned and registered (where applicable) by National Grid or another member of the Group. No rights or licence are granted or may be implied by their display on the Site.
Cover photograph used with permission, Copyright 2009 DONG Energy Sun rise over the installation of the first Siemens 3.6MW turbine at the Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm in the Northern Thames Estuary, Great Britain. The offshore substation for the 48 turbine 172MW wind farm is in the foreground. Electricity was first generated from the Gunfleet Sands Offshore Wind Farm during August 2009. 2
Foreword
The 2009 Offshore Development Information Statement (Statement) is the first to be published by National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) acting in its role as National Electricity Transmission System Operator (NETSO). National Grid Electricity Transmission plc is a member of the National Grid plc (National Grid) group of companies. The Statement is produced in accordance with the obligations placed on NGET under Special Licence Condition C4 of its electricity transmission licence. Amongst other things, this condition requires that NGET publishes this Statement on an annual basis in a form approved by the Authority. The main purpose of this Statement is to facilitate the achievement of the coordinated development of the offshore and onshore electricity grid in Great Britain. The network solutions identified in this report represent a vision of how the offshore and onshore reinforcements could be developed; it is the responsibility of individual onshore/offshore network owner to develop detailed designs. In developing these detailed designs it is envisaged that this Statement will provide guidance in determining the optimum solutions.
Comments
I hope you find the 2009 Statement both interesting and informative. Given that this is the first publication of the Statement, I would particularly welcome any comments you may have on both the style and the content of the document such that any improvements for the 2010 Statement may be fully considered. An Online Survey Form has been made available for this very purpose. I look forward to receiving your views on the Statement, including suggestions on how it may be further improved, which can be sent in the Online Survey Form or via email.
Nick Winser, Executive Director, Transmission National Grid December 2009
Contents
Executive Summary 1. Offshore Electricity Transmission Overview
1.1 Background 1.2 Offshore Generation Development 1.3 Offshore Transmission Regulatory Regime 1.4 Previous and Parallel Initiatives 8 9 10 13 6
2. Offshore Development Information Statement

2.1 Aim and Purpose 2.2 Development and Structure 2.3 Evolution of Statement 15 15 16
3. Offshore Windfarm Projects: Rounds 1 & 2

3.1 Overview 3.2 East Coast 3.3 North West 3.4 Thames Estuary 17 18 20 22
4. Future Generation and Demand Scenarios

4.1 Overview 4.2 Future Generation Scenarios 4.3 Regional Analysis: Additional Sensitivity 24 25 32
5. Offshore and Local Onshore Connection Designs

5.1 Overview 5.2 Integrated Onshore/Offshore Design 33 38
6. Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS) Considerations

6.1 Background and Assessment Methodology 6.2 Boundaries Considered 6.3 MITS Reinforcement Options 6.4 Boundary Results 65 67 68 70
7. Way Forward
7.1 General Industry Consultation on the 2009 Statement 7.2 Industry Contribution on the Generation Background Scenarios 7.3 Proposed 2010 Consultation Timetable 7.4 Consultation Process for Enduring Offshore Development Information Statement 80 80 81 81 82
Glossary
Appendices
1 2 3 4 5 Future Generation Scenarios Details MITS Boundaries Drawing Offshore Network Design Methodology Review of Offshore Transmission Technologies Detailed Offshore Network Design Drawings
Executive Summary
Introduction
The 2009 Offshore Development Information Statement (Statement) is the first to be published by National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) acting in its role as National Electricity Transmission System Operator (NETSO). Being the first of its kind, we have endeavoured to provide a statement that is both interesting and informative, but inevitably there will be areas which can be improved. We look forward to receiving any feedback or comments through an Online Survey Form that has been made available. The Statement includes a wide range of information relating to possible development of both the offshore and onshore transmission systems including generation scenarios, applicable technology, offshore transmission design and onshore transmission co-ordination. It is also supported by technical and economic analysis and sets out options for reinforcing both the offshore and onshore and transmission networks that demonstrate the way in which the UK can achieve its challenging renewable energy target. The reinforcements identified in this report represent a vision of how the offshore and onshore reinforcements could be developed; it is the responsibility of individual onshore/offshore network owner to develop detailed designs. In developing these detailed designs it is envisaged that this Statement will provide guidance in determining the optimum solutions.
Background
The Government has set ambitious energy targets to increase the establishment and use of renewable energy. The introduction of Renewable Obligation scheme has provided a considerable incentive for the development of new renewable generation. A vast wind resource is available in the waters surrounding the UK with the potential to be captured by predominately Offshore Windfarms but also via marine technology. To use this resource, areas have been identified for lease by The Crown Estate and Scottish Government, and released in various licensing rounds. Under a new regulatory regime transmission licenses will be granted, following competitive tender for new offshore transmission and this regime will achieve separation of the businesses of generation, offshore transmission and onshore transmission. Offshore projects that have already progressed through The Crown Estate rounds one and two will pass through a transitional stage where the offshore transmission will transfer to an Offshore Transmission Owner (OFTO). The larger, more distant Round 3 generation areas will require the direct appointment of OFTOs.
Scenarios
To assess the potential for transmission reinforcement options a number of scenarios have been developed, which cover a range of potential offshore developments from 14GW offshore generation capacity up to 50GW by 2025. These scenarios cover the possibility of not having enough renewable generation to meet government renewable target up to massively exceeding the target.
Offshore and Local Connection Design

Having reviewed currently available and anticipated technology available for offshore use and applying National Electricity Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard (NETS SQSS) requirements, three standard offshore designs are presented which are likely to be used for offshore transmission. In general for generation zones further than 60km from shore HVDC transmission technology is the most technically suitable with AC technology more applicable for closer connections. It is presented in chapter five that significant offshore transmission capacity and local onshore transmission reinforcements will be required for connecting the high levels of offshore generation and in particular the large Round 3 zones. The indicative designs in this Statement have been developed and optimised given the high level information presently available to NGET. However, detailed design activities will need to be undertaken considering detailed seabed surveys, shoreline landing access, potential environmental and community impacts, planning consent, installation vessel availability, the design and location of Windfarms, the leadtime and cost of equipment etc. As such, the final designs are likely to vary somewhat from the indicative networks illustrated in this report, in response to issues identified in the detailed design phase. The responsibility for this detailed investigation and design lies entirely with each OFTO. As projects develop continuous co-ordination and discussion will need to take place to aid the sharing of limited resources such as shoreline landing points and seabed routes.
Wider System Considerations

The cumulative effect of all the possible new generation, both offshore and onshore, has a marked effect on the nature of the power flows across the national electricity transmission system. Much of the new generation lies to the North while demand remains in the South which leads to transmission reinforcements being needed for a number of Northern boundaries. To accommodate the changing power flows across the transmission network a number of reinforcements have been proposed as strategic developments. Much of the development of these reinforcements has been undertaken by the Energy Networks Strategy Group (ENSG).
Practical Challenges
Amongst the many challenges for development of the offshore transmission network, we identified that connections to multiple Offshore Windfarms may compete for access to limited resources of: offshore routes free of underwater restrictions such as existing gas pipes, feasible and acceptable landing points on the coastal foreshore, overland routes to interface points, and finally limited options for onshore substations. We hope that this Statement can form a basis against which potential and actual OFTOs can appraise and resolve these resource conflicts.
Chapter One
Offshore Electricity Transmission Overview
1.1 Background
The Government has set an ambitious target for the development of renewable energy over the next decade. By 2020, the Government expects that 15% of the UKs energy needs will be met from renewable sources. This means that around 30% of UKs electricity may come from renewables. The Renewable Obligation scheme has been established to oblige electricity suppliers to source an increasing proportion of their power from renewable generation. Accredited renewable generators are issued Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) for each MWh of eligible energy generated multiplied by a factor that depends on the generation technology.
TABLE 1.1 - Renewable Obligation Certificates Allocation
1
Renewable generators can sell ROCs that they have acquired to electricity suppliers. The additional revenue provided by the sale of ROCs improves the economics of developing renewable generation. Each year, Ofgem sets the percentage of electrical energy for which suppliers much obtain ROCs, and the buyout price that suppliers must pay for any deficit (with the proceeds recycled to those suppliers who have met their requirement). The ROC scheme has been in operation since April 2002 and has recently been extended to operate until 2037, subject to a further review of the Renewable Obligation Order scheduled for 2010.
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sustainability/environment/renewablobl/Documents1/Large%20Gen%20Guidance%202009%20%20for%20publication.pdf
In order to further stimulate the market, offshore wind projects that have government consents (planning permission) and place orders for wind turbines in financial year 2009/10 will be eligible for two Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) per MWh, with 1.75 ROCs available in 2010/11. After this the standard 1.5 ROCs per MWh will apply. This may encourage the development of offshore wind and at the time of writing the projects at Lincs, London Array and Gwynt y Mor are set to receive 2 ROCs per MWh. Offshore power generation will play an important part in the meeting the renewable energy and carbon emissions targets and improving energy security by 2020 and afterwards, towards 2050. supported by The Crown Estate leasing programme for offshore generation sites. The industry aim is that economic, efficient and co-coordinated offshore electricity transmission networks are built to transmit the electricity generated from these offshore sources to the onshore network and ultimately to consumers. This is
1.2 Offshore Generation Development

1.2.1 Offshore Wind Development
The wind resource in the waters surrounding the UK is vast. Offshore Windfarms make it possible to harness some of this wind energy to generate electricity. The development of large Offshore Windfarms is a key component of UK's strategy to reduce its carbon emissions Offshore Windfarm developers must lease the seabed on which their infrastructure is to be constructed from The Crown Estate. To facilitate this, The Crown Estate has held a number of allocation rounds, allocating defined areas of the seabed to potential Windfarm developers. The Crown Estate announced the first round of UK Offshore Windfarms development sites in 2000. This allocated 13 sites, each within 12 nautical miles of the UK coastline. These were demonstration sites, in which the number of turbines was limited to 30 in each. Given the maximum capacity of wind turbines available at that time, this implied an upper capacity in the order of 100MW per site. Following the success of the first round, The Crown Estate conducted a second round in 2003 for sites at least 8-13km offshore. Bids were invited from developers for leases within the three strategic areas. Leases were awarded to 15 projects, with a combined generation capacity of 7.2GW. Earlier this year, applications closed for the third round of Offshore Windfarm leases. The areas of the Round 3 zones are significantly greater than that of Round 1 and 2 sites, and in some cases extend to the extremities of the UK's Continental Shelf.
3
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/phases_of_development
9
There are further Windfarm development sites within Scotland's territorial waters that have to satisfy both Crown Estate and Scottish Government conditions. These sites will be allocated on a case by case basis by The Crown Estate.
4
Additionally, The Crown Estate is now in the process of receiving tenders for the so called Round 2.5 projects, extensions to the existing Round 1 and Round 2 schemes. The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), as the principal regulator of the offshore oil and gas industry, initiated the use of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) as a means of striking a balance between promoting economic development of the UKs offshore energy resources and effective environmental protection. In conducting the SEA process, DECC is guided by the Oil and Gas SEA Steering Group.
5
1.2.2 Offshore Marine Technology

The geography of the UK lends itself to the utilisation of other offshore renewable power generation technologies, including wave and tidal generation. Scotland has good locations for marine power generation, particularly in the Pentland Firth and surrounding waters. Tenders closed on 15 May 2009 for The Crown Estates first round of marine energy site leases within the Pentland Firth strategic area, and the successful bidders are yet to be announced. The programme is seeking to enable the deployment of over 700 MW of offshore wave and tidal power in the region by 2020 . In the longer term, marine energy generation is expected to make a reasonable contribution towards meeting the UKs renewable generation targets. The future generation scenarios used in this Statement include the potential development in offshore marine technology.
6
1.3 Offshore Transmission Regulatory Regime

1.3.1 Regime Overview
The Government's aim is that economic, efficient and co-coordinated offshore electricity transmission networks are built to transmit the electricity generated from these offshore sources to the onshore network and ultimately to consumers. The Government has decided that this aim is best achieved through the introduction of a new regulatory regime for offshore electricity transmission. This involves altering the relevant licences, system codes and agreements that govern electricity transmission. As part of the new regime, licences for offshore transmission will be granted by means of a competitive tender process, run annually by Ofgem, although this is subject to a further consultation by Ofgem scheduled for Q4 2009.
7
Offshore transmission that operates at 132kV or above will be a licensed activity, regulated by Ofgem and assigned through competitive tender process. Qualifying companies will bid for licences to be the OFTO of particular offshore networks. NGET will operate as the NETSO and will have a relationship with each OFTO in accordance with System Operator/Transmission Owner Code (STC). In addition, NGETs
8
4 5 6
http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/scottish-offshore-wind http://www.decc.gov.uk www.thecrownestate.co.uk/newscontent/92-pentland-firth-tidal-energy-project-4.htm 7 http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Pages/MoreInformation.aspx?docid=98&refer=Networks/offtrans/pdc/cdr/cons2009 8 https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Codes/sotocode/ 10
current responsibility of operating and co-coordinating onshore applications for grid connection will be extended to include the processing of applications for offshore connections in the new regime. The OFTOs revenue will be predominantly made up of the 20 year revenue stream determined by its bid during the tender process, based upon its submission of costs of financing, operating, maintaining (and in the case of enduring projects, designing and building, or for transitional projects the purchase from the developer) of the transmission assets. OFTOs will receive their regulated revenue stream payments via NGET (acting in their role of NETSO). NGET will calculate and levy the charges payable by the offshore generator for the transmission service, according to its published Use of System charging methodology . To introduce the offshore transmission regime into a situation in which there are existing projects making use of offshore transmission circuits that will now require a licence, the introduction process has been divided into two discrete categories:
9
Transitional projects are those in which the offshore transmission assets have been, are being, or will be built by the generator/developer. These, subject to meeting the criteria of the Tender Regulations, will be allowed entry into one of two Transitional Tender Rounds, which on completion will result in the appointment of an OFTO, and the transfer of the transmission assets from the developer to the OFTO at either the Go Live date or the date of commissioning of the assets (if after the Go Live date).
Enduring projects are those projects which do not qualify as Transitional and will be progressed as per the normal grid connection application process, explained below.
It is a precondition of the connection process that a developer has obtained a lease agreement with The Crown Estate. The grid connection application process shown in Figure 1.1 is initiated by the developer submitting a competent Connection Application to NGET, which will include a statement as to which Offshore Tender Round the developer wishes to submit the project into. NGET will then produce its Stage 1 offer to the developer, who will have three months
11
to consider and accept or reject, or indeed refer the
offer to Ofgem. The construction programme in the offer will be based on the date of entry into the tender process identified by the developer in their application, and the assumed date of appointment of an OFTO deriving from this. The developer is required to hold a signed connection agreement for a minimum of one month prior to the commencement of any tender round for Enduring schemes. In the period up to the commencement of the tender process, the developer is free to progress as much of the design work, e.g. onshore/offshore routing studies, consenting progression etc, as they wish, strictly at their own risk. Indeed, the developer is entitled to commence this in advance of submission of a connection application, and produce the results of studies and surveys to NGET in support of their application. NGET will take due cognisance of such additional data provided by a developer, although there is no obligation on NGET to adopt any routes etc identified in such supporting documentation. Ultimately NGETs role, as defined by its transmission licence, is to design and operate an economic efficient and coordinated transmission system while facilitating entry to the market without undue discrimination between users or classes of users. As such, NGET will undertake brief desk-top studies to derive an offshore route from the Connection Site to the onshore interface point, having due consideration of the overall system development and issues associated with the scheme.
FIGURE 1.1 Overall Connection Application Process
9 11
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Networks/offtrans/pdc/cdr/cons2009/Documents1/Main.pdf http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Codes/systemcode/ 11
NGET interaction with potential OFTOs during this period via Tender Panel only
Approx One year April Tender Window Starts Preferred Bidder Identified Process continues to licence award
Tender Process Tender Panel (Ofgem)

