Spalding Energy Expansion · 2019-11-13 · Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL Issue 3 64C13376 DCS...

Spalding Energy Expansion

Environmental Statement

Main Report

Volume 2

Spalding Energy Expansion Limited

Environmental Statement Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL

64C13376 Issue: 3

SEEL Environmental Statement


64C13376 Issue: 7 i

PrefaceEnvironmental Statement & Other Documents

This ES, prepared under the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000, accompanies an application (the application) by SEEL (the applicant) to DECC for Section 36 Consent under the Electricity Act 1989 for up to a nominal 900 MW CCGT Power Station in Spalding, Lincolnshire. The ES comprises three volumes:

• Volume 1: NTS;

• Volume 2: Main Report; and

• Volume 3: Technical Appendices.

Additional documentation that will be submitted with the application for Section 36 Consent includes:

• Design & Access Statement;

• Planning Statement;

• Statement of Community Involvement;

• Transport Statement (Appended to the ES);

• Flood Risk Assessment (Appended to the ES);

• Landscape and Visual Assessment (Appended to the ES);

• CCR Assessment; and

• CHP Assessment.

Notification

Regulation 11 of the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 ensures that the relevant consultative bodies are consulted by providing for the applicant to serve on them a copy of the Section 36 consent application, any plan and the ES.

At the same time the applicant will advertise the application and the ES for two successive weeks in the London Gazette, the Spalding Guardian, the Lincolnshire Free Press and for one week in a national newspaper, in accordance with Regulation 9 of the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000. The public may make representations to the Secretary of State on the application within 28 days of the date the notice last appeared in the newspapers.

The consent application, including the ES and associated documents, will be available for viewing at the following locations:

South Holland District Council

Council Offices

Priory Road

Spalding

Lincolnshire

PE11 2XE

Opening hours: Monday/Tuesday/Thursday 8.30 - 17.15, Wednesday 9.00 - 17.15, Friday 8.30 - 16.45

Lincolnshire County Council

Council Offices

Newland

Lincoln

LN1 1YL

Opening hours: Monday to Thursday 8.45-17.15, Friday 8.45-16.45

Spalding Library

Victoria Street

Spalding

Lincolnshire

PE11 1EA

Opening hours: Monday/Friday 9.00 - 18.00, Tuesday/Wednesday 9.00 - 19.00, Thursday 9.00 - 14.00, Saturday 9.00 - 16.00

The South Holland Centre

Market Place

Spalding

Lincolnshire

PE11 1SS

Opening hours: 9.30am – 8.30pm Monday to Saturday


ii Issue 7 64C13376

Pinchbeck Study Centre and Library

48 Knight Street

Pinchbeck

Spalding

Lincolnshire

PE11 3RB

Opening hours: Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday

10.00 – 16.00

An electronic version of the consent application reports, including the ES, will be available to download from http://www.spaldingenergy.co.uk. Paper copies of the NTS and main report can be requested from ENVIRON UK Ltd at 7 Walker Street, Edinburgh, EH3 7JY. Copies of the NTS are available free of charge; the Main Report and Technical Appendices can be purchased on CD for £5 or in paper form at a cost of £250.



64C13376 Issue: 7

Table of Contents Abbreviations

1 Introduction Introduction

Development Context

Planning Context

Application Details

Applicant

The Project Team

Structure of the Environmental Statement

2 EIA Process and Methodology EIA Process

Regulatory Context

Screening

Scoping and Consultation

EIA Methodology

The Environmental Statement

3 Alternatives and Design Evolution Introduction

Consideration of Alternatives

Consideration of Alternatives – Infrastructure Connections

Summary

4 Development Description Introduction

Section 36 Consent Application

Land Use

Access and Traffic Movements

Landscaping

Plant and Process Description

Operation and Maintenance

Description of Operational Residues and Emissions

5 Construction Introduction

Construction Programme

Description of Works

Construction and Contracting Strategy

Construction Employment

Hours of Work

Construction Plant and Equipment

Construction Traffic

Material and Resource Use

Construction Waste

Testing and Commissioning

Potential Construction Phase Environmental Impacts

6 Environmental Management Introduction

Construction Environmental Management Controls

Scope of Construction Environmental Management and Mitigation

Construction Health and Safety Management

Operational Environmental Management Controls

Summary

7 Landscape and Visual Introduction

Legislation and Policy Context

Issues Identified During Consultation

Assessment Methodology

Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment

Schedule of Mitigation & Monitoring Measures

Summary

References


Issue 7 64C13376

8 Transport and Access Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment

Committed Development

Monitoring Measures


Summary

References

9 Noise and Vibration Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment


Summary

References

10 Air Quality Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment

Schedule of Monitoring Measures

Schedule of Mitigation Measures

Summary

References

11 Ground Conditions Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment


Summary

References

12 Water Resources and Flood Risk Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment


Summary

References

13 Ecology Introduction






64C13376 Issue: 7

Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment


Summary

References

14 Socio-economics Introduction




Baseline Conditions

Potential Impacts

Mitigation

Impact Assessment


Summary

References

15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects Introduction

Structure

Part 1 – Description of Associated Infrastructure and Developments

Part 2 – Baseline Conditions

Part 3 – Indirect and Secondary Effects

Part 4 – Likely impacts of the Rand and Howtin Development

Part 5 – Type 1 Cumulative Impacts

Part 6 - Type 2 Cumulative Impacts

Summary


64C13376 Issue: 3

SEEL Environmental Statement: Abbreviations


64C13376 Issue: 3

AbbreviationsAADT Annual Average Daily Traffic

AC Alternating Current

ACC Air Cooled Condenser

ACE Association for Consultancy and Engineering

ACM Asbestos Containing Materials

ADMS Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System

AGI Above Ground Installation

AIS Air-Insulated Substation

AIEEM Associate member of Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

AL Advisory Leaflet

AOD Above Ordnance Datum

APIS Air Pollution Information System

AQM Air Quality Monitoring

AQMA Air Quality Management Areas

AQMAU Air Quality Modelling and Assessment Unit

AQO Air Quality Objective

AQS Air Quality Strategy

AQTAG Air Quality Technical Advisory Guidance

ARCADY Assessment of Roundabout Capacity And Delay

ATC Automatic Traffic Counts

AURN Automatic Urban and Rural Network

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BAT Best Available Techniques

BERR Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform

bgl Below Ground Level

BGS British Geological Survey

BITS Business Impact Tracking System

BOD Biological Oxygen Demand

BoP Balance of Plant

BPA British Pipeline Agency

BPM Best Practicable Means

BRE Building Research Establishment

BREEAM BRE Environmental Assessment Method

BS British Standard

BSSSC British Sugar Sports and Social Club

°C Celsius, degrees

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

CBC Common Birds Census

CCA Countryside Character Area

CCGT Combined Cycle Gas Turbine

CCR Carbon Capture Ready

CCS Carbon Capture and Storage

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CDM Construction Design Management

CECA Civil Engineering Contractors Association

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

CEMS Continuous Emission Monitoring System

CFC Chlorofluorocarbon

CH4 Methane

CHP Combined Heat and Power

CHPA Combined Heat and Power Association

CIP Close Interval Potential

CIRIA Construction Industry Research and Information Association

CLG Community Liaison Group

CMLI Chartered Member of the Landscape Institute

CO Carbon Monoxide

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

COSHH Control of Substances Hazardous to Health

CRoW Countryside Rights of Way

CTG Combustion Turbine Generator

CTMP Construction Traffic Management Plan

dB Decibels

DC Direct Current

DCLG Department of Communities and Local Government

DCO Development Consent Order

Environmental Statement: Abbreviations Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL

Issue 3 64C13376

DCS Distributed Control System

DCVG Direct Current Voltage Gradient

DDF Depth-Duration-Frequency

DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change

DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DfT Department for Transport

DLN Dry Low NOX

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

DOT Department Of Transport

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

EA Environment Agency

EAL Environmental Assessment Limit

EAP Environmental Action Plan

EC European Council

EHD Environmental Health Department

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ELC European Landscape Convention

ELO Environmental Liaison Officer

EMDA East Midlands Development Agency

EMP Environmental Monitoring Plan

EMRA East Midlands Regional Assembly

EMRP East Midlands Regional Plan

EMS Environmental Management System

EP Environmental Permit

EPA Environmental Protection Act

EPARP Emergency Preparedness And Response Plan

EPI Environmental Performance Indicator

EPR Environmental Permit Regulations

EPS European Protected Species

EPUK Environmental Protection UK

ERP Emergency Response Plan

ES Environmental Statement

ESP Electrostatic Precipitator

ETS Emissions Trading Scheme

EU European Union

EWC European Waste Catalogue

FEH Flood Estimation Handbook

FGD Flue Gas Desulphurisation

FID Flame Ionisation Detector

FRA Flood Risk Assessment

FTE Full Time Equivalent

g gram

g/MWh gram per megawatt hour

g/s gram per second

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GL Ground Level

GLVIA Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

GRF Gas Reception Facility

GQA General Quality Assessment

GW Gigawatt

GWh Gigawatt hours

H2S Hydrogen Sulphide

ha Hectares

HAZOP Hazard and Operability

HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon

HFC Hydrofluorocarbon

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle

HMSO Her Majesty’s Stationery Office

HPA Health Protection Agency

HRSG Heat Recovery Steam Generator

HSE Health, Safety and Environment

IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

IEA Institute of Environmental Assessment

IHT Institution of Highways and Transportation

ILE Institution of Lighting Engineers

InterGen InterGen NV, its subsidiaries and affiliates

IOA Institute Of Acoustics

IPC Integrated Pollution Control

IPPC Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control

ISO International Standards Organisation

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature

JSA Job Seekers Allowance

K Kelvin

keq/ha/yr A measure of acidification per hectare per year

SEEL Environmental Statement: Abbreviations


64C13376 Issue: 3

kg/ha/yr Kilograms per hectare per year

kV Kilovolt

km Kilometre

km2 Kilometre, square

KPI Key Performance Indicator

L/s Litres per second

LAAPC Local Air Authority Pollution Control

LAQM Local Air Quality Management

LBAP Lincolnshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan

LCA Landscape Character Area

LCC Lincolnshire County Council

LCPD Large Combustion Plants Directive

LCT Landscape Character Type

LDF Local Development Framework

LGV Large Goods Vehicle

LHMP Landscape and Habitat Management Plan

LNR Local Nature Reserve

LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas

LSP Lincolnshire Structure Plan

LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

m Metre

m2 Metre, square

m3 Metre, cubic

m3/day Metre, cubic per day

m3/s Metre, cubic per second

mg Milligrams

mg/l Milligrams per litre

mg/m3 Milligrams per cubic metre

mg/Nm3 Milligrams per normal cubic metre

mm Millimetres

mm/s Millimetres per second

mAOD Metres Above Ordnance Datum

MAPP Major Accident Prevention Plan

MCC Manual Classified Counts

MEA Monoethanolamine

MIAQM Member of the Institute of Air Quality Management

MIEEM Member of Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

MoD Ministry of Defence

MOF Minimum Offtake Facility

Mt Million Tonnes

MW Megawatt

MWh Megawatt Hours

MWth Megawatt Thermal

NATS National Air Traffic Services

NBN National Biodiversity Network

NCR National Cycle Route

NE Natural England

NER New Entrant Reserve

NGET National Grid Electricity Transmission

NGG National Grid Gas

NHS National Health Service

NiCd Nickel-cadmium

Nitrogen/ha/yr Nitrogen per hectare per year

NO Nitrogen Oxide

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOX Oxides of Nitrogen

NRTF National Road Traffic Forecasts

NSI National Significant Infrastructure

NSCA National Society of Clean Air

NTS Non-Technical Summary

NPS National Policy Statement

NVZ Nitrate Vulnerable Zone

OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer

Ofgem Office of the Gas and Electricity Markets

OS Ordnance Survey

PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon

PAN Planning Advice Note

PB Parsons Brinckerhoff

PC Process Contribution

PCPA Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act

pH Potential Hydrogen (a measure of how acidic or alkaline a substance is)

PICADY Priority Intersection Capacity And Delay

Environmental Statement: Abbreviations Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL

Issue 3 64C13376

pig Pipeline Inspection Gauge

PM2.5 Fine particles of 2.5 micrometres or less in aerodynamic diameter

PM10 Fine particles of 10 micrometres or less in aerodynamic diameter

PPC Pollution, Prevention and Control

PPG Planning Policy Guidance

PPP Pollution Prevention Plan

PPS Planning Policy Statement

ppv Peak Particle Velocity

PR Progress Report

QC Queen’s Counsel

QRA Quantitative Risk Assessment

RAZ Rural Action Zone

RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

RSS Regional Spatial Strategy

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SAM Scheduled Ancient Monument

SBA Savell Bird & Axon

SCP Site Closure Plan

SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction

SEE Spalding Energy Expansion

SEEL Spalding Energy Expansion Limited

SECL Spalding Energy Company Limited

SF6 Sulphur Hexafluoride

SFRA Specific Flood Risk Assessment

SHDC South Holland District Council

SHLP South Holland Local Plan

SLNCI Site of Local Nature Conservation Interest

SLR Single-Lens Reflex

SNCI Site of Nature Conservation Interest

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide

SO3 Sulphur Trioxide

SOX Oxides of Sulphur

SOP Standard Operating Procedures

SPA Special Protected Area

SPG Strategic Planning Guidance

SPZ Source Protection Zone

SSI Site Specific Investigation

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

STG Steam Turbine Generator

SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems

SVOC Semi-Volatile Organic Compound

SWMP Site Waste Management Plan

T Tonnes

TA Traffic Assessment

TG Technical Guidance

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TRL Transport Research Laboratory

TRRL Transport and Road Research Laboratory

UCWI Urban Catchment Wetness Index

UK United Kingdom

USA Updating and Screening Assessment

µg/m3 Micrograms per cubic metre

µgm-3 Micrograms per cubic metre

µm Micrometre

VAT Value Added Tax

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

w/w Weight By Weight

WCA Wildlife and Countryside Act

WDIDB Welland and Deepings Internal Drainage Board

WFD Water Framework Directive

WHO World Health Organisation

WMP Water Management Plan

ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility



64C13376 Issue:7 1-1

1 IntroductionIntroduction

1.1 This ES, prepared under the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000, accompanies an application (the application) by SEEL (the applicant) to DECC for Section 36 Consent under the Electricity Act 1989 for up to a nominal 900 MW CCGT Power Station in Spalding, Lincolnshire (see Figure 1.1).

1.2 The proposed power station will be an expansion of SECL’s existing power station and is to be known as the ‘SEE’ or the ‘proposed SEE’. The proposed SEE, to be constructed adjacent to the existing power station, will be owned and operated by SEEL, an affiliate of SECL. SECL and SEEL are part of the InterGen group. InterGen is a global power generation company with plants located in the UK, the Netherlands, Mexico, the Philippines and Australia.

