Show and Tell - Renewable Energy integration and Circular Economy.pdf

Strategic Innovation Fund
Project ‘Show and Tell’ webinar
Whole Systems Integration:
Renewable Energy integration and
Circular economy
23 May 2022

Welcome
Manu Ravishankar, Innovation Lead, Innovate UK

Introduction: Whole Systems
Integration challenge

Whole Systems Integration Challenge
Aim: To consider and develop whole system approaches across energy supply, demand and
networks for better integration and optimisation of the energy system
Themes include:
Increasing
flexibility sources
in energy system
Hydrogen
deployment and
integration
New technology
development for
RE integration
Circular economy
for resource
efficiency
Image courtesy: Energy Systems Catapult, Systems thinking in the energy system

Agenda – Whole Systems Integration, Part 1
1. SCADENT - SuperConductor Applications for
Dense Energy Transmission
NGET
2. SEGIL - Sustainable Electrical Gas Insulated
Lines
NGET
3. Network-DC SSEN
Q&A on projects 1, 2 & 3
10:17am – 10 minute break
3. Excess gas turbine energy generation NGN
4. Asset Reuse and Recovery Collaboration
(ARRC)
SPEN
Q&A on projects 4 & 5
11:15am – end of session

SCADENT - SuperConductor
Applications for Dense
Energy Transmission
Alexander Yanushkevich, NGET

SCADENT
SuperConductor Applications for
Dense Energy Transmission
Show and tell webinar
May 2022

9
National Grid
Problem statement:
Increasing need to deliver more power
in urban areas for EVs and heat supply
networks meets challenges:
• Aging infrastructure,
• Slow consent and construction,
• Community disturbance
Solution:
Develop High Temperature Superconductor
(HTS) 132kV cable systems to
• Uprate existing cable routes to achieve
up to 5 times higher capacity density
• Utilise 132kV substations for capacity
where 400kV systems used today
SCADENT – SuperConductor Applications for Dense
Energy Transmission
Project partners:
NGET, WPD, SPEN, UKPN, Orsted,
Nexans, American Superconductors,
University of Strathclyde,
University of Manchester,
Frazer Nash Consulting
Deliverables:
- Technology readiness assessment,
- Cost benefit analysis case studies,
- Technology development roadmap
- Final project report
Benefits to consumers:
- Sooner power connections in urban areas
(power, heat, EV)
- Cost saving by reusing old routes and
infrastructure
- Reduced disturbance by construction
[SIF S&T webinar - SCADENT] | [May 2022]
Route to the market:
Alpha Phase:
• FEED of HTS systems for 132kV solutions
• Review policies and standards
Beta Phase:
• Develop and build demonstrator
• Identify BaU investment opportunities
Project budget: £148,440
Image ref: AMSC, Nexans

10
National Grid
Project Partners
Project Lead
Expertise in network
requirements
Expertise in network
requirements
Expertise in power systems
research and testing
Expertise in cable
technology,
manufacture and
installation
Expertise in
generation
development
Expertise in techno-
economic assessment &
innovation PM

11
National Grid
• No significant technological challenges to design and produce 132 kV/4kA
• Cooling system can leverage existing advancement in LNG cooling systems
• Installation is very similar to conventional cables
• Tested according to IEC 63075:2019
• Low failure rate
(mainly external risks)
Technology readiness

12
National Grid
• Case: replacing 400kV
conventional cable with 132kV
HTS for generic 5km cable system
• HTS is sensitive to infrastructure
requirements – achieve parity if
tunnelling can be avoided
• Potential locations to be identified
and costed in alpha phase
• Economy of scale effect requires
detailed study
Techno-Economic Assessment - Key Findings

13
National Grid
• Design, test and trial a 150kV 2kA and 4kA system
• Understand lifetime performance: maintenance, repair requirements
• Improve resilience to external damage risks
• Assess effects on electrical network: fault levels, power flows
• Design 132kV/900MVA urban energy hub to unable HTS connection
Adoption roadmap

SEGIL - Sustainable Electrical
Gas Insulated Lines
Alexander Yanushkevich, NGET

SEGIL
Sustainable Electrical Gas Insulated Lines
Show and tell webinar
May 2022

16
National Grid
What is the problem to be solved?
[SIF S&T webinar - SEGIL] | [May 2022]
1. Large Expansion in
Offshore Wind
Capacity…
2. …means growing demand
for high capacity power
connections needed from
landfall substations to GB grid
3. Difficult to consent
OHL in environmentally
sensitive areas…
4. …and conventional
cable can have thermal
bottlenecks
GILs could be a solution

17
National Grid
Gas-Insulated Lines (GILs) comprise a
conductor housed inside an aluminium pipe
which is filled with an insulating gas
Compared with conventional cable, GILs have:
• higher power transmission over a long distance
• low capacitance
• lower electromagnetic fields
• a longer lifetime, due to lower electrical and thermal
cycling
What are GILs?
Structure of a Gas Insulated Line (GIL)

