thorpe marsh ccgt project development feasibility study ... · thorpe marsh ccgt project...

90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0

Penspen Limited 3 Water Lane Richmond upon Thames Surrey TW9 1TJ United Kingdom

Thorpe Marsh CCGT Project Development Feasibility Study for Fuel Gas Pipeline Thorpe Marsh Power Ltd

THORPE MARSH CCGT PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR FUEL GAS PIPELINE

Revision Description Date Originated by

Checked by

Approved by

A Issued for Internal Review 18-08-09 AH DJW DJW B Issued for Client’s Review 20-08-09 AH DJW DJW 0 Issued for Use 17-09-09 DJW PT PT

© Copyright Penspen Limited 2009 All rights reserved. This document is issued in accordance with the limited terms of an agreement between Penspen Limited and its Client. Penspen assumes no liability or respons bility to any other party relying in any way on the content or any other aspect of this document. 90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

2 ABBREVIATIONS

3 DESIGN

4 ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATIONS

5 PIPELINE ROUTE REVIEW

6 PIPELINE SIZING

7 DESKTOP GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION

8 BUDGET COST ESTIMATE

9 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY PIPELINE ROUTE OPTIONS

APPENDIX B TYPICAL OFF-TAKE AGI LAYOUT PLAN

APPENDIX C TYPICAL GAS RECEPTION FACILITY LAYOUT PLAN

APPENDIX D PIPELINE HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX E PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE BREAKDOWN

APPENDIX F CORRESPONDENCE FROM NATIONAL GRID GAS



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

1.2 Scope The scope of this feasibility study is as follows:

• Carry out routing survey to develop a preferred pipeline route from a point on an existing National Grid Feeder suitable as an offtake site to the proposed power station site. The study to be undertaken from accessible vantage points but without contacting landowners, other utilities or interested third parities at this stage.

• Present a preferred route option with a budget cost estimate and programme

for the works.

• Conceptual design of Above Ground Installation (AGI) at the off-take point from the NTS.

• Desktop geo-technical site Investigation of the preferred route and ground

contamination assessment of the AGI.

• Preliminary pipeline length, diameter, wall thickness and material.

• Operating parameters (velocity, flow, temperature, pressure and their variation with operating/loading conditions and their maximum limits at both ends of the pipeline, ramping rates etc and base case pipeline sizing.

• Rationale of whether a compressor is required or not based on the likely

future system pressure, and also considering the NTS parameters, at the off-take point.

1.3 Summary

From the study, it has been possible to develop a preferred route subject to NTS connection consent and landowner permissions. Due to the client requirements at this stage of the project no interested third parties or landowners were contacted during this study. It has only been possible to view the pipeline route from public rights of way and vantage points along the route. The selected route would appear to be practical for construction utilising normal well tried construction methods. Confirmation and refining of the route will be required from line walk surveys and landowner discussions early in the conceptual design stage to confirm necessary assumptions made such as usable gaps in tree belts along the pipeline route. Two Power Station outputs of 900MW (2 trains) and 1350MW (3 trains) have been considered within this report. Pipeline sizing has been undertaken based on these power generation figures and an assumed efficency of 58% resulting in recommended pipeline sizes of 18” and 24” respectively. Based on the construction of a 900MW station the total estimated CAPEX budget for the gas supply pipeline to the power station is £17.3 million +/-30%. Following consultation with National Grid on the minimum required pressure it was concluded that there will not be a requirement for a compressor station.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

2 ABBREVIATIONS

The following abbreviations are used in this report; 3LPE Three Layer Poly-Ethylene AC Alternating Current AGI Above Ground Installation CCGT Combined Cycle Gas Turbine ESD Emergency Shut Down Valve GRF Gas Reception Facility HDD Horizontal Directional Drill IGEM Institute of Gas Engineers and Managers LDZ Local Distribution Zone LHV Lower Heating Value MOC Minimum Off-take Connection NGG National Grid Gas NTS National Transmission System RDX Road Crossing RLX Railway Crossing ROV Remotely Operated Valve RTU Remote Terminal Unit RVX River / Major Watercourse Crossing TMPL Thorpe Marsh Power Ltd.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

4 ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATIONS

4.1 Compressor Requirements National Grid confirmed that they can provide a minimum inlet pressure of 40 barg. It was therefore concluded that there will be no requirement for a compressor station. Correspondence letter from NGG is included in Appendix F of this report.