1.3 In accordance with the draft Directive on the Geological Storage of CO2, which was published by the EC in January 2008 and finalised in December 20081 and which aims to facilitate the deployment of CCS, the proposed SEE is to be CCR enabling it to be capable of being retrofitted with technology for the capture of CO2.

1.4 In order to provide the proposed SEE with a gas supply, it will be necessary to construct a new gas pipeline approximately 8 km in length and an AGI linking the proposed SEE with the Gas National Transmission System located to the north east, near Wragg Marsh. The pipeline will be subject to a separate planning application made to SHDC and will be accompanied by a separate ES. The gas pipeline is assessed in combination with the proposed SEE in Chapter 15: Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

1.5 The electricity generated by the proposed SEE will require transmission by a new 400 kV overhead transmission line to the National Grid, including construction of new transmission towers for which an application accompanied by a separate ES will be made by NGET to DECC for Section 37 consent under the Electricity Act 1989. The transmission line is assessed in combination with the proposed SEE in Chapter 15: Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

Terminology

1.6 For the purposes of this report, the following distinctions are made:

• the ‘proposed SEE site’ will refer to the area of land to the south of the existing SECL power station and NGET substation, where it is intended to construct the proposed SEE and a corridor within the existing SECL power station site (see below) to enable pipework, cabling and road access interconnections (see Figure 1.2). For ease of reference, Figures shown in subsequent Chapters do not show the corridor of interconnections, however the associated likely environmental impacts of these interconnections are assessed within the technical chapters where relevant (see Chapters 7 – 15); and,

1 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide and amending Council Directives 85/337/EEC, 96/61/EC, Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006; COM 2008 (18 final); 2008/0015 final; Brussels, 23.01.2008.

• the ‘existing SECL power station site’ refers to the developed area of land located to the north of the NGET Substation, together with the GRF located on the eastern side of West Marsh Road (see Figure 1.2).

Development Context

Site Location

1.7 The proposed SEE site is located approximately 2 km to the north east of Spalding town centre, Lincolnshire at National Grid Reference TF 259 249 (Figure 1.1), comprising a total area of approximately 13 ha. The locations of the proposed SEE and existing SECL power station sites are shown on Figure 1.2. Both parcels of land were occupied formerly by a sugar factory, which was owned and operated by British Sugar plc, prior to demolition in 1996. The red line application boundary is shown on Figure 1.3.

1.8 The existing SECL power station site comprises the following:

• existing SECL power station (7 ha);

• NGET substation (2 ha)2; and

• land to the east of West Marsh Road (1 ha).

1.9 The proposed SEE will be located to the south of the existing NGET substation. The northern part of the proposed SEE site comprises made ground in the form of a large flat-topped mound (the Mound) up to 4 m above ground level. The Mound is formed from washings from the former sugar beet settlement lagoons that were relocated from the site of the existing SECL power station at the time of its construction (see paragraphs 1.19 -1.24 below). Four storage tents, used during the construction phase of the existing SECL power station, are located in the north west corner of the proposed SEE site. A disused office block, a group of buildings and a bowling green owned by SECL, which is subject to a short term lease to the BSSSC, are located in the north east corner of the proposed SEE site. The southern extent of the proposed SEE site is vacant grassland.

1.10 Primary access to the existing SECL power station site is from West Marsh Road immediately before it bridges Vernatt’s Drain.

Surrounding Land Use

1.11 The immediately surrounding land use is predominantly industrial, with some residential properties located further afield. The wider area is predominantly rural. The land uses adjacent to the proposed SEE site are as follows:

2 The substation land is owned by SECL and has been leased to NGET for 99 years from 4 March 2002.


1-2 Issue 7: 64C13376

• to the north is the NGET Substation and existing SECL power station site, beyond which is a sewage treatment works operated by Anglian Water. Across West Marsh Road to the north east lies the GRF for the existing SECL power station, and some local authority offices;

• to the east is West Marsh Road, with the River Welland and associated flood defences located beyond; further east across the River Welland is agricultural land with occasional housing;

• to the south east lies Springfields Shopping Centre and the Festival Gardens. The residential area of Fulney is located approximately 400 m to the east;

• to the south is undeveloped industrial land, with industrial buildings located beyond comprising a mixture of commercial buildings and vehicle parking;

• to the west is Vernatt’s Drain and associated flood defences, a man-made drainage channel designed as a flood prevention measure. A public footpath runs along the eastern side of Vernatt’s Drain, adjacent to the proposed SEE site; and

• beyond Vernatt’s Drain to the west is vacant grassland and the Benner Road Industrial Estate comprising a mixture of industrial premises, including some associated with food storage, processing and distribution. Further to the north west, over Wardentree Lane, land use includes a factory, various warehouses and business space.

1.12 Approximately 2 km to the south west of the proposed SEE site is Spalding town centre. The village of Pinchbeck is located approximately 2 km to the north west. The centres of Spalding and Pinchbeck are designated as Conservation Areas, containing a number of Listed Buildings. Some isolated residential properties are located to the east, beyond the River Welland, and a denser residential area of Spalding lies approximately 400 m to the south east.

1.13 Agriculture, horticulture and food processing industries represent the main land uses in the wider area.

1.14 The proposed SEE site lies adjacent to Vernatt’s Drain to the west and the River Welland lies 30 m to the east. There are a number of licensed surface water abstractions from these watercourses within 1 km of the proposed SEE site for general farming, domestic and spray irrigation purposes.

1.15 There are two statutory designated sites within a 5 km radius of the proposed SEE site (Figure 1.4):

• Surfleet Lows (SSSI): the SSSI is located approximately 3.5 km to the north; and

• Vernatt’s Nature Reserve (LNR): this LNR is located approximately 700 m to the south west.

1.16 There are also three non-statutory sites (SNCI) within a 2 km radius of the proposed SEE site comprising Vernatt’s Nature Reserve (see above), Spalding Cemetery (600 m to the south west) and Pinchbeck Marsh (1 km north) (Figure 1.4).

1.17 Further afield is Cowbit Wash (a Geological SSSI), located approximately 5 km to the south and Baston Fen SAC, situated approximately 15 km to the south west. Baston Fen SAC consists of a large drainage channel running alongside Baston Fen which is designated for its high densities of spined loach Cobitis taenia, a small bottom-living fish that has a restricted microhabitat associated with a specialised feeding mechanism and which has a restricted range in the UK. Surfleet Lows SSSI, a wet alluvial meadow, lies approximately 3.5km to the north west of the

proposed SEE site. Cross Drain SSSI lies approximately 15 km south west of the proposed SEE site. Cross Drain represents one of the best remaining fragments of fenland habitat in an area where no fenland remains. It is notable for supporting an exceptional beetle fauna including two national rarities and also contains a diverse aquatic flora including nationally scarce plants.

1.18 Approximately 15 km to the east lies The Wash, which is recognised at both international and national level. Under European legislation, it is designated as a SPA, due to its importance to over 20 wetland bird species, and a SAC as a result of its varied wetland habitat and because it supports the largest common seal (Phoca vitulina) colony in the UK. Encompassing all of these designations, The Wash and North Norfolk Coast has been designated a European Marine site. Additionally, the wetland habitats are recognised under the Ramsar Convention as providing a wetland of international importance by regularly supporting in excess of 20,000 birds. The Wash is designated a SSSI as a result of the variety of habitats and the fauna it supports, and it is also a EU Site of Community Importance3.

Site History

1.19 Historical OS maps of the area indicate that the proposed SEE site and existing SECL power station site were undeveloped and used as agricultural farm land until the establishment of the British Sugar factory in 1926. The 1888/89 OS map edition shows that a network of drains were present in the southern half of the proposed SEE site and existing SECL power station site. The 1932 map edition shows the “Anglo-Scottish Sugar Beet Factory” and associated infrastructure (including rail lines) in the centre of the proposed SEE site and existing SECL power station site and settling ponds, used for the washing of sugar beet, in the southern section of the proposed SEE site. A sewage works was present to the south east of the proposed SEE site.

1.20 By 1951, the settling ponds to the south of the factory site had expanded and occupied approximately 40% of the proposed SEE site, and the drainage network in the southern half of the site was no longer shown to be present. The 1968 OS map edition shows that the Beet Sugar factory comprised eleven circular structures resembling tanks, with two further tanks (which appear to be waste water treatment tanks) to the south of the factory. Sludge beds associated with the sewage works were present to the south east of the factory, and a playing field was located to the north east of the existing SECL power station site.

1.21 By 1988, the sludge beds had been replaced by settling ponds in the south east of the factory site, and two electrical sub stations were present adjacent to the factory. The rail lines were no longer depicted in the southern half of the proposed SEE site.

1.22 The British Sugar factory closed in 1994 and was demolished in 1996, and the 2000 OS map edition shows that the factory, settling ponds, sewage works and tanks were no longer present. The playing field was still present, along with a cluster of buildings to the east of the main factory site. The playing field and buildings have subsequently been demolished. During construction of the existing SECL power station, site works were undertaken to form a contractor’s laydown area. This involved the collection and storage of the former settling ponds in the northern part of the proposed SEE site (the Mound).

3 A Site of Community Importance (SCI) is defined in the European Commission Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) as a site which, in the biogeographical region or regions to which it belongs, contributes significantly to the maintenance or restoration at a favourable conservation status of a natural habitat type or of a species.



64C13376 Issue:7 1-3

1.23 The existing SECL power station was constructed between 2001 and 2004 and became operational on 1st October 2004. The infrastructure connections were established in November 2003 for electricity and January 2004 for gas.

1.24 The existing SECL power station uses CCGT technology to produce up to 880 MW of electricity for export to the National Grid and during 2007 is reported to have generated 4,852 GWh of electricity4. In 2008, it is reported that 5,301 GWh of electricity was generated5.

Environmental Sensitivity

1.25 The proposed SEE site lies within the designated flood plain of the River Welland, although it is protected by flood defences. The site has low ecological value itself, but Vernatt’s Drain to the west and the River Welland to the east, beyond West Marsh Road, provide river corridor habitat which is an important biodiversity resource (see Chapter 13 Ecology).

1.26 The proposed SEE site is brownfield but there is no evidence of significant soil contamination. However, ground gas (CH4 and CO2) is being generated at low flow rates, as a result of decomposition of organic material in the Mound. No significant risk associated with gas migration beyond the proposed SEE site boundary has been identified, and SEEL has developed a plan in consultation with the EA and SHDC to remove this spoil for off-site re-use as part of the enabling works for the proposed SEE (see also Chapter 5 Construction, Chapter 6 Environmental Management and Chapter 11 Ground Conditions).

1.27 Whilst the immediate surroundings of the proposed SEE site include large scale industry, the wider area is predominantly rural, and existing air quality is good. With the exception of the existing SECL power station, there is no major source of emissions evident within 1 km of the proposed SEE site, although low levels of emissions arise from local industrial sources and traffic.

1.28 The immediate landscape context of the proposed SEE site is the existing SECL power station and large scale industrial and distribution development. Beyond this the surrounding landscape is predominately rural and is traversed by a hierarchy of field dykes and roads creating a strong geometrical field pattern. The landscape is generally open and low-lying, however the flat and uniform topography means that localised undulations such as dyke embankments and shelterbelts intervene with long distant views. The area is generally sparsely populated; the open landscape being punctuated by isolated farmsteads.

Planning Context

Need for Development

1.29 This application is submitted by SEEL in line with national energy objectives. The UK Government predicts that the UK requires substantial investment in new electricity generating capacity as many old coal and nuclear plants are scheduled to retire and as energy demand grows over time, despite improvements in energy efficiency. A shortfall in electricity supply is

4 SECL (2007) Pollution Inventory Reporting Form

5 SECL (2008) Pollution Inventory Reporting Form

predicted by 2015, requiring new generating capacity to be provided in addition to that already under construction.

ENERGY MARKETS OUTLOOK 2008

1.30 The Energy Markets Outlook Report 20086 has been compiled by DECC and Ofgem to meet their obligations to report annually to Parliament on the availability of gas and electricity for meeting the reasonable demands of consumers in Great Britain, and to meet certain EU obligations to address security of supply.

1.31 The Report states that, as a consequence of the LCPD, a number of coal/oil generating plants will close before the end of 2015, resulting in a loss of around 12 GW of generating capacity and that, on current timetables, about 7.3 GW of nuclear generating capacity will close by 2020. Further, the proposed draft Industrial Emissions Directive could result in further UK coal plant operators having to choose between new technical upgrades and closure. It is therefore accepted that there is a need for replacement generating capacity and that to “maintain security of supply at similar levels to those existing”, will be a challenge; finally, in addition to the construction of new generating plant there will be a need for expansion and strengthening of the transmission network.

1.32 Government’s objective is to move towards a low carbon economy which, in the longer term, will require substantial investment in renewables with appropriate back up capacity to deal with intermittency. The Report also refers to the need for new nuclear plant and the role for CCS in relation to fossil fuel generation.

1.33 On the matter of gas supply to the UK, it is noted that there is a continuing need to invest in import and storage capacity, in particular the latter, while maximising the delivery of sources of supply. The Report also acknowledges that, while discussions on security of supply often focus on the risks of import dependency, these have historically not been the main causes of interruptions and these have instead been technical difficulties, adverse weather conditions, etc.

1.34 The Report concludes that future security of supply will be mainly determined by the market. The Government’s position is that it “considers that the best way to deal with future uncertainties is to ensure that the market has access to all the technologies and options available, encouraging a diverse and increasingly low-carbon energy mix”.

HEAT AND ENERGY SAVING STRATEGY CONSULTATION (FEBRUARY 2009)

1.35 The Heat and Energy Saving Strategy Consultation7 has been published as part of the strategy designed to increase energy saving measures, as well as “decarbonising the generation and supply of heat”. One of the key policy proposals is the encouragement of CHP and achieving better use of surplus heat through carbon pricing mechanisms.

THE ENERGY WHITE PAPER

1.36 The Energy White Paper8 sets out a vision for the UK to become a low carbon economy while achieving energy security, which will require investment in a diverse energy mix, including gas

6 DECC and Ofgem (December 2008) Energy Markets Outlook

7 DECC and Department of Communities and Local Government (February 2009) Heat and Energy Saving Strategy Consultation

8 DTI (2007): Meeting the Energy Challenge – A White Paper on Energy


1-4 Issue 7: 64C13376

fired generating plant. It acknowledges that the UK cannot rely on improvements in energy efficiency and renewable technologies alone, and will therefore need to continue to use fossil fuels as part of a diverse energy mix for some time to come. In 2006, the electricity generation mix was coal (37%), gas (36%), nuclear (18%) and renewables (4%), with the remainder coming from oil and imported electricity. There is a target for the UK to increase renewables to 20% by 2020; however it is recognised that fossil fuels will continue to be the dominant fuel source for the foreseeable future. The Energy White Paper emphasises that this diverse generation mix avoids exposure to the risks associated with heavy dependency on a single fuel or technology type, helping to maintain secure supplies of electricity. A diverse mix also provides the system with the flexibility to accommodate variations in demand throughout the year and at different times of the day.