18
National Grid
• lack of experience with long-distance GIL construction and operation
• …particularly on routes outwith the direct control of the network operator.
- Currently the applications are limited to interconnections inside substations or in other
relatively controlled environments such as power stations or short, tunnelled sections as
part of a longer circuit
• current generation GILs are filled with a sulphur hexafluoride (SF6)
• SF6 is used because of its superior electrical properties, but it is a potent
greenhouse gas which has 23,900 times more global warming potential than CO2
- phasing out of SF6 is a key element of network operators’ Net-Zero commitments
Why are GILs not used already?
Aim of our Discovery Phase was to investigate these issues, find the
challenges, and propose potential solutions for further investigation

19
National Grid
GIL Technology & Cost SF6 alternatives
GIL supply chain &
installation
What have we found out in Discovery Phase?
manufactured
by 7 companies
worldwide
Main material
cost is in outer
pipe (Al)
4/7 companies offer an SF6
alternative
These include NOVEC™, air,
N2, CO2 in various mixtures
NOVEC™ (a perfluoroketone)
is made to order by 3M – no
dedicated production
GIL sections made
as complete
modules
Joined at site –
either welded or
bolted flange
Installation has
much in common
with gas pipes
NOVEC™ has similar
dielectric properties to SF6
Cost is also very
dependent on
route

20
National Grid
Approximate cost breakdown of GIL elements & main areas for savings:
• Materials - 40%
• Aluminium is the biggest material cost - reducing size or thickness of pipes will have large cost impact
• pipe manufacturing potential not fully used – if it were, a manufacturing cost reduction of 30-50% is possible
• Civils & installation – 40%
• route is key as the more bending/direction changes are needed, the higher the cost
• longer length GIL sections reduce jointing costs and assembly time
• type of ground has a large influence on civil costs
• Other (Planning, design, permits etc) – 20%
• GILs have lower power losses in operation & potentially smaller footprint than cables depending on power
capacity
Discovery Phase Findings

21
National Grid
Looking Ahead to Alpha Phase
Investigating cost reductions is key
Review & propose solutions to challenges including:
• Optimum gas mix
• Optimum pipe size
Deliver a FEED study for a selected route to:
• Investigate manufacturing of long-length GILs & associated issues
• Investigate civils and installation challenges
Refine the benefits case, including detailed full lifecycle costs
Plan demonstrator to test the options to resolve issues identified

Network-DC
Simon Stromberg & Ben Marshall, SSEN
Aurelia Hibbert & Martin Wilcox, Mott MacDonald

Network-DC SIF
Show and Tell
23 May 2022

The Need for Multi-Purpose Interconnection
BEIS’ Offshore Transmission Network Review has identified
current interest in Multi-Purpose Interconnection (MPI) for
deploying offshore wind capacity and the significant benefits
associated with DCCBs.
‘These potential benefits include reducing the number of landfall points of
onshore grid connections, and therefore the environmental and local community
impacts, reducing the capital and operational costs, alongside reducing the
curtailment of wind with associated benefits of higher infrastructure utilisation
rates.’ (BEIS)

Counterfactual & Alternatives
From: Multi-Purpose Interconnectors: Why a new generation of interconnector holds the key.
National Grid Publication

The Problem to Solve
DCCBs are proposed in previous work as a potential means for enabling a streamlined HVDC network
As an emerging innovation, DCCBs have a high level of uncertainty around them, leading to hesitancy
How they can be integrated into the GB system is not yet defined
The size of the benefits and costs have not been quantified for the GB system
There is no defined process for how a DCCB could be designed, procured and implemented here

Overview of the work in Discovery phase
There were two key strands of work in Discovery Phase:
1. What are the benefits of DCCBs and how significant are those benefits?
…a cost benefit analysis using the information available at present
2. What is needed to encourage adoption?
…a routemap to FEED which identifies the questions remaining to be answered before a first
implementation is reasonably possible

Opportunities to Address the Problem
To address the first mover hesitancy, the group saw four possible routes to follow
A
B
C
D
Re-analyse the literature and carry out 1:1 engagement with manufacturers to learn from
their previous results
Synthetic testing of an HVDC breaker in a test laboratory
Full-scale deployment in an in-flight project, with some additional support from Ofgem for
first-of-a-kind costs
Demonstration of critical real-time control and protection functions in a realistic test
facility

User Needs
The opportunities to address the problem were assessed against the stakeholder needs we mapped
Stakeholders Mapped
GB System Operator
Transmission system planners
Transmission asset owners
Offshore wind developers
OFTOs
Interconnector operators
Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs)
Electricity consumers
Key Needs
Increased policy certainty
Increased cost-benefit certainty
Early engagement with OEMs for developing proven models
Development of ownership and operational models
Assessment of supply-chain depth and experience
Learnings from first implementation
Development and testing of protection philosophy in GB
Understanding of technology’s capabilities