4.2 Connection to NTS Transmission System The Minimum Off-take Connection (MOC) will be taken from an existing National Grid Feeder pipeline within a fenced site. The MOC comprises a pipeline Tee, a telemetered Remotely Operated Valve (ROV) and suitable bypass arrangement.

4.3 TMPL Off-take AGI A separate sector of the Off-Take site will comprise a Thorpe Marsh Power Ltd facility for temporary pipeline pig launcher, one Emergency Shut Down (ESD) valve and associated instrumentation, one block valves, one isolating joint, civil works and fencing. A Typical Off-take Above Ground Installation layout plan is included in Appendix B and shows the MOC to the NTS system and the TMPL off-take AGI arrangement.

4.4 Gas Reception Facility The Gas Reception Facility (GRF) will be contained within the new Power Station and will comprise a temporary pipeline pig receiver, one Emergency Shut Down (ESD) valve and associated instrumentation, one block valve and one isolating joint in addition to a flanged connection to the CCGT filtration and pressure reduction facilities.

A Typical Gas Reception Facility layout plan is included in Appendix C.

4.5 Control and Instrumentation Operators at the Power Station control room will undertake the operation and monitoring of the pipeline. The operators will exercise control via a Remote Terminal Unit (RTU) at the TMPL Off-take AGI and discrete instrumentation at the GRF. Selected signals will be transmitted between the TMPL Off-take RTU and the GRF RTU and the Power Station control room. Selected signals will also be transmitted between the TMPL Off-take AGI RTU and the National Grid AGI RTU in the Control Kiosk.

4.6 Other Works In addition to the mechanical and instrumentation works, the AGIs work will include civil, electrical and security elements. These will be addressed in later design stages.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

5 PIPELINE ROUTE REVIEW

5.1 Introduction An initial desktop study was undertaken in order to identify the shortest practical route that provides adequate clearance to villages, other occupied buildings, woodlands and areas that appear to have potential for development in the near future. Two potential pipeline routes have been identified connecting the National Transmission Systems (NTS) and the CCGT Power Station Site.

• Route option 1 commences on a potential offtake west of Camblesforth on

the 48’’ diameter National Grid pipeline.

• Route option 2 commences on a potential offtake south east of Rawcliffe on the National Grid 36” diameter Feeder 7 pipeline.

The identified routes have then been developed following a vantage point survey, visiting every accessible road crossing and observing the route in each direction from the crossing. Photographs were taken at many locations to illustrate the nature of the routes and the major crossings.

5.2 Pipeline Construction Pipeline construction is usually carried out by the “spread method” which involves several groups of men and equipment who collectively conduct the various stages of the construction operation. Each group of men and equipment complete an activity which picks up where the last one left off, advancing the construction process a step at a time and leaving it ready for the next step to begin, from initial setting out of the route through to reinstatement. The rate at which the spread advances is determined by the nature of the terrain, the prevalence of necessary special sections, weather conditions and other environmental factors.

Pipelines often have to cross watercourses, public roads and railways. Typically, elevated crossings are avoided and pipes pass under the ‘obstruction’ either by open cut or by trenchless techniques. Trenchless methods adopted normally include boring, tunneling or directional drilling techniques.

The factors that affect the selection of a crossing point vary enormously depending on the size of the crossing, its location, the authority responsible and environmental issues. The actual crossing point can have significant effect upon the routing of the proposed pipeline both approaching and leaving the proposed crossing point. Road and railway crossings are normally carried out at right angles on the flat or where the road is on an embankment as it assists construction and minimize the extent of any excavation required (i.e. the depth and extent of any launching and reception pits, etc.). Existing services are often buried in the verges of roads. During the detailed design stage the various service authorities will be contacted to confirm their exact size, location and if there are any special requirements to be considered when crossing these services.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

5.3 Route Description 5.3.1 Potential Routes

The potential routes are shown on drawing 90130/PL/2/001 included in Appendix A.