1.37 The policies contained within the Energy White Paper recognise the continuing importance of fossil fuels but aim to:

• manage reliance by encouraging energy efficiency and renewable energy development; and

• mitigate the environmental effects associated with the use of fossil fuel.

1.38 A particular focus of this policy is the proposed adoption of technologies for CCS, when they prove technically and commercially feasible on a large scale.

1.39 CCS is a process by which the CO2 emitted when burning fossil fuels is captured, transported and then permanently stored in suitable geological formations. The European Commission and UK Government consider that CCS is indispensable for tackling the current unsustainable trends in global energy emissions. The technology for CCS is not yet proven commercially, and there are uncertainties still associated with this technology, especially on a large scale. Globally, experience with large volume CO2 storage is limited, in particular over the timescales required by CCS.

1.40 Further information about the planning policy context in which the proposed SEE is being brought forward is provided in the stand-alone Planning Statement submitted as part of the application; the planning policy context is summarised briefly below (paragraphs 1.43 – 1.48).

1.41 The proposed SEE will use the reliable and efficient CCGT technology to provide a supply of electricity to help meet the regional and national electricity demand. Much of the UK’s power generation is located in the north of England and Scotland, either in the vicinity of coal fields or on the coast where fuel supplies can be readily imported. This situation is much the same for many renewable forms of generation, including wind farms and hydroelectric plant which are generally situated in more remote locations. However, the main electricity demand is in the south of England, particularly in London.

1.42 Currently, electricity is transported to these areas of high demand via transmission lines belonging to NGET. As demand increases, more or larger transmission lines are required as the need to reinforce/enlarge the capacity of the system arises. An alternative to this reinforcement is to generate more electricity in the areas where it is needed, reducing the need for long power lines and lowering transmission losses. Transmission losses can amount to a significant quantity of the electricity generated – according to NGET9, the relative effect of locating a power station

9 NGET, (2008) GB Seven Year Statement 2008, based on winter peak demand case.

in Spalding (in East England), as opposed to in the north of Scotland, is a benefit of 8% compared to a loss of at least 10% (see Table 1.1 below). Thus Spalding’s location relatively close to the south east of England presents an excellent opportunity to generate electricity near an area of high demand.

Table 1.1: Effectiveness of Power Generation across Britain

Zone name Percentage effectiveness

N Scotland -10%

Central Scotland -6%

S Scotland -3%

NE England +1%

NW England and N Wales +3%

E England +8%

Midlands +1%

Anglia +7%

S Wales and Central England +10%

London +7%

Thames Estuary +5%

S Coast +3%

SW England +4%

Planning Policy Context

1.43 The PCPA 2004 states that “If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise” (Section 38(6)). In England, the development plan is the RSS for the region in which the site is situated and the development plan documents adopted or approved by the relevant planning authority in relation to the site in question (Section 38(3)).

1.44 In this matter, the development plan comprises the EMRP 2009 and the SHLP 2006. SHDC is developing its replacement LDF and has requested that certain policies in the SHLP be saved beyond July 2009 pending the introduction of the LDF.

1.45 The main policies in the respective plans relevant to the proposed SEE are described in Table 1.2 below.



64C13376 Issue:7 1-5

Table 1.2: Relevant Planning Policies

Plan Policies

South Holland Local Plan, July 2006

SG1 (General Sustainable Development), SG2 (Distribution of Development), SG3 (Settlement Hierarchy), SG6 (Community Infrastructure and Impact Assessment), SG7 (Energy Efficiency),SG11 (Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS)); SG12 (Sewerage and Development); SG13 (Pollution and Contamination), SG14 (Design and Layout of New Development), SG15 (New Development: Facilities for Road Users, Pedestrians and Cyclists), SG16 (Parking Standards in New Development), SG17 (Protection of Residential Amenity); SG18 (Landscaping of New Development), EC1 (Major Employment Areas – Sites Allocated for Employment Uses), EC3 (Existing Employment Areas/Premises), EN1A (Development and Sites of Local Biodiversity Interest), LT2 (Safeguarding Open Space for Sport, Recreation and Leisure); LT3 (Recreational Routes, Public Rights-of-Way); TC2 (Cycling, Cycleways)

East Midlands Regional Plan 2009

1 (Regional Core Objectives), 2 (Promoting Better Design), 3 (Distribution of New Development), 4 (Development in the Eastern Sub-area), 5 (Strategy for Lincolnshire Coastal Districts), 6 (Overcoming Peripherality in the Eastern Sub-area),18 (Regional Priorities for the Economy), 19 (Regional Priorities for Regeneration), 20 (Regional Priorities for Employment Land), 25 (Regional Priorities for ICT), 26 (Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Heritage), 27 (Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment), 28 (Regional Priorities for Environmental and Green Infrastructure), 29 (Priorities for Enhancing the Region’s Biodiversity), 31 (Priorities for the Management and Enhancement of the Region’s Landscape), 32 (A Regional Approach to Water Resources and Water Quality), 33 (Regional Priorities for Strategic River Corridors), 34 (Priorities for the Management of the Lincolnshire Coast), 35 (A Regional Approach to Managing Flood Risk), 36 (Regional Priorities for Air Quality), 38 (Regional Priorities for Waste Management), 39 (Regional Priorities for Energy Reduction and Efficiency), 40 (Regional Priorities for Low Carbon Energy Generation), 41 (Regional Priorities for Culture, Sport and Recreation), 43 (Regional Transport Objectives), 44 (Sub-area Transport Objectives), 45 (Regional Approach to Traffic Growth Reduction), 46 (A Regional Approach to Behavioural Change), 48 (Regional Car Parking Standards), 49 (A Regional Approach to Improving Public Transport Accessibility).

1.46 Government Planning Policy is derived from various sources, in this matter:

• PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development;

• PPS1 - Planning and Climate Change – Supplement to PPS1;

• PPG4 - Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms (and draft PPS4);

• PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas;

• PPS9 - Biodiversity and Geological Conservation;

• PPS10 - Planning for Sustainable Waste Management;

• PPS11 - Regional Spatial Strategies;

• PPS12 - Local Spatial Planning;

• PPG13 - Transport;

• PPG14 - Development on Unstable Land;

• PPG15 - Planning and the Historic Environment;

• PPG16 - Archaeology and Planning;

• PPS22 - Renewable Energy;

• PPS23 - Planning and Pollution Control;

• PPG24 - Planning and Noise; and

• PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk.

1.47 Government Energy Policy is contained in the following documents.

• Our Energy Future - Creating a Low Carbon Economy” Cm 5761 (DTI Energy White Paper - 2003);

• “The Government’s Strategy for Combined Heat and Power for 2010” (DEFRA CHP Strategy – 2004); and

• “UK Climate Change Programme” 2006, 2007, 2008;

• “The Energy Challenge – Energy Review” (2006) Cm 6887;

• “Meeting the Energy Challenge Cm 7124” (A White Paper on Energy – 2007);

• “Energy Markets Outlook 2008”; and

• “Towards Carbon Capture and Storage – Consultation June 2008”

1.48 Other relevant considerations include consultations “Towards Carbon Capture and Storage” (2008) and “Health and Energy Saving Strategy” (2009).

Planning History

1.49 The proposed SEE site and the existing SECL power station site were occupied formerly by British Sugar which closed its factory in 1989. Following the demolition of the factory in 1996, Section 36 Consent and deemed planning permission was granted in November 2000 to SECL for the construction and operation of an 880 MW CCGT generating station (the 2000 S.36 consent); separately, consent was granted for an overhead line connection and for pipeline construction authorisation.

1.50 To fulfil its obligations under an agreement entered into under Section 106 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in connection with the 2000 S36 consent, SECL submitted an application for planning permission for highway improvements to West Marsh Road which was approved in January 2006. The works included road widening, a ghost island, a right turn lane, a new site access and an extension of a combined cycleway and footpath.

1.51 In February 2005 outline planning permission was granted for development of the remainder of the former sugar beet factory site, of which the proposed SEE site comprises part for “Use Classes B1, B2 & B8, open storage, vehicle parking and petrol filling station with access from West Marsh Road plus re-levelling and landscaping”. The 2005 planning permission has expired; and the area has subsequently been the subject of a revised application for planning permission by Rand Developments LLP and Howtin Investments Ltd for “proposed B1, B2 and B8 employment development with open storage, vehicle parking, car showroom and petrol filling station on land off West Marsh Road”. This area includes the proposed SEE site but some land fronting West Marsh Road and to the south of the proposed SEE site will remain available for


1-6 Issue 7: 64C13376

development. Outline planning permission for this area has recently been granted by SHDC, and this is further discussed in Chapter 2 EIA Process and Methodology.

Consents Procedure

1.52 In addition to Section 36 Consent under the Electricity Act 1989, the proposed SEE will also require the following key consents and permits:

• power stations of 10 MW or more require energy policy clearance under section 14 (1) of the Energy Act 1976 if they are to be fuelled by oil or natural gas;

• an EP to operate under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2007;

• a permit to emit CO2 under the EU ETS scheme. The scheme is currently operating in Phase II, which runs from 1st January 2008 until 31st December 2012 and SEEL will make an application for carbon allowances in Phase III, which is due to be implemented in January 2013;

• the new overhead transmission line associated with the proposed SEE will require a consent under section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989;

• the new gas pipeline associated with the proposed SEE will require planning permission for its construction under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990; and

• a land drainage consent from the WDIDB in connection with works to Vernatt’s Drain.

1.53 A full list of the consents required, and the legislation under which they are prescribed, is provided as Appendix 1.1. Each ES technical chapter summarises applicable regulatory frameworks including regimes for water pollution prevention, wildlife protection, noise control, air quality control and construction.

Application Details

1.54 SEEL seeks consent principally for:

1 Up to a nominal 900 MW CCGT Power Station

2 GRF within proposed SEE site

3 Substation (Air Insulated)10

4 Infrastructure (internal roads, utilities etc.)

5 Site clearance, ground stabilisation, demolition (for further information on the removal of the existing Mound see also Chapters 5 (Construction), 6 (Environmental Management) and 11 (Ground Conditions).

6 Landscaping and biodiversity enhancement

7 Highways and transport works

8 Drainage works, including SUDS ponds(s)

10 The substation is located within the red line application boundary for the proposed SEE, but procedurally will form part of the Section 37 consent application for the new transmission line to be submitted by NGET.

9 Engineering Operations

10 Associated and ancillary works

1.55 The application is accompanied by the following stand-alone documents, in addition to the ES:

Design and Access Statement Statement of Community Involvement

Planning Statement Transport Statement (appended to the ES)

CHP Assessment Landscape & Visual Assessment (appended to the ES)

CCR Assessment Flood Risk Assessment (appended to the ES)

Applicant

1.56 The application is submitted by the following entity:

• Spalding Energy Expansion Limited, 81 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 3ES

1.57 The applicant’s agent for the application is Keith Dalton of Dalton Warner Davis at 21 Garlick Hill, London EC4V 2AU

The Project Team

1.58 The applicant has appointed a project team to assist in the development of the application and the preparation of the ES. The members of the project team and their respective roles are presented in Table 1.3

Table 1.3: EIA Project Team

Company Role Input and ES Chapters

ENVIRON Environmental Consultants ES Project Management Chapters: Introduction EIA Process and Methodology Alternatives and Design Evolution Development Description Development Programme & Construction Environmental Management Noise and Vibration Air Quality Ground Conditions Water Resources and Flood Risk Ecology Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects



64C13376 Issue:7 1-7

Table 1.3: EIA Project Team

Company Role Input and ES Chapters

EDAW Landscape Architect Consultant Chapter: Landscape and Visual Amenity

Savell, Bird & Axon Transport Engineering Consultant Chapter: Transport and Access

Hunt Dobson Stringer Economic and Social Impact Consultants

Chapter: Socio-economics

Archaeological Services WYAS

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Consultants

Chapter: Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects

(Archaeology)

Clifford Chance Environmental Lawyers Review of ES

Dalton Warner Davis Planning Consultants Review of ES Chapter: Introduction (Planning policy)

Parsons Brinckerhoff Engineering Consultant N/A

Pendragon Consulting Public Relations and Communication N/A

Structure of the Environmental Statement

1.59 The ES presents an assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the proposed SEE. Technical appendices are presented as a separate volume, as is a NTS of the ES.

1.60 Within the main report, Chapter 2 describes the EIA process and the methods adopted in this assessment and summarises the consultation process undertaken for the project. Chapter 3 describes the evolution of the design and an outline of the main alternatives considered. Chapter 4 provides a description of the proposed SEE for which consent is being sought, together with details of the proposed SEE site and information on utilities, emissions and residues.

1.61 Chapter 5 describes the envisaged development programme and associated construction impacts that are likely to arise from the proposed SEE, and Chapter 6 details the measures which are proposed for environmental management.

1.62 Chapters 7 – 15 contain the detailed technical assessments of the proposals. These assessments describe the baseline conditions of the proposed SEE site, identify the likely significant environmental impacts, outline mitigation put forward to avoid, reduce or offset these impacts, and assess the significance of residual impacts on the environment.


1-8 Issue 7: 64C13376

Client

Scale Version Control

Project No DateDrawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 CC March 2009

Figure 1.1Location of Proposed SEE Site

7ENVIRON UK Limited

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh EH3 7JYTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey with the permission of the controller HMSO Crown Copyright Reserved. Licence No. ES 100012174

N

Aberdeen

Glasgow

Edinburgh

Newcastle

Liverpool

Belfast

Dublin

Cork

York

BirminghamNorwich

London

Bristol

PlymouthNewquay

Cardiff

Spalding

Client

Scale

Project No

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC

March 2009

Figure 1.2Location of SECL and Proposed SEE Sites


ENVIRON UK Limited

Version Control 7

NGETSubstation

Gas Receipt Facility

Land leased to the Sports and Social Club

© GeoPerspectives

Existing SECL Power Station Site

Proposed SEE Site

LEGEND

Corridor for Interconnections

N

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC

March 2009

Figure 1.3Red Line Application Boundary


ENVIRON UK Limited

Version Control 6


N LEGEND

Red Line ApplicationBoundary

Horbling Fen SSSI

Cowbit Wash SSSI

Pinchbeck Marsh SNCI

Spalding Cemetery SNCI

Vernatt's Nature Reserve

Cross Drain SSSI

Surfleet Lows SSSI

Baston Fen SAC

The Wash SPA SAC Ramsar SSSI

Proposed SEE site

ENVIRON UK Limited

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh E 3 7JYHTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411

Figure 1.4: Designated Sites

Client: SEEL

Scale: NTS Drawn By: AF Date: March 2009

Project No: 64C13376 Version Control: 5

±© Crown copyright,

All rights reserved 2009Licence number 0100031673

LEGENDProposed SEE site

The Wash SPA SAC Ramsar SSSI

Baston Fen SAC

Surfleet Lows SSSI

Cross Drain SSSI

Vernatt's Nature Reserve

Spalding Cemetery SNCI

Pinchbeck Marsh SNCI

Cowbit Wash (Geological) SSSI

Horbling Fen (Geological) SSSI



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-1

2 EIA Process and MethodologyEIA Process

2.1 EIA is a process that identifies the likely significant effects on the environment, both beneficial and adverse, of a proposed development. The process aims to prevent, reduce and mitigate any likely significant adverse environmental effects, where these are identified. Proposed developments to which EIA is applied are those that are likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as their nature, size or location.