Activities to Date
Identify case studies
Collate unit costs
Establish calculations sheet
“Say it in words” Develop benefits calculation in Ofgem format
Other supporting cost / value parameters
1.
Benefits
of
DCCBs
2.
Accelerate
adoption
Identify stakeholder concerns
Explore the literature
Connect with manufacturers
Identify high-level options
Assess the options
Develop the preferred option
Roles and responsibilities
Indicative cost
Indicative timeline
Case Studies NPV
RAG ratings
WBS
Activity
Output

Potential Benefits
➢ Reduced number of converter stations
➢ Reduced environmental impact
➢ Acceleration of wind capacity deployment
➢ System reliability
➢ Flexibility of Resource
➢ Reduced AC network reinforcement
➢ Reduced ancillary services expenditure
Based on currently available
information, the Cost-benefit Analysis
indicates DCCBs can deliver
multi-billion GBP benefits

Potential Benefits
DC Onshore
Hubs, MPIs
Increased
Wind
System
Security
Reduced
Cost
DCCBs
+ + +
System frequency
Normal frequency event possible via Network DC
Loss without Network DC
Market intervention alternative (counterfactual)
DC fault
Excursion limit
Recovery limits.
Recovery limits.
50Hz
• The main monetized benefit is from a reduction in ancillary
services required to maintain system frequency
• The scale of the inertia required in the use case and
counterfactual is based on the "swing equation" for frequency
management.
• The cost of the services contract is based on PathFinder Phase
1, in consultation with our project partners
• Even if only 10% of the ancillary services savings are realized,
the use cases still offer overall consumer benefit
RoCoF

Alpha Phase Beta Phase
Decision
Gate
Delivery of Front End
Engineering Design DCCBs to
be selected in network
design
➢ supply chain of multiple vendors able to supply DCCBs
➢ existing designs are practical and adapted to address
GB network conditions
➢ validate the ability of equipment to isolate faulted
➢ no significant integration issues with current
interconnectors are familiar with
➢ no significant regulatory or commercial barriers to the
development of onshore HVDC hubs
• Refinement of counterfactual
• Site selection
• Configuration of system
Define the Use Case
• NDA with OEMs
• Draft Invitation to Tender
• Technical Queries from manufacturers
Engagement with
Suppliers of Equipment
• Validated network models
• Manufactures model and open source models
• Performance testing through simulation
Simulation of
performance of DCCBs
• Draft commercial models
• Recommendations for regulation
Commercial Model
• Revised CAPEX
• Validated counterfactual
Updated Cost Benefit
Analysis
Forward Workplan

Thank you for listening
For further information on the project, please contact
simon.stromberg@sse.com

Potential Benefits
Goal Impact Category Benefit Assessed
Lower bills for consumers Lowest cost solution Total expenditure (Quantified in CBA)
NPV (Output of CBA)
Marginal economic efficiency Relative NPV (Output of CBA)
Unit cost (Quantified in CBA)
Efficient use of existing resources Limiting onshore network reinforcements (not currently quantified)
Ensuring system security and
reliability
Increase UK sourced energy mix Increased capacity of Offshore Wind connected within a given timeframe (not currently quantified)
Increase energy reliability Ancillary services requirement (Quantified in CBA)
Accelerated construction of renewables (meeting Energy Security Strategy targets) Speed of offshore wind connection (not currently quantified)
Reduced environmental damage Access to clean energy Speed of offshore wind connection (not currently quantified)
Reduced impact of assets on the environment Size of onshore footprint (Quantified in CBA)
Reduced impacts on communities (not currently quantified)
Better quality of service Flexibility of resource Rate of system recovery in fault scenario (Quantified in CBA)
Impact of ability to isolate fault on dispatch of surrounding generators (not currently quantified)
Accelerated construction of renewables Speed of offshore wind connection – reliant on number of changes to connection process required (not
currently quantified)
Developing wind resources with the highest EROI Reducing connection constraints through streamlined infrastructure(not currently quantified)
Benefits for society as a whole Energy affordability Relative NPV (Output of CBA)
Job creation Development of UK supply chain (not currently quantified)
Regional levelling up N/A until use case location defined