5.3.2 Pipeline Route Option 1 – Camblesforth Offtake

The pipeline route option 1 commences on an offtake approximately 1.5km west of Camblesforth on the 48” diameter Feeder 2 National Grid Pipeline. The potential offtake is on the north east side of Lynwith Lane which is the first road the pipeline route crosses (RDX1). Figure 3 shows the potential offtake location.

Figure 3: Potential Offtake Location The route follows a southerly direction to cross two minor tracks before crossing the twin-track railway between Camblesforth and Knottingley (RLX1), shown in Figure 4, approximately 1.5 km west of Carlton village.

Figure 4: Rail Crossing



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

A trenchless technique will be used to cross the railway. The selection of the suitable trenchless technique will depend on the ground conditions and the requirements of railway owner/operator with respect to the minimum depth of cover and the allowable settlement. The pipeline route continues in a southerly direction to cross Hirst Road (RDX2) to the west of Carlton village. The crossing method of this minor public road will be agreed with the local authorities. South of Hirst Road the pipeline continues in a southerly direction to run parallel to a high voltage over head power line. The distance between the high voltage line and the proposed route is approximately 200 meters. Approximately one kilometre south of Hirst Road crossing, the pipeline route crosses the River Aire (RVX1). The watercourse is approximately 24m wide as shown in Figure 5. A trenchless technique, likely to be a Horizontal Directional Drill (HDD) will be required to cross the River Aire.

Figure 5: River Aire Crossing Thereof the pipeline route continues in a southerly direction to cross Gowdall Lane (RDX3) and the railway between Hensall and Snaith (RLX2) approximately one kilometre west of Snaith. Due to the minimal separation between Godwall Lane and the railway, a trenchless technique will be used to cross both obstacles as a single crossing. The pipeline route then crosses under the high voltage over head power line before crossing the A645 – Pontefract Road (RDX4) between a cemetery and a small woodland to the west of Snaith. A trenchless method will be required to cross the A645. Approximately one kilometre south of the A645 crossing the pipeline route crosses the M62 Motorway (RDX5) south west of Snaith. A trenchless crossing technique, most probably a HDD due to the width of the crossing, will be required to cross this Motorway. Figure 6 shows a photograph of the M62 approximately 800 meters west of the pipeline crossing location.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

Figure 6: M62 Crossing After crossing the M62 the pipeline route continues in a southerly direction parallel to the high voltage power line and across open fields approximately 2 kilometers east of Pollington, crossing a minor farm track and a footpath, before turning to a south westerly direction to cross Balne Croft Lane (RDX6) and Knottingley and Goole navigation canal (RVX2) approximately 200 m east of a dismantled railway. The Knottingley and Goole canal crossing is shown in Figure 7. A trenchless technique, likely to be a HDD, will be required to cross this navigation canal.

Figure 7: Knottingley and Goole Canal As pipeline crosses the canal it continues in a south westerly direction to cross a public foot path and minor track before crossing the River Went (RVX3). The River Went crossing, likely to be a HDD, is shown in Figure 8.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

Figure 8: River Went

The pipeline route continues in a south westerly direction to pass to the east of Riddings Farm and Fenwick Hall. The route then turns to follow a southerly direction to cross Moss Road (RDX7) to the east of the village Moss. As the pipeline route continues in a southerly direction to cross Wrancarr Lane (RDX8) between Trumfleet Grange and an old windmill to the east of Haywood. The route continues in a south westerly direction passing through open fields and crosses a minor track before passing under a high voltage overhead power line to the west of Thorpe In Balne village. The pipeline route then turns to follow an easterly direction. The route crosses Bell Croft lane (RDX9); a minor public road to the south west of Thorpe In Balne village. As it continues in an easterly direction the route crosses two minor tracks and two overhead power lines before crossing a major drain (RVX4), possibly a HDD, to the west of Thorpe Marsh power station. As the pipeline route approaches the Thorpe Marsh Power Station it turns to follow a southerly direction and crosses a minor twin-track railway (RLX3) that passes inside the power station boundary. A trenchless technique, potentially a HDD, will be required to cross RLX3, shown in Figure 9. The HDD exit point inside the power station, where the Gas Reception Facility (GRF) will be, will approximately be 100m south of the power station northern boundary fence.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