2.2 The EIA process has a number of key characteristics and, in particular, is:

• systematic, comprising a sequence of tasks defined both by regulation and by practice;

• consultative, with provision being made for obtaining feedback from interested parties including statutory agencies and the community;

• reliant on the most up-to-date information on the nature and sensitivity of the environment;

• predictive, using techniques and professional judgement to estimate the potential nature, size and significance of environmental change;

• transparent; the information and assumptions upon which assessments are made are set out clearly, as are limits to knowledge and to the capability of the predictive tools employed in the assessment process; and

• iterative, allowing opportunities for environmental concerns to be addressed during the planning and design of a project.

2.3 The process and outcomes of the EIA are presented in a single document, known as the ES, which should be a clear and concise summary of the proposed development and its likely significant environmental effects – including direct, indirect, secondary, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative, and cumulative effects – on the natural, built and human environments. The ES is submitted to a competent authority (in the case of a consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, to the Secretary of State for DECC) in support of an application for consent and provides the competent authority, statutory consultees and the wider community with sufficient information to make an objective judgement as to its acceptability within the context of national, regional and local planning and environmental policy.

Regulatory Context

2.4 Legislation on EIA was first implemented in the UK in 1988 following the adoption of the 1985 EC Directive (No. 85/337/EEC) ‘on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment’, as amended by EC Directive (No. 97/11/EEC), the ‘EIA Directive’.

2.5 Article 4 of Annex I to the EIA Directive, requires that thermal power stations and other combustion installations with a heat output of 300 MW or more (Schedule 1) are subject to EIA. This European Directive has been transposed into the laws of England through the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2000 (S.I. 2000/No. 1927), as amended

by the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2007 (SI 2007/1977) (hereafter ‘the EIA Regulations’). The Amendment Regulations take into account the EU’s Public Participation Directive 2003/35/EC.

2.6 The specific requirements for EIA in relation to the electricity generating station consenting process are defined in the EIA Regulations and in associated guidance produced by the Department of Trade and Industry and subsequently by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, now DECC:

• The Consenting Process for Onshore Generating Stations Above 50 MW in England and Wales: A Guidance Note on Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, October 2007;

• Guidance on the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000. URN 01/789. Published 1st September 2000; and

• The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2007. Supplementary Guidance Note. URN 07/1569.

2.7 In addition to the above, there is also general guidance available on EIA and the application of the Regulations in the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions Circular 02/1999.

2.8 The EIA Regulations define the information to be included in the ES accompanying the application and the involvement of environmental regulatory bodies in the process; in addition to consultation with regulatory bodies, the participation of non-statutory organisations and the public is also important.

2.9 The required content of the ES is set out in Schedule 4, Part II of the Regulations. Table 2.2 presents these requirements and indicates where in this ES the requirements have been met.

Screening

2.10 Screening is the term in the EIA Regulations used to describe the process by which the need for EIA is considered. Applicants can request a screening opinion from the competent authority prior to submitting an application for development consent. However, as the proposed SEE is defined as ‘Schedule 1 Development’ an EIA is mandatory and therefore screening is not applicable in this instance.

Scoping and Consultation

Scoping

2.11 An applicant can request a ‘scoping opinion’ from the competent authority on the information to be provided in an ES. The purpose of scoping is to ‘focus the EIA on the environmental issues and potential impacts which need the most thorough attention; identify those which are unlikely


2-2 Issue 6: 64C13376

to need detailed study; and provide a means to discuss methods of impact assessment and reach agreement on the most appropriate’1.

2.12 In accordance with Regulation 7 of the EIA Regulations, a scoping opinion was sought from the Secretary of State for DECC on 18 November 2008. This request was accompanied by a Scoping Report, which set out a summary of the proposed SEE, identified the issues proposed to be included in the ES, and proposed an approach to the assessment of impacts in each case. The Scoping Report was simultaneously issued to a list of statutory and non-statutory consultees, developed by the project team after consultation with key stakeholders including SHDC.

2.13 As a result of the planning history associated with the proposed SEE site, extensive consultation, baseline characterisation, impact assessment, and design and mitigation refinement have already been undertaken as part of the Section 36 application for the existing SECL power station, which is very similar in design to the proposed SEE. The application for Section 36 Consent for the existing SECL power station was submitted in August 1996, however this was not consented until November 2000 following a moratorium on gas fired power stations. The existing SECL power station was constructed between 2001 and 2004 and became operational on 1 October 2004.

2.14 The main benefit that this recent consenting experience delivered for the current scoping process was that the Scoping Report was able to draw on existing information and knowledge of the likely environmental issues associated with development of a power station at the proposed SEE site, to further refine the EIA approach for this application.

2.15 A scoping opinion was received from DECC on 9 January 2009 and was accompanied by responses received from a number of consultees. Many consultee responses were received directly by SEEL, as requested in the Scoping Report.

2.16 A list of organisations consulted on the scope of the EIA is provided in Table 2.1 below. The scoping opinion, together with associated consultation responses, is reproduced in Technical Appendix 2.1. Details of how the environmental assessments undertaken have considered and responded to the individual scoping comments are provided within the relevant technical chapters.

Table 2.1: Scoping Consultation

Statutory Consultee Comments ES Response / Chapter

DECC** The Secretary of State is satisfied with the items contained in the Scoping and Consultation Report which are to be included in the ES. In addition, the ES should detail the consideration that has been given to combined heat and power. The Government will shortly be issuing its response to the consultation on carbon capture readiness and,

Refer to Chapter 4 Development Description

1 Scottish Government (1998) Planning Advice Note 58 Environmental Impact Assessment


given that this application will not be submitted until after the response is issued, the application will need to include detail of the measures undertaken to demonstrate that the proposed SEE will be CCR.

EA++* Flood Risk A flood map and historic flood map, as well as tidal flood level information, tidal defence information, fluvial flood level information and fluvial defence information has been provided. In addition, defence crest levels and internal drainage board information have been provided. The Local Planning Authority should be contacted to ascertain the likely outcome of a sequential test for this site. The FRA should demonstrate that the proposals are ‘safe’ throughout the lifetime of the development, which may require calculation of flood depths and velocities on the site. The FRA should show the quantity of impermeable area for both the pre and post development scenarios, and surface water drainage should be calculated in full for these. Clarification of the existing system needs to be outlined, together with details of how the proposed development will affect the current situation. The EA considers the FEH appropriate for catchment specific data. Calculations need to be presented and post-development figures should be modelled for the 1-year, 30-year, 100-year and 100-year-plus-allowance-for-climate-change events. The maximum volume and peak flow rate should be identified in the worst case storm event, including seasons and the duration of the event. Full details of any attenuation methods should be included in the FRA. Details of all elements of the proposed drainage systems should be included, along with clear details of the ownership and responsibility for maintenance of all drainage elements for the lifetime of the development. The FRA should state the overland flood flow routes and subsequent flood risk, in the event of surface water system failure. The section of the FRA providing details of the modelled flood levels should indicate, not just the 1 in 200 year and crest heights, but also the freeboard that is provided as protection to the site. Information should be provided in the FRA regarding the Coronation Channel and its purpose, and the names of the sluice gates. The FRA should also consider what would happen should a failure of the

Refer to Chapter 12 Water Resources and Flood Risk and Technical Appendix 12.1



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-3


sluice gates occur, or if a tide lock scenario were to arise. The outcome of the breach analysis should be used to inform finished floor levels and safe access and egress routes and/or safe refuge. Details regarding the flow velocities, depths and time that water will stay on the site after a breach event should all be calculated.

Water Quality The EIA should include an assessment of the potential impacts on water quality during the construction and operational phases of the development. Appropriate measures to ensure that there is no deterioration in the quality of Controlled Waters in the vicinity of the site should also be identified.

Refer to Chapter 12 Water Resources and Flood Risk

Air Quality The ES should explain the H1 tool (used for the screening of pollutants) and state the ADMS used.

Refer to Chapter 10 Air Quality

Waste The EIA should assess the impact of waste generation from the site and identify measures (e.g. minimisation, recycling) to reduce this impact.

Refer to Chapters 4 Development Description, 5 Construction and 6 Environmental Management.

General When scoping the EIA of a proposed development, developers should satisfy themselves that they have addressed all the potential impacts and the concerns of all organisations and individuals with an interest in the project. Reference should be made to the guidance notes produced by the EA, which are based on the main legal requirements on EIA stemming from the EC Directive and the UK Regulations.

Refer to Chapter 2 EIA Process and Methodology

Anglian Water* No comment regarding water source/abstraction. The proposed SEE will have little impact on Anglian Water’s sewerage system. There is currently a valid Trade Effluent Licence in operation for the existing SECL power station and Anglian Water should be notified of any proposed variations to the licence as soon as possible.

Comment noted

Natural England* The location of the proposed SEE adjacent to the River Welland means that there is scope for indirect impacts on The Wash SAC/SPA/Ramsar site. For example, if there were a requirement to abstract water

Refer to the relevant technical chapters (Chapter 5 Construction, Chapter 6 Environmental


from the Welland, this may result in a potential deficit to freshwater inputs into The Wash. Similarly, given the location of the proposed SEE, there could be issues relating to air quality on Surfleet Lows SSSI. Both of these issues should be considered in the ES.

Management, Chapter 10 Air Quality, Chapter 12 Water Resources and Flood Risk and Chapter 13 Ecology)

SHDC:* Planning Environmental Health Nature Conservation Officer

Planning The following issues, in order of priority, should be considered in the environmental assessment: Emissions; Air quality; Landscape and visual; Socio-economics; Transport; Ecology; Noise and vibration; Indirect secondary and cumulative effects; Archaeology and cultural heritage; and Waste.

In addition the ES should explain the rationale for the development; the community benefits arising from the proposal; any alternative sites considered; and, alternative energy sources considered, including renewables

These issues are all covered in the ES. Archaeology and cultural heritage has been scoped out of the EIA and the reasons for this are given in Chapter 2 EIA Process and Method. Archaeology and cultural heritage is considered in Chapter 15 (Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects) in relation to the proposed gas pipeline and overhead transmission line connections. The rationale for the development proposals, community benefits, alternative sites and alternative energy sources are described in Chapter 3 Alternatives and Design Evolution, Chapter 4 Development Description and Chapter 14 Socio-economics.

SHDC:* Planning Environmental Health Nature Conservation Officer

Environmental Health Noise and Vibration With regard to noise monitoring locations, the locations used for the noise survey conducted at the development stage of the existing power station should be used, with the exception of the properties on West Marsh Road, immediately adjacent to the site (now demolished). Air Quality The baseline data collected by the Council at Monkhouse School is collected some 2 km away from the proposed SEE site, and the only other monitoring carried out is by passive diffusion tube monitoring for NOx. Therefore, the assessment should consider whether it is appropriate to install additional equipment at a suitable site locally to the proposed SEE.

Refer to Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration Refer to Chapter 10 Air Quality


2-4 Issue 6: 64C13376


In addition, with regard to any Section 106 negotiations, the Council will aim to improve on the Monkhouse School AQM unit. Contaminated Land A full contaminated land survey should be conducted and submitted to SHDC, and any remediation measures implemented. Particular reference should be made to any risk to controlled waters and to workers during the construction phase. A detailed contaminated land condition requiring such a survey is likely to be included at the planning stage. A copy of the full contaminated land condition for the existing SECL power station site has been received by ENVIRON from SHDC, which details the requirements for a desk-top study, any site investigation works and any remediation works.

Refer to Chapter 11 Ground Conditions

Health and Safety Executive*

The Health and Safety Executive does not wish to comment on the EIA and EP Scoping and Consultation report for the proposed SEE at this stage. They require further involvement at the construction stage.

Refer to Chapter 5 Construction

Food Standards Agency+ No response received No response required

NHS Lincolnshire+ The EIA should determine any public health impacts of the emissions and activities from the installation and place any risks in a local context. This may also include consideration of the level of public health nuisance reported in relation to the installation and whether there is a need for further environmental monitoring to help the regulator assess potential problems or gaps in the application. The EIA should also describe all pollution sources using suitably predicted values. Data should be as comprehensive as possible and up to date. The HPA supports the use of relevant background data when assessing the impact of emissions on the environment. The EIA should also address the following issues: the significance of the impact of emissions when

combined with other sources of pollution, both existing and proposed;

sources of fugitive emissions which could impact significantly on local populations;

the significance of emissions from abnormal operations;

all possible exposure routes, with data to quantify levels of exposure to human receptors; and

current/proposed Environmental Management

Refer to Chapter 6: Environmental Management, Chapter 9: Noise, Chapter 10: Air Quality and Chapter 11 Ground Conditions


Systems sufficient to reduce risk from accidents and spillages.

Comments should be sought from the Local Authority Environmental Health Department in relation to: impact on human health of noise, odour and dust

nuisance; and the applicant’s site investigation, to ensure that,

once construction is completed, the site could not be determined as ‘contaminated land’ under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act.

The applicant should also ensure that they have an accident management plan in place that will meet the requirements of the EP Regulations (2007). This should: identify all potential hazards in relation to

operations at the site (including potential for fire, vandalism, spills of waste, etc);

include an assessment of the risks posed; identify risk management measures employed;

and identify contingency actions to be taken in the

event of an accident, in order to mitigate the consequences.

Lincolnshire County Council*

The following issues should be considered in the EIA, in order of priority: Emissions, including impact on air quality; Flood risk; Carbon footprint issues; Visual impact; Impact on the water environment; and Impact on highways.

In addition, the following issues should be covered in the ES: the energy equation/carbon footprint of the

proposed SEE; and the impact of discharges on the surrounding area

and on the water environment. Consideration should be given to potential impacts on/discharges to the River Welland, as the River Welland runs into The Wash, which is a SPA and Ramsar site. Further information for comment should also be sent to the Wash Project Officer Tammy Smalley.

Refer to Chapter 7 Landscape and Visual Amenity, Chapter 8 Transport and Access, Chapter 9 Noise, Chapter 10 Air Quality, Chapter 12 Water Resources and Flood Risk and Chapter 13 Ecology. Energy equation and carbon footprint issues are dealt with in Chapter 4 Development Description.