NGET submits Connection Offer Connection Application Connection Offer Acceptance Assessment of onshore impact Connection Process Connection Process 3 business days to apply for a TOCO Information Offshore network design options Iterative (including distribution Process NGET options) & Tender Panel Preferred Bidder accedes to STC NGET applies for TOCO
3 months Stage 2 Offer issued by NGET
3 months Stage 2 Offer accepted / referred
- NGET
Connection Terms varied to include Final offshore works
Stage 1 Connection Offer Onshore Works and Assumed Offshore Works
Minimum 1 month
Construction, Commissioning and Accession proceed under STC Governance
Three months + Three months
Stage 1
Stage 2
During the tender process, NGET will submit the scheme data required by the Authority to the Tender Room. Bidders may submit queries to NGET via the tender panel, and NGET will respond through the tender panel. In due course Ofgem may appoint an OFTO to the applicant scheme, and NGET will then submit an application to the OFTO for a Construction Offer in respect of the offshore works which are the subject of the successful bid. NGET will then incorporate the terms of these works into its corresponding Stage 2 offer to the generator, who again will have 3 months to consider and accept, reject or refer the offer. The process allows that the works in the revised offer will be progressed both on and offshore, through to commissioning, completion and operation of the plant. However, it should be noted that a further consultation on this process is scheduled to be undertaken in the near future. In December 2009 Ofgem announced the shortlist of potential OFTOs bidding to own and operate transmission connections for the first tranche of transitional tender process. It is presently envisaged that the winning bidders will be announced in May 2010.
13
13
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Media/PressRel/Documents1/Final%20shortlist%20press%20notice.pdf 12
1.4 Previous and Parallel Initiatives

This Statement complements work previously undertaken by the Electricity Networks Strategy Group (ENSG)
14
and The Crown Estate .
15
The Round 3 Offshore Windfarm Connection Study was carried out by Senergy Econnect and National Grid for The Crown Estate in 2008 to support the Round 3 site allocation process. The aim of the study was to identify the extent and cost of the works necessary to provide optimised transmission connections for all of the Round 3 Offshore Windfarms. The aim was also to ascertain at a high level the optimal ratio between the installed generating capacity offshore and the transmission capacity of the offshore transmission assets . Like the Round 3 Offshore Windfarm Connection Study, this Statement presents a view of the offshore transmission infrastructure that is expected to be required to connect the Round 3 Offshore Windfarms to the onshore transmission system. In this statement, a greater emphasis has been placed on explaining the technology and cost assumptions and the process that were used to develop the offshore network designs. The ENSG 'Our Electricity Transmission Network: A Vision for 2020' report was published in July 2009, and presented the 'Gone Green' background scenario and the onshore transmission network reinforcements likely to be required by the year 2020 to cater for the scenario. Like the ENSG report, the Statement utilises the 'Gone Green' scenario (slightly modified to take account of recent developments such as the impact of the recession on electricity demand and the cap on the contribution of the aviation sector to total energy demand). However, this Statement also includes additional background scenarios and explorers the how the need for onshore transmission network reinforcement varies with the generation background over the period 2010-2025. Additionally, this Statement incorporates recent developments in the offshore wind sector, such as the release of version 2 of the NETS SQSS, which is expected to continue to evolve, as explained in greater detail below. This Statement will be re-issued each year to take account of ongoing industry developments and present an evolving view of offshore initiatives in GB.
16
1.4.1 National Electricity Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard
The National Electricity Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard (NETS SQSS) Version 2.0 was issued in June of 2009 . This is the first version of the NETS SQSS to contain criteria for the planning and operation of offshore transmission networks. The criteria are organised along similar lines as those used for the planning and operation of the onshore transmission system. They are divided into sections as follows: i) ii) iii) iv) Generation Connection Criteria Demand Connection Criteria Operation of an Offshore Transmission System Voltage limits in planning and operating an offshore transmission system
17
14 15 16 17
Our Electricity Transmission Network: A Vision for 2020 The Crown Estate Round 3 Connection Study Publications on the Crown Estate website https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/149DEAE1-46B0-4B20-BF9C66BDCB805955/35218/NETSSQSS_GoActive_240609.pdf 13
The criteria have been developed from a cost benefit analysis of projects up to 100km offshore and up to 1500MW in size, and are designed to be consistent with the onshore criteria. This was adequate for Round 1 (R1) and Round (R2), but not sufficient for Round 3 (R3) because the projects being developed for The Crown Estates Round 3 will significantly extend the design limits considered to date, both in terms if their distance from shore and generation capacity of the projects.
TABLE 1.2 Round 3 Projects (Distance and Size)
Distance from shore Generation Capacity 0 to 100km >1500MW to 10GW < 1500MW R3 R1 & R2 100km to 300km R3 R3
The NETS SQSS criteria are now being reviewed to take into account the cost benefit analysis of projects proposed for Round 3. In summary, the cost benefit analysis considers, for different network design options, the relative capital costs and cost of losses against the expected costs of energy curtailed during planned and unplanned component outages. As a result of this assessment the existing criteria may be extended or additional criteria may be added to reflect the expected cost of constructing and operating these systems.
14
Chapter Two
Offshore Development Information Statement
2.1 Aim and Purpose
The aim of the Statement is to help to coordinate the development of the onshore and offshore electricity grid in Great Britain. The report seeks to do this by a high-level analysis of the various ways in which:
offshore transmission networks can be developed to interconnect offshore generation with the onshore transmission network the onshore transmission network can be reinforced to provide the necessary connection and transfer capability to support the connection of offshore transmission networks
with a view to identifying the most economic and coordinated options. It is envisaged that this Statement will provide a platform for more detailed option identification and evaluation to be performed. Proposed onshore network reinforcements will follow the established project development process, which includes extensive consultation with the community and assessment of possible environmental impacts. The detailed evaluation and design of offshore infrastructure, including environmental impact assessment, is the sole responsibility of each OFTO. It is envisaged that the report will evolve from year to year in response to changes in background assumptions and as ongoing network studies and engineering feasibility assessments progress. The document is not intended to reflect NGET's investment intentions or NGET's opinion regarding the likelihood of different background scenarios. Given the purpose and indicative nature of this Statement, it should not be used as the sole basis for any financial, commercial or engineering decisions. Whilst the report has been prepared in good faith and a great deal of effort has been put into ensuring that the report's content is accurate, no warranty is provided against errors. Presently this Statement considers the connection of offshore generation to the onshore transmission network but does not consider the possibility or influence of combining these offshore connections with greater interconnection to Europe. This may be considered in subsequent statements.
2.2 Development and Structure

The structure of the remainder of the statement reflects the process that was used to develop it: The development status of Round 1 and Round 2 Windfarms was firstly reviewed to provide a baseline for subsequent analysis. The results of this review are presented in Chapter 3. A number of future scenarios were then developed to reflect the range of ways in which offshore power generation may develop over time. The composition and rational behind the different scenarios are presented in Chapter 4. Offshore transmission network designs were then developed to cater for these scenarios, along with corresponding onshore transmission reinforcements needed to provide the necessary local connection capability. The process used to develop these designs, details of the designs themselves, and a comparison of the different options is presented in Chapter 5. (Prior to developing the offshore network designs, a review of the present capabilities of offshore transmission technologies was undertaken, the results of which are presented in Appendix 4.)
15
Finally, the implications of offshore power generation on the Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS) onshore were assessed, and the need case for various onshore transmission reinforcements was evaluated. The findings of this work are presented in Chapter 6.
2.3 Evolution of Statement

Following this initial Statement, it is intended that the Statement will be published annually in September each year. Feedback on this initial statement is welcome and where possible will be incorporated into subsequent years' statements to ensure that the Statements address the needs of the industry and achieve their stated purpose. All readers are therefore encouraged to provide feedback, and can do so quickly and easily using the Online Survey Form. A formal consultation process will apply to the development of the background scenarios to be used in the 2010 Statement. The proposed timeline for the 2010 consultation process is discussed further in Chapter 7.
16
Chapter Three
Offshore Windfarm Projects: Rounds 1 and 2
3.1 Overview
In December 2000, The Crown Estate launched the first round of Offshore Windfarm site allocations in the United Kingdom's territorial waters. Round 1 was planned to allow Windfarms:
up to 30 turbines, up to 10km in seabed area; and at least 20MW of generation capacity.

2
This enabled potential developers of future large scale offshore wind energy projects an opportunity to demonstrate and gain an understanding of the technological, environmental and economic issues associated with developing and operating an Offshore Windfarm. In July 2003 a competitive tender process began for the second round of Offshore Windfarm site allocations (Round 2). The successful developers and their projects were announced in December 2003. Altogether, 7.2GW of wind generation was planned for development in Round 2. Subsequently, some Round 2 sites faced unavoidable difficulties in developing their projects and were given the opportunity to relocate. Additionally, developers have also been granted permission by The Crown Estate to adjust their project boundaries by up to 40%, allowing for the optimization of their designs and the opportunity to overcome any issues identified since the development rights were awarded . The Transmission Entry Capacity (TEC) of Round 1 and 2 connected to the national electricity transmission system is illustrated in Figure 3.1 below. Round 1 and 2 projects are expected to have a combined TEC of approximately 7,000MW by 2014 and just over 8,000MW by 2020. These figures do not include the following Round 1 sites, which are (or will be) embedded within regional distribution networks: Burbo Bank, Lynn & Inner Dowsing, Kentish Flats, Scarweather Sands, Blyth, Teeside, North Hoyle and Scroby Sands.
18
18
Crown Estate Website: www.thecrownestate.co.uk 17
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 3.1 Offshore Windfarm TEC for Combined Rounds 1 & 2
9000 8000 7000 6000
TEC (MW)
5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Annual TEC 2018 2019 2020
Accumulating TEC
The following section summarises the Round 1 and 2 projects that have been commissioned or are in development.
3.2 East Coast

The East Coast region encompasses several Round 1 and Round 2 Windfarm sites. The location of each site, and TEC associated with each site is shown in the figure below. The overall TEC in this region is in the order of 3100MW, with over a third of this provided by the Triton Knoll.
FIGURE 3.2 East Coast Rounds 1 and 2 Sites
18
3.2.1 Round 2 Sites

Westermost Rough - Westermost Rough Limited Westermost Rough is located in the Greater Wash region approximately 8km from the coast.
19
It is The
waiting for its consent applications to be approved. An agreement for leasing the seabed was granted by The Crown Estate in May 2007, with procurement and construction scheduled to start in 2012/13.
19
project is presently contracted to be commissioned in April 2014. The project is allocated 175MW of capacity at the Offshore Connection Point (OCP) Westermost Rough, most likely connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface near Hedon. Humber Gateway E.ON Climate & Renewables UK Humber Wind Limited Humber Gateway in the Greater Wash Region is located approximately 8km from the coast. more detailed surveys and consultations were carried out in 2005/06.
20 20
It was
granted its bid for the site by The Crown Estate in 2003. A scoping report was produced in 2004 and Planning applications were submitted in 2009 and are yet to be approved. The project is presently contracted to be commissioned in April 2013. The project is allocated 220MW of capacity at the Offshore Connection Point Humber Gateway, probably connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Hedon. Triton Knoll - Triton Knoll Offshore Windfarm Limited Triton Knoll in the Greater Wash Region is located 33km off the coast of Lincolnshire.
21
The project is
currently in the scoping and design stage. Implementation will be split into three phases and is contracted to be commissioned between 2018 and 2020. The project is allocated 1176 MW of capacity at the Offshore Connection Point, most likely to be connected via four AC cables energised at 220kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface near Mumby. Docking Shoal Centrica (DSW) Ltd Docking Shoal in the Greater Wash Region is located 14km off the North Norfolk Coast. It was granted the lease of the sea bed by The Crown Estate in 2004.
22
It is currently in scoping and is contracted to be
commissioned in October 2011. The project will probably use four AC cables energised at 132kV to connect its allocated 500MW capacity between the Offshore Connection Point Docking Shoal and its Onshore Transmission Interface at Walpole. Lincs Centrica (Lincs) Limited Lincs is located in the Greater Wash Region approximately 8km from Skegness. It was awarded the lease from The Crown Estate in 2003. An application for consents was submitted in 2007 and was approved in 2008.
22
It is contracted to be commissioned in July 2010 with an allocated 250MW of capacity at the Lincs
Offshore Connection Point and is likely to be connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Walpole.
19 20 21 22
DONG Energy website: www.dongenergy.co.uk E.On UK Renewables website: www.eon-uk.com/generation/windfarms.aspx NPower website: www.npowerrenewables.com Centrica Energy website: www.centricaenergy.com 19
Race Bank Centrica (RBW) Ltd Race Bank is located in the Greater Wash Region roughly 27km from the coast (outside UK territorial waters). The Crown Estate awarded an Agreement for Lease in 2004.
22
The project is currently being
scoped and has a contracted commission date of June 2013. The project is allocated 500MW of capacity at the Race Bank Offshore Connection Point and is likely to connect via four AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Walpole. Sheringham Shoal - Scira Offshore Energy Ltd Sheringham Shoal in the Greater Wash region, roughly 17 km
23
from the coast. It has been granted
consent and is contracted to be commissioned in October 2010. The project is allocated 315MW of capacity at the Offshore Connection Point Sheringham Shoal and will probably connect via three AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Interface at Norwich Main.
3.3 North West

This region includes both Round 1 and as well as Round 2 Windfarms with embedded and NETS connections. The TEC provided by the sites connected to NETS in this region account for 1579MW.
FIGURE 3.3 North West Rounds 1 and 2 Sites
3.3.1 Round 1 Sites

Ormonde - Ormonde Energy Limited Ormonde is located roughly 10km west of Barrow-In-Furness . It is intended to implement the Windfarm in two phases, with 99MW in Phase I and 51MW in Phase II. The project was a late entry within the jurisdiction of the original Round 1 process and conforms to Round 1 terms . It has a contracted
25 24
23 24
Statoil website (Scira Offshore Energy ltd): www.statoil.com Vattenfall website: www.vattenfall.co.uk 25 BWEA website: www.bwea.com/offshore/index.html 20
commissioning date of October 2010.
The project is allocated 150MW of capacity at the Offshore
Connection Point Ormonde which is likely to be connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Heysham.
The Barrow Offshore Windfarm Barrow Offshore Windfarm Limited The Barrow Offshore Windfarm has an export right of 90MW and it is located approximately 7km south west of Walney Island. The 30 wind turbine development was commissioned in 2006 with one offshore substation, with interconnecting cables and a single 145kV transmission cable extending from the Offshore Windfarm site to shore.
26
Robin Rigg East and West - E.ON UK Renewables Limited The Robin Rigg Windfarms (East and West) are located in the Solway Firth with a capacity at the proposed offshore connection points of 180MW. The site is located near the ports of Workington and Maryport, with the Offshore Connection Points approximately 12 km from the shore line. The Robin Rigg Windfarm generation is connected to the Onshore Interface via two 12.5km 132kV cables.
26
3.3.2 Round 2 Sites

Walney I & II Dong Walney UK Ltd Walney in the North West region located 20km offshore from Barrow-in-Furness,
19
consists of two phases.
Phase I is currently under construction while Phase II has consents approved. The projects have an allocated capacity of 178MW (Phase I) at the Walney 1 Offshore Connection Point with its Onshore Transmission Interface is Heysham expecting connection in April 2010. Phase II with 183MW of capacity has an Offshore Connection Point at Walney 2 and its Onshore Transmission Interface at Stanah, with expected connection in April 2011. Walney is likely to be connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV, to each Onshore Transmission Interface. West of Duddon Sands ScottishPower Renewables (UK) Limited West of Duddon Sands is located 14km southwest of the Barrow-In-Furness coastline , and currently has its consents approved and is contracted to be commissioned in October 2013. The project is allocated 333MW of capacity at the West of Duddon Sands Offshore Connection Point which is likely to be connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV connecting to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Heysham. Gwynt-Y-Mr Gwynt-Y-Mr Offshore Windfarm Limited Gwynt-Y-Mr in the North West Region, 13km off the North Wales coast, consists of three phases which are currently in scoping. Consent applications for the offshore work were submitted in November 2005 with additional information submitted in August 2007 covering changes to the layout of the Windfarm.
21 27
Final commissioning is contracted for April 2013 with 735MW of capacity having an Offshore Connection Point at Gwynt-Y-Mr, possibly connected via six AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at St Asaph.
26 27
Ofgem website: www.ofgem.gov.uk Scottish Power Renewables: www.scottishpowerrenewables.com 21
3.4 Thames Estuary

The Crown Estate and DECC (formally BERR) identified this region as one of the most appropriate areas to further developing Windfarms for Round 2. The Round 1 process limited the number of turbines per site but this was relaxed for Round 2 which had no limit on number of turbines a site could have. This enabled schemes such as the London Array which is the largest Windfarm scheme in its region, with the potential to generate 1000MW.
FIGURE 3.4 Thames Estuary Rounds 1 and 2 Sites
3.4.1 Round 1 Sites