Figure 9: Rail Crossing Adjacent to the North Boundary of the Power Station

5.3.3 Pipeline Route Option 2 – Rawcliffe Offtake The pipeline route option 2 commences on a potential offtake approximately 1 km east of Rawcliff Bridge on the 36” diameter NGG Feeder 7 pipeline. Access to the proposed AGI location can be through a minor private track that will need to be upgraded for approximately 700 meters between the AGI and Bridge Lane. Early consultation with the land owner and the local authorities is essential to avoid consenting and planning permission problems. From the Offtake AGI the pipeline route follows a south westerly direction passing through arable fields to cross a number of farm tracks and ditches. The pipeline route crosses Moorends Road (RDX1) approximately 800 meters north of Moorends village. A pump house, shown in Figure 10, is located adjacent to the proposed crossing point which indicates that the water table in the area could be high and that the area could be susceptible to flooding.

Figure 10: Water Pump



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

The pipeline route turns slightly to the west and follows a south westerly direction to cross the M18 Motorway (RDX2), shown in Figure 11, at Dikes Marsh. Due to the length of this crossing the crossing method is likely to be a HDD.

Figure 11: M18 Crossing The pipeline route continues in a south westerly direction and crosses the A614 – Selby Road (RDX3) and the River Don (RVX1). The crossing of the A614 and the River Don is likely to be a HDD. Figure 12 shows a photograph of the River Don.

Figure 12: River Don As the pipeline route continues in a south westerly direction it crosses Wormerly Hill Lane (RDX4), a minor public road leading to Wormley Hill village.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

The pipeline route continues in a south westerly direction to cross a footpath, a ditch and a minor track before turning slightly to the south to cross under a high voltage overhead power line. The pipeline route then crosses Hushels Lane (RDX5), a minor public road to the west of Fosterhouses. As the pipeline continues in a south westerly direction it crosses a number of minor farm tracks. When the route reaches Westfield Road it turns slightly to the west to run parallel to this minor public road for approximately 500 meters before crossing it (RDX6). After approximately 400 meters the pipeline route crosses another minor public road called Lodge Lane (RDX7). Following RDX7 the pipeline route turns west to cross the New Junction Canal (RVX2) south of Kirkhouse Green. This canal crossing is likely to be a HDD. Figure 13 shows a photograph of the New Junction Canal.

Figure 13: New Junction Canal The pipeline route continues in a westerly direction to cross Braithwaite Lane (RDX8). This is a minor public road to the south of Kirkhouse Green. The route thereof continues in a westerly direction and crosses a dismantled railway (RLX1) before crossing under a high voltage overhead power line. The dismantled railway crossing needs careful consideration. In some cases dismantled railways have become the home for protected species (fauna and flora) and have been designated accordingly. The issue of contaminated land also needs consideration. As the route continues in a westerly direction it crosses Trumfleet Lane (RDX9). This is a minor public road between Trumfleet and Moss. From this point this route option merges with pipeline route option 1. The route turns to follow a southerly direction to cross Wrancarr Lane (RDX10) between Trumfleet Grange and an old windmill to the east of Haywood.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

The route continues in a south westerly direction passing through open fields and crosses a minor track before passing under a high voltage overhead power line to the west of Thorpe In Balne village. The pipeline route then turns to follow an easterly direction. The route crosses Bell Croft lane (RDX11); a minor public road to the south west of Thorpe In Balne village. As it continues in an easterly direction the route crosses two minor tracks and two overhead power lines before crossing a major drain (RVX3), possibly a HDD, to the west of Thorpe Marsh power station. As the pipeline route approaches Thorpe Marsh Power Station it turns to follow a southerly direction and crosses a minor twin-track railway (RLX2) that passes inside the power station boundary before terminating at the GRF. A trenchless technique, potentially a HDD, will be required to cross RLX3, shown earlier in Figure 9.