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-5


Non-Statutory Consultee Comments ES Response / Chapter

BSSSC No response received No response required

Civil Aviation Authority Any high structures of 90 m or more in height should be discussed with the Directorate of Airspace Policy. NATS should be consulted for projects which bypass the normal process of application for planning permission or for substantial new structures. With regard to safety considerations, reference should be made to any aeronautical safeguarding maps that may have been issued to the relevant planning authorities, in order to confirm the appropriate consultees to comment on matters of aviation safety.

SHDC and LCC were contacted with regard to aeronautical safeguarding maps, and SHDC advised that relevant safeguarding areas in the vicinity of the proposed SEE are the MoD low-flying area surrounding The Wash and Fenland Airfield, near Holbeach. Reference is made to the response from MoD Safeguarding and to the response from Fenland Aero Club. A further letter has been issued to the CAA to advise of the presence of a 100 m high crane for 1-3 months during the construction phase of the proposed SEE.

Community Lincs No comment No response required

EMDA No comment No response required

EMRA The Assembly has been using the Draft Regional Plan (Draft RSS) as a material consideration in assessing the conformity of planning proposals with regional spatial objectives and policies. The Secretary of State is currently carrying out consultation on Proposed changes to the Draft RSS. The main Draft RSS policies relating to this project are: Policy 1, containing the 10 core regional

objectives; Policy 2, setting out a regional approach to

selecting land for development, based on a sequential approach to development form. It also provides ‘sustainability criteria’ which should be used to assess site suitability;

Policy 32 – A Regional approach to water resources and water quality;

Policy 38 – Regional priorities for energy reduction and efficiency; and

Refer to the policy review contained in each technical chapter of this ES (Chapters 7-14).


Policy 34 – Regional approach to traffic growth reduction.

Fenland Aero Club No response received No response required

Government Office for the East Midlands No comment No response required

Lincolnshire Association of the National Trust No comment No response required

Lincolnshire Badger Group No response received No response required

Lincolnshire Bat Group Lincolnshire Bat Group holds records for this area, including information regarding roosts in the immediate vicinity. It is recommended that a data search be requested from the county recorder, as the additional information will be relevant to inform biodiversity gain and enhancement. We request that full surveys be carried out on any buildings to be demolished and that roosting opportunities be created in suitable buildings as part of this development. In addition, landscaping should take account of the foraging needs of the local bat population.

Refer to Chapter 13 Ecology

Lincolnshire Biodiversity Partnership

The ES should address the following issues: The use of Vernatt’s Drain and the River Welland

by water voles and other protected species such as otters and bats;

The status of Vernatt’s Drain and the River Welland as wildlife corridors;

The use of the site by breeding birds; Opportunities for habitat enhancement and

creation to the south and east of the proposed SEE site;

Where notable species or habitats will be affected, alternatives should be explored and impacts avoided;

Mitigation measures to minimise any adverse impacts by changing the nature of the development should be considered if the above cannot be achieved; and

Compensation should be considered where, despite mitigation, there will be residual adverse effects by offsetting these by compensation measures either on or off the proposed



2-6 Issue 6: 64C13376


development site. The environmental assessment should identify opportunities for habitat enhancement and creation. It should also identify how species and habitats will be affected both on and off site, how alternatives will be explored, impacts avoided and how mitigation measures and compensation will be employed as a last resort. The habitat and species surveys should have been carried out by competent, named ecologists, preferably members of the IEEM. In accordance with IEEM guidance, the results of these surveys should be sent to the relevant Local Records Centre (Lincolnshire Environmental Records Centre c/o Lincolnshire Biodiversity Partnership).

Lincolnshire Enterprise The most important issues to consider in the environmental assessment are: Access to potential employment land outside the

proposed SEE site; and Impact on employment land outside the proposed

SEE site. The proposed SEE site is part of land allocated for employment use in the SHLP, and the development of the proposed SEE could limit the employment potential of the land.

Refer to Chapter 14 Socio-economics

Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue (Spalding)

Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue wishes to be informed of the following topics regarding this project: Access to the site for emergency vehicles during

and upon completion of the construction works; Water available to the site for fire fighting

purposes; Security of the buildings on site; and The timescale for demolition of the BSSSC.

Details of the following considerations should be included in the ES: Risk assessments; Site SOP; Inter-agency working; Access to the site; Access to water; Identification of hazards; Gas pipeline safety; and

Positioning of the proposed SEE with regard to residential accommodation.

Refer to Chapter 4 Development Description, Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 6 Environmental Management.


Lincolnshire Naturalists’ Union

Please refer to comments from the Environmental Records Centre, part of the Lincolnshire Biodiversity Partnership.


Lincolnshire Police (Spalding) No comment No response required

Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust The primary concern of the Trust is to ensure that works have no adverse effect on protected species or habitats during construction or operation. In addition to the ecological surveys carried out in 2008, we would recommend surveys for reptiles, great crested newts and badgers, and additional bat surveys of the buildings to be demolished. Opportunities for the creation of BAP habitats should be considered at every stage of the project. There should be a net biodiversity gain on the proposed SEE site.


MoD Safeguarding The proposed SEE site falls outside of a statutory safeguarding area, however it lies close to Wainfleet and Holbeach Air Weapon Range. Therefore, further information regarding the location of the new overhead power lines and the height of the turbines is required by the MoD for accurate assessment.

The height of the structures is given in Chapter 4 Development Description, and details of the anticipated height of the new overhead power lines are given in Chapter 15 (Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects). In addition, the MoD will be contacted as part of the Section 37 application process for consent to build the new overhead power lines.

NATS NATS has no safeguarding objections to this proposal. No response required

Pinchbeck Parish Council No response received No response required

RSPB The ES should address the following issues, in order of priority: Indirect, secondary and cumulative effects,

particularly any potential impacts on The Wash

Refer to Chapter 10 Air Quality, Chapter 12 Waster Resources and Flood Risk and Chapter 13 Ecology.



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-7


SSSI/SAC/SPA/Ramsar site; Impacts on breeding birds, particularly Birds of

Conservation Concern species2 and proposals for mitigation of any identified significant impacts;

Identification of the potential for biodiversity enhancement that could be incorporated into the proposal.

The ES should address the potential for incorporation of biodiversity enhancement into the proposal, particularly for species of conservation concern, and to contribute to the Lincolnshire BAP. The ES should contain an assessment of the cumulative impact of the proposal in combination with other extant and consented proposals and projects in the area, particularly identifying any cumulative effects on The Wash.

SECL Community Liaison Group

Please refer to the Statement of Community Involvement which accompanies the Section 36 application.

Refer to Chapter 2 EIA Process and Methodology ‘Consultation’ section.

South Holland Rural Action Zone

The South Holland RAZ is fully supportive of the SEE development proposals. No response required

Spalding and District Civic Society No comment No response required

Spalding Town Forum No response received No response required

Welland and Deepings Internal Drainage Board

In the ES, reference should be made to South Drove Drain (not South Drive Drain, as in the Scoping Report).

Refer to Chapter 12 Water Resources and Flood Risk

Weston Parish Council A representative of Weston Parish Council attended the public exhibition and submitted comments, therefore reference should be made to the Statement of Community Involvement.

Refer to Chapter 2 EIA Process and Methodology ‘Consultation’ section.

* These consultees are statutory for the purposes of the EIA. + These consultees are statutory for the purposes of the EP process ** This is the competent authority for the Section 36 Consent ++ This is the competent authority for the EP

2 Gregory R.D., Wilkinson N.I., Noble D.G., Robinson J.A., Brown A.F., Hughes J, Procter D.A., Gibbons D.W. and Galbraith C.A. (2002) The population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man: an analysis of conservation concern 2002-2007. British Birds 95:410-450

Consultation

2.17 As stated earlier, the proposed SEE has been the subject of extensive consultation, particularly with DECC, SHDC and the EA. The feedback from this consultation has been used to shape the proposed SEE, for example, in relation to the CCR arrangements; and defining suitable finished floor levels to mitigate against flood risk.

2.18 This consultation followed a 4 page newsletter that was circulated to approximately 3,500 homes and businesses in the wider Spalding community on 7 November 2008. The Statement of Community Involvement summarises the outcomes of this event, however key themes included:

• future options for the BSSSC;

• the new overhead transmission line (in conjunction with National Grid);

• support for initiatives within the community and local economy; and

• environmental impacts of the proposed SEE including air emissions, noise, visual, ecology, re-use of heat and environmental impacts associated with infrastructure connections (gas pipeline and overhead transmission line).

2.19 In parallel with the EIA Scoping, the wider community was invited to comment on the proposals at a public exhibition held over three days (Thursday 20 November – Saturday 22 November) at the Broad Street Business Centre in Spalding town centre. The purpose of the public exhibition was two-fold – to provide the community with an understanding of the proposed SEE, and to provide the applicant with an understanding of local opinion. The exhibition material consisted primarily of a range of display boards with information about the project and a selection of views from various locations.

Potentially Significant Issues

2.20 The scoping process concluded that the following key environmental issues associated with the development should be addressed in the EIA:

• Landscape and Visual (Chapter 7);

• Transport and Access (Chapter 8);

• Noise and Vibration (Chapter 9);

• Air Quality (Chapter 10);

• Ground Conditions (Chapter 11);

• Water Resources and Flood Risk (Chapter 12);

• Ecology (Chapter 13); and

• Socio-Economics (Chapter 14).

2.21 In addition, the potential for indirect, secondary and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the infrastructure connections and CCS element of the proposed SEE are considered in Chapter 15: Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

WASTE

2.22 Waste will be generated during both the construction phase and operational phase of the proposed SEE. Due to the nature of the proposed SEE site, it is likely that construction may


2-8 Issue 6: 64C13376

generate large quantities of waste, while during operations there will be only minor quantities of waste produced.

2.23 Methods of minimising and reusing or recycling wastes, along with suitable disposal routes for wastes generated during the construction phase, will be identified in the CEMP and SWMP, which are discussed in Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 6 Environmental Management respectively, and which will be prepared at a later date if Section 36 Consent is granted.

2.24 The quantity of waste generated during the operational phase will be estimated using information from the existing SECL power station, and appropriate benchmarks and disposal routes for the waste will be generated.

2.25 Further assessment of waste is presented within the ES, in Chapter 4 Development Description, Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 6 Environmental Management. Chapter 8 Transport and Access considers the transportation effects associated with the movement of wastes.

Non-significant Issues

2.26 Taking account of the environmental aspects that can be affected by new development, the scoping process concluded that the issues described below would not constitute a significant environmental impact and therefore did not require assessment in the EIA or inclusion within the ES.

ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE

2.27 According to earlier survey findings3 there are no records of archaeological findings on the existing SECL power station site or in immediately adjacent areas, and the proposed SEE site is not known to contain any archaeological interest. The previous development of the proposed SEE site for a sugar factory and subsequent demolition is also likely to have disturbed any in situ archaeological remains, therefore the likelihood of surviving archaeology on the proposed SEE site is expected to be negligible.

2.28 There are no significant cultural heritage resources within the vicinity of the proposed SEE site, with the closest SAM being located at a distance of 1 km to the north (Pinchbeck Engine), and the closest Listed Building approximately 1 km to the south (in Spalding). The nearest Conservation Area is at Pinchbeck, approximately 1 km to the west.

2.29 In light of the above, it is considered that no further assessment of archaeology and cultural heritage is required within the EIA, except for the proposed gas pipeline and overhead transmission line elements which are considered in Chapter 15: Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

EIA Methodology

2.30 Good practice in EIA is defined in a number of sources4. The methods followed in this EIA have drawn on these to generate a robust assessment. In line with guidance provided in the EIA Regulations and EIA good practice guides, the EIA process has involved the following:

3 Environmental Resources Management Spalding Energy Project: Environmental Statement Volume 1 – Main Report 16 August 1996.

4 Hakes P (2007) The Essex Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment; Carroll B and T Turpin (2003) Environmental Impact Assessment Handbook: A Practical Guide for Planners, Developers and Communities; Department for Communities and Local Government (2006)

• Consultation and scoping with statutory consultees, non-statutory consultees and the local community to identify the key issues on which the EIA should focus;

• Establishing baseline environmental conditions through desktop research and site surveys;

• Identifying impacts of the proposed SEE;

• Determining how impacts will be avoided or reduced through design evolution or additional mitigation measures;

• Assessing the significance of residual environmental impacts on the identified receptors against recognised or defined criteria;

• Describing how likely significant future impacts will be monitored (through e.g. conditions attached to a Section 36 Consent); and

• Reporting the process, results and conclusions of the EIA in an ES.


2.31 Both the EIA Directive and the EIA Regulations require that, as part of the information to be provided in an ES, an outline of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main reasons for their choice, taking into account the environmental impacts, should be provided.

2.32 Good practice on EIA5 clarifies this point. It explains that the EIA Regulations do not require applicants to ‘invent’ an alternative where none has been considered, although the lack of alternatives should be explained. It goes on to accept that alternatives will be constrained by economic and operational reasons, and that the competent authority should consider an application on its merits and not on the merits of potential alternatives (although for some applications, the existence or otherwise of feasible alternatives might be a material consideration). Chapter 3: Alternatives and Design Evolution therefore summarises the alternatives to the proposed SEE considered by the design team, including the ‘no-development’ alternative, the use of alternative sites, the use of alternative fuels and the consideration of alternative designs through design evolution.

Baseline Characterisation

2.33 The purpose of EIA is to predict how environmental conditions may change as a result of a proposed development. This requires that the environmental conditions now and in the future – assuming no development on the site – are established. These conditions are referred to as the baseline and are usually established through a combination of desk based research, site survey, and empirical studies and projections. Together these describe the current and future character of the site and surroundings, and the value and vulnerability of key environmental resources and receptors.

2.34 Making predictions about how parameters such as land use, townscape, views and the wider community may change in the future relies heavily on assumptions about future development

Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Good Practice (Consultation Paper); Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2004) Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment; European Commission (2001) Guidance on EIA: Scoping; Scottish Government (1998) Planning Advice Note 58: Environmental Impact Assessment

5 Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Environmental Impact Assessment: A Guide to Good Practice (Consultation Paper); Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2004) Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment; Scottish Government (1998) Planning Advice Note 58: Environmental Impact Assessment



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-9

and environmental trends and is at risk of being wholly hypothetical and subjective. For this reason, where development is not proposed in the vicinity for a future baseline to be addressed, the baseline adopted for EIA is normally taken as the current character and condition of the site and surrounds, and the likely significant environmental impacts of the development are then assessed in the context of the current conditions alone.

2.35 Where an environmental trend can be determined, and may influence the future conditions of the site and its surrounds, this is described in individual technical chapters. For example, there are conventions that describe future traffic growth on strategic roads, and risk assessment models that predict future risk from contaminated soils and groundwaters.