Stakeholder group Specific sources of first adopter hesitancy Specific knowledge which is lacking
GB System Operator ● Policy uncertainty: a change to the in-feed loss threshold in the Grid Code could reduce the need for DCCBs
● Cost-benefit case too uncertain
● Lack of proven models and characteristics
● Requires adoption of a fully-selective protection philosophy to gain benefits
● Lack of track record working with the companies which are developing DCCBs
● For use in international meshed grids, lack of clarity on ownership and operational models
● Indicative DCCB cost deployed in GB and net-benefit
● Timescale to deliver a DCCB project and whether it will deliver acceleration of time-to-connect
● Date on which a first DCCB could credibly be deployed in GB
● Reliability during operations (specifically how often a DCCB may fail to break the fault current and the system has to rely on slower
back-up protection)
● Duration of maintenance outages
(during which meshed DC networks fall back to PtP)
● Role of DCCBs in international meshed networks and how these will be operated
Transmission system
planners
● Policy uncertainty: a change to the in-feed loss threshold in the Grid Code could reduce the need for DCCBs
● Lack of proven models and characteristics
● Requires adoption of a fully-selective protection philosophy to gain benefits
● Timescale to deliver a DCCB project and whether it will deliver acceleration of time-to-connect
● Date on which a first DCCB could credibly be deployed in GB
● Reliability during operations
● Duration of maintenance outages
(during which meshed DC networks fall back to PtP)
Transmission asset
owners
● Cost unknown (both CapEx and OpEx)
● Depth of supplier experience and number of suppliers
● Competing designs with no clear winner
● Footprint
● Fall-back running arrangements during maintenance
● Loss of capacity during maintenance
● Reliability
Offshore wind
developers
● Treatment of DCCBs in OFTO Cost Assessment (in a case where asset transferred to OFTO following generator build)
● Reliability and O&M requirements – impact of outages on OSW farm revenue
● Lack of track record of OFTOs (or TOs) owning and maintaining DCCB assets
● Lack of clarity on design, construction and ownership responsibilities from the Offshore Transmission Network Review
● Risk that reliability impacts wind farm operators’ revenues and is not suitably compensated
● Cost Assessment Guidance (Ofgem) – if asset constructed by developer
● Reliability
● O&M requirements
● Impact on network charges
● How does asset lifetime compare to other OFTO assets.
● How will this be priced into TRS (and what approach is taken at End of TRS period)
● Outcomes of the Offshore Transmission Network Review
OFTOs ● Lack of track record working with the companies which are developing DCCBs
● Lack of previous field experience on operating transmission systems with DCCBs (summarised as availability indices)
● Lack of suitable policies from regulator to reduce the impact of DCCBs on OFTO availability and, consequently, revenues.
● Uncertainty around asset life and maintainability could impact availability indexes which are a key investment decision
lever
● Risk that reliability impacts OFTO revenues and is not suitably compensated
● Risk that insufficient field experience and track record increase complexity of operation and asset management of the transmission
systems.
● Availability indices for DCCBs: low availability indices might make the investment too expensive or even unfeasible.
● Risk that the lack of track record increases complexity and uncertainties on due diligence process of tenders.
● Risk that the lack of track record and suitable policies from regulator make the investment risky and unfeasible
Interconnector
operators
● Depth of supplier experience and number of suppliers
● Competing designs with no clear winner
● Lack of clarity on operational procedures
● Becoming first to utilise/install DCCB for first time (taking on the risk).
● Integration of DCCB into Proven Protection and Control multi-terminal Philosophy.
● Sufficient Current breaking rating of DCCB for higher fault levels.
● Certainty of performance under realistic faults not “laboratory condition” faults
● Cost-benefit case of a shared connection between interconnector and wind farm not proven
● Risk that reliability impacts interconnector revenues
● Battery limits in a shared connection
Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs)
● Limited deployment history, this gives suppliers pause concerning upfront development towards a specific development.
Past deployments have bee project specific in nature- the “big picture on cost beneficial use cases remains uncertain,
leading suppliers to not be able to identify reliably future volumes of DCCB construction required)
● Competing designs with no certainty how clients will assess quality vs. price
● Cost of meeting GB standards (if different to rest-of-the-world or an existing core market)
● Size of the market in the GB
● Suitability (and profitability) of the “next best” conventional solution
● Most optimal deployment technologies across those available. An expectation that stand-alone DCCB building installations will be
more efficient over integration into convertor building in the long-run and that significant economy of scale would emerge
however specific costs would relate to overall solution- the specification, protection solution and DCCB and numbers required. In
other words specific use cases are needed.
Electricity consumers ● Lack of evidence to demonstrate cost-benefit of onshore DCCBs
● DCCB solutions may speed up wind connections by reducing consenting associated with multiple point-to-point links,
but there is uncertainty whether it could cost customers more
● Whether DCCBs represent anticipatory investment and whether they represent a risk of stranded assets if one of the
connectees to an onshore HVDC hub pulls out
● Demonstrable improvement in TRL level from TRL5 to TRL7 (as per SIF application)
● Re-use of learning from other countries to avoid spend by GB customers
● Carries out the necessary and sufficient market interventions only
● Most economic route to these market interventions

Q&A – Whole Systems Integration challenge
1. SCADENT - SuperConductor Applications for Dense Energy Transmission
2. SEGIL - Sustainable Electrical Gas Insulated Lines
3. Network-DC

10 minute break
See you soon…..

WELCOME BACK!