Gunfleet Sands I & II Gunfleet Sands Limited Gunfleet Sands, lying within the Thames Estuary region some 7km off the coast from Clacton-on-Sea, will be built in two phases. Gunfleet Sands I (along with its associated offshore substation and cabling) received consent in 2003/2004. A comprehensive Scoping report was issued in 2006 following the establishment of the consents. Procurement of the turbines, foundations and electrical infrastructure then took place during 2007. Gunfleet Sands II received consent in 2008 and onshore construction was carried out the same year, including foundations, array cabling offshore and export cabling.
19
The project has
100MW of capacity at the Offshore Connection Point Gunfleet Sands 1 for Phase I and 64MW of capacity at a second Offshore Connection Point Gunfleet Sands 2 for Phase II respectively, giving a combined total of 164MW capacity, likely to be connected via two AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Bramford.
22
3.4.2 Round 2 Sites

Greater Gabbard Greater Gabbard Offshore Winds Limited Greater Gabbard in the Thames Estuary is currently under construction. Its consents were achieved in July 2009 with a project capacity allocation of 500MW at Greater Gabbard Offshore Connection Point, which is likely to be connected via multiple AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Leiston near Sizewell.
London Array London Array Limited London Array in the Thames estuary consists of 2 phases and currently has approved consents. In December 2003 The Crown Estate awarded London Array Ltd a lease for development of a 1000MW windfarm.
28
Phase I is contracted for commission in April 2012 with a capacity of 630MW and additional
capacity of 370MW for Phase II expected in April 2014, bringing the schemes total allocated capacity to 1GW. Connection from the London Array Offshore Connection Point may be by eight AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Transmission Interface at Cleve Hill. Thanet Thanet Offshore Wind Ltd Thanet in the Thames Estuary is 11km from the coast . The project is currently under construction and being developed by Thanet Offshore Wind Ltd. The project has 300MW of capacity connected to the Thanet Offshore Connection Point which is likely to be connected via three AC cables energised at 132kV to its Onshore Interface.
24
28
http://www.londonarray.com/ 23
Chapter Four
Future Generation and Demand Scenarios
4.1 Overview
In order to assess the need for future transmission system development, it is necessary to make assumptions regarding the future generation and demand background that the transmission system will need to accommodate. This chapter describes the three future generation scenarios which have been developed to assess the range of potential investment options: Slow Progression, Gone Green and SEA Plus. These scenarios cover the period from 2009 to 2025 and consider the anticipated range of potential offshore developments, from 14GW of offshore generation capacity in 2025 in the Slow Progress scenario to 50GW of offshore generation capacity in 2025 in SEA Plus. Different investment requirements will be driven not just by the timing, volume and location of offshore developments but also by onshore generation patterns. Each view therefore has a different onshore generation background that is consistent with the inherent underlying premise of that particular scenario. The different scenarios are summarised below and then described and compared in more detail as the chapter progresses. In each of the scenarios, demand is included at its forecast peak level. Assessment of electricity network adaquacy tends to focus on system peak demand as this is often the most onerous demand condition the network needs to be able to accommodate, and will drive many of the required reinforcements. description of the generation background for each scenario is provided in Appendix 1. In addition to the three main scenarios, the Additional Regional Capacity (ARC) sensitivity has also been included. This is based on a contracted background
30
A detailed
for onshore generation with relatively high levels of
offshore development for Round 3 Windfarms included in addition. Overall, these levels of offshore generation may seem optimistic; however they play an important part in examining the potential local investment that may be required in each region. The different offshore Round 3 zones could be developed at different rates. For example, the majority of the capacity in the Gone Green scenario could be delivered from Windfarms in only two or three zones without any contribution from the other regions. Identifying different levels of potential capacity that could be developed in each of the zones enables NGET to assess a number of different scenario and investment options that may not be covered directly by the three broad scenarios detailed in this chapter. This should also assist developers in identifying the maximum capabilities and requirements in different zones.
30
Contracted background is the one used in the 2009 Seven Year Statement August 2009 Update 24
4.2 Future Generation Scenarios

4.2.1 Scenario Summary
Slow Progression (SP): In this scenario offshore wind developments build up at a much slower rate than in the other assessments. The slow progression scenario assumes no major changes to current known policy or the regulatory framework and no additional incentives or subsidies. This power generation scenario is supported by information received through consultation feedback, customer enquiries, journals, press releases and other sources. A power generation background is developed based on known and potential station closures, and the connection of new generation capacity to replace this plant. The timing of these openings and closures is important when assessing how the power generation market will look over the next ten years and beyond, with the plant margin, the fuel mix, suppliers generation portfolios, government and environmental legislation all taken into account when developing the scenario. For example, under this scenario the European Union 2020 environmental targets are not met. In this scenario there is 10GW of offshore generation capacity (9.75GW of wind and 0.25GW of marine) included in 2020 with 14GW (13.1GW of wind and 0.9GW of marine) by 2025. This is the scenario that is presented 31 in other National Grid documents such as the Ten Year Statement and the Development of Investment 32 Scenarios . One of the key sensitivities to this scenario is the impact of the existing AGR nuclear plants receiving ten-year life extensions instead of the five assumed in the main scenario. This sensitivity has been assessed in this document. Gone Green (GG): In June 2008, the Government published its consultation on a UK Renewable Energy Strategy. Following on from this, the ENSG, a cross industry group jointly chaired by the DECC and Ofgem, asked the three electricity Transmission Licensees: NGET, Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission and Scottish Power Transmission with the support of an Industry Working Group to take forward a study to: 1. Develop electricity generation and demand scenarios consistent with the EU target for 15% of the UKs energy to be produced from renewable sources by 2020 2. Identify and evaluate a range of potential electricity transmission network solutions that would be required to accommodate these scenarios. In July 2009, ENSG published a report Our Electricity Transmission Network: A Vision for 2020
33
underpinned by the Gone Green generation scenario. This scenario has since been updated in order to take into account recent developments such as the impact of the recession on electricity demand and the cap on the contribution of the aviation sector to total energy demand. In this scenario there is 19GW (16.5GW of wind and 2.5GW of marine) of offshore generation capacity included in 2020 with 25GW (21.7GW of wind and 3.3GW of marine) by 2025. SEA Plus (SEA +): This scenario takes the original Gone Green generation background developed for the ENSG study detailed above and replaces the offshore wind generation with a view based on the DECCs Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) study of potential offshore wind capacity. One of the main parts of the draft plan/programme subject to the SEA was to enable further rounds of offshore leasing with the aim of achieving an additional 25GW of offshore wind generation in the territorial waters of England and Wales by 2020.
31 32 33
http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Gas/TYS/ http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Gas/OperationalInfo/TBE/docs/Development+of+Energy+Scenarios.htm http://www.ensg.gov.uk/assets/ensg_transmission_pwg_full_report_final_issue_1.pdf 25
This scenario also includes an assessment of offshore wind generation in Scottish territorial waters, as well as other forms of offshore generation. This results in the SEA plus view which has total offshore generation reaching 36GW (33.5GW of wind and 2.5GW of marine) in 2020, and 50GW (46.2GW of wind and 3.8GW of marine) in 2025. Figure 4.1 below details the total amount of offshore generation capacity for the three scenarios. This serves to highlight the significant differences between the cases enabling a full range of investment analysis to be undertaken.
FIGURE 4.1 - Offshore generation capacity by scenario
60 50 40
GW
30 20 10 0 2010 2015 Slow Progression 2020 Gone Green SEA+ 2025
4.2.2 Slow Progression Scenario

Offshore Summary The first Round 2 transmission connected Offshore Windfarm is predicted to start commercially generating in early 2010. The credit crunch and ensuing recession resulted in a number of announcements about the 're-evaluation' of large renewables projects, with lower oil prices, lower electricity demand and the difficulty in obtaining credit resulting in some project delays in the short-term. In order to counter this to some degree and stimulate the development of offshore generation, the government have put additional incentives in place. Offshore wind projects that have government consents (planning permission) and place orders for wind turbines in financial year 2009/10 will be eligible for two Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) per MWh, with 1.75 ROCs available in 2010/11. After this the standard 1.5 ROCs per MWh will apply. This may encourage the development of offshore wind and certainly Centrica are hoping to order the turbines for their Race Bank and Docking Shoal projects by April next year in order to qualify. At the time of writing the projects at Lincs, London Array and Gwynt y Mor are set to receive 2 ROCs per MWh. The recent announcement that the European Investment Bank is considering the provision of over 300m of funding to investors in high voltage transmission links to Offshore Windfarms in Great Britain could also stimulate growth in the offshore wind sector.
34
The six projects that would benefit from the funding are The
34
http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Media/PressRel/Documents1/EIB V6.pdf 26
Crown Estate Round 2 projects at Sheringham Shoal, Ormonde, Greater Gabbard, Thanet, Walney 1 and Walney 2. This scenario includes Round 3 offshore wind developments towards the end of the next decade, with these developments beginning to connect when the Round 2 offshore wind developments have been connected. Some incremental wave and tidal projects have also been included towards the end of the period. This includes the build up of capacity in the Pentland Firth in the far north of the UK. The full scale Severn Barrage project has not been included in this scenario which is consistent with the recent government announcement on this project. The build up of offshore wind generation in the slow progression scenario is shown in Figure 4.2 below. This scenario includes 6GW of Round 1 and 2 projects by 2020, with an additional 2.5GW of Round 3 projects by this date. The development of Round 3 projects continues with a further 3.5GW developed by the end of the period studied. The total capacity of offshore generation in this scenario, including marine power developments, is 14GW.
FIGURE 4.2 - Offshore wind in the Slow Progression scenario
14 12 10
GW
8 6 4 2 0
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Offshore Wind
Demand The impact of the recession has been keenly felt with electricity demand falling rapidly during the course of 2008/09 and future power generation projects being delayed due to the current economic climate and the lower demands. For the financial year 2008/09, weather-corrected electricity demand from the transmission system fell by 4% compared with the previous year. With the effect of the recession and increasing energy efficiency measures driven by higher end-user electricity prices, peak electricity requirements are projected to continue to fall over the next two years. Peak electricity demand was 58.4GW in 2008/09, with the forecast not reaching this level again until the very end of the period studied. Increased exports at the time of system peak and economic growth are offset by increasing energy efficiency and higher prices. Potential areas of growth such as electric vehicles should not impact on the system peak as any charging would be likely to occur off-peak e.g. overnight.
27
Onshore Summary A detailed summary of the onshore generation mix underpinning this scenario can be found in the Development of Investment Scenarios
35
document.
The overall generation mix in this scenario is detailed in Figure 4.3 below. Generation is shown at full capacity, with the total rising to account for the intermittent nature of wind generation and thus the need for back-up plant.
FIGURE 4.3 Generation mix in the Slow Progression scenario
100 90 80 70 60
GW
50 40 30 20 10 0
4.2.3 Gone Green Scenario

This scenario uses the slow progression scenario as a basis, but in order to meet the EU 2020 environmental targets a significant amount of additional renewable generation is required as well as a slightly lower fossil fuel capacity. It is important to remember that the ultimate aim with this scenario is to hit the 2020 targets. The analysis undertaken on this scenario was initially carried out in 2008, and subsequently updated in November 2009. The updated scenario includes a different phasing of the offshore wind developments and although ultimately reaching the same capacity, there is less renewable generation required in 2020 due to a combination of lower forecast demands and a re-evaluation of how the aviation sector will be assessed against the target. Offshore Summary The Round 2 offshore wind developments are similar to those included in the Slow Progression scenario, with some projects included at slightly earlier dates. The major difference is with the timing and scale of the Round 3 offshore developments. The first Round 3 development is included in 2016 with a rapid build up of further developments to reach 9GW of Round 3 projects by 2020. In order to remain on the flightpath to meeting the 2050 carbon emissions reduction targets, this build-up of offshore wind continues with 14.3GW of Round 3 offshore wind generation included in 2025.
35
http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Gas/OperationalInfo/TBE/docs/Development+of+Energy+Scenarios.htm 28
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Nuclear Coal Gas Offshore Wind Onshore Wind Other Renew able Other
2 GW of wave and tidal capacity is also included by 2025, although the full Severn Barrage is again not included in this scenario. The build up of offshore wind in this scenario is shown in Figure 4.4 with 6.8GW of Round 1 and 2 capacities being included by 2020, with just over 9GW of Round 3 offshore wind included in 2020. The Round 3 figure increases to over 14GW by 2025. Total offshore capacity including marine developments is 27GW by 2025 in this scenario.
FIGURE 4.4 - Offshore wind in the Gone Green scenario
25
20
15
GW
10 5 0
Demand The updated Gone Green scenario has lower demands than in the previous analysis due to the impact of the recession. The economic outlook is forecast to reduce demand in the short-term, with any future growth due to an improving economic background offset by higher prices and increasing energy efficiency. This scenario does include a greater build up of electric vehicles and there is also greater demand through heat pumps, although these do not have a significant effect on peak electricity demand. Onshore Summary The onshore background accompanying the updated Gone Green scenario has minor differences to that published in 2008. The background that underpins the ENSG studies can be found on the ENSG 36 website. The overall generation mix in this scenario is detailed in Figure 4.5 below. The total amount of generation in this scenario is higher than in the Slow Progression to account for the intermittent nature of wind although increasing levels of demand-side response towards the end of the period will also provide a back-up for intermittent wind generation.
36
http://www.ensg.gov.uk/index.php?article=126 29
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Offshore Wind
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 4.5 Generation mix in the Gone Green scenario
120 100 80
GW
60 40 20 0
4.2.4 SEA Plus Scenario

Offshore Summary This scenario utilises the Gone Green scenario with adjustments made to the Round 3 offshore wind development to allow an assessment of 25GW of additional UK offshore wind capacity in the territorial waters of England & Wales by 2020 (as examined in the Strategic Environmental Assessment). The Round 1 and 2 offshore developments are consistent with those included in the Gone Green scenario. The Round 3 offshore wind generation included in this scenario view is based on the SEA view. The total amount of offshore wind capacity included is slightly higher than the 25GW identified in the SEA to allow for regional assessments and the inclusion of capacity in Scottish territorial waters. The SEA study of UK offshore energy is intended to consider the environmental implications of a draft plan/programme for licensing offshore oil and gas, including gas storage, and leasing for offshore wind. This includes consideration of the implications of alternatives to the plan/programme and the potential 37 space interactions with other users of the sea. This takes into account key constraints such as proximity to shipping lanes. This scenario enables NGET to analyse a higher case for the level of offshore generation that may connect in the future. Whilst this scenario may not be particularly realistic by 2020, it may be more realistic by 2025. In this case, the same transmission developments, both onshore and offshore, are likely to be required; and hence we present them here for information. Figure 4.6 shows the build up of offshore wind capacity in this scenario. 6.5GW of Round 1 and 2 capacities are included by 2020 with 26GW of Round 3 (including STW) capacity included by 2020. A further 12.5GW of Round 3 and STW capacity is included by 2025. The tidal and wave developments included in this scenario are the same as in the Gone Green scenario giving a total of 50GW of offshore capacity by 2025.
37
DECC Offshore SEA Offshore Energy SEA Environmental Report 30
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Nuclear Coal Gas Offshore Wind Onshore Wind Other Renew able Other
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 4.6 - Offshore wind in the SEA plus scenario
50 45 40 35 30
GW
25 20 15 10 5 0
Demand The electricity demand in this scenario is the same as that used in the original Gone Green scenario. This enables consideration of a range of demand scenarios as well as patterns of offshore and onshore generation. Onshore Summary The onshore generation in this scenario is the same as that used in the Gone Green scenario. The overall generation mix in this scenario is detailed in Figure 4.7 below.
FIGURE 4.7 Generation mix in the SEA plus scenario
GW
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Offshore Wind
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Nuclear
Coal
Gas
Offshore Wind
Onshore Wind
Other Renew able
Other
31
4.2.5 Comparison of Scenarios

Figure 4.8 shows the annual build up of all offshore wind developments in all of the three scenarios to highlight the differences in more detail.
FIGURE 4.8 Scenario Comparison
50 45 40 35 30
GW
25 20 15 10 5 0
4.3 Regional Analysis: Additional Sensitivity