Identification of Impacts

2.36 Each technical chapter contains a section that identifies the likely significant effects on the environment that may arise as a result of the construction and/or operation of the proposed SEE. Impacts may be direct, indirect, secondary or cumulative. Within these categories, they may also be short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative. Direct (or Primary) impacts are changes to the baseline arising directly from activities that form part of the development, for example a localised increase in noise during construction. Indirect (or Secondary) impacts are those that arise as a result of a direct impact, for example deterioration of water quality in a watercourse due to an effluent discharge could have secondary impacts on aquatic biodiversity. Cumulative impacts occur when a receptor is subject to multiple impacts, either of the same nature from different developments, or of different types but caused by the same development. Cumulative impacts are discussed further below.

Cumulative Impacts

2.37 Cumulative impacts can arise in two ways:

• Type 1: Cumulative impacts arising from the combination of individual activities or impacts at a particular site, for example noise, dust and visual impacts resulting together from construction; and

• Type 2: Cumulative impacts arising from the recurrence of the same impact at different locations, for example, air pollutant emissions affecting a specific receptor, may be acceptable in terms of a single proposed project, however when several projects (e.g. proposed SEE, gas pipeline, CCS and overhead transmission line) all affect the same receptor the combined result may result in a significant effect on the receptor.

2.38 Type 1 Cumulative Impacts are of particular importance during the construction phase as it is considered that the greatest likelihood of impact interaction, and hence significant impacts, would occur during construction works. Receptors have been identified which could be subject to impact interactions and an assessment has been made of the likelihood and nature of impacts on these receptors at regular intervals during the site preparation and construction programme.

2.39 In the consideration of Type 2 Cumulative Impacts best practice guidance6 suggests that only committed developments should be considered as part of the cumulative assessment.

6 Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Amended Circular on Environmental Impact Assessment (Consultation Paper); Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2004) Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment

Committed developments are defined as those which have been granted planning permission but where construction is not yet underway, or where construction is at a very early stage. Schemes in later stages of construction would normally be considered as part of the baseline.

2.40 Not all committed schemes in a given area will lead to cumulative effects. For example, only schemes visible in a specific view would have a cumulative visual impact. Cumulative noise and air quality impacts may arise where committed schemes were considered to act together to increase traffic flows.

2.41 Early consultations with SHDC have not identified any consented developments in the vicinity of the proposed SEE site that require to be considered for likely significant cumulative impacts. As described in paragraph 1.51, an outline planning application for an industrial development including warehouses, smaller industrial units, a petrol station and car showroom on land located within and adjacent to the proposed SEE site has recently been consented by SHDC. It has been agreed with SHDC that due to the nature of this scheme, which overlaps with a large proportion of the proposed SEE site, it does not require to be assessed within the EIA as the consented development and the proposed SEE are largely mutually exclusive. Nevertheless, the EIA has considered a scenario whereby a portion of the consented land, fronting West Marsh Road and outwith the proposed SEE site is able to be developed. This is explained further in Chapter 8 Transportation and Access, and Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects. Further details of the consented scheme, along with its relationship to the proposed SEE are discussed in the Planning Statement submitted with this application.

2.42 As described in Chapter 1 Introduction and Chapter 4 Development Description, the gas pipeline, transmission line connection and CCR are integral components of the proposed SEE. Separate ESs will be prepared for these components, which will provide detailed information on their environmental impacts. Off-site works associated with the CHP will comprise the installation of a hot water and/or heat network using small diameter pipework that will either be laid overground or buried. The latter will not require a separate ES.

2.43 The proposed SEE cannot be considered in isolation and it is appropriate to consider the cumulative impacts associated with all of the integral components of the proposed SEE within this ES, to the extent that this is possible. Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects provides an assessment of the indirect, secondary and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the overall development, taking into account interactions between all of the individual components (the proposed SEE; the gas pipeline; the overhead transmission line; off-site pipework associated with CHP; and future CCS).

2.44 It should be noted that in all technical assessments within the ES, including the cumulative effects assessment, the existing SECL power station and any other existing operational developments are considered part of the baseline environment. This is in accordance with accepted best practice EIA methodology.


2-10 Issue 6: 64C13376

Approach to Mitigation

2.45 In the hierarchy of mitigation, likely significant adverse effects should in the first instance be avoided altogether, then reduced and finally offset7.

2.46 Adverse effects are best avoided through the design and the iterative nature of EIA can help to inform the development of the design process. In this case, the EIA and the design processes have been combined. The baseline assessment informed the initial framework of the development; then as the scheme developed, likely significant environmental effects were identified and the proposals refined to minimise likely significant environmental effects. Where impacts have been avoided or reduced through design, this is described in the relevant technical chapters.

2.47 Mitigation measures to prevent, reduce and, where possible, offset any significant adverse effects on the environment can also be implemented during the construction phase or once the development is completed. Where the assessment of impacts (see below) draws on mitigation that will be implemented in the future, a commitment has been sought from the applicant to implement the mitigation measures set out in the relevant technical chapter. A schedule of mitigation and monitoring measures is presented in Technical Appendix 6.1.

Assessment of Impacts

SIGNIFICANCE

2.48 The assessment of the significance of environmental effects is important in that it informs the determination by the competent authority of the overall acceptability of the proposal. Determining significance is frequently one of the more contentious elements of the EIA process in that it uses not only predictive tools and assessment criteria, but also expert interpretations and value judgements.

2.49 It is possible to consider the likely significance of environmental effects with and without mitigation measures in place. In the absence of clear guidance within EIA practice on how to approach this issue, this EIA adopts an approach that reflects how the proposed SEE has responded to environmental constraints and opportunities in its design and how it envisages responding to issues through construction and operation. Likely significant environmental effects have therefore been identified first, based on an understanding of the site and the general form of development. A description of the mitigation measures incorporated into the design, and envisaged for the construction and operation stages of the proposed SEE, is then provided. Finally, residual impacts, i.e. those that remain following the implementation of mitigation, are then assessed to demonstrate how the mitigation has been effective at avoiding, reducing or offsetting likely significant environmental effects.

2.50 The significance of environmental effects in EIA is typically assessed by considering both the character of the change (i.e. the size and duration of the impact) and the value/sensitivity of the environmental resource that experiences this impact (the receptor).

2.51 Impacts and receptors have been described using quantitative criteria wherever possible using those listed below. Where different terminology has been used, this is stated clearly in the relevant chapter.

7 IEMA (2004) Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment

• The nature of the impact, described as adverse, neutral or beneficial;

• The magnitude of the impact, based on a scale of major, moderate, slight, negligible and unknown;

• The likelihood of the impact occurring, based on a scale of certain, likely or unlikely;

• The duration of the impact, based on a scale of long, medium and short term;

• The reversibility of the impact, being either reversible or irreversible;

• The value of the receptor, based on a scale of international, national, regional, local and negligible;

• The sensitivity of the receptor to the impact, based on a scale of high, medium and low; and

• The occurrence of the impact during the phased implementation of the project.

2.52 Each of the technical chapters provides the specific criteria, including sources and justifications, for quantifying the different levels of impact. Where possible, this has been based upon quantitative and accepted criteria together with the use of value judgements and expert interpretations to establish to what extent an impact is environmentally significant.

PHASING

2.53 In relation to phasing, the likely significant effects arising from construction and operation have been assessed individually in each chapter. Chapter 5 Construction provides a detailed breakdown of project phasing.

DETAILED DESIGN

2.54 The final configuration of the proposed SEE within the parameters cannot be confirmed until a construction contract is in place. Where detailed design issues within the parameters have yet to be determined (e.g. the precise plant configuration), any resulting uncertainty in assessing likely significant environmental impacts has been dealt with by using the ‘worst case’ scenario, e.g. the highest NOx emissions and the maximum build envelope.

2.55 A parameter plan has been developed to define the proposed SEE and assist the assessment of the likely significant environmental effects, and this is intended to provide a degree of flexibility in the final building layout and height. This parameter plan is presented in Figure 2.1. The objective of the parameter plan is to identify blocks within which structures of a maximum height may occur; in practice, these areas may also include structures less than the maximum height and there may be space between some structures. For example, two tanks are located in the green shaded area on Figure 2.1 – the final layout may require these tanks to be relocated within the green shaded area, however they would not exceed the maximum height of 23 m assigned to this block, and the footprint of these tanks would not increase.

2.56 This approach inevitably overstates the visual impacts associated with the proposed SEE, however it provides an appropriate means of assessing the likely significant effects of the proposed SEE.



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-11

Assumptions and Limitations

2.57 The principal assumptions that have been made, and any limitations that have been identified, in undertaking the EIA are set out below. Assumptions specifically relevant to each topic have been set out in the relevant chapter.

• The assessments contained within each of the technical chapters are based upon the application drawings and parameter plan submitted as part of the application;

• Baseline conditions have been established from a variety of sources, including historical data, but due to the dynamic nature of certain aspects of the environment, conditions may change during the construction and operation of the proposed SEE;

• The assessments contained within each of the technical chapters are based upon all of the principal existing land uses adjoining the site remaining substantially unaltered;

• Construction works across the site will take place in accordance with the description in Chapter 5: Construction and Chapter 6: Environmental Management;

• The design, construction and completed development will satisfy environmental standards consistent with contemporary legislation, practice and knowledge as a minimum, but will strive to achieve best practice; and

• A CEMP will be discussed and agreed with SHDC at a later date, if Section 36 Consent is granted, and enforced and monitored during all key stages of the works (see Chapter 6 Environmental management for more details).

The Environmental Statement

Content of the ES

2.58 The required content of the ES is set out in Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations. Table 2.2 presents these requirements and indicates where in this ES the requirements have been met.

Table 2.2: Information which is required in an ES (Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations)

Required Information Section of ES

PART I

1 Description of the development, including in particular – A description of the physical characteristics of the whole

development and the land-use requirements during the construction and operational phases;

A description of the main characteristics of the production processes, for instance, nature and quantity of the materials used;

An estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (water, air and soil pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation, etc) resulting form the operation of the development.

Chapter 4 Description of Development; Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 6 Environmental Management provide these details.

Table 2.2: Information which is required in an ES (Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations)

Required Information Section of ES

PART I

2 A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the development, including, in particular, population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the inter-relationship between the above factors.

Technical chapters 7-15 provide these details, particularly in the Baseline Conditions section

3 A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment, which should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development, resulting from: The existence of the development The use of natural resources; The emission of pollutants, the creation of nuisances and the

elimination of waste, and The description by the applicant or appellant of the forecasting

methods used to assess the effects on the environment.

Technical chapters 7-15 provide these details, particularly in the Potential Impacts and Impact Assessment sections

4 A description of the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and where possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment.

Technical chapters 7-15 provide these details, particularly in the Mitigation section

5 A NTS of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Part.

This is published as Volume 1 of the ES

6 An indication of any difficulties (technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered by the applicant or appellant in compiling the required information.

Technical chapters 6-15 provide this information where relevant

PART II

1 A description of the development comprising information on the site, design and size of development.

Chapter 4 Description of Development

2 A description of the measures envisaged in order to avoid, reduce, and, if possible remedy significant adverse effects.

Mitigation section in each technical chapter

3 The data required to identify and assess the main effects which the development is likely to have on the environment.

Methodology section in each technical chapter

4 An outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant or appellant and an indication of the main reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects.

Chapter 3 Design Evolution and Alternatives

5 A NTS of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Part.

Volume 1 of the ES

Technical Chapters

2.59 A consistent approach to the presentation of EIA findings in the ES has been adopted for each of the technical areas, including:

• an explanation of the information gathering and assessment methodology, including a review of policy and legislative requirements of relevance to the specific technical area;


2-12 Issue 6: 64C13376

• a description of the baseline conditions;

• a description of the mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the proposed SEE through its design and for its construction and operation;

• the identification of the likely significant impacts arising during the construction and operation phases of the proposed SEE;

• a description of additional opportunities for mitigation to reduce the significance of any adverse environmental effects, including the requirements for post-development monitoring; and

• an assessment of the likely significant environmental effects these impacts are expected to cause and an evaluation of their significance against defined criteria.

2.60 Accordingly, the technical chapters (Chapter 7-14) adopt the following structured approach:

• Introduction;

• Legislation and Policy Context;

• Issues Identified During Consultation;

• Assessment Methodology;

• Baseline Conditions;

• Mitigation;

• Impact Assessment;

• Schedule of Mitigation & Monitoring Measures;

• Summary; and

• References

Good Practice

2.61 As with EIA, good practice in the preparation of the ES is defined in a number of sources, with more specific issues covered by ES review checklists8. Many of these checklists are very detailed and go to some length. In terms of widely applicable and practical guidance, the quality indicator check provided within the Scottish PAN 58 EIA in particular identifies a number of possible quality indicators for an ES. No similar checklist is published within EIA guidance for England and Wales. Table 2.3 therefore reproduces the PAN 58 checklist, along with a description of how these indicators have been met by this ES.

8 E.g. IEMA (2008) ES Review Criteria; European Commission (2001) Guidance on EIA: EIS Review; Lee N, R Colley, J Blonde and J Simpson (1999) Reviewing the quality of Environmental Statements and Environmental Appraisals; Scottish Government (1998) Planning Advice Note 58: Environmental Impact Assessment Annex 5.

Table 2.3 Quality indicator check from PAN 58

Does the statement report on a systematic approach to the gathering and analysis of information?

The approach adopted for gathering and analysis of information is outlined in Chapter 2. Specific methodology for each discipline is outlined in the ‘Methodology’ section of each technical chapter.

Does it contain the information specified in Schedule 4 of the Regulations?

Yes, as identified in Table 2.2.

Is the information presented in a clear, comprehensive and objective manner?

The approach to collection of information, modelling and impact assessment is outlined in the ‘Methodology’ section of each technical chapter. Baseline conditions are summarised in each technical chapter with reference to appropriate sources, and the impact assessment has followed a systematic and transparent approach.

Is there a relatively concise main report which draws on the technical studies and summarises them as necessary?

Volume 2 of the ES is the main report, presenting the most important baseline, mitigation and interpretative assessment results. Raw data and further technical information has been included in Technical Appendices in Volume 3.

Is there sufficient cross referencing for the reader to make the links between the NTS, the main report, appendices, and any separate studies?

The NTS contains references throughout to direct the reader to further information in the main ES report. Similarly, technical chapters in the main ES report refer the reader to supporting data and other technical information where this is available in the Technical Appendices. The ES also cross-refers to other documentation supporting the application for Section 36 Consent. Referencing of legislation, guidance and previous studies has been provided throughout the ES.

Is the space devoted to environmental issues commensurate with their potential impacts, and are those issues with insignificant impacts identified?

A range of likely significant environmental impacts has been identified in each technical chapter. These impacts are then mitigated through avoidance or reduction, by design or by construction / operational management. The residual impacts are then assessed for significance in accordance with the sequence of assessment outlined in the methodology sections of each technical chapter. The residual impact assessment demonstrates how the conclusion of significance or non significance has been reached. Where a residual impact has been determined as potentially significant, further consideration has been given to describing this impact and additional mitigation that may reduce the impact further.

Are mitigation measures presented as a hierarchy?