5.4 Summary of Findings

5.4.1 General For both route options, the land in general is prime and being used mostly for arable purposes with a good depth of topsoil present. There is likely to be a high density of existing land drainage schemes present in the fields that the pipeline will cut. It is therefore essential that landowners are consulted at an early stage as to the location of drains, reinstatement requirements and methods etc. Where the pipeline route crosses existing services or obstacles, consents will be required from the owner/operator. In some cases, e.g. for railway crossings, the consenting process can take a significant period of time. Approaches to any consenting body should be made as soon as a feasible pipeline route is agreed in order to avoid design changes and delays during construction. In some locations, specially along route option 1, the pipeline crosses under, or runs parallel to, high voltage over head power lines. The risk of A.C. corrosion from the overhead lines depends on the electric current passing through the cable, the cable arrangement, the proximity to the pipeline route and the length of this parallelism. During the detailed design phase the risk of AC corrosion will need to be assessed and mitigation measures applied as necessary in accordance with the requirements of CEN/TS15280 (Evaluation of AC Corrosion Likelihood of Buried Pipelines – Application to Cathodically Protected Pipelines).

5.4.2 Option 1 Although this route option is shorter, the number of encountered crossings is slightly more than those of route option 2. The crossings are also wider than those of route option 2 and will be more expensive to achieve. Several lockouts are present on this route option, where the continuity of the pipeline spread can not be maintained and the pipeline construction equipment will need to be transported from one section of the route to the other using the local road network, which can cause increased disruption to the locals in addition to the extra costs associated with moving equipment around using suitable transport.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

Option 1 Unit Qty

Total Length km 18.18

Crossings

Trenchless/Auger bores (Rail/Motorway/Public road)

no

12

Open Cut (Other roads/tracks) no 10

Major river crossings – Trenchless no 4

Minor river/Drain crossings – open cut no 12

5.4.3 Option 2

This route option is slightly longer than route option 1 however the constructability of this route option and the nature of the encountered crossings in addition to the smaller number of lockouts along it make it the more attractive route. The National Grid Feeder 7 pipeline provides a number of power stations in the East Midlands with gas. Consultation with NGG was made to identify the feasibility of supplying the required gas quantity through this pipeline. NGG confirmed that the required gas flow and minimum pressure can be provided. Although the access to the offtake location is difficult and will need some additional works, this pipeline route is the preferred route option.

Option 2 Unit Qty

Total Length km 19.58

Crossings

Trenchless/Auger bores (Rail/Motorway/Public road)

no 14

Open Cut (Other roads/tracks) no 10

Major river crossings – Trenchless no 3

Minor river/Drain crossings – open cut no 3



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

6 PIPELINE SIZING

6.1 Material Grade For the anticipated size and design pressure for the pipeline, and to avoid weldability problems, API 5L X60 material grade is assumed to be practical.

6.2 Pipeline Hydraulics Utilising the flow figures provided and the identified pipeline lengths, initial pipeline size calculations have been undertaken. These calculations have been based on the requirements of IGE/TD/1 with the intention of providing acceptable pressure drop along the pipe. Initial calculations were undertaken to review the hydraulics and the sizing of the pipeline. These calculations have identified that the pipeline size will be in the order of 18’’. This is subject to confirmation of the Power Station gas requirements.

Pipeline Location

Pipeline Length “km”

Pipeline Inlet Pressure

“barg”

Pipeline outlet Pressure

“barg”

Minimum Pipeline Diameter “inches”

Option 1

Option 2

18.18

19.58

40

40

35

35

18

18 Calculation based on standard wall thickness pipe. Typical pressure is based on historic NTS pressure regime. Details of the pipeline hydraulic calculations are included in Appendix D of this report.