Additional Regional Capacity sensitivity (ARC): This sensitivity to the three main scenarios studied has been developed using information received through the preferred partners process to identify the capacity, location and timing of Round 3 Windfarm developments. The Round 1 and Round 2 developments are consistent with their connection agreements as published in the August update of the 2009 Seven Year Statement and on the Transmission Entry Capacity (TEC) register. Otherwise, the background includes all generation that has existing TEC rights and any generation that has signed a connection agreement with NGET for future TEC. This information is consistent with the contracted background published in the August update of the Seven Year Statement . A few minor adjustments have been made to the contracted position to take into account known closure dates for certain power stations. Overall, these levels of generation in this sensitivity may seem optimistic; however the sensitivity plays an important part in examining the potential local investment that may be required in each region. The development of offshore generation may not occur evenly in each Offshore Windfarm. For example, it is possible that the majority of the offshore generation capacity assumed in the Gone Green scenario could be delivered from Windfarms in only two or three of the Round 3 zones. Chapter 5 illustrates indicative offshore network designs and local onshore transmission reinforcements that are adequate to cater for the Additional Regional Capacity of offshore wind generation in the region. However, these overall regional designs often contain a number of discrete components which could be implemented independently. Were the volume of generation constructed in a particular region to fall short of its regional capacity, a subset of the overall regional design could be implemented.
38
38
http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/3B1EF31A-DF7E-4A1E-9A8F-5E211EB03AF5/37995/quarter3.pdf 32
20 08 /0 9 20 09 /1 0 20 10 /1 1 20 11 /1 2 20 12 /1 3 20 13 /1 4 20 14 /1 5 20 15 /1 6 20 16 /1 7 20 17 /1 8 20 18 /1 9 20 19 /2 0 20 20 /2 1 20 21 /2 2 20 22 /2 3 20 23 /2 4 20 24 /2 5 20 25 /2 6
Slow Progression Gone Green SEA+
Chapter Five
Offshore and Local Onshore Connection Designs
5.1 Overview
Having reviewed the new OFTO regime and established various scenarios of how offshore power generation may develop in the years to come; this chapter explores the different ways in which this offshore generation can be connected to the onshore transmission system. This requires the development of offshore transmission links (OFTO infrastructure) to transmit the power from Offshore Windfarms to the shore, and local onshore transmission reinforcements to provide the necessary connection capacity. Both are discussed in this chapter. As already established in previous chapters, the offshore regime includes Rounds 1, 2 and Scottish territorial waters projects. Many of the early projects in Round 1 and 2 are already well developed in terms of design. Many are already connected or in construction so further discussion on design options is not prudent for these. The potential scale and distance from shore of the Round 3 projects dwarfs the smaller earlier projects so most of the discussion in this chapter focuses on the Round 3 projects. Different connection options are possible for each project and this has a great impact on the onshore network design however for this document of the options have been reduced what is currently considered to be optimum. Under the new regime, the detailed design and investment decisions relating to offshore networks will be the responsibility of each OFTO. However for this Statement, NGET engaged Senergy Econnect to conduct a review of offshore transmission technologies and develop indicative offshore transmission network designs. The findings of the technology review are included in Appendix 3. This includes data on the background capabilities, cost and dependencies, etc of various offshore transmission technologies. The network designs consist of a number of reference equipment arrangements. These were designed to minimise the cost of the infrastructure and be compliant with the reliability requirements of the NETS SQSS and the dynamic power factor requirements of the STC . In developing the designs, the following factors were evaluated:
The number and capacity of offshore platforms The use of an AC or HVDC connection to shore The interconnection of multiple platforms The capacity of each link The number and voltage of circuits The reactive compensation of AC circuits
33
Altogether, three reference arrangements were developed:
a 600MW (640MVA) AC Offshore design, a 900MW (960MVA) AC Offshore design, and a 1000MW HVDC Offshore design,
AC600 AC900 HVDC1000
Please note the abbreviations henceforth used to refer to each of the reference arrangements. A single line diagram illustrating each of these reference arrangements is shown in Figures 5.1 to 5.3 below. The rationale behind the reference designs is discussed in Appendix 4. The capacity of the HVDC design option is limited by the present value of the normal infeed loss risk (1000MW). If the Authority endorses the proposed increase of the Infeed Loss Risk, consideration could be given to increasing the HVDC designs capacity up to 1.32GW. There are more detailed offshore network design diagrams available in Appendix 5 which do not include onshore reinforcement designs. The optimal combination of these reference arrangements and specific design parameters were then identified for each region, considering the following factors:
Cable routing and obstacle crossing Placement of Windfarm arrays within the Round 3 zones Available onshore interface locations
The individual Windfarms within each Round 3 zone are laid out within the same study areas identified for the purpose of the Round 3 Connection Study as being suitable for Offshore Windfarm development. However, more detailed assessment must be carried out by developers to confirm that these areas are in fact suitable, and to confirm that other areas are not suitable (especially if other areas could offer advantages, such as a shorter connection route to the onshore transmission system). The indicative designs in this Statement have been developed and optimised given the high level information presently available to NGET. However, detailed design activities will need to be undertaken considering detailed seabed surveys, shoreline landing access, potential environmental and community impacts, planning consent, installation vessel availability, the design and location of Windfarms, the leadtime and cost of equipment etc. As such, the final designs are likely to vary somewhat from the indicative networks illustrated in this report, in response to issues identified in the detailed design phase. The responsibility for this detailed investigation and design lies entirely with each OFTO. As projects develop, continuous co-ordination and discussion will need to take place to aid the sharing of limited resources such as shoreline landing points and seabed routes.
34
FIGURE 5.1 - Possible 600MW (640MVA) AC Offshore Design
AC600
35
FIGURE 5.2 - Possible 900MW (960MVA) AC Offshore Design
AC900
36
FIGURE 5.3 - Possible 1000MW HVDC Offshore Design
HVDC1000
37
5.2 Integrated Onshore/Offshore Design

This section considers the offshore and local connection works required to provited connection to the Main Interconnected Transmission System with sufficient capacity and security. The indicative offshore and onshore designs have been developed with sufficient capability to accept the full possible user generation capacity whilst ensuring compliance with the NETS SQSS. Wider onshore transmission system requirements are discussed in Chapter 6. Offshore generation areas within close proximity to each other may share onshore collector substation capacity and will interact in the use of that capacity. In order to develop onshore connection options a number of regions have been identified were offshore generation may be considered as an interactive group. Figure 5.4 below shows how the regions have been assigned.
FIGURE 5.4 - Connection regions
R3 Z1 Moray Firth
R3 Z1 Moray Firth
Scotland
R3 Z2 Firth Of Forth R3 Z2 Firth Of Forth
R3 Z3 Dogger Bank
R3 Z4 Hornsea
R3 Z9 Irish Sea
East Coast
North West East Anglia

R3 Z5 Norfolk
Bristol Channel
R3 Z8 Bristol Channel
R3 Z7 WIoW
R3 Z6 Hastings
South Coast
38
5.2.1 East Coast

Off the east coast there is significant interest in new offshore wind development with leased Round 1 and 2 areas already having installed generation and more in advanced development. The Round 3 offshore zones of Dogger Bank and Hornsea offer the potential to connect up to 18GW of wind capacity to the East coast of England. Figure 5.5 below shows the total offshore generation capacity that may wish to connect to the east coast of East Riding, Humberside and Lincolnshire. With the large areas available huge variation is apparent between the scenarios making investment decisions difficult by not knowing exactly how much of offshore areas will be used and by when. Existing transmission substations closest to the East coast are located along the North and South banks of the Humber Estuary and south of the Wash. These substations are already heavily utilised providing connections to thermal generation. To accommodate the new offshore generation significant reinforcing will be required including the establishment of multiple new substations and circuit routes.
FIGURE 5.5 - Humber and Great Wash Offshore Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - Humber & Greater Wash

25000.00 SP SEA+ GG ARC
20000.00
Capacity (MW)
15000.00
10000.00
5000.00
0.00
/2 01 0 /2 01 1 /2 01 2 /2 01 3 /2 01 4 /2 01 5 /2 01 6 /2 01 7 /2 01 8 /2 01 9 /2 02 0 /2 02 1 /2 02 2 /2 02 3 /2 02 4 /2 02 5 /2 02 6
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
20 24
Year
Hornsea and Dogger Bank Offshore Design The capacity of both the Hornsea and Dogger Bank Offshore Windfarms (OWF) and there distance from the possible connection points dictate that a conventional HVAC solution will be impractical and uneconomic and hence an HVDC solution has been applied in each case. Voltage Source Converter (VSC) HVDC technology is suited to applications offshore and it is this technology that has been used for these connections. Note that the indicative offshore cable routes are designed to avoid areas allocated for mineral extraction, other Windfarms, or concentrations of oil and gas pipelines, however some pipeline and cable crossings are inevitable, and for some routes numerous. Offshore, the OWF connection design is based on two 36/220kV offshore substations each consisting of two 320MVA 36/220kV transformers with associated GIS switchgear. Each offshore AC substation is interconnected to an HVAC busbar on the offshore platform housing the HVDC VSC 1000MW converter
20 25
39
via a pair of three core 220kV cables. An analysis of the full lifetime capital and operational costs and equipment reliability would be required to optimise the overall electrical design for each specific Windfarm. The power from the offshore converter is routed through two HVDC cables (forming a bipole) to an onshore 1000MVA converter located in a compound adjacent to the National Grid connection substation where it is converted back from HVDC to AC for input to the onshore transmission network.
TABLE 5.1 Round 3 Hornsea Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission Zone Windfarm L1 L2 Hornsea M1 M2 N1 Capacity (MW) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 TO Interface Point Grimsby South Triton Knoll North Triton Knoll South Triton Knoll South Triton Knoll South Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 85 111 82 95 96 16 9 8 8 8 Design Blocks 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
TABLE 5.2 Round 3 Dogger Bank Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 800 1000 1000 1000 1000
TO Interface Point
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 152 168 209 179 222 236 240 257 265 187 202 219 239 14 14 4 14 4 4 16 16 9 2 2 2 27
Design Blocks 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
H1 H2 H3 H4 H5 H6 Dogger Bank I1 I2 I3 J1 J2 J3 K1
Creyke Beck East Creyke Beck East Killingholme South Creyke Beck East Killingholme South Killingholme South Grimsby South Grimsby South Triton Knoll North Hornsey Hornsey Hornsey Creyke Beck
40
Onshore Connection design The onshore transmission system on the east coast of England spans from the predominately 275kV system around Teesside down through two 400kV double circuits through Yorkshire to the Humber area were there is a concentration of mostly gas fuelled generation. A significant amount of CCGT generation has been built around the Humber area due to ready access to the gas transmission system and the sharing of steam services with local heavy industry. Transmission south from Keadby continues down through four 400kV double circuits towards the major load centre of London. Before reaching London the most easterly of these four double circuits branches out into a further two 400kV double circuits forming a ring around East Anglia. As demonstrated in the previous reports of Round 3 Offshore Wind Connection Study
40
for The Crown
Estate and that done through the ENSG work, the Humber and East Anglia areas are important to the connection of new generation and significant development will be required. Each area is discussed further below: East Riding As outlined in the report published by The Crown Estate, the Humber area is close to the Round 3 zones of Dogger Bank and Hornsea making it a convenient part of the system for the offshore connections to minimise the offshore cable distances. The north side of the Humber Estuary has CCGT generation at Saltend connected back westward to Creyke Beck by means of 275kV network. The 275kV network connecting Saltend offers negligible redundant capacity for additional connections. The estuary is a barrier to putting new transmission routes south. Therefore, for offshore generation to connect to the coast north of the estuary requires either bringing the power inland or constructing an estuary crossing by tunnel. Humberside Several large CCGT generators exist south of the Humber Estuary Humber, Killingholme, Grimsby and Keadby connected in a double circuit 400kV ring. The local transmission system has been developed to accommodate the existing generation and provides very little spare transmission capability. New generation capacity may be released if any of the existing generators close but failing that, additional substations and circuits will be required. Given the small area and similar generator types it is valid to require sufficient capability to have all local generation operating at full capacity. Lincolnshire The transmission system in this area is characterised by a double circuit ring that links Walpole, Norwich, Bramford, Pelham and Burwell Main substations. Four circuits run towards the coast from Bramford substation to Sizewell, forming an overhead line radial spur. This spur provides a transmission corridor for the existing nuclear generator located at Sizewell and some Round 2 offshore wind generation. At the bottom of the East Anglia loop there is a circuit route between Pelham, Bramford and Rayleigh Main that is a corridor for generation from power stations at Walpole, Norwich and Sizewell, carrying it further
40
www.thecrownestate.co.uk/round3_connection_study.pdf 41
south towards Essex and Kent. When planning transmission capacity in this region, the double circuit fault of these circuits is one of the more onerous contingencies. Pelham substation provides additional interconnection between the East Anglia region and other sections of the transmission system. Two 400kV lines run west from Pelham to supply demand centres in west Hertfordshire and another two 400kV lines run south, extending the transmission system to the outskirts of London. East Anglia is a congested area of the transmission system with many generation projects contracted to connect including CCGT, Round 2 offshore wind and new nuclear at Sizewell, there is also the potential for up to 5GW of Round 3 offshore wind generation. Walpole is a significant substation situated directly in the main transmission route south to London in addition to accommodating heavy GSP demand, a new CCGT generator and new connections for Round 2 projects. Future expansion beyond what is already planned is not feasible with the existing substation due to circuit loadings and the unavailability of adjacent land. In order to accommodate the scenario of connecting the maximum identified offshore capacity, the reinforcements shown in the following figures and table below have been identified. The reinforcement options, including substation locations and circuit routes have only been developed by high level design and are therefore for indicative purposes only. The full development each project will be subject to detailed survey and design, consenting, environmental assessment and funding. A possibility identified through ENSG is the use of a multi-terminal HVDC design to provide HVDC connections for HVDC offshore transmission links. This may reduce the transmission works required to connect the offshore capacity over traditional AC designs and provide additional control to transmission system power flow. Multi-Terminal HVDC is new technology and may pose unknown technical problems however it seems prudent to consider how it could be used. NGET is monitoring the ongoing development of multi-terminal HVDC technology. The two different designs, with and without multi-terminal technology, are shown in figures 5.6 and 5.7.
42
FIGURE 5.6 - East Coast Indicative Connection and Reinforcements (Non Multi-Terminal HVDC Option)
OFTO
Shoreline
To Thornton AC 400kV
VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV
HVDC Platforms
To Hedon Possible Interface Substation Configuration
7 1 Westermost Rough 6
Humber Gateway
Killingholme South
3 Triton Knoll - 1.2 GW 4 Lincs Race Bank
OFTO Docking Shoal 2a 2b

To Bicker Fen
Shoreline
Sheringham Shoal
To Grimsby
VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV
AC 400kV
HVDC Platforms
Bicker Fen
To Walpole
VSC HVDC 300kV
Possible Interface Substation Configuration
43
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 5.7 - East Coast Indicative Connection and Reinforcements (Multi-terminal HVDC Option)
To Grimsby
OFTO
AC 400KV
Shoreline
HVDC Platforms
VSC HVDC 300kV
VSC HVDC 300kV
VSC HVDC 300kV
VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV
HVDC Platforms
AC 400kV
Possible Multi-Terminal HVDC Configuration
7 1 Westermost Rough 6 Humber Gateway

Killingholme South
Triton Knoll - 1.2 GW
5 Lincs Race Bank
~ 2a 2b Docking Shoal Sheringham Shoal

OFTO Shoreline
Bicker Fen
To Pelham & Norwich
AC 400kV
AC 132kV
Conventional Generation Possible Interface Substation Configuration
44
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 TABLE 5.3 - Indicative Reinforcements for Offshore Connections
Ref.
EC1
Description
Incremental Gen Cap. 1 GW
ARC 2015
SEA+ 2016
GG 2017
SP 2019
EC2a
EC2b

EC3

EC4
EC5

EC6
EC7
Extend the 400kV substation at Creyke Beck Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation Triton Knoll 400kV New 400kV, 48km double circuit line from Triton Knoll substation to Bicker Fenn. New 400 kV, 34km double-circuit line from the Spalding/Bicker Fen area to a new substation in the vicinity of Bainton, on the existing Cottam Eaton Socon line Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation near Triton Knoll 400kV New 400kV, 68km double circuit line from Triton Knoll substation to Walpole. Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation near Grimsby West 400kV New 400kV, 46km double circuit line from Grimsby West - Triton Knoll 400kV Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation south of Killingholme New 400kV, 12km double circuit line from Killingholme south Grimsby West New HVDC link between Killingholme south and the Skegness area suitable for multi-terminal working with offshore HVDC transmission teeing into the circuits Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation near Saltend Transfer the 400/275kV interbus transformers from Creyke Beck to Saltend Uprate Saltend North to Creyke Beck from 275 to 400kV operation Combination of 400kV, 6.5km cable tunnel across the Humber estuary and 400kV, 32km double circuit overhead line from Grimsby West to Saltend Establish a new 400kV double busbar collector substation near Hornsea New 400kV 41km double circuit to Thornton New 400kV 22km double circuit to Saltend
1.32/1.8 GW *
2015
2018/ 2019
2018
N/A
4.2GW
2019
2018/2019
2018
N/A
3GW
2015
2020
2027
N/A
3GW
2017
2020
2028
N/A
6GW
2019
2020
2027
N/A
3GW
2019
2021
2030+
N/A
3GW
2020
2022
2030+
N/A
*Under present NETS SQSS requirements the generation capacity limit would be 1.32GW. If the Authority endorses the proposed increase in the Infrequent Infeed Loss Risk, the generation capacity limit will be 1.8GW.
41
41
https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/EF5C0829-1C5E-4258-8F73-70DC62C43F49/36936/SQSS1320Reportv10_final.pdf 45
5.2.2 Norfolk and Suffolk