PAN 58 identifies a hierarchy of preferred mitigation options, starting with avoidance of impacts where possible, followed by reduction of the impact, and then lastly through offsetting the impact. The approach to mitigation adopted in the environmental assessment process is described in Chapter 2 and in more detail in each of the technical chapters. Wherever possible, potentially significant environmental impacts have been avoided through design. Where this has not been possible, reduction of the magnitude or duration of the impact has been considered; this has been achieved at both the design stage and through the implementation programme. Off-setting of unavoidable impacts has been adopted at the final stages.

Are mitigation (and restoration) measures described in sufficient detail and timetabled?

Mitigation through design is described in detail in each of the ES technical chapters, with references to the timing of implementation where relevant.

Does it state the means by which monitoring will be carried out?

Monitoring proposals are addressed in the mitigation proposals outlined in each of the ES technical chapters where appropriate.



64C13376 Issue: 6 2-13

Are the methods by which the analysis was carried out and the ES prepared explained, and are the credentials of the experts involved stated?

Chapter 2 of the ES provides a detailed description of the methodological approach adopted for this EIA. This is further expanded in each of the technical chapters. The EIA project team is presented in Chapter 1 of the ES, and the author of each technical section is stated at the beginning of that chapter.

Is the development plan context for the project set out?

The development context has been summarised in Chapter 1 of the ES. There is also further information available in the stand alone Planning Statement, which accompanies the application for Section 36 Consent.

Are detailed technical studies contained in appendices?

Detailed technical information is provided in the Technical Appendices Volume (3) of the ES. Sources of information for the environmental assessment and raw data (where appropriate) are summarised in the chapters and the supporting appendices.

Are links to other consent regimes clearly indicated?

Yes. Each ES section summarises applicable regulatory frameworks including regimes for water pollution prevention, wildlife protection, noise control, air quality control and construction.

Is the 'Non Technical Summary' a summary in every-day language?

The NTS has been drafted with a careful eye to removing technical language, and defining other terms where appropriate. There is also a glossary of technical terms and abbreviations provided with the ES main report.


2-14 Issue 6: 64C13376

Client



SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC March 2009

Figure 2.1Parameter Block Model Layout

5ENVIRON UK Limited



LEGEND

N



64C13376 Issue: 7 3-1

3 Alternatives and Design EvolutionIntroduction

3.1 The EIA Directive and Schedule 4 of the EIA Regulations require the ES to report on the main alternatives studied by the applicant and give an indication of the main reasons for their choice, taking into account environmental impacts. This chapter explores the objectives of the proposed SEE and describes how the development has evolved in response to environmental and planning opportunities and constraints. The “do nothing” scenario is also addressed.

3.2 As discussed in Chapter 1 Introduction, a shortfall in electricity generation capacity versus demand is predicted in the UK by 2015 if no new power stations are constructed. This is because many older coal and nuclear plants are scheduled to retire and energy demand is predicted to grow over time, despite improvements in energy efficiency.

3.3 As such, power generation development is required to ensure security of supply is maintained in the future. The Energy White Paper1 and the Energy Markets Outlook 20082 outline the requirement to ensure security of supply. This favourable regulatory climate, combined with strong market forces, has driven InterGen’s decision to invest further in power station development in the UK.


Alternative Sites

EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.4 InterGen has considered a variety of alternative sites for the purposes of power station development across the UK. The main considerations influencing the decision making process are:

• accessibility to the national electricity transmission network;

• accessibility to the national gas transmission network;

• availability of industrial sites with sufficient land area;

• economic benefits of proximity to the national electricity and gas networks;

• compatibility with planning policies and local development plan;

• environmental considerations, e.g. conservation designations, the presence of protected species;

• likely suitability for CCS; and

• opportunities to link beneficially with local industry.

1 DTI (2007): Meeting the Energy Challenge – A White Paper on Energy

2 Energy Markets Outlook, December 2008, DECC and Ofgem

3.5 In addition, the location of existing InterGen power generation is an important consideration in the site selection process. Constructing a new plant adjacent to an existing power station is standard industry practice as it allows power generators to take advantage of economies of scale and utilise existing infrastructure wherever possible. Local examples of this include: South Humber Bank 1 & 2 and Kings Lynn A & B.

3.6 There is a range of site-specific environmental issues which affect the suitability of a site for a power station, falling broadly into two categories:

• factors which affect the potential magnitude of likely significant environmental impacts such as the existing baseline environment, screening of the site, the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development; and

• presence of receptors sensitive to impacts which may comprise population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the inter-relationship between these factors, both on and off site.

SITES CONSIDERED

3.7 A site selection process was carried out by InterGen prior to development of the existing SECL power station. Spalding was selected as a preferred location on the basis of the site evaluation criteria described in paragraphs 3.4 – 3.6.

3.8 Three potential sites located within 1 km2 of the northern edge of Spalding were then considered for siting of the existing SECL power station, as shown in Figure 3.1. The sites were located adjacent to the Benner Road Industrial Estate. Site A was used for agricultural research and development and Sites B and C were both previously part of a British Sugar factory complex.

3.9 The three sites were assessed for suitability based on the environmental issues outlined in Table 3.13.

3 Spalding Energy Project: Scoping Report, June 1996. ERM


3-2 Issue 7: 64C13376

Table 3.1: Key Environmental Issues for Siting a Power Station

Environmental Issue Proposed Indicators

Air Quality Background air quality Factors influencing atmospheric dispersion Odour and dust

Traffic Site access Main road network

Landscape and Visual Impact

Visibility of site Existing landscape character of site Existing landscape character of surrounding area Landscape and visual impact

Geology, Hydrogeology and Surface Water Geology and ground conditions Groundwater resources Surface water resources

Ecology and Wildlife Ecological habitats on-site Ecological habitats of surrounding area

Noise and Vibration Existing noise climate Screening and noise attenuation

Land Use, Planning Context and Material Assets Land use/planning designation, mature trees, agricultural resources, mineral resources Land uses of the surrounding area

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Archaeology on-site Archaeology and heritage of surrounding area

3.10 The key environmental advantages and sensitivities associated with each of the sites identified during the above assessment are summarised in Table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Key Environmental Advantages and Sensitivities

Site Key Advantage Environmental Sensitivity

Site A

Existing roundabout available to service the site access. Designated for industrial development, especially ‘major industrial proposals’.

Visual impact Protection of surface water

Site B

Greatest separation from residential receptors. Likely to have the lowest visibility and noise screening due to location amongst industrial premises. Designated for industrial development, especially ‘major industrial proposals’.

Visual impact Protection of surface water On-site ecology

Table 3.2: Key Environmental Advantages and Sensitivities

Site Key Advantage Environmental Sensitivity

Site C (The existing SECL site)

Recently occupied by a British Sugar Factory, with buildings and structures comparable with that of a power station. No nature conservation interest on site. Derelict land (i.e. demolished factory) not currently in productive use.

Visual impact Protection of surface water

3.11 No over-riding reasons were identified to reject any of the sites for development of a power station. The existing SECL site was selected because it offered the opportunity to reuse former industrial land which was in need of regeneration, and as there were fewer technical and environmental issues associated with the routeing of the overhead electricity transmission line and gas supply pipeline to this site.

3.12 The proposed SEE site is located directly adjacent to the existing SECL power station site and shares many of the same characteristics. It comprises brownfield land which has been identified for employment use by SHDC.

3.13 The recent EU requirement that new plants are constructed CCR (refer to Chapter 4 Development Description, paragraphs 4.168 – 4.173) is now an additional consideration in the site selection process. SEEL has commissioned a CCR Assessment4 to assess the feasibility of installing CCS technology at the proposed SEE site. The study demonstrates that Spalding is well located for implementing CCS because potential CO2 storage sites are currently all located offshore and the proposed SEE site is located within 100 km of a number of ports along the east coast. Therefore CO2 can be transported to one of the nearby port facilities, or to the gas terminals at Theddlethorpe or Bacton, from where it can then either be shipped or piped to an offshore CO2 storage site in the south North Sea gas fields.

3.14 Transportation of CO2 via pipeline is a feasible option because experience within the natural gas industry has consistently demonstrated that transport using a network of pipelines is the most cost effective and least environmentally harmful option when it is necessary to transport large volumes of gas over long distances. The CCR assessment indicates that routeing a CO2 pipeline from the proposed SEE site to a port on the east coast is likely to be technically feasible as routing options that avoid areas of high population density exist and it may be possible to parallel existing NGG natural gas feeder pipelines.

3.15 Alternatively, it may be necessary to transport CO2 by road and suitable highway infrastructure is in place. Potential destinations for road transport from the proposed SEE include Theddlethorpe (80 km), Bacton (130 km), or a nearby port or harbour either on the coast, a river or canal. Rail options are possible but would require the construction of rail infrastructure.

4 Spalding Energy Expansion 900 MW CCGT Plant, Carbon Capture Readiness Assessment, March 2009. Parsons Brinckerhoff



64C13376 Issue: 7 3-3

PREFERRED SITE OPTION

3.16 The site selection process undertaken for the existing SECL power station remains current for the proposed SEE. The location of the proposed SEE site directly adjacent to an existing InterGen development offers the potential for synergies in construction and operation. The suitability of the proposed SEE site for CCR is a further factor. It is on this basis that InterGen has selected the proposed SEE site, taking into account all of the likely significant environmental effects.

3.17 The following summarises the rationale for the selection of the proposed SEE site:

• the opportunity to utilise existing infrastructure where possible, which means that items such as the demineralisation plant may not be duplicated;

• the presence of a skilled workforce at the existing SECL power station, with its established operational systems, will be available for training new employees;

• the electrical grid connection, east of Spalding is accessible to key areas of UK electricity demand;

• the national gas supply pipeline east of Spalding is accessible and has capacity;

• there is sufficient land available for CCS and transport of CO2 from this location appears to be feasible;

• the land use characteristics of the adjoining industrial estate and the existing SECL power station site provide an appropriate environment for the development of the proposed SEE;

• proximity to potential heat and power off-takers; and

• SECL has a strong existing relationship with key stakeholders and the local community.

Alternative Processes

EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.18 InterGen has considered alternative processes at a strategic level in determining what form of power generation development activity to pursue. The main considerations that influence this decision making process are:

• likely significant environmental effects as discussed above and including, for example, air emissions, land take, transportation and waste;

• the regulatory climate (e.g. certainty that plant will be able to continue to generate for its operational life, likelihood of obtaining relevant consents and permits, etc);

• technical feasibility;

• economic feasibility (achieving acceptable terms for Principal contractor, financing and resultant returns); and

• InterGen experience and expertise.

3.19 There are a range of processes available for the generation of electricity. These include fossil fuels, renewable energy such as wind or photovoltaics, sustainable energy such as biomass, and nuclear power. A brief description of the alternative processes considered by InterGen is provided below.

FOSSIL FUELS

3.20 Fossil fuels such as coal, diesel and natural gas are combusted in power stations to generate electricity. Fossil fuel combustion is capable of generating a significant amount of electricity in comparison with many other generation technologies. In addition, fossil fuel plants are flexible and reliable and relatively low cost to construct compared, for example, to nuclear plants. However, there are environmental concerns associated with burning fossil fuels, particularly with regard to their contribution to global warming through CO2 emissions. The severity of environmental impacts associated with fossil fuel power generation is dependent on the type of fossil fuel burnt and specific plant technology.

3.21 Diesel and coal-fired plants have relatively high atmospheric emissions in comparison to modern gas-fired CCGT plants. The combustion of all fossil fuels results in the production of CO2, however the combustion of natural gas in a plant utilising CCGT technology results in the emission of just over half the CO2 per unit of electricity generated when compared with a conventional coal-fired power station. This is due to the higher specific energy content of natural gas and the greater efficiency of CCGT technology. For an explanation of the CCGT process, please see Chapter 4 Development Description.

3.22 SO2 and NOX contribute to acid rain and are produced in significant quantities by both coal and diesel fired power stations. In comparison, the combustion of natural gas produces only trace quantities of SO2 and considerably lower levels of NOX. It is possible to reduce the SO2

emissions produced by coal-fired power stations by fitting FGD technology, however this reduces efficiency levels resulting in a relative increase in CO2 emissions per unit of electricity produced. Dependent on the technology used, the desulphurisation process may also result in the production of solid residues, such as gypsum. Although these wastes can sometimes be sold as a useful by-product, e.g. for plasterboard manufacture, they are not always of saleable quality and their disposal may have environmental impacts. More recently seawater scrubbing FGD has been deployed within the UK, e.g. at Longannet Power station in Fife. However, the inland location of the proposed SEE would preclude the use of sea water scrubbing technology at the proposed SEE site.

3.23 A comparison of CO2, SOX, NOX and particulate matter emissions from various combustion processes, based on meeting the new plant standards of the LCPD (2001/80/EC) and other relevant European directives is given in Table 3.3 below.


3-4 Issue 7: 64C13376

Table 3.3: Comparison of Atmospheric Emissions from New Power Plants

Parameter Units Gas-fired CCGT Conventional Oil-Fired Plant*

Conventional Coal-fired Plant *

mg/Nm3 50 150 150 NOx

g/MWh 861 3681 3834

mg/Nm3 Negligible 100 150 SO2

g/MWh Negligible 2454 3834

mg/Nm3 Negligible 15 10 Particulates

g/MWh Negligible 369 255

mg/Nm3 50 150 150 CO

g/MWh 861 3681 3834

CO2 g/MWh 389 737 843

* with flue gas desulphurisation and selective catalytic reduction.

3.24 Clean coal technology is an umbrella term used to describe technologies that aim to reduce the environmental impact of coal energy generation. Various clean coal technologies are currently being taken forwards by industry players. These include chemically washing minerals and impurities from the coal prior to combustion, gasification of the coal prior to combustion, utilisation of flue gas cleaning technologies such as FGD, SCR and ESPs to reduce atmospheric emissions, and supercritical and ultra-supercritical steam cycle technology.

3.25 Supercritical and ultra-supercritical coal-fired plants operate at very high temperatures and pressures, resulting in much higher energy conversion efficiency within the steam turbine cycle. The higher operating efficiencies of supercritical plants result in less CO2 and other emissions per unit of energy generated - a typical advanced supercritical coal pulverised fuel coal plant can offer efficiencies of up to 47%, compared with 35 - 38% for sub-critical plants. However this is still less than CCGT plants, which can achieve cycle efficiencies of up to around 55%.

3.26 Coal is a readily available fuel, and the development of clean coal technology means that it is likely to continue to play a significant role in maintaining security of supply and generating capacity in the UK in the foreseeable future. However many of these technologies are not yet well enough developed and tested to be deployed with the degree of commercial certainty that exists for gas, and even when BAT are incorporated, CCGT technology still represents the cleanest and most efficient form of electricity generation from fossil fuel.

3.27 The combustion of coal results in the production of solid wastes requiring disposal such as ash. The disposal of these materials has environmental implications associated with their transport to ash lagoons, landfill (markets for re-use exist but are limited) and the impacts of disposal. The combustion of gas results in the production of immaterial solid wastes.