6.3 Pipeline Standard Wall Thickness

The pipeline standard wall thickness is calculated in accordance with IGEM/TD/1 (Section 6.4). Minimum Design Wall Thickness (t min)

t = PD (20fs) -1 Where: t design thickness of pipe mm

P design pressure bar D outside diameter mm s SMYS of the material N mm-2 f design factor

Cross country pipelines in rural areas where the population density does not exceed 2.5 persons per hectare are designed to a maximum design factor of 0.72. This design factor would be reduced where the pipeline passes in proximity to residential buildings, schools, offices, crossings (road / rail / river) and other sensitive locations.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

7 DESKTOP GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION

7.1 Introduction In accordance with IGEM/TD/1, the minimum depth of cover for onshore pipelines is 1.1 meters. Accordingly the minimum depth of the pipeline trench is 1.7 meters. At crossings the depth of cover increases according to the crossing method. For auger bores the depth of cover below the obstacle is normally 1.5 meters. In this case the launching and reception pits are normally a minimum of 2.5 meters deep. The depth of cover for Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) is normally in the range of 10 meters. These are usually the deepest locations along the pipeline route. Accordingly the geological information that is important for the majority of the pipeline route is usually related to the upper subsoil stratum. At HDD crossings the geological information up to 25 meters are of importance.

7.2 Sources of Information

7.2.1 British Geological Survey Maps The following British Geological Survey (BGS) 1:50,000 maps were consulted for the purpose of this desktop geotechnical investigation;

• England and Wales Sheet E71 • England and Wales Sheet E78 • England and Wales Sheet E79

7.2.2 Reports

The following report was used for the purpose of this desktop geotechnical investigation;

• Doncaster Geodiversity Assessment Report published on the Doncaster Council website www.doncaster.gov.uk.

7.3 Published Geology

The review of the published geology showed that the superficial deposits for the majority of the preferred route option consist of Alluvium Clay, Sand and Gravel and Glacial Clay and Silt. The start of the route avoids a Peat area by passing in the Alluvium Clay, Sand and Gravel to the north east of the Peat area. The pipeline route avoids inactive and ceased mines east of Moorends village and Thorne village. The route also passes to the north of Stainforth avoiding the active mine east of the village. From the review of the available documents there is no evidence of ground contamination at the offtake AGI location. This will be verified after consultation with the landowner and, if necessary, window sampling and laboratory testing during the detailed design stage. Ground investigation works including exploratory boreholes and trial pits will be required at a later stage in the design. These are particularly important at crossing points to verify the suitability of the ground for the proposed crossing method.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

8 BUDGET COST ESTIMATE

8.1 Introduction This budget cost estimate is based on the preferred pipeline route option (route option 2) and a gas requirement based on 900MW Power Station (18” pipeline). The activities comprising the cost estimates for the preferred pipeline route option entail execution of reconnaissance surveys of areas associated with major construction items and obtaining quotations for major cost items. Costs provided at this stage are to +/- 30%. Details of the preliminary cost estimate are given in Appendix E.

8.2 Assumptions The following assumptions were made for the purpose of this cost estimate;

• Approximately 10% of the selected route will be constructed using proximity wall pipe. The design factor for the heavy wall pipe is 0.3 and therefore the heavy wall thickness is 17.48 mm.

• Land costs are based on actual costs obtained from recent projects in similar land use.

• Construction costs are based on actual costs of recent projects (2009).

8.3 Quotations

• Quotations for linepipe manufacture and delivery were obtained for heavy wall and standard wall linepipe externally coated with Three Layer Polyethylene (3LPE) and internally coated with an epoxy flow coat.

• Quotations for the manufacture and delivery of ESD and ROV valves were obtained.

• NGG Minimum Offtake Connection cost is based on the preliminary budget indication received from NGG.

8.4 Summary

The table below summarises the preliminary cost estimate for the preferred pipeline route option based on quotations and costs derived from recent similar projects. The total estimated budget of the project is £17,257,026.