To the east of Norfolk and Suffolk lies the Round 3 Norfolk development area with a potential to contain up to 7.2GW of Windfarm capacity. Additionally, several Round 1 and 2 areas lie to the north and south in Norfolk, in the Wash and Thames Estuary. Figure 5.8 below shows possible scenarios on how offshore generation may develop and connect to the east coast of Lincolnshire, Norfolk and Suffolk.
FIGURE 5.8 - Norfolk and Suffolk Offshore Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - Norfolk, Suffolk& Greater Wash

12000.00 SP SEA+ GG ARC
10000.00
8000.00
Capacity (MW)
6000.00
4000.00
2000.00
0.00
/2 01 0 /2 01 1 /2 01 2 /2 01 3 /2 01 4 /2 01 5 /2 01 6 /2 01 7 /2 01 8 /2 01 9 /2 02 0 /2 02 1 /2 02 2 /2 02 3 /2 02 4 /2 02 5 /2 02 6
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
20 24
Year
Norfolk and Suffolk Offshore Transmission Design Multiple possible connection points and a range of offshore route lengths from 26km to 172km mean that both HVDC and AC solutions will be required to connect offshore generation within the Norfolk Zone. In the indicative offshore network designs, the maximum zonal capacity of 7200MW has been divided into two 600MW and six 1000MW Windfarms. Six of the Windfarm connections have a total route length in excess of 87km which means that an AC solution would require intermediate platform substations alonf the cable route, adding additional cost and complexity. Therefore, the AC connection option was found to be best for only the two of the Windfarms, both of which connect to the 400kV substation at Sizewell. HVDC is used for the remainder of the links, connecting to the 400kV substations at Bramford and Norwich Main. This split in capacity allows the standard AC 600MW argangement (AC600) to be used for both the AC connections. This design utilises two 220kV 3 core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore 36/220kV AC substation platform rated at 640MVA located at the Windfarm. Onshore the two 3-core cables will be terminated at the transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which six single core 220kV cables will form the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 220kV double busbar substation before being connected to the NGET onshore transmission system at Sizewell 400kV substation via two 220/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the onshore and
20 25
46
offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the STC section K requirements.
42
For the six 1000MW Windfarms an HVDC solution has been applied in each case using Voltage Source Converter (VSC) HVDC technology. Note that the offshore cable routes are designed to avoid areas allocated for mineral extraction, other Windfarms, or concentrations of oil and gas pipelines, however some pipeline and cable crossings are inevitable, and for some routes numerous. The OWF connection design is based on two 36/220kV offshore platform AC substations each consisting of two 320MVA 36/220kV transformers with associated GIS switchgear. Each offshore AC substation is interconnected to an HVAC busbar on the separate offshore platform housing the HVDC VSC 1000MW converter via a pair of 3-core 220kV cables. An analysis of the full lifetime capital and operational costs would be required to optimise the overall electrical design for each specific Windfarm. The power from the offshore converter is then routed through two HVDC cables (forming a bipole) to an onshore 1000MVA converter located in a compound adjacent to the NGET connection substation where it is converted back from HVDC to AC for input to the onshore transmission network.
TABLE 5.4 Round 3 Norfolk Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm T1 T2 U1 V1
Capacity (MW) 600 600 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
TO Interface Point Sizewell Sizewell Norwich Main Norwich Main Norwich Main Bramford Bramford Bramford
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 26 0 28 0 48 67 62 128 142 145 39 39 39 27 27 27
Design Blocks 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
Norfolk
V2 Z1 Z2 Z3
Norfolk and Suffolk Onshore Transmission Design The transmission system covering the Norfolk and Suffolk east coast consists of a 400kV double circuit running from Walpole to Norwich to Bramford to Pelham. From Bramford two 400kV double circuits go east to Sizewell providing connection for the Sizewell nuclear generator. The Round 2 Greater Gabbard project is planned to connect to Sizewell together with a new 3.6GW EPR nuclear generator. To accommodate the new nuclear generator a new substation is planned to be built adjacent to the existing substation. To connect up to 10GW of generation capacity off the Norfolk and Suffolk coast requires the use of multiple substations to spread the load. As per NETS SQSS requirements, any generation connecting greater than 1.32GW requires the use of two or more separate circuit routes (as already indicated, this threshold may increase if the Authority approves a proposed change to the Infeed Loss Risk). A possible
42
https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/DE34BA62-ACE8-4E88-A038-0CC138181843/35311/STC_SectK_GoActive.pdf
47
connection design minimising the number of new circuits is shown in figure 5.9 below using the capacity of three different substations. Increased power flows around the region from the new generation will require extensive substation development, circuit reconfiguration and circuit upgrade to carry larger electric currents. The currently planned reinforcements are shown in figure 5.9 below.
FIGURE 5.9 Norfolk and Suffolk Coast Indicative Connection Reinforcement
Shoreline OFTO
Area currently identified for reinforcement

Dudgeon Docking Shoal Lincs Inner Dowsing Lynn Race Bank Sherringham Shoal
To Walpole AC 400kV
HVDC Platforms
To Bramford
R3 Z5 Norfolk 7.2GW
2 4
Greater Gabbard
To Sizewell
Shoreline OFTO
Gun Fleet Sands I & II
London Array
OFTO Shoreline
To Norwich Main AC 400kV
To Bramford
HVDC Platforms
AC 400kV
AC 220kV
Nuclear Generaton
AC Platforms
To Pelham
TABLE 5.5 Indicative reinforcements for Norfolk and Suffolk
48
Ref.
Description Reconductor the Norwich Main to Walpole Circuit Turn-in Norwich Main to Sizewell circuit at Bramford Reconductor the Bramford to Norwich Main circuit Install two Quadrature Boosters in Norwich to Walpole Circuit Create a new Bramford to Twinstead 400kV overhead line circuit
ARC 2011 2013 2015 2015
SEA+ 2011 2013 2016 2016
GG 2011 2014 2017 2017
SP 2013 2016 2017 2019
NS1 NS2 NS3 NS4
5.2.3 South Coast

Generation in the south coast consists of a few large generators to the east and west of the region and the main flow of power on the onshore transmission is to supply local demand. The region is served by a double circuit from Kemsley substation right through to Lovedean where it branches out into further routes. Figure 5.10 below shows the possible growth in offshore generation for each scenario. The expected level of generation is significantly less than the other regions and will be less difficult to accommodate into the existing onshore transmission system.
FIGURE 5.10 South Coast Offshore Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - South Coast

1800.00 1600.00 1400.00 1200.00
Capacity (MW)
SP SEA+ GG ARC
1000.00 800.00 600.00 400.00 200.00 0.00

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 /2 0 20 25 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 /2 0 26
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
Year
Hastings Offshore Transmission Design The Round 3 Hastings Offshore Windfarm (OWF) is located directly south of Bolney and has a potential generation capacity up to 0.7GW. Given the sparse distribution of existing transmission substations in the area and the relatively small capacity of the zone the best practical solution is to connect to the existing Bolney substation. A total on and offshore route length of 37km means that an AC solution is likely to be the more cost effective technology. The maximum zonal capacity of 665MW requires at least three 220kV 3-core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from the zone. In this case, if possible, it could be economical to increase the wind farm capacity to 900MW to fully utilise the three cables. Alternatively, the capacity of the Windfarm could be reduced to around 600MW, in which case only two cables would be required, leading to a significant cost reduction.
20 24
49
To cater for between 600 and 900MW of generation, the AC900 standard arrangement could be used. This design involves using two offshore AC 33/220kV substations, one rated at 640MVA feeding two of the 220kV cables, the other rated at 320MVA feeding a third cable. A 220kV 3 core AC cable will also interconnect the two platforms in order to meet the NETS SQSS requirement for 50% redundancy in Offshore Grid Entry Point capacity for the AC cables from an offshore platform. Onshore the three 3-core cables may be terminated at the transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which nine single core 220kV cables will form the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 220kV double busbar substation before being connected to the NGET onshore transmission system at Bolney 400kV substation via two 220/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the on and offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the STC section K requirements.
44
If the generation connection capacity is limited to 600MW the AC600 standard arrangement can be used. This would be implemented in the same manner as the AC900 design described above, minus the second 320MVA platform, the cable from this platform to shore, and the cable interconnecting to the offshore platforms, significantly reducing the total cost of the OFTO infrastructure required. An alternative location for the onshore connection at Ninfield was considered but was discarded on the basis that it is further away from the source of generation compared with Bolney. Hence, this would result in an increase in transmission costs and providing minimum advantages over onshore reinforcement.
TABLE 5.6 Round 3 Hastings Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 665
TO Interface Point
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 15 21
Design Blocks 2xAC600 Or 1xAC900
Hastings
AA1
Bolney
TABLE 5.7 Round 3 Hastings Zone Suggested Alternative Offshore Transmission
Zone Hastings Alternate
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 600
TO Interface Point
Design Blocks 1xAC600 Or 1xAC900
AA1
Bolney
West Isle of Wight Offshore Transmission Design The other possible Offshore Windfarm area of the South Coast is the Round 3 West Isle of Wight, which has a nominal capacity of 0.9GW and is located about 40km south of the proposed onshore connection at Chickerell. Alternative connection points were considered, including the existing onshore substation at Mannington, and a possible new substation between Chickerell and Mannington on an existing overhead line route. These connection locations turned out to less attractive, both be financially and environmentally, due to a longer cable route length and possible disturbance to the coast line between Weymouth and Bournemouth. The existing onshore transmission infrastructure should be able to
44
https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/DE34BA62-ACE8-4E88-A038-0CC138181843/35311/STC_SectK_GoActive.pdf
50
accommodate the new indeed without futher reinforcement beyond providing new substation connection bays. A total on and offshore route length of 40km dictates that an AC solution would be a more cost effective technology. The maximum anticipated zone capacity of 900MW means that at least three 220kV 3-core submarine cables will be required to transmit the power ashore from the zone. Utilizing the AC900 standard design would involve using two offshore AC 33/220kV substations, one rated at 640MVA feeding two of the 220kV cables, the other rated at 320MVA feeding a third cable. A 220kV 3 core AC cable will also interconnect the two platforms in order to meet the NETS SQSS requirement for 50% redundancy in Offshore Grid Entry Point capacity for the AC cables from an offshore platform. Onshore the 3-core cables may be terminated at a transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which nine single core 220kV cables will be used for the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 220kV double busbar substation before being connected to the NGET onshore transmission system at Chickerell 400kV substation via two 220/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the on and offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the STC section K requirements.
45
Similarly to the Hastings area it may offer a significant saving in offshore transmission infrastructure costs if the generation connection was limited to the standard 600MW design negating the need for a second platform.
TABLE 5.8 Round 3 WIoW Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone West Isle of Wight
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 900
TO Interface Point Chickerell
Design Blocks 1xAC900
DA1 & DA2
TABLE 5.9 Round 3 WIoW Zone Suggested Alternative Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 600
TO Interface Point Chickerell
Design Blocks 1xAC600
West Isle of Wight Alternate
DA2
45
https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/DE34BA62-ACE8-4E88-A038-0CC138181843/35311/STC_SectK_GoActive.pdf 51
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 5.11 - South Coast Round 3 Zone Locations
R3 Z6 Hastings 665MW R3 Z7 WIoW 900MW

OFTO
To Mannington
OFTO Shoreline
To Ninfield
Shoreline
AC 400kV
AC 220kV
AC Platforms
AC 400kV
AC 220kV
AC Platforms
To Axminster
To Lovedean
52
5.2.4 Bristol Channel

The Bristol Channel has attracted significant interest for new renewable generation projects, both wind and marine based. Figure 5.12 below shows how the generation may increase in the future.
FIGURE 5.12 Bristol Channel Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - Bristol Channel

4500.00 SP 4000.00 SEA+ GG ARC
3500.00
3000.00
Capacity (MW)
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
1000.00
500.00
0.00
/2 01 0 /2 01 1 /2 01 2 /2 01 3 /2 01 4 /2 01 5 /2 01 6 /2 01 7 /2 01 8 /2 01 9 /2 02 0 /2 02 1 /2 02 2 /2 02 3 /2 02 4 /2 02 5 /2 02 6
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
20 24
Year
The Severn Estuary has transmission network covering both shores along South Wales and the South West. The South Wales transmission network consists mostly of 275kV assets which only offer very limited additional connection capacity without replacement and upgrade to 400kV. The transmission network below the estuary in the south west is mostly 400kV, joining large generators at Hinkley Point, Langage and Marchwood. The area typically sees high peak demands and power is commonly imported into the area as there is not enough local generation to meet the demand.
Offshore Transmission Design The Round 3 zone withing the Bristol Channel lies approximately 60km offshore from Alverdiscott. The area has the potential to accommodate up to 3GW of offshore wind capacity. 1.5GW of that capacity has already applied for transmission connection and a suitable connection has been identified at Alverdiscott. A total on and offshore route length of upto 58km is close to the typical cutover distance where HVDC becomes more economic than AC. Therefore, HVDC and AC solutions have been considered for the Bristol Channel zone. For the AC solutions the maximum anticipated zone capacity of 3000MW has been divided into five 600MW Windfarms. This allows the standard AC 600MW solution to be used. This design utilises two 220kV 3 core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore AC 33/220kV substation rated at 640MVA located adjacent to the Windfarm. Onshore the two 3-core cables may be terminated at a transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which six single core 220kV cables will be used for the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 220kV double busbar substation before being connected to the NGET onshore transmission system at Alverdiscott
53
20 25
400kV GIS substation via two 220/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the on and offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the STC section K requirements.
46
The HVDC solution sees the zone capacity split into three 1000MW Windfarms. Each HVDC solution utilises the HVDC 1000MW standard design which consists of two subsidiary AC 33/220kV offshore substations feeding an offshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter. The power is then transmitted ashore via two XLPE cables to an onshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter adjacent to Alverdiscott substation.
TABLE 5.10 Round 3 Bristol Channel Zone Suggested AC Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm EA1 EA2 HA1 HA2 HA3
Capacity (MW) 600 600 600 600 600
TO Interface Point Alverdiscott Alverdiscott Alverdiscott Alverdiscott Alverdiscott
Bristol Channel
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 42 6 34 6 39 6 42 6 46 6
Design Blocks 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600
TABLE 5.11 Round 3 Bristol Channel Zone Suggested HVDC Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm EA1 HA1 FA1 & HA2
Capacity (MW) 1000 1000 1000
TO Interface Point Alverdiscott Alverdiscott Alverdiscott
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 34 39 53 6 6 6
Design Blocks 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
Bristol Channel HVDC Alternate
Onshore Transmission Design With the Round 3 Bristol Channel offshore wind in the Severn Estuary there is a potential for up to 3GW of wind. 3.6GW of new nuclear generation wishes to connect to Hinkley Point which in combination with the potential new offshore generation will exceed the capability of the current transmission network requiring the establishment of a new transmission circuit from Hinkley Point to Seabank. The existing substation at Alverdiscott does not have sufficient switching capability for any new connections so the offshore connection will require expansion of the substation. The full 3GW offshore capacity may be accommodated by the new substation.
46
FIGURE 5.13 - Bristol Channel Indicative Connection Reinforcement by 2022
R3 Z8 Bristol Channel 3GW
Scarweather Sands
OFTO
To Hinkley Point
Shoreline
AC 400kV
AC 220kV
5 AC Platforms
AC 220kV To Indian Queens
55
5.2.5 North West