Excess gas turbine energy
generation
Nick Smith, NGN
Tim Moor, Revolution Turbine Technologies

Northern Gas Networks
OFGEM Strategic Innovation Fund – Discovery Phase Closure
Excess Gas Turbine Energy Generation
Nick Smith, Operational Innovation Lead, Northern Gas Networks
Tim Moor, CTO, Revolution Turbine Technologies

Northern Gas Networks (NGN)
Northern Gas Networks owns and operates the gas distribution network in the North of England,
NGNs networks supply natural gas to 2.7million customers through a complex network, comprising
37,000km of buried and above ground pipelines. NGN have a track record of deploying robotics
throughout their network to carry out remediation works with the aim of eliminating leakage and
preparing the system for future hydrogen conversion. Project lead, licensed GDN operator and
pipeline network specialists. Owner of the technical and business case.
Revolution Turbine Technologies (RTT)
Owner of the IP for the micro-Expansion Turbine System (mETS) product. Responsible for product
innovation. Will lead of Work Package 2 and provide support throughout the project to help identify
opportunities for deployment/development of mETS.
Digital Catapult (DC)
The UK’s leading advanced digital technology R&D centre; DC will lead on digital systems architecture
to inform the requirements for power and grid planning, design for scalability and integrate RTT’s
mETS with NGN’s new and existing platforms.
Northern PowerGrid (NPG)
UK Electricity distribution network operator (DNO), transporting electricity to 8 million people across
3.9 million homes and businesses in the North East of England, Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire.
NPG will support with scoping interoperability & whole systems transition strategies.
Citizens Advice - Stockton & District Advice & Information Service (SDAIS)
Consumer views will be represented through engagement with SDAIS to ensure customer views are
incorporated into the project outputs and will support the business case for the project progressing
beyond the Discovery phase.
Project Partners

The existing Gas Distribution system is operated and controlled by utilising a
variety of electrical & instrumentation equipment. This vast majority of this
equipment, including critical alarm systems are powered by electricity,
either by direct connection to the local electricity distribution network, or
by lower voltage renewables (small solar panels). Although there is some
direct gas fired appliances stationed on NGNs sites, this is typically to
provide gas pre-heating capacity rather than electricity.
A need to identify opportunities to reduce our reliance & impact on the
local electricity distribution network, by increasing our understanding for
network interoperability & improving our resilience against sever weather
events.
Late 2021 & early 2022 demonstrated the negative impacts that severe
weather events can have on the local electricity distribution network, which
in turn directly impacts our local communities and also NGNs ability to
operate the gas distribution network efficiently.
The project explored the opportunity for the mETS product to generate
sufficient electricity to not only power NGN equipment, but also understand
the systems capability to return excess electricity back into the local
network, which has potential to in turn reduce network replacements and
reinforcements required by NPG.
Additionally, by reducing the power NGN takes off of the local electricity
network, this will have potential to free up excess capacity, which will
inevitably be required as the deployment of EVs, heat pumps etc. ramps up.
Problem Space
Decarbonisation, System Resilience & Customer Vulnerability

REVOLUTION TURBINE TECHNOLOGIES - OVERVIEW
RTT’s micro-Expansion Turbine System
generates reliable, zero-emission, off-grid
electricity for pipelines, facilities and gas
distribution networks. RTT can reduce carbon
footprint while increasing electric power
available for operations and resilience.

Takes a small stream of flowing gas from a facility or flow line
Uses it to drive a generator, lab tested to outputs c.1kW
Returns it to the system without combustion or venting
Our Solution – the micro-Expansion Turbine System

Value Proposition
CLEAN, RELIABLE, ZERO-EMISSION OFF-GRID POWER
BENEFITS – DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
RTT’s CUSTOMER
• Support Gas Distribution Networks (GDNs) to meet ambitious net-zero goals.
• Generate net zero electricity for digitalisation strategy
• Take GDNs off-grid & add resiliency
• Potential to harvest energy back to the grid
ENVIRONMENT
• Clean energy
• Reduces carbon footprint by millions of tons
• Zero fuel consumption
• Harvests wasted energy
GDN’s CUSTOMER
• Clean energy – lower carbon footprint product
• Reduced costs and increased efficiency

RTT’s Development Roadmap:
1) BATMAN: Attempt to increase turbine power output up
towards 20kW*
2) ROBIN: Develop a composite turbine that lowers cost and
functions in Intermediate pressure regimes
3) Mighty Mouse: Develop a super low-cost polymer turbine
that functions in low pressure regimes to service
digitalization needs
* Please note the output will be governed by available pressure, flow rates and temperature of identified gas
Product Opportunities
mETS 1000 mETS 1020
"Batman" (future design)
Material Stainless Steel Stainless Steel
Maximum Pressure 2000 psi (135 bar) 2000 psi (135 bar)
Turbine design Standard High Strength
Operating RPM 6000 6000
Maximum RPM 12000 12000
Maximum flow rate (Volumetric,
at operating pressure)
TBD TBD
Fluid Compatibility
natural gas, CO2,
nitrogen, air, other
inert gases
natural gas, CO2,
nitrogen, air, other
inert gases
Generator Type Permanent Magnet
Permanent Magnet -
High Output
Maximum Electric Power Output 2.0 kW 20 kW
Generator Output
3-phase AC, convertible
to desired AC or DC
voltage
3-phase AC, convertible
to desired AC or DC
voltage
Dimensions
H30cm x W30cm x
D27cm
H30cm x W30cm x
D27cm
Weight (approx) 115 kg (250 lb) 122 kg
Sensors
Inlet pressure/temperature Standard Standard
Outlet pressure/temperature Standard Standard
Internal temperature Standard Standard
Turbine RPM Standard Standard
Inlet flow rate Optional Optional
Outlet flow rate Optional Optional
Controller
Microprocessor Standard Standard
PLC Optional Optional
Model