Description Cost £

Linepipe 2,490,577

Land Costs 1,234,800

Pipeline Construction 9,737,720

AGIs 2,077,500

Other Project Costs 1,716,429

Total 17,257,026



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

9 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

The schedule below provides an overview of the anticipated project delivery schedule given a first gas date of October 2012.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 of 25

TM

10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Following a desktop study two potential route options have been identified. The identified routes have then been inspected by means of a vantage point survey to assess the nature of the routes and the major crossings. Although slightly longer, pipeline route option 2 is the preferred route option. A desktop geo-technical site investigation of the preferred route has been undertaken. The study has not identified any major concerns with regards to the ground conditions along the preferred route however this needs to be verified and assessed by exploratory boreholes and trial pits at selected locations. At this stage there is no evidence of ground contamination at the offtake AGI. This will be verified after consultation with the landowner and, if necessary, window sampling and laboratory testing during the detailed design stage. NGG confirmed that they can provide a minimum inlet pressure of 40 barg. It was therefore concluded that there will be no requirement for a compressor station. Conceptual design of the Above Ground Installation (AGI) at the off-take point from the NTS has been prepared. Preliminary pipeline length, diameter, wall thickness and material have been identified. Based on route option 2 and an 18” pipeline a preliminary cost estimate for the pipeline CAPEX has been produced. The total estimated budget is £17.3 million +/-30%. It should be noted that the current steel prices are low and are likely to rise in the future. This will inevitably impact on the linepipe cost. It is recommended that the purchase order for the linepipe is placed as soon as a fixed pipeline route is agreed. Early consultation with landowners and other stake holders (e.g. Network Rail) is recommended. This consultation will identify third party requirements that needs to be taken into account in the design and will avoid construction delays. An overall programme for the project showing the main design, procurement, consenting and construction activities has been prepared based on first gas date of end of 2012.



90130-RPT-PL-001 Rev 0 Page 1 of 2

TM

APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY PIPELINE ROUTE OPTIONS




TM

APPENDIX B TYPICAL OFF-TAKE AGI LAYOUT PLAN




TM

APPENDIX C TYPICAL GAS RECEPTION FACILITY LAYOUT PLAN




TM

APPENDIX D PIPELINE HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS

The following table summarises the results of the pipeline hydraulic calculations.

Pipeline hydraulic simulation results for a flow equivalent to 2 trains

Flow (MMSCFD)

Pipe Length (km)

Outer Diameter

(in)

Wall thickness

(in)

Inner Diameter

(in)

Inlet Pressure

(barg)

Outlet Pressure

(barg)

Maximum Velocity

(m/s)

Maximum Pressure

Drop (bar/km)

129.75 17

16 0.25 15.5

40

34.11 9.2 0.35

18 0.28 17.438 36.93 6.7 0.18

20 0.31 19.376 38.26 5.2 0.10

24 0.38 23.25 39.33 3.5 0.39

Flow (MMSCFD)

Pipe Length (km)

Outer Diameter

(in)

Wall thickness

(in)

Inner Diameter

(in)

Inlet Pressure

(barg)

Outlet Pressure

(barg)

Maximum Velocity

(m/s)

Maximum Pressure

Drop (bar/km)

129.75 20

16 0.25 15.5

40

32.95 9.5 0.35

18 0.28 17.438 36.36 6.8 0.18

20 0.31 19.376 37.94 5.2 0.10

24 0.38 23.25 39.21 3.5 0.04

Notes. 1. All results are preliminary. 2. Hydraulic simulation were based on the following assumptions:

- Pipeline is horizontal. - Design Pressure = 90 barg.

- Constant simulation temperature = 15°C. - Design Factor = 0.72 - Hydraulic roughness = 0.0015" - Pipe Grade = X60

- Wall Thickness code = IGE TD/1 - Under tolerance applied = 0% - Corrosion allowance applied = 0 mm




TM

Pipeline hydraulic simulation results for a flow equivalent to 2 trains

Flow (MMSCFD)

Pipe Length (km)

Outer Diameter

(in)

Wall thickness

(in)

Inner Diameter

(in)

Inlet Pressure

(barg)

Outlet Pressure

(barg)

Maximum Velocity

(m/s)

Maximum Pressure

Drop (bar/km)

194.62 17

16 0.25 15.5

40

24.72 19.3 0.90

18 0.28 17.438 32.66 11.4 0.43

20 0.31 19.376 35.95 8.3 0.24

24 0.38 23.25 38.48 5.4 0.09

Flow (MMSCFD)