The North West area of interest includes North Wales and Lancashire. A number of offshore Round 1 and 2 Windfarms in the Irish Sea are already connected or in the advances stages of development. A large Round 3 area has been released for development between Anglesey and the Isle of Man. The new Round 3 zone has the potential to accommodate up to 6GW of generation capacity. Figure 5.14 below shows the possible capacity of offshore generation that could connect to the North West. Steady growth occurs in all scenarios including the Slow Progress scenario.
FIGURE 5.14 - North West Offshore Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - North West

8000.00 SP 7000.00 SEA+ GG ARC
6000.00
Capacity (MW)
5000.00
4000.00
3000.00
2000.00
1000.00
0.00
/2 01 0 /2 01 1 /2 01 2 /2 01 3 /2 01 4 /2 01 5 /2 01 6 /2 01 7 /2 01 8 /2 01 9 /2 02 0 /2 02 1 /2 02 2 /2 02 3 /2 02 4 /2 02 5 /2 02 6
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
20 24
Year
Offshore Transmission Design Potential onshore connection sites for the Round 3 Irish Sea zone include Anglesey, the North Wales coast and the Lancashire Coast. Much of the southern side of the zone lies within 50km of the north tip of Anglesey making the use of AC connections practical and economical. The north east portion of the zone is much further away from Anglesey, and an AC connection would require the use of intermediate platform substations along the cable route length adding significant additional cost. Using HVDC connections the north east portion of the zone may connect to any part of the shoreline. In the indicative offshore network design, the maximum zonal capacity of 6000MW has been divided into five 600MW and three 1000MW Windfarms. The two Windfarms in the north east corner of the zone have been connected to Stannah East with an HVDC link. The remaining six Windfarms have been connected to the 400kV substation at Wylfa using an AC link. The standard AC 600MW arrangement has been used in all cases. This design utilises two 220kV 3-core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore AC 33/220kV substation rated at 640MVA at the wind farm. Onshore, the two 3-core cables will be terminated at the transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which six single core 220kV cables will form the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 220kV double busbar substation before being connected to the NGET onshore transmission system at Wylfa 400kV GIS substation via two 220/400kV transformers.
20 25
56
Static shunt reactors at the onshore and offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the System Operator/Transmission Owner Code section K requirements.
47
For the 1000MW KA1 Windfarm, two AC 600MW offshore substations are used, each transmitting power ashore through two 220kV 3-core AC cables. These two platforms are not interconnected offshore as this would incur additional capital cost and is not required for NETS SQSS compliance. Alternatively, if the capacity of the Windfarm were able to be reduced from 1000MW to 900MW, the AC900 design could be used, based on a single 900MW platform substation and three 220kV 3-core AC cables to shore. Another option for the KA1 Windfarm would be to use the standard HVDC solution, consisting of two subsidiary AC 33/220kV offshore substations feeding an offshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter. The power is then transmitted ashore via two XLPE cables to an onshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter adjacent to Wylfa substation. The AC output from the converter is fed into the NGET onshore transmission system.
TABLE 5.12 Round 3 Irish Sea Zone Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm JA1 JA2 IA1 IA2 IA3 KA1 NA1 MA1
Capacity (MW) 600 600 600 600 600 1000 1000 1000
TO Interface Point Wylfa Wylfa Wylfa Wylfa Wylfa Wylfa Stannah East Stannah East
Irish Sea
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 35 0 37 0 28 0 26 0 28 0 37 0 75 79 4 4
Design Blocks 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
TABLE 5.13 Round 3 Irish Sea Zone Suggested Alternative Offshore Transmission
Zone Irish Sea Alternate
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 1000
TO Interface Point Wylfa
Design Blocks 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
KA1
Onshore Transmission Design The onshore transmission network in North Wales currently consists of a 400kV double circuit connecting Anglesey to Pentir and Deeside. A second double circuit connects Trawsfynydd back to Deeside and to Legacy. Interconnection between Pentir and Trawsfynydd is provided by a single 400kV cable circuit. Most of the presently available transmission capability is used by the nuclear power station as Wylfa and the pumped storage stations at Dinorwig and Ffestiniog. In addition to the potential offshore generation a new 3.6GW nuclear generator is expected to be built at Wylfa which will replace the existing nuclear generator. In order to connect the new generation,
47
reinforcement of the North Wales transmission network is needed including a second double circuit connecting Wylfa to Pentir in addition to a new circuit from Pentir to Trawsfynydd. This strengthened transmission network will also support the connection of offshore generation at Wylfa. Deeside was considered as an alternative connection site for offshore generation but already planned developments at the site including HVDC links to Ireland and the Scottish East Coast limit the sites ability to accept further conections. Figure 5.15 and Table 5.14 show the progression of reinforcements that may be necessary to connect the largest expected offshore developments in the North West.
FIGURE 5.15 - North West Indicative Connection Reinforcements
Walney
West of Duddon
R3 Z9 Irish Sea
8
Gwynt Y Mor
9 6
7 3
4 10
Mid Wales
OFTO
Shoreline
AC 400kV
AC 220kV
7 AC Platforms
AC 220kV To Pentir CSC HVDC 500kV To Heysham AC 400kV
OFTO
VSC HVDC 300kV VSC HVDC 300kV
HVDC Platforms
To Penwortham
58
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 TABLE 5.14 - Indicative reinforcements for North West Connections
Ref. NW1 NW2
Description Reconductor 2x85km of Trawsfynydd to Deeside-Deeside tee with GZTACSR Establish a new 400kV substation in mid-Wales for the connection of multiple TAN8 wind generation sites. 80km, double circuit overhead line Extension of Ironbridge substation to accommodate new double circuit Rationalise existing SP Manweb owned 132VK circuit, strung between Trawsfynydd and tower 4ZC70, for operation at 400kV by reconductoring the circuit using 2x700mm2 conductor Create a new 400/132kV single switch mesh substation at Penisarwaun to allow the tee connection of the Trawsfynydd leg of the new Pentir Trawsfynydd circuit Installation of approximately 5.8km of 2x2500mm2, 400kV XLPE cable to cross the Glaslyn Estuary Install 120MVAr series compensation in the Deeside Trawsfynydd circuits Install 120MVAr series compensation in the Deeside Pentir circuits Establish a new 400kV substation close to the existing Wylfa substation for offshore connections Construct a new 35km, 3x700mm2 double circuit overhead line from the new substation to Pentir Extend Pentir substation New 150km HVDC underground cable link from new Wylfa substation to new mid Wales substation. Establish a new 400kV substation for offshore connections connected to the Heysham to Penwortham circuits Upgrade the 275kV route and associated substations from Penwortham to Frodsham to 400kV operation Install series compensation and reconductor with higher rating conductor the Legacy to Ironbridge circuits.
ARC 2013 2015
SEA+ 2013 2015
GG 2017 2016
SP 2019 N/A
NW3
2015
2015
2017
2020
NW4 NW5 NW6
2016 2016 2017
2016 2016 2017
2017 2017 2019
2022 2022 2024
NW7 NW8 NW9 NW10
2021 2020 2023 2025
2022 2020 2024 2026
N/A 2022 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A
59
5.2.6 Scotland
A significant proportion of the UKs existing wind farm capacity is on the many hills and mountains of Scotland. Further offshore generation capacity has been identified all around the Scottish coast including the Moray Firth and Firth of Forth Round 3 wind zones, the Pentland Firth strategic marine power development area, and several Windfarms in the Scottish territorial water areas close to shore. Many of these offshore development areas are shown in Figure 5.16 below. All of the developments are subject to the appropriate agreements and permissions being established. Figure 5.16 below also shows a number indicative offshore connection designs. A larger view of the networks required by the Round 3 Windfarms is shown in Appendix 5. The likelihood of significant offshore and onshore renewable generation development in Scotland mean that an extensive upgrade of the onshore transmission system (including offshore cable links) will likely be required to facilitate the increased transmission of power into England. With the possibility of significant onshore transmission upgrades the offshore transmission network could be interfaced with the onshore network at several different locations. Suggested locations have been shown in Figure 5.16, but it is quite possible that these will change in response to connection applications, OFTO appointments, and more detailed surveys and analysis.
60
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 FIGURE 5.16 - Scottish Reinforcement Areas and Offshore Development Areas
Area currently identified for reinforcement

HVDC Link Scottish Territorial Waters
R3 Z2 Firth Of Forth
HVDC Links to E&W
OFTO To Dounreay
Shoreline OFTO To Torness Shoreline
AC 132kV
AC 220kV VSC HVDC 300kV
AC Platforms AC 400kV HVDC Platform CSC HVDC 500kV To Eccles
AC 220kV
AC Platforms
CSC HVDC 500kV To Beaully
VSC HVDC 300kV
HVDC Platform
61
The total potential Scottish offshore generation capacity for each scenario is shown in figure 5.17 below.
FIGURE 5.17 - Scottish Offshore Generation Capacity
Offshore Generation Capacity - Scotland

16000.00 SP 14000.00 SEA+ GG ARC
12000.00
10000.00
Capacity (MW)
8000.00
6000.00
4000.00
2000.00
0.00
/2 01 0 /2 01 1 /2 01 2 /2 01 3 /2 01 4 /2 01 5 /2 01 6 /2 01 7 /2 01 8 /2 01 9 /2 02 0 /2 02 1 /2 02 2 /2 02 3 /2 02 4 /2 02 5 /2 02 6
20 09
20 10
20 11
20 12
20 13
20 14
20 15
20 16
20 17
20 18
20 19
20 20
20 21
20 22
20 23
20 24
Year
Firth of Forth Offshore Transmission Design The Round 3 Firth of Forth zone has the potential to accommodate up to 3.7GW of generation capacity and is located approximately 60km from shore. With a total on and offshore route length of up to 60km both HVDC and AC solutions are possible. In the indicative design the maximum zonal capacity of 3700MW has been divided into one 500MW, two 600MW, and two 1000MW Windfarms. The standard AC 600MW arrangement is used for the smaller Windfarms. This standard design utilises two 220kV 3-core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore AC 36/220kV substation rated at 640MVA at the Windfarm. For each connection onshore the two 3-core cables may be terminated at the transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which six single core 220kV cables may form the onshore portion of the route. These cables would terminate at a 220kV substation for further transmission into the wider onshore transmission system. This onshore interface could be at a new Torness South 400kV GIS substation via two 220/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the on and offshore substations are required to compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static Var Compensator at the onshore substation is needed to meet the System Operator/Transmission Owner Code section K requirements. The standard HVDC solution is used for both of the 1000MW Windfarms. Each HVDC solution utilises the HVDC 1000MW standard design which consists of two subsidiary AC 36/220kV offshore substations feeding an offshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter. The power is then transmitted ashore via two XLPE cables to an onshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter adjacent to Torness South substation. The AC output from the converter may then be fed into the onshore transmission system. Alternative onshore connection points are possible and it may be more suitable to connection some of the offshore capacity to the other sites. The indicative offshore design is shown in Figure 5.16 and listed in Table 5.16.
20 25
62
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 TABLE 5.16 Round 3 Firth of Forth Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm
Capacity (MW) 1000 1000 600 600 500
TO Connection Interface Point Torness South Torness South Torness South Torness South Torness South
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 58 55 31 31 43 2 2 2 2 2
Design Blocks 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600 1xAC600
F1 Firth of Forth F2 G1 G2 G3
Moray Firth Offshore Transmission Design The Round 3 Moray Firth zone has the potential to accommodate up to 1.3GW of generation capacity and is located approximately 50km from shore. With a total on and offshore route length of up to 53km both HVDC and AC solutions could be considered for the Moray Firth Zone. In the indicative design the 1300MW zone has been divided into a 1000MW Windfarm connected using HVDC in combination with a 300MW Windfarm utilising a AC connection. The HVDC solution utilises the HVDC 1000MW standard design. The power is transmitted ashore via two XLPE cables to an onshore HVDC 1000MW Voltage Source Converter adjacent to Mybster substation. The 300MW AC design utilises two 132kV 3 core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore AC 36/132kV substation rated at 360MVA at the Windfarm. Onshore the two 3-core cables from the offshore platform may be terminated at a transition pit (via a 500m directionally drilled conduit) from which six single core 132kV cables form the onshore portion of the route. These cables will terminate at a 132kV double busbar substation before being connected to the onshore transmission system at a new 400kV GIS substation via two 132/400kV transformers. Static shunt reactors at the on and offshore substations will compensate for the cable capacitance, while a Static VAr Compensator at the onshore substation will meet the STC section K requirements.
48
An alternative solution has been considered in which the zone has been divided into two 600MW arrays. This allows the standard 600MW solution to be used. This design utilises two 220kV 3 core submarine cables to transmit the power ashore from a single offshore AC 36/220kV substation rated at 640MVA at the Windfarm. The indicative offshore design is shown in figure 5.5 above and listed in tables 5.17 and 5.18.
48
Offshore Development Information Statement 2009 TABLE 5.17 Round 3 Moray Firth Suggested Offshore Transmission
Zone
Windfarm C1
Capacity (MW) 300 1000
TO Interface Point Mybster Mybster
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 30 21 30 21
Design Blocks 1xAC600 1xHVDC1000 2xAC600
Moray Firth
D1
TABLE 5.18 Round 3 Moray Firth Suggested Alternative Offshore Transmission
Zone Moray Firth Alternate
Windfarm C1 D1
Capacity (MW) 600 600
TO Interface Point Mybster Mybster
Connection Distances (km) Offshore Onshore 30 29 21 21
Design Blocks 1xAC600 1xAC600
5.2.7 References
i. ii. National Electrical Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard, Version 2, June24 2009 Cost benefit methodology for optimal design of offshore transmission systems, P. Djapic, G Strabac, SEDG July 2008
iii. "Rating cables in J-Tubes" by M. Coates of Engineering Materials Division, Era Technology Ltd iv. www.windpower.org Danish Wind Industry Association 200
64
Chapter Six
Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS) Considerations
6.1 Background and Assessment Methodology
As the volume and location of generation within Great Britain evolves, the flow of power on the Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS) changes. When studying the changes in power flows over time, NGET commonly assesses the capability of each main network boundary defined as the border between two adjacent regions. The boundaries themselves are 'arbitrary' they are simply a tool to study and discuss MITS capability. Naturally, boundaries are defined such that they highlight the most constrained network areas where reinforcement is thought most likely. Where there is a surplus of power on one side of a boundary and a deficit on the other side, surplus power flows across the boundary to resolve the deficit. The MITS needs to have adequate transfer capability to be able to securely transport power across its boundaries. The NETS SQSS
49
defines a process by which the
required transfer capability of each MITS boundary can be determined, based upon the balance of generation and demand on each side of the boundary. The required transfer capability can then be compared with the planned capability of the MITS to assess whether it requires reinforcement. The future required transfer capability of each boundary has been determined against the requirements of the NETS SQSS. The NETS SQSS capability determination process selects the generation thought most likely to be running at system peak demand, and sets this generation to defined levels of output. As the proportion of wind generation increases, a greater proportion of non-wind generation is considered unlikely to be generating (i.e. new wind generation tends to displace existing conventional generation). Therefore, the overall amount of generation increases in some regions and decreases in others. This in turn affects the balance of generation and demand of power on both sides of each boundary, and subsequently alters the required transfer capability of each boundary. The required transfer capability can be:
unchanged if new generation displaces existing generation on the same side of the boundary; increased if new generation is added on the side of the boundary with a generation surplus, and displaces generation on the side of the boundary with a generation deficit; decreased if new generation is added on the side of the boundary with a generation deficit, and displaces generation on the side of the boundary with a generation surplus.
In reality, as the generation background changes, each boundary will tend to experience all three of these effects to differing degrees. The relative scale of each of the effects will dictate the overall net change to the boundary's required transfer capability. The required transfer capability identified for each boundary under each background scenario over the period 2009 2025 is presented in the Boundary Results section below. It should be noted that the suitability of the existing NETS SQSS used for determining the required boundary transfer capability is presently under review, given the expected increase in intermittent renewable generation,
49
https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/Codes/gbsqsscode/ https://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/149DEAE1-46B0-4B20-BF9C-66BDCB805955/35218/NETSSQSS_GoActive_240609.pdf 65
and a corresponding increasing in overall generation variability. If the NETS SQSS is found to be sub-optimal, the standard may be revised, altering the boundary capabilities deemed to be necessary. In addition to defining the minimum boundary capability, the NETS SQSS permits reinforcements over-andabove the minimum requirements where the benefits of these reinforcements can be shown to outweigh the costs. Detailed studies into the cost of transmission constraints are ongoing, and it is possible that some boundaries may be cost-effective to reinforce even if this is not explicitly required by the NETS SQSS minimum criteria.
66
6.2 Boundaries Considered