Opportunity
The Primary Aim of this project was to investigate if RTT’s mETS product is capable of
generating power from excess gas pressure within NGNs Gas Distribution Network that could
be utilised to power NGN equipment (Telemetry, metering, control, security etc.), helping to
initially facilitate our Digitalisation goals, with a view on how to potentially scale up the
solution, to enable excess power to be fed back into the local electricity network.
Through delivery of this project, the team aimed to address the following key themes:
• Digitalisation
• Whole Systems Transition
• Network Interoperability
• Decarbonisation/Net Zero
• Customer Vulnerability
• OPEX Reduction
• System Resilience Above: Typical UK Gas Distribution Above Ground Installation (AGI)

To understand Whole Systems Integration requirements, the Project Team worked closely with
Northern PowerGrid to understand existing network infrastructure and opportunities to integrate the
existing networks to enable NGN to supply excess generated energy back onto the network.
NPG identified future energy outputs would be required in the range of 50kW+ to offer any substantial
benefit to the network.
User Needs

The Project Team worked closely with Stockton District Advice & Information Service to share
information from the project and to understand local community opinion, to ensure the project
remained on topic and that any future phases would be aligned to community targets.
The Project Team engaged openly with SDAIS to make local communities & consumers aware of the
ongoing feasibility study and presented information to a local Housing, Neighbourhood and Affordable
Warmth Partnership Group. The purpose of this was to highlight NGN’s ongoing initiatives, including
the SIF Discovery Phase Project, share the challenges facing the local energy networks and discuss the
potential opportunities that we’re being explored throughout the project.
One of the key aims from the session was to try and further explore the direct consumer benefits
cases that the project may unlock, these included; a potential to increase capacity on the local
electricity network by reducing NGN’s reliance, increase resilience of the gas supply to the area by
exploring the ability to take site operations ‘Off-Grid’ and explore additional scenarios such as the
capability to deploy local EV charging points at an increased rate as a direct result of the extra network
capacity.
User Needs

In order to understand the current challenges around the monitoring of the NGN infrastructure, integration of
the RTT turbine into the NGNs gas network and instrumentation of the RTT turbine, Digital Catapult organised a
series of workshops and interview sessions with key stakeholders from NGN and RTT.
The workshops also involved carrying out a Site Visit at 4 AGIs in the Stockton-on-Tees area to understand
existing site set ups and components across a variety of pressure regimes, these site visits enabled RTT & Digital
Catapult to further understand NGNs current position and to understand NGNs digitalisation needs for the future.
Ways of Working

Only 2 of the sites had an existing electricity network connection, these higher-
pressure sites are operated and monitored remotely at NGN’s System Control,
therefore a resilient energy supply is essential, from historical usage, NGN’s
energy usage for the sites are approximately 58,000kWh per annum.
If the same logic is applied network wide, to NGN’s 23 NTS Offtake Sites, an
overall indicative cost saving of £230k per annum could be achieved if all 23 sites
could be powered using energy generated by the RTT mETS.
The initial maximum output of the Turbine was previously tested to 1kW and
therefore would not be able to reasonably achieve the future power outputs
without additional development and financial investment. At such energy
outputs, a whole system integration strategy for use with the Turbine would not
be possible to deliver any meaningful benefits for consumers. Discussions with
NPG identified energy outputs would be required in the range of 50kW+ to offer
any substantial benefit to the network. However, there could be potential benefit
in terms of relieving demand on the grid by self-generating power for NGN
operations, if the Turbine’s output was expanded further.
Decarbonisation & Cost Benefit Value
Throughout NGN’s area, which encompasses approximately 4000 deployment opportunities, delivering varied energy outputs, NGN may be
able to operate as low scale system balancer for the Electricity Network during periods of peak demand, further work is required to
understand the opportunity as this requires analysis of gas/electricity demand correlation as this will inform a forecast for potential power
generation by NGN vs. Local DNO requirements.