Pipe Length (km)

Outer Diameter

(in)

Wall thickness

(in)

Inner Diameter

(in)

Inlet Pressure

(barg)

Outlet Pressure

(barg)

Maximum Velocity

(m/s)

Maximum Pressure

Drop (bar/km)

194.62 20

16 0.25 15.5

40

20.88 22.9 0.96

18 0.28 17.438 31.9 12.0 0.44

20 0.31 19.376 35.18 8.5 0.24

24 0.38 23.25 38.2 5.4 0.09

Notes. 1. All results are preliminary. 2. Hydraulic simulation were based on the following assumptions:

- Pipeline is horizontal. - Design Pressure = 90 barg.

- Constant simulation temperature = 15°C. - Design Factor = 0.72 - Hydraulic roughness = 0.0015" - Pipe Grade = X60

- Wall Thickness code = IGE TD/1 - Under tolerance applied = 0% - Corrosion allowance applied = 0 mm




TM

APPENDIX E PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE BREAKDOWN

No ITEM UNIT QTY RATE (£) COSTS (£)

1 Steel Gas Pipeline 1.1 Supply 18" 7.92 mm (f=0.72)

X60 coated linepipe meter 17,622 110 1,938,420

1.2 Supply 18" 17.48 mm (f=0.3) X60 coated linepipe meter 1,958 210 411,180

1.3 Delivery to Site (6% Linepipe Price)

Sum 1 140,976 140,977

SECTION 1 SUB TOTAL 2,490,5772 Land Costs 2.1 Wayleave and compensation

gas pipeline meter 19,580 60 1,174,800

2.2 Offtake (NGG and TMPL) sum 1 60,000 60,000 SECTION 2 SUB TOTAL 1,234,8003 Basic Pipeline Construction

and Installation

3.1 Cross country gas pipeline meter 19,580 400 7,832,000

SECTION 3 SUB TOTAL 7,832,0004 Crossings 4.1 Horizontal Directional Drills no. 5 200,000 1,000,0004.3 Auger Bores no. 12 20,000 240,000

SECTION 4 SUB TOTAL 1,240,000

5 Land Drainage 5.1 Pre‐construction meter 19,580 17 332,8605.2 Post‐construction meter 19,580 17 332,860

SECTION 5 SUB TOTAL £ 665,7206 NGG Minimum Offtake

Connection (MOC)

6.1 Conceptual Design Study sum 1 50,000 50,0006.2 MOC sum 1 1,000,000 1,000,000

6.3 NGG Overheads (5% of the MOC Cost)

sum 1 52,500 52,500

SECTION 6 SUB TOTAL £ 1,102,5007 TMPL Offtake AGI 7.1 ROV and ESD Valves sum 1 100,000 100,0007.2 Control Kisok & Equipment sum 1 150,000 150,0007.3 Install gas offtake facility

including Civil, Mechanical and E&I Works and Access Road Upgrade (Not Including Pig Trap)

sum 1 400,000 400,000

SECTION 7 SUB TOTAL 650,000




TM

No ITEM UNIT QTY RATE (£) COSTS (£) 8 Gas Reception Facility 8.1 ROV and ESD Valves sum 1 100,000 100,0008.2 Control Kisok & Equipment sum 1 75,000 75,000

8.3

Install gas reception facility including Civil, Mechanical and E&I Works (Not Including Pig Trap)

sum 1 150,000 150,000

SECTION 8 SUB TOTAL 325,0009 Project Costs

9.1 Project Management and Procurement (6% of capital cost)

sum 1 792,198 792,198

9.2 Design, Investigations and Surveys (4% of capital cost) sum 1 528,132 528,132

9.3 Supervision and Inspection (3% of capital cost) sum 1 396,099 396,099

SECTION 9 SUB TOTAL 1,716,429

TOTAL COSTS 17,257,026




TM

APPENDIX F CORRESPONDENCE FROM NATIONAL GRID GAS

thorpe marsh ccgt project development feasibility study ... · thorpe marsh ccgt project...

Documents