FIGURE 6.1 MITS Boundary Map (also available in Appendix 2)
67
6.3 MITS Reinforcement Options

Where the required transfer capability exceeds a boundary's existing transfer capability, the MITS will either need to be reinforced to cover the deficit or Ofgem will need to approve a NETS SQSS derogation. Derogations are only likely to be approved in situations where the deficit is limited both in its extent and duration. Options to reinforce MITS boundaries with inadequate existing capability were identified in the ENSG 'Our Electricity Transmission Network: A Vision for 2020 ' study. For reference the details of these reinforcements are provided in Table 6.1. Please note that the ENSG report also contained several reinforcements required to address local issues. These reinforcements have been considered in Chapter 5. Following Ofgem's initial consultation on strategic investments; it made funds available to undertake the 2009/10 pre-construction engineering for reinforcements identified by the ENSG study. These reinforcements are being developed without the requirement for specific user commitment. Ofgem have initiated further consultation with regard to funding which will facilitate taking forward the reinforcements identified by the ENSG report. In their initial proposal, Ofgem reiterated their commitment to ensuring adequate funds are made available to ensure timely investment is undertaken. It is anticipated that Ofgem will publish its final proposal in mid January 2010. MITS reinforcements may increase the transfer capability across a single boundary, or may benefit multiple boundaries (depending on the nature of the reinforcement and the surrounding network). The boundaries that benefit from each reinforcement are indicated in the Table 6.1 below. Accordingly, the year that each reinforcement is required will be set by whichever boundary requires the reinforcement first, or when the total cost of constraints on all affected boundaries exceeds the threshold needed for the reinforcement to be costeffective. The approximate year that each reinforcement is first required (or a derogation will need to be obtained), for NETS SQSS compliance under each of the background scenarios is indicated in Table 6.1. Additionally, each boundary's existing transfer capability and the indicative capability benefit provided by any reinforcements are superimposed onto its plot in the boundary results section below. These results are intended to illustrate the changing requirements of MITS boundaries over time and how the timing of MITS reinforcements may vary under the different generation scenarios. However, in reality, a boundary's transfer capability is affected by several different factors and can fluctuate over short and long timescales with different patterns of generation and demand. For example, the post-TIRG (Transmission Investment for Renewable Generation) transfer capability of boundary B7 is shown as being 3400MW due to limitations on the North-Western circuits from Harker to Hutton. Where 1000MW of generation around Harker and Strathaven to be displaced by 1000MW of For generation at Stella, the required capability across B7 would remain the same; yet the existing transfer capability rises to approximately 4000MW as a result improved sharing of flow between circuits. simplicity, this issue is overlooked in the simplified plots of section 6.4; yet this issue is highly relevant. The capacity values shown on the plots, and the years that reinforcements are shown to be necessary should therefore be understood as being indicative only, and do not constitute a definitive plan of exactly when network reinforcements are required under each scenario. The need for each MITS reinforcement will be
50
50
http://www.ensg.gov.uk/assets/ensg_transmission_pwg_full_report_final_issue_1.pdf
68
supported by more detailed analysis that takes account of the variability of each boundary's transfer capability with changing generation patterns and the likelihood of different background scenarios. Some of the projects proposed to address local network congestion do also provide a benefit to the wider system boundaries, as is shown on the plots in the following section. Please refer back to Chapter 5 for the details of these projects.
TABLE 6.1 MITS Reinforcement Options
Benefiting Ref. Description Boundary WS1 Reconductor Harker Hutton Quernmore B7
Approximate Year Required SEA+ 2009 GG 2009 SP 2009
WS2
2 x 116km of GZTACSR conductor B6 2009 2009 2009
Series Compensation

WS3
Harker-Hutton circuits Harker-Stella circuits Stella-Spennymoor circuits B6 B7 B11 B16 B32 2012 2013 2013 2013 2011 2011 2015 N/A N/A 2012 2013 2018* N/A N/A 2014
West Coast HVDC Link
Deeside: New 400kV 21 bay GIS substation together with line entry and generator connection rationalization. HVDC converter ~2GW capacity installation at Deeside and Hunterston HVDC cable connection from Deeside to Hunderston, ~340km, submarine and land sections.
WS4
East Coast HVDC Link
B4 B6 B7 B32
2016 2018 2017 2017
2018 2018 2019 2016
N/A N/A N/A N/A
HVDC converter ~2GW capacity installation at Hawthorn Pit and Peterhead HVDC cable connection from Hawthorn Pit to Peterhead, ~360km, submarine and land sections. Hawthorn Pit: establish new 400kV substation 9 bay plus one additional 400/275kV supergrid transformer connected to existing Hawthorn Pit 275kV. Modify line entries. Up-rate existing Hawthorn Pit to Norton 275kV circuit to 400kV operation, transfer into 400kV substations Extend Norton 400kV GIS by one bay for new Hawthorn Pit circuit.
The year when each reinforcement is likely to be required for each scenario, considering all of the boundaries the reinforcement benefits, is underlined.
69
6.4 Boundary Results

Specific results for each boundary are provided in each subsection below. Boundaries are discussed in the order in which they are encountered when travelling towards London:
from the north (B6, B7, B11, B16, B32, B8, B9), from the south-west (B12), and finally, London itself (B14).
The indicative capability of the network before and after the proposed reinforcements is superimposed onto each of the boundary transfer graphs. Because the required transfer capability varies under the different background scenarios, the approximate year that each reinforcement is required will vary under each of the scenarios. This has been indicated in the plots using background shading:
Solid white shading denotes the time when boundary reinforcement is not expected to be required under any scenario; Solid grey shading denotes the time when boundary reinforcement is likely to be required under all scenarios; Grey and white diagonal lines denote the time when boundary reinforcement is required under some, but not all, scenarios. The years corresponding to the left and right edges of this region, therefore, indicate the earliest and latest date the reinforcement is expected to be required for that boundary. In some cases, a particular reinforcement is required under some scenarios but is not required for others until beyond 2025. In this case, the grey and white shading continues to the right edge of the plot.
Although the discussion in this chapter frequently uses the expression that certain reinforcements "are required" in certain years, this should be understood as shorthand notation for the more exact articulation:
The required transfer capability is found to exceed the boundary's existing transfer capability, as enhanced by any previously assumed reinforcements. The boundary is therefore non-compliant and requires reinforcement to increase its capability. Of the available options to reinforce the boundary, NGET considers that the reinforcement said to be "required" is considered to be the most appropriate.
70
6.4.1 Boundary B6: SPT - NGET

Boundary B6 crosses Great Britain from east to west along the Anglo-Scottish border. Scotland generally has an excess of generation with more generation capacity than peak demand. The flow across this boundary therefore indicates how much excess generation is being exported from Scotland into England. Across all of the scenarios, onshore Windfarms progressively come online in Scotland throughout the entire timeframe. This results in a gradual increase in B6's required transfer capability as these new Windfarms north of the boundary displace thermal generation to the south. In 2015, some of the existing thermal generation in Scotland is displaced by new wind generation beginning to come online south of B6, leading to a slight drop in required transfer capability under the Slow Progression scenario. From 2017 the increasing capacity of the Moray Firth and Firth of Forth Round 3 Windfarms and the connection of new wave and tidal farms in Scotland largely displace generation in England, resulting in an incremental increase in the required transfer capability. The rate of this increase is roughly proportional to the rate at which new generation capacity is installed under the different scenarios. Following 2020, the transfer capability required under the SEA Plus scenario increases very slowly, as further renewable generation installed displaces much of the remaining thermal generation online in Scotland. It can be seen that the series compensation (WS2) is required in order to meet the required boundary transfer capability for all years under all scenarios. Although the reinforcement is justified immediately, it will obviously take some time to develop. The West Coast HVDC link (WS3) is required by 2011-13 to meet the requirements of all three scenarios. Under the Slow Progression scenario, the reduction in the required transfer capability in 2014-15 means that requirement for the link to reinforce B6 is marginal in remaining years. The East Coast HVDC link (WS4) is required in 2017-18 under both the Gone Green and SEA Plus scenarios, but is not required at all under the Slow Progression scenario. Still further reinforcement is required under SEA Plus from 2023. Options to provide this capability remain to be identified.
FIGURE 6.2 Boundary 6 Transfers: Scenario Comparisons
Boundary B6: SPT - NGET

9000
Further Reinforcement(s) to be Identified

8000
7000
East Coast HVDC Link (WS4) West Coast HVDC Link (WS3)
Boundary Transfer (MW)
6000
5000
4000
Series Compensation (WS2)

3000
Existing Capability & Transmission Investment for Renewable Generation (TIRG)
2000
1000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
71
6.4.2 Boundary B7: NGET Upper North

B7 also crosses Great Britain from east to west, but is located south of B6 such that the urban Tyneside/Teeside regions of North East England are now north of the boundary. The plot of required transfer capability is similar to that of the B6 boundary since much of what flows across B6 continues flowing south across B7. From 2020, the increase in generation in Scotland is offset by a decrease in generation in North East England, partly due to assumed closures of some plant and partly due to existing generation being displaced by new renewable generation. This results in a reasonably flat required transfer capability in all scenarios from 2020 onwards. The required transfer capability is greater than the existing capability of the network in all years under all three scenarios, and accordingly, the reconductoring of the Harker Hutton Quernmore circuits (WS1) is required as soon as possible. The development of a West Coast HVDC link (WS3) is required to enable B7 to meet its required capability under the Gone Green and SEA Plus scenarios from 2015 and 2013 respectively, until beyond 2025. Under the Slow Progression scenario, the West Coast link is required from 2018 until 2020. The development of an East Coast HVDC link (WS4) is required in 2019 under Gone Green and in 2017 under SEA Plus.
Boundary B7: NGET Upper North

9000
8000
Further Reinforcement(s) to be Identified East Coast DC Link (WS4) West Coast DC Link (WS3)
7000
6000
5000
4000
Reconductor Harker - Hutton - Quernmore (WS1) Existing Capability & Transmission Investment for Renewable Generation (TIRG)
3000
2000
1000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
72
6.4.3 Boundary B11: NGET North East & Yorkshire

Boundary B11 starts on the west coast in the same location as B7, but instead of traveling directly east across England, it cuts south between Manchester and Leeds, before turning East and meeting the east coast just south of the Humber estuary (i.e. the same point that B8 meets the east coast). Therefore, as well as capturing the power flowing south, it also describes the network's requirement to transfer power from the Humber region in the east to the built-up area surrounding Manchester in the west. Several Round 1 and 2 Windfarms and most of the links to the Dogger Bank and Hornsea Round 3 Windfarms are assumed to connect to the onshore network just north of this boundary. The required transfer capability fluctuates up and down for all three scenarios, but overall tends upwards for the SEA Plus scenario, and downwards for Slow Progress and Gone Green. This is a consequence of new generation progressively being added and existing generation progressively being closed or falling out of merit fairly evenly on both sides of the boundary, with a slight imbalance one way or the other under the different scenarios. The higher volume of wind generation off England's east coast in SEA Plus is the major difference between scenarios. The required transfer capability for Gone Green and Slow Progress scenarios is always within the existing capability of the MITS. In some years, SEA Plus requires a transfer capability in excess of the existing capability; however, this is well within the capability of B11 when reinforced by the proposed West Coast HVDC link (WS3).
B11: NGET North East and Yorkshire

12000
West Coast HVDC Link (WS3)

10000
Existing Capability
8000
6000
4000
2000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
73
6.4.4 Boundary B16: NGET North East, Trent & Yorkshire

B16 starts on the west coast in the same location as B7 and B11, and initially follows the same path as B11, traveling south between Manchester and Leeds. However, B16 turns to the east slightly further south than B11 and meets the east coastline just south of the Wash. As such, the Lincolnshire region is located north of B16. Several Round 1 and 2 Windfarms and the Dogger Bank and Hornsea Round 3 Windfarms are assumed to connect to the onshore network just north of this boundary on the East Coast. The boundary's required transfer capability closely resembles that of B11. The only significant difference is that the transfer capability required under the SEA Plus scenario is slightly less variable and now tends slightly lower overall. This is due to the increase in East Coast wind (responsible for the overall increasing trend for B11) being largely being offset by a reduction in thermal generation in Lincolnshire, either due to assumed closures or falling out of merit. The required transfer capability for Gone Green and Slow Progress scenarios is always within the existing capability of the MITS. In 2013 and 2014, SEA Plus requires a transfer capability slightly above the existing capability, but if the proposed West Coast HVDC link (WS3) is implemented in time, the deficit can be avoided.
B16: NGET North East, Trent & Yorkshire

18000
16000
West Coast HVDC Link (WS3) Existing Capability
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
74
6.4.5 Boundary B32: NGET Upper North & North Lancaster

Boundary B32 runs in parallel with and to the south of B7, starting from just south of Preston in the west, and heading east until it reaches the coast north of the Humber estuary. Some of the Irish Sea Round 3 Windfarm is expected to connect to the onshore transmission network near Stanah, just north of B32. Until 2020, the plot of B32's required transfer capability closely resembles that of B7, as the power flowing across B7 continues flowing south crossing B32 as well. From 2020, the required transfer capability plateaus and in 2023, decreases in all three scenarios due to the assumed closure of several nuclear generators. Under Slow Progression scenario, the West Coast HVDC link (WS3) is required between 2013 and 2023 to meet the required boundary capability. The SEA Plus scenario requires the West Coast HVDC Link (WS3) from 2010 onwards (albeit marginally until 2012), and the East Coast HVDC link (WS4) from 2017. Under the Gone Green scenario, the West Coast HVDC link (WS3) is required from 2012 and the East Coast HVDC link (WS4) from 2016.
B32: NGET Upper North & N Lancs.

10000

9000
East Coast DC Link (WS4)

8000 7000
West Coast DC Link (WS3)
6000
5000
Existing Capability
4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
75
6.4.6 Boundary B8: NGET North to Midlands

Boundary B8 also crosses Great Britain from east to west, separating Northern England from the Midlands. As such, the major load centre around Leeds, Manchester and Liverpool is now north of the boundary. Several Round 1 and 2 Windfarms, as well the Irish Sea and much of the Dogger Bank and Hornsea Round 3 Windfarms are expected to connect to the onshore network just north of B8. The required transfer capability fluctuates somewhat from year to year under the different scenarios but never significantly exceeds its present value. From 2018, the required boundary capability tends downwards under the Slow Progression and Gone Green scenarios. This result may initially seem counter-intuitive, given the increasing flow south across B32, the closest parallel boundary to the north. The outcome is due to the strong concentration of thermal generation in the North Midlands and South Yorkshire, a considerable volume of which is either assumed to close or become displaced by the large volumes of renewable generation coming online. In 2013 and 2014, SEA Plus requires a transfer capability slightly in excess of the existing capability. If the proposed North Wales HVDC link (NW7) or new Humber region circuits (EC6 or EC2a, EC2b, EC3 and EC4) introduced in Chapter 5 are implemented in time, the capability deficit is avoided. Although these projects provide some benefit to B8, it should be remembered that the primary driver for these projects is to address local congestion in the North Wales and Humber regions.
Boundary B8: NGET North to Midlands

14000
12000
HVDC link between Pentir and Mid Wales (NW7)
Lincolnshire Reinforcements (EC2a, EC2b, EC3 & EC4, or EC5)

10000
8000
Existing Capability
6000
4000
2000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
76
6.4.7 Boundary B9: NGET Midlands to South

Boundary B9 also crosses Great Britain from east to west, separating the Midlands from Southern England. The major load centre around Birmingham is north of the boundary. Several of the Round 1 and 2 Windfarms located in/near the Wash and the remaining portion of the Dogger Bank and Hornsea Round 3 Windfarms are expected to connect to the onshore network just north of B9. With all three background scenarios, B9's required transfer capability fluctuates around its present value until 2018 when it declines steadily across all three scenarios. The reason for the overall decline is similar to the reason why the results for B8 are different to B32: the southern midlands contain a significant amount of conventional thermal generation, and much of this is either assumed to close or become displaced by renewable generation connecting south of the boundary. Although the Lincolnshire and North Wales projects provide some benefit to the boundary (as is shown in the figure below), it should be remembered that the primary driver for these projects is to address local congestion and create connection capacity near the coastline for Offshore Windfarms.
Boundary B9: NGET Midlands to South

12000
Lincolnshire Reinforcements and HVDC link between Pentir & Mid Wales (NW7 and EC2a, EC2b, EC3, EC4, or EC5) Existing Capability
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Year 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
77
6.4.8 Boundary B12: NGET South & South West