To date there have been no commercial or regulatory constraints
identified, the technical limitation of the Turbine is due to existing
prototypes having only been tested to deliver an output of 1kW.
Achieving maximum power yield from a single turbine can be achieved
in incremental steps through product development with the ambition
of achieving power yields within the 10kW to 20kW range future
development & investment.
For high pressure, intermediate to medium pressure regimes, bypass
systems with one or more turbines yielding greater combined power
outputs (above 50kW) could be designed that can be independently
operated by a control system located outside of hazardous zones. The
control system could be part of the power electronics, initially designed
in the form of a PLC during the development phase allowing for
flexibility and progressing to a PCB micro control-based system for
production lowering costs significantly. The power management system
element could control feed and use of the generated 3-Phase AC Net
Zero electricity.
For medium to low pressure opportunities, the technical requirements
from a regulatory & standards aspect significantly lower turbine and
system costs to enable deployment.
Challenges

The Discovery Phase evaluated the potential energy generation
volumes vs. the existing demand at four NGN locations. The phase
demonstrated how by reducing energy consumption on these sites,
NGN could expect reasonable energy bill savings, which could be
passed onto consumers.
A high-level assessment was carried out to evaluate installation &
whole life costs of developing & deploying the system on the gas
networks. At this point it was identified that significant time and
investment would be required to ensure compliance with Gas
Industry Standards and to enable the power generation output to
be scaled up to a point whereby forecasted energy use reduction
and cost savings could be realised, on this basis the decision was
made not to progress to an Alpha Phase utilising SIF as the funding
mechanism as it didn’t appear to offer value for money to
consumers at this time.
NGN are continuing to work closely with RTT to understand other
potential routes to market and assess other suitable funding
streams.
Look Ahead
This phase has been extremely beneficial in terms of
identifying routes for NGN to decarbonise its
network operations by identifying the minimum
required renewable generation to achieve net zero.

With the support of Digital Catapult, the project will aim explore the opportunities
& capacity to capture, analyse & share the operational information & data
associated with deployment of the mETS solution.
A key part of Northern Gas Networks operating strategy is to enable innovation by
digitalisation, this can take many forms; but a primary focus is for NGN to increase
the granularity of its datasets, specifically across pressure monitoring & control.
Deploying greater volumes and more advanced pressure monitoring solutions will
increase the required power inputs to operate such devices, therefore a solution
such as mETS provides opportunity to directly support digitalisation of NGNs assets,
whilst helping to minimise the size & scale of infrastructure changes for both NGN,
NPG & local communities.
A further point to consider is that by NGN increasing the volumes of data it is able
to collect on how the Gas Distribution Network is operated, not only today but into
the future, this will enable greater transparency and openness through data
sharing with it’s partners, such as NPG and our local communities.
Whole System Transition, Interoperability &
Digitalisation

Discovery Phase
Excess Gas Turbine Energy Generation
Any Questions?

Asset Reuse and Recovery
Collaboration (ARRC)
Claire Roxburgh, SP Energy Networks
Edward Dutton, Frazer-Nash Consultancy

60
Asset Reuse Recovery Collaboration
(ARRC)
Claire Roxburgh, SP Energy Networks
Edward Dutton, Frazer-Nash

61
The
Challenge
How can UK energy infrastructure address the common challenges
of the climate emergency and safeguard the earths resources?
In transitioning to a circular economy, what solutions are needed to
keep assets in use for as long as possible at as high a value as
possible?
Is the best environmental solution to keep legacy assets in use or to
replace with new?
How can circular solutions provide value to customers, the
environment and the green economy?
Electricity demand could grow by over 70% owing to the rapid
increase in electrification of heat, transport and industry. Over 85%
of electrical asset producers (surveyed by BEAMA) expect to scale
up their production by over 20%. How can this be done
sustainably?

62
Linear
Yesterday
ARRC Circular
Tomorrow
Design
Production &
Manufacturing
Asset use
End of first life
Resource
Exchange
Mechanism
MAKE > USE > DISPOSE
Refurbishment
and recovery
centre
Secondary
Reuse/
Remanufacturing
Markets
Raw
materials
Deconstruction
/ Recovery
Remanufacture/
Long Life/ Service
Models
ARRC Overview

63
Problem
Investigation:
Engagement
 32 interviews with teams across the energy system to identify
current practice, opportunities and challenges: including Asset
Management, Sustainability, Procurement, Standards, Generators
(SPR) and Wider Industry (BEAMA, Network Rail, UKRI Circular
Economy, Zero Waste Scotland)
 Value chain workshop with BEAMA members to establish current
maturity in circularity and embodied carbon data
 Presentations to Major Infrastructure Re-use Optimisation Group
(MIROG) and Scottish Infrastructure Circular Economy Forum
 Communication to the Energy Networks Association and Energy
Innovation Centre members
 3 Steering Group meetings to approve and challenge
assumptions and approach

64
 Research on circular practices outside the partner
organisations was carried out, identifying notable good
practice from each part of the CE pyramid.
 This information was used to help inform enablers of
circular economic interventions.
Re-Mine
(BAU)
Refurbish/Remanufacture
Reuse/Redistribute
Maintain/Prolong
Share (Service Model)
Recycle
Refuse/Reduce (Re-Design)
Recover
Wider Industry Trends