Boundary B12 encompasses the region to the south and south-west of Great Britain. This area includes the connection points of several Round 1 and 2 Windfarms and the Hastings, West Isle of Wight and Bristol Channel Round 3 Windfarms. The peak demand in this region exceeds the total volume of local generation, and so the flow of power across the boundary at peak demand is towards the south and west (i.e. away from London) and is therefore expressed as a negative quantity. Overall, the connection of new generation within the region is largely offset by the assumed closure of existing generation or generation being pushed out of rank and subsequently not dispatched with the small residual causing the required boundary transfer capability to tend slightly down overall under the Slow Progression and Gone Green scenarios, and slightly up overall in the SEA Plus scenario. However, the assumed closures of existing generators are not fully aligned with the openings of new generation, and so there is noticeable annual fluctuation in the required transfer capability. The MITS' existing capability to transfer power across B12 is adequate under the Gone Green and Slow Progress scenarios in most years, apart from a moderate deficit in 2012 and 2016-18. Conversely the MITS is unable to meet the requirements of the SEA Plus scenario after 2012, apart from a temporary dip in 2019 due to the assumed connection of new nuclear and wind generation in this year (displacing external generation), before the connection of new generation elsewhere in Britain in 2020 displaces some of the existing generation west of B12. Suitable reinforcements to increase the MITS capability to transfer power across B12 are still to be identified.
B12: NGET South & South West

0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Existing Capability
-1000
-2000
-3000
-4000
-5000

-6000 Year
78
6.4.9 Boundary B14: NGET London

Boundary B14 encircles London, the largest demand centre in the National Electricity Transmission System. Apart from some small CHP projects, there is little generation in the London area, except for the large concentration of coal, oil and gas-fired plant in the lower Thames estuary. More distantly, there are nuclear units at Sizewell and Dungeness to the north east and south, and coal and gas plants at Didcot and Marchwood to the west. Consequently, the demand in London is predominately met by transmission connections from remote generation sources. Some of these sources are even more remote, with an existing interconnector to France and another to The Netherlands in an advanced stage of development. Whilst the required transfer into London does not vary significantly over time, the existing capability of the boundary is highly sensitive to the disposition/pattern of generation (to the extent that a plot would misrepresent the situation). In recent analysis, it was shown that the capability on the London boundary varies over a large range when varying generation in East Anglia and Thames Estuary and with varying demand in London. This led to a number of credible scenarios where the London boundary was noncompliant. Therefore, to accommodate the increase in flows from generation in East Anglia and changes in generation volume in Thames Estuary, the Waltham Cross-Hackney 400kV upgrade has been proposed to provide a robust solution against these variations.
79
Chapter Seven
Way Forward
The Statement will be published on an annual basis by NGET. It is intended that this Statement will be used as the basis for future editions of the Statement , subject to industry consultation and the approval of the Authority. Industry feedback is therefore sought to inform the development of subsequent statements, to ensure that the Statement fulfills its objective of facilitating the development of an efficient, coordinated and economical electricity transmission system.
51
7.1 General Industry Consultation on the 2009 Statement

Interested parties are encouraged to provide feedback on all aspects of the 2009 Statement via an Online Survey Form, available on NGET's website . Given the truncated timeline for the development of the 2010 Statement (as outlined in section 7.3), it would be appreciated if responses can be provided as soon as possible, and by 29 January 2010 at the latest. Furthermore, it would be appreciated if respondents can indicate a willingness to be contacted by NGET to discuss their feedback. Following this consultation, NGET will submit the proposed form of the 2010 Statement to the Authority for determination.
th 52
7.2 Industry Contribution on the Generation Background Scenarios

During March to May 2010, NGET will conduct consultation on the future generation background scenarios to be used in the 2010 Statement. The consultation will seek to:
describe and receive feedback on the scenarios proposed for the 2010 Statement describe any additional information that interested parties could provide to NGET which may assist in the preparation of the future scenarios
The exact nature and timing of this consultation exercise is currently being finalised. However, it is anticipated that a formal written consultation with interested parties will be a key component in receiving the views from the industry on this matter. In the mean time, views are welcomed on how best to engage with the industry on this issue. After the consultation process has finished, NGET will submit the scenarios proposed for inclusion in the 2010 Statement to the Authority for determination.
51 52
The 2010 Statement will be published by 30 September 2010 NGET's website is available at http://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/Electricity/
80
th
7.3 Proposed 2010 Consultation Timetable

The proposed timetable for the publication of the 2010 Statement is detailed as follows:
Publication of 2009 Statement by 31 December 2009 Deadline for feedback on 2009 Statement via the Online Survey Form - 29 January 2010 Submission of proposed form of enduring Statement to the Authority 1 March 2010 Determination on proposed form of enduring Statement 29 March 2010 Future Scenario Consultation March to May 2010 Submission of proposed Future Scenarios for inclusion in 2010 Statement 1 June 2010 Determination on proposed Future Scenarios 29 June 2010 2010 Offshore Development Information Statement published 30 September 2010
th th st th st th
st
The truncated timeline for the publication of the 2010 Statement will result in a slight overlap between the key stages. However the proposed timetable will ensure that key milestones are achieved whilst providing sufficient time to obtain valuable feedback from the industry and undertake and complete the necessary analytical work required.
7.4 Consultation Process for Enduring Offshore Development Information Statement

Subsequently, the Statement will be produced annually and evolve as advised by the feedback received from the industry, but remain within the remit set by the special license condition C4. It is intended in the future to seek contributions from interested stakeholders with the view to enhance future versions of the report, to facilitate the co-coordinated development of an efficient, co-coordinated and economical system of electricity transmission.
81
Glossary
Simplified definitions of many of the terms used in this statement are provided below to assist a diverse range of readers to understand this Statement. Please be aware that many of these terms are officially and precisely defined in various industry codes, standards, and licence conditions.
Air Insulated Substations/Switchgear (AIS)

Traditionally, substations at transmission voltages use atmospheric air as the principal insulating medium. The substation components energised at transmission voltages (such as circuit breakers, disconnectors, instrument transformers and the conductors that interconnect them) are supported on porcelain insulating columns and spaced with sufficient clearances that the surrounding air will provide adequate insulation.
Alternating Current (AC)

See High Voltage Alternating Current (HVAC)
Array
The electrical network, typically energised at 33kV or 11kV, used to collect the power generated by multiple generators and deliver it to a central substation where the power is aggregated and its voltage is stepped up for export to the grid.
Authority
The Director General of Electricity Supply.
Boundary
A border that divides the transmission system into two adjacent regions. Boundaries are used when assessing and discussing the future requirements and capabilities of the transmission system. Boundaries are defined such that they highlight the most constrained areas of the network where reinforcement is thought most likely.
Boundary Transfer Capability

The maximum pre-fault power that the transmission system can carry from the region on one side of a boundary to the region on the other side of a boundary while ensuring acceptable transmission system operating conditions will exist following one of a range of different faults.
Busbar
The common connection point of two or more transmission circuits.
82
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) Module

Gas-fired generation in which the waste heat from the gas turbines is passed to an associated steam unit and used to contribute to the overall efficiency of the generation.
Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

The production of electricity and thermal energy in a single integrated process.
Constraints
Limitations applied to the operation of the power system, to prevent it from operating in a state in which, following a fault, unacceptable operating conditions could be experienced. Constraint costs are incurred when it is necessary to alter the power output of generators in order to alleviate the constraint.
Contracted Plant
Generators which hold a valid connection agreement. Such agreements are commonly secured in advance of the construction of generation.
Current Source Converter (CSC)

A type of HVDC converter which uses electronic switches that can be controlled on, and naturally commutate off at the end of each cycle. Please refer to the corresponding technology sheet in Appendix 4 which describes the merits of CSC converters.
Demand
The sum of electrical loads satisfied by power from the transmission system.
Embedded
Generation which is directly connected to a distribution network.
Fault
An incident in which an element of the power system fails and needs to be disconnected from the rest of the power system. In transmission networks, the most common example of a fault is the failure of insulation leading to a short circuit. The SQSS defines a list of faults which the transmission system must be able to sustain without leading to unacceptable conditions. The network must be designed with an appropriate amount of redundancy to provide such resilience to faults.
83
Gas Insulated Substations/Switchgear (GIS)

Substations in which the components that are energised at transmission voltages are enclosed in a metal vessel containing pressurised sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) gas. The improved insulation properties of SF6 over atmospheric air means that a GIS substation can be arranged more compactly then an equivalent AIS substation.
Go-Active
The date on which the modifications to the industry codes and licence conditions underpinning the new offshore regime took effect: 24 June 2009.
Go-Live
The date on which the new regulatory regime for offshore transmission will come into force. From this date, participation in the transmission of electricity from generating stations in offshore waters at voltages of 132kV and above will be prohibited without a licence. This date is presently anticipated to occur in June 2010 .
53
Grid Entry Point (GEP)

The point at which a generating unit is directly connects to the transmission system. A grid entry point can be onshore or offshore. When offshore, the GEP is defined as the low voltage busbar on the platform substation
Grid Supply Point (GSP)

A point of supply from the GB Transmission System to a distribution network or transmission-connected load. Typically only large industrial loads are directly connected to the transmission system.
High Voltage Alternating Current (HVAC or AC)

Electric power transmission in which the voltage varies in a sinusoidal fashion, resulting in a current flow that periodically reverses direction. HVAC is presently the most common form of electricity transmission and distribution, since it allows the voltage level to be raised or lowered using a transformer.
53
Offshore Transitional Tenders First Round Transitional Projects Tender Guidance Note on Process to Asset Transfer, Ofgem, October 2009, Available at: http://www.ofgem.gov.uk/Networks/offtrans/ott/tendocs/Documents1/Guidance%20note%20on%20process%20to%20asset%20tra nsfer%20(offshore%20electricity%20transmission).pdf 84
High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC)

Electric power transmission in which the voltage is held at a constant magnitude. HVDC is commonly used for point to point long-distance and/or subsea connections. HVDC offers various advantages over HVAC transmission, but requires the use of costly power electronic converters at each end to change the voltage level and convert it to/from AC.
Infeed Loss Risk

The maximum amount of power injection into the grid that can be lost for different types of power system contingencies, as defined by the SQSS. The normal infeed loss risk, relating to relatively common contingencies, is presently 1000MW. The infrequent infeed loss risk, relating to relatively uncommon/multiple contingencies, is presently 1320MW. The power system is designed in such a way that it is not possible to loose generation infeed greater than these thresholds. As such, the infeed loss risk defines the maximum capacity of radial offshore transmission connections. Operationally, adequate frequency response is maintained to ensure that the power system can withstand the sudden loss of generation up to the infeed loss risk. There is an active proposal which, should it be approved by the Authority, will increase the normal and infrequent loss risk to 1320 and 1800MW respectively. For further information, please refer to SQSS Review GSR007 on National Grid's website.
Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS)

The 400kV and 275kV elements of the transmission system, including in Scotland, the 132kV elements operated in parallel with 400kV or 275kV elements, excluding radial connections to generators, transformer connections to lower voltage systems and interconnectors to other power systems.
National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET)

National Grid Electricity Transmission plc. NGET is a member of the National Grid group of companies. National Grid Electricity Transmission plc owns, maintains and develops the high voltage electricity transmission system in England and Wales, and operates the power system across the National Electricity Transmission System.
National Electricity Transmission System Security and Quality of Supply Standard (NETS SQSS)
An industry document that sets out the criteria and methodologies that transmission licensees must use when planning and operating their networks. It addresses issues such as supply reliability and acceptable network conditions.
Offshore Grid Entry Point (offshore GEP)

The point at which an offshore generator connects to the offshore transmission system, defined as the AC connection onto the low voltage busbar on the OFTO platform substation.
85
Offshore Transmission Owner (OFTO)

Companies with an offshore transmission licence, responsible for owning and maintaining offshore transmission assets.
Onshore Interface Point

The point at which an offshore transmission system is directly connected to the onshore transmission system.
Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs)

A 'green' certificate issued to an accredited generator for eligible renewable electricity generated and supplied to customers within the United Kingdom. Different forms of renewable power generation earn a different number of ROCs for each MWh of energy produced. Electricity suppliers are responsible for obtaining ROCs for a certain proportion of the energy that they have supplied to customers, or they must pay the buy out price, with the proceeds distributed amongst suppliers who met their requirement. The Renewable Obligation (RO) scheme therefore helps to make renewable power generation cost-effective for generation developers/owners.
Scenario
A set of assumptions about the magnitude and spatial disposition of future generation and demand. Scenarios are typically 'themed' to represent how the generation and demand is expected to change in different economic and political conditions.
Static VAR Compensators (SVC) and Static Compensators (STATCOM)

Both are devices which are capable of producing variable inductive and capacitive reactive power, and can be used to regulate the network voltage on the network and control the power factor at grid entry and interface points.
System Operator - Transmission Owner Code (STC)

The System OperatorTransmission Owner Code (STC) defines the high-level relationship between the national electricity transmission system operator and the transmission network owners.
Transformer
An electro-magnetic device that can be used to change the voltage level in an AC network. Please refer to the corresponding technology sheet in Appendix 4 for more information.
86
The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC)

The Department of Energy and Climate Change is the Government department responsible for all aspects of UK energy policy, and for tackling global climate change on behalf of the UK.
The Crown Estate

The Crown Estate is the owner of the seabed around the coast line of UK.
Transmission Entry Capacity (TEC)

The maximum amount of active power deliverable by a power station at its grid entry point (which can be onshore or offshore). This will be the maximum power deliverable simultaneously by all of the generating unit that connect to the a GEP, minus any auxiliary loads.
Units
Measures of power the rate at which energy is being generated, consumed, or transferred:
Gigawatt (GW) = 1,000,000,000 Watts Megawatt (MW) = 1,000,000 Watts 1 Watt = 1 Joule/second
Measures of energy the overall energy generated, consumed, or transferred. In electricity, energy is commonly expressed as a multiple of the energy that would be realised if a particular power level were maintained for an hour:
Gigawatthour (GWh) = 1,000,000,000 Watts X 3600 seconds Megawatthour (MWh) = 1,000,000 Watts X 3600 seconds
Measures of Voltage the electrical potential at which electrical conductors are energised:
Kilovolts (kV) = 1,000 Volts 1 Volt = 1 Joule/coulomb of charge
Voltage Source Converters (VSC)

A relatively new type of HVDC converter which uses electronic switches which can be controlled on and off. Please refer to the corresponding technology sheet in Appendix 4 which describes the merits of VSC converters.
XLPE Cables
Cables that utilise extruded cross-linked polyethylene insulation. Please refer to the technology sheets in Appendix 4 for more information about the merits of different types of cable.
87

ODIS2009FINAL

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ODIS2009FINAL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transmission Networks

Offshore Development Information Statement

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Nick Winser, Executive Director, Transmission National Grid December 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

2. Offshore Development Information Statement

3. Offshore Windfarm Projects: Rounds 1 & 2

4. Future Generation and Demand Scenarios

5. Offshore and Local Onshore Connection Designs

6. Main Interconnected Transmission System (MITS) Considerations

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore and Local Connection Design

Wider System Considerations

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

1.2 Offshore Generation Development

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

1.2.2 Offshore Marine Technology

1.3 Offshore Transmission Regulatory Regime

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

to consider and accept or reject, or indeed refer the

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Tender Process Tender Panel (Ofgem)

3 months Stage 2 Offer issued by NGET

3 months Stage 2 Offer accepted / referred

Stage 1 Connection Offer Onshore Works and Assumed Offshore Works

Construction, Commissioning and Accession proceed under STC Governance

Three months + Three months

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

1.4 Previous and Parallel Initiatives

and The Crown Estate .

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

2.2 Development and Structure

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

2.3 Evolution of Statement

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

up to 30 turbines, up to 10km in seabed area; and at least 20MW of generation capacity.

Crown Estate Website: www.thecrownestate.co.uk 17

3.2 East Coast

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

3.2.1 Round 2 Sites

It is currently in scoping and is contracted to be

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

The project is currently being

from the coast. It has been granted

3.3 North West

3.3.1 Round 1 Sites

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

commissioning date of October 2010.

The project is allocated 150MW of capacity at the Offshore

3.3.2 Round 2 Sites

consists of two phases.

Ofgem website: www.ofgem.gov.uk Scottish Power Renewables: www.scottishpowerrenewables.com 21

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

3.4 Thames Estuary

3.4.1 Round 1 Sites

The project has

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009

3.4.2 Round 2 Sites

Offshore Development Information Statement 2009