© Frazer-Nash Consultancy Ltd. All rights reserved.
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
Opportunities Identified – Strategic, holistic, whole systems approach
Resource Exchange Mechanism (REMs)
Toolchains which allow for the effective
exchange of surplus resources
CE Intervention Centre
A facility which allows for collaborative
workshopping of CE activity
Policy Interventions
Systemic solutions which enable the
development of circular economic activity.
CE Asset Management Framework
Development of an asset management framework which promotes the use of CE activity
CE Asset Investment Framework
Development of new KPIs and design gates to further consider whole-lifecycle cost to better inform investments
Standardised Carbon Calculator Tool Development
Further development of a standardised carbon calculator tool in collaboration with the partners and supply chain.
Common Failures (and Maintenance) System Development
Further development between partners and supply chain to communicate failures (and maintenance) data
Asset Health Monitoring and Sharing Development
Further development of data usage from the NARM framework to enable more informed decision making
Enablers
Proposed Solutions
System Enablers
Aid management of assets
and enable greater CE
activity.
Strategic Enablers
Development of internal
policy and strategies which
encourage CE interventions.
Toolchain Enablers
Enable greater
understanding of assets
and CE potential.
Secondary Reuse Market and Waste Destinations Potential
A study on the potential for a secondary reuse market of assets
Spares Management System Development
Further development of a spares management and assurance system

© Frazer-Nash Consultancy Ltd. All rights reserved.
WP1:
Project
Manag
ement
WP2:
Substation
Selection &
Decomposition
WP3: Enabler
Definition &
Development
WP4: Enabler
Substation
Analysis
WP5: Resource
Exchange
Mechanism
WP6: Circular
Economic
Intervention Centre
T2.1 Substation
Decomposition
T2.2 Substation
Taxonomy &
Definition
SSE
Frazer-Nash
Consultancy
AECOM SPR
SPEN
Distribution
T3.1 Circular Asset Investment Framework
T3.2 Circular Asset Management Framework
T3.4 Asset Health Monitoring Upgrade Feasibility
T3.5 Spares Management Requirements Capture
T3.6 Common Failures (and Maintenance) System Development
T3.7 Wider CE Market Analysis
T3.8 Secondary Use Market & Waste Destination Potential
T3.9 Generation Requirements and Systems Inclusion
T4.1 Enabler Substation Analysis
T4.2 Market SWOT & PESTLE
Analysis
T4.3 Cost Benefit Analysis
T4.4 Carbon Impact and Risk
Assessment
T4.5 Consumer Benefit
Assessment
Requirements
Gathering
Functional Design
Development
Beta Solutions
Policy
Interventions
Resource
Exchange
Mechanism (REM)
Circular Economic
Intervention
Centre
SPEN
Transmission
WP/Task Leads
Responsible for the technical support and delivery of the respective WPs and tasks.
T3.3 Standardised Carbon Calculator Tool Adoption
Activities - Alpha to Beta to BaU
BaU

68
Sustainability
Carbon
Resource consumption
Cost
Reduce new assets
purchased
Increased reuse and
secondary value
Economic
Circular economy
= UK growth
Government Priorities
Net Zero
Resilience
Availability of spares
Refurbished assets ready to use
Reduced geopolitical procurement impact
Benefits

Q&A – Whole systems Integration challenge
4. Excess gas turbine energy generation
5. Asset Reuse and Recovery Collaboration (ARRC)

Other Show and Tells
Whole System Integration – this afternoon 13:00 – 15:30
Increasing flexibility sources in energy system and Hydrogen
deployment and integration
Registration page will be shared in
the chat
https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/ofge
m-sif-round-1-discovery-show-and-
tells-259469?utm-
campaign=social&utm-
content=attendeeshare&utm-
medium=discovery&utm-
term=odclsxcollection&utm-
source=cp&aff=odclsxcollection

Now Open for Ideas - Ofgem’s Strategic Innovation Fund
A £450m fund for large scale electricity and gas energy network innovation
Each challenge area has key themes which must be addressed. The projects
against these can be technical, social, commercial and/or market innovations.
Supporting a just energy transition
Preparing for a net zero power
system
Improving energy system resilience
and robustness
Accelerating decarbonisation of
major demands
Inclusivity, accessibility, and cost of
living crisis
A fully decarbonised power system by
2035
Energy security and energy system
durability
Decarbonisation of heat, transport,
and buildings
Round 2 Challenges
Supporting
Launch Events – Wednesday 25 May 11:00 – 12:30 and 13:30 – 15:00
Check out the link in the chat

Thank you

Show and Tell - Renewable Energy integration and Circular Economy.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Show and Tell - Renewable Energy integration and Circular Economy.pdf

Similar to Show and Tell - Renewable Energy integration and Circular Economy.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Show and Tell - Renewable Energy integration and Circular Economy.pdf