3.28 Delivery of coal to the proposed SEE site would result in a significant number of traffic movements as there is no suitable railway infrastructure associated with the proposed SEE site or located in the immediate area. However, gas is delivered to power station sites by underground pipeline, resulting in minimal environmental impacts and disturbance.

3.29 The land-take required for a CCGT power station is substantially smaller than that required for a coal-fired power station as the latter requires larger buildings and a greater area for storage of coal, and management of wastes associated with the combustion process. As such, it would not be possible to construct a coal-fired power station capable of generating 900 MW on the proposed SEE site.

3.30 The power produced from coal generation can be relatively high cost, particularly if carbon prices are high, owing to the higher CO2 emissions of coal. The capital cost of coal plants may also be around three times that of a CCGT plant.

RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGIES

3.31 InterGen supports the Government’s initiative for a low carbon economy and believes renewable technologies have an important role to play in meeting UK energy demands. InterGen will continue to consider investment in renewables, however it has not yet identified a suitable opportunity. The proposed SEE site is not considered suitable for such renewable developments, which tend to require large areas of land. For example, in order to provide 900 MW of electricity from wind power approximately 450 large wind turbines would be required5. This would require a wind farm extending over some 6,250 acres and the tall wind turbines, which can be anywhere from 60 – 120 m in height, would have a significant visual impact over this vast area.

3.32 Solar photovoltaic panels convert light energy into DC, suitable for charging a battery. Due to their small scale, they are not considered feasible for providing large-scale electricity generation in the UK climate. The northerly latitude of the proposed SEE also limits the feasibility of solar energy.

NUCLEAR

3.33 Nuclear power is not being considered currently by InterGen as this is not its core expertise. Furthermore, the proposed SEE site would not provide a good location for nuclear build due to limited access to sufficient quantities of water.

BIOMASS

3.34 The term "biomass" encompasses diverse fuels derived from timber, agriculture and food processing wastes or from fuel crops that are specifically grown or reserved for electricity generation. Biomass plants generate air emissions. These emissions vary depending upon the fuel and technology used.

3.35 It would not be feasible to install a biomass plant of up to 900 MW size at the proposed SEE site due to limited fuel availability, the space required for storage of fuel and the transportation issues associated with delivery of the large quantities of biomass required.

PREFERRED PROCESS

3.36 On the basis of the above InterGen is focussing its current investment in the UK on gas-fired CCGT power generation. CCGT technology comprises the optimal combination of the most energy efficient and environmentally friendly form of electricity generation from fossil fuel. The Government’s UK Energy White Paper makes it clear that the UK cannot rely on renewable

5 British Wind Energy Association website, December 2008 - http://www.bwea.com/index.html



64C13376 Issue: 7 3-5

technologies alone, and that fossil fuels will continue to be an important part of the energy mix for some time to come6. Due to the inherently clean and efficient nature of CCGT plants they are an important step towards a low carbon economy.

3.37 Gas-fired CCGT generation is also cost-effective to develop and operate, and enables a rapid response to customer demands. InterGen has extensive experience in CCGT development and currently owns three CCGT plants across the UK, as well as a further nine power plants in the Netherlands, Mexico, the Philippines and Australia, with a combined energy generating capacity of over 6,000 MW.

Alternative Site Layouts and Design Evolution

EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.38 The main considerations that have influenced the design process in terms of site layout and plant design include:

• the presence and form of the existing SECL power station, including potential for interconnections and shared services;

• the availability of land;

• access arrangements;

• health and safety requirements;

• reduction of environmental impacts, including:

− reduction in noise; − reduction in emissions; − reduction in visual impacts; − reduction in water use and protection of the water environment;

• opportunities for ecological enhancement;

• Government guidance;

• CCR feasibility;

• infrastructure connections (i.e. gas pipeline and overhead transmission line);

• design feedback from the EIA and stakeholder consultation process; and

• financial considerations.

PLANT CONFIGURATION

3.39 Although the conceptual design of the proposed SEE has been concluded, the final detailed design will not be completed until a Principal construction contract is in place, post determination of the Section 36 Consent.

3.40 The key driver in determining the nominal 900 MW generation capacity of the proposed SEE is that this has been considered the size required to attract competitive bids from potential contractors in respect of its construction.

3.41 Two main options have been considered in relation to the plant layout, these are known as multi-shaft and single shaft units. The principal difference between these options is that the multi-shaft

6 DTI (2007): Meeting the Energy Challenge – A White Paper on Energy; Energy Markets Outlook 2008

option uses one large STG, whereas the single shaft option uses two smaller STGs. In terms of emissions to air, water and land both options are similar, and each generates the same amount of power. These options are described in further detail in Chapter 4 Development Description.

COOLING OPTIONS

3.42 Three alternative types of cooling system have been considered for use at the proposed SEE - dry cooling, wet cooling (direct or indirect) and a hybrid system.

3.43 During the consenting process for the existing SECL power station it was proposed initially to use a wet cooling system. However SECL agreed to change this to a dry system to address concerns expressed by stakeholders in relation to both the amount of water required, and the potential impacts on the Wash due to abstraction of cooling water.

3.44 As a consequence of this experience, the wet cooling option was discounted from the design considerations for the proposed SEE, and an ACC has been selected as the preferred option.

3.45 Use of an ACC, rather than wet cooling, has the following benefits:

• significantly lower water consumption; and

• no surface water abstraction or discharge of heated cooling water to watercourses.

3.46 Hybrid schemes can be used to limit many of the issues associated with a wet system, including reduced water consumption; however a significant amount of water is still required and therefore a hybrid system was also discounted.

CHP

3.47 In the context of the proposed SEE, CHP refers to the utilisation of excess heat produced during the electricity generation process. Utilising excess heat in this manner can increase the overall efficiency of the combustion process and could potentially make a significant contribution to the UK’s sustainable energy goals.

3.48 As part of National Energy Policy, the UK Government is committed to promoting the installation of CHP wherever it is proved to be technically practical and economically justifiable. As such, any proposals for new power projects must be accompanied by an assessment of the potential for CHP supply in the vicinity of the proposed site, as outlined in the DTI (now DECC) Guidance Document “Guidance on Background Information to Accompany Notifications under Section 14(1) of the Energy Act 1976 and Applications under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, December 2006”.

3.49 The assessment is required to demonstrate that developers have explored opportunities seriously to implement CHP (including community heating), when developing proposals for new power projects. Where CHP opportunities have been identified, developers are required to show that they have carried out detailed studies on the feasibility of these opportunities and how they have used the results in shaping their proposals.

3.50 SEEL appointed PB to prepare a CHP Assessment to investigate the possibility of the proposed SEE supplying heat and power to nearby potential users, in accordance with the above Guidance. This report is provided as a supporting document to the Section 36 application and the alternatives considered within the assessment are summarised below.


3-6 Issue 7: 64C13376

Alternative Heat Users

3.51 The DECC CHP Guidance identifies a number of potential heat markets for consideration, including industry, commerce and public services. In accordance with this guidance, the following organisations were contacted as part of the CHP Assessment:

• The Carbon Trust;

• NHS Estates/Strategic Health Authority;

• SHDC

• DECC

• EMRA;

• LCC; and

• CHPA.

3.52 The Industrial Heat Map website provided by DEFRA7 was also used to identify CHP opportunities in the East Midlands area. Although there are 790 sites identified as suitable for CHP in the UK, the nearest registered heat user is located 19 km to the east of the proposed SEE site, and it is too far from the proposed SEE site to be viable.

3.53 In order to support the development of CHP in the UK, SEEL is seeking to provide an innovative local solution. On this basis, three areas of commercial/industrial development adjoining the proposed SEE site have been considered for CHP opportunities. These areas are shown in Figure 3.2 and summarised below:

• Zone 1 is bounded by Wardentree Lane to the north, Vernatt's Drain to the south and east and Spalding Road (B1356) to the west. This area comprises industrial and commercial businesses, a supermarket, a petrol station, the new South Holland Community Hospital and vacant employment land;

• Zone 2 is bounded by the A16 to the north, West Marsh Road and the River Welland to the east, Vernatt’s Drain to the west and residential land to the south. This area comprises the existing SECL power station, the proposed SEE site, water treatment works, food processing (production and packaging) and distribution; and

• Zone 3 is bounded to the north and east by the A16, to the south by Holbeach Road (A151) and to the east by the River Welland. This area comprises Springfields Outlet Centre (retail), industrial and commercial businesses, agriculture, horticulture and vacant land.

3.54 Zone 1 is accessible via pipe gantry across Vernatt’s Drain and Zone 2 is located adjacent to the proposed SEE site. Zone 3 has been discounted as initial calculations suggest that the cost associated with tunnelling beneath the River Welland is likely to be prohibitive.

3.55 Several local parties were contacted and the outcome of this consultation is presented in Table 3.4 below. The majority of parties have requested that discussions remain “Commercial in Confidence” at this time, and therefore have not been identified by name.

7 www.industrialheatmap.com

Table 3.4: CHP Assessment – Consultation with Potential Heat Users

Party Business Outcome

Host A Operates a food processing facility. This party was unable to explore the opportunity at this time.

Host B Provides critical local services. This party has expressed interest and will revert once internal discussions have been completed.

Host C Operates a food processing facility. This party has not replied to initial letters or follow up calls.

Host D The new South Holland Community Hospital. This party has indicated they would be interested in sourcing heat from the proposed SEE.

Host E A large multinational with operations outside the district.

This party has indicated they would be interested in sourcing heat, electricity and CO2 from the proposed SEE for a future horticultural development.

Host F Involved in intensive agriculture. Discussions with this party are on hold as its operations are outside the 3 zones identified above.

Host G Involved in intensive agriculture. Discussions with this party have been parked at this time as its operations are outside the 3 zones identified above.

3.56 At this stage, the consultation process has identified two potential users of heat, electricity and CO2 who may be able to take advantage of the construction of the proposed SEE – the new South Holland Community Hospital and Host E.

3.57 Assessment by PB indicates that provision of heat export from a new plant specifically designed to accommodate heat transfer using waste heat or heat from the steam cycle would present few technical challenges. A heat supply can be extended through Zone 1 and Zone 2 simply by extending the supply and return pipework ready for future users to connect into. In addition, the provision of electricity supply and CO2 export could also be provided without significantly affecting the plant design.

3.58 The timing of the construction of the proposed SEE would not support the initial supply of heat to the new South Holland Community Hospital, which is already under construction. However, a long term supply could be integrated into the design, with the hospital’s gas fired boilers relegated to back up duty once the CHP scheme became operational.

3.59 SEEL now intends to examine the commercial benefits and risks associated with implementing these proposals. At the time of writing, there is no formal agreement with either end user.



64C13376 Issue: 7 3-7

3.60 A technical description of the on-site elements required to implement a CHP scheme at the proposed SEE, along with the potential environmental effects, is provided in Chapter 4 Development Description. Off-site CHP elements are described in Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

Community Heating

3.61 Discussions were held with SHDC to identify community heating opportunities. The first of the two alternatives considered is the new South Holland Community Hospital, which is addressed above. The second is district heating, however due to the significant distance from local residences and the inherent low housing density in Spalding, district heating has been discounted at this time.

GAS RECEPTION FACILITY

3.62 The GRF is where the gas pressure is reduced and the gas is preheated and filtered prior to introduction into the gas turbine. Three options were considered for the location of the GRF as part of a Gas Pipeline Feasibility Study commissioned by SEEL8. The main criterion that was taken into account is that the GRF should be as close as possible to the proposed SEE.

Option 1

3.63 The existing GRF could be modified or extended to include the new installation. This was considered as a possible option as InterGen would then only have one GRF to maintain, as the single GRF would supply fuel gas to both the proposed SEE and the existing SECL power station. A disadvantage of this option is that if there was a major incident within the GRF, the fuel gas supply to both the proposed SEE and the existing SECL power station would be lost.

Option 2

3.64 A new compound could be constructed adjacent to the existing compound. The advantage of this option is that as the two GRFs would be in close proximity, it may be possible to use the existing electrical / instrumentation kiosk within the existing GRF to operate the new GRF. This would provide cost savings for the installation of the new GRF.

Option 3

3.65 A new compound could be constructed to the south of the existing SECL power station within the fence line of the proposed SEE site. The advantage of this option is that as the GRF will be contained within the proposed SEE site, allowing easy access and providing additional security.

3.66 Option 1 was discounted as it is not practical to extend the existing GRF as it is unlikely that the existing equipment would be suitable for the increased demand. Option 2 was discounted as, although there may be benefits in having the two GRFs in close proximity, routing the outlet pipework from the GRF across West Marsh Road to the proposed SEE could prove difficult and it is considered that installing the new GRF inside the proposed SEE site provides a better solution for the reasons outlined above.

3.67 Following evaluation SEEL has chosen, Option 3 as its preferred option as it will enable the GRF to be contained within the proposed SEE site. This provides operational advantages, as well as

8 Spalding Energy Expansion – Gas Pipeline Feasibility Study, 21.11.2008. 981230-M-RPT-003. BPA

providing constructability benefits and additional security for the GRF. The GRF will have its own security fence, but will also be situated within the proposed SEE site’s security fence.

SUBSTATION

3.68 The final switchyard design is the responsibility of NGET. During the design process for the proposed SEE, consideration has been given to both air insulated and gas insulated options. The latter uses SF6 as an insulator, which enables a reduction in the required footprint of the electrical gear, whereas the air insulated option would require a similar footprint to the existing SECL power station substation. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, SF6 is the most potent greenhouse gas that it has evaluated, with a global warming potential of 22,200 times that of CO2 when compared over a 100 year period. As such NGET has advised that air insulated is normally the preferred option and the larger substation footprint has therefore been included within the design proposals (see Chapter 4, Development Description).

ROADS AND ACCESS

3.69 During the design process, consideration was given to providing a new access point off West Marsh Road during the construction period, which was to be situated approximately 50 m to the north of Gate C. This option was subsequently discarded as the existing access was built to current design standards with good visibility splays, and the new proposed access had the potential to create a conflict with users of Gate C due to its close proximity. As such it is now proposed that construction traffic will use Gate C – this is further explained in Chapter 4 Development Description.

CCS

3.70 As described in paragraph 3.13 above, the proposed SEE site is sited in a suitable location to support future CCS, with good accessibility to potential storage sites in the south North Sea. A further essential consideration has been the availability of land to site future CCS plant. Through the design process, SEEL has been able to identify an adjacent parcel of land capable of supporting future CCS plant, and has control over this land through an option agreement. This land forms the southern portion of the proposed SEE site, and will be used as a laydown site during the construction of the proposed SEE.

The Mound – Alternative Options Considered

EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.71 As described in Chapter 1 Introduction, a Mound is located on the proposed SEE site comprising sugar beet washings, excavated from historical settlement lagoons to form an area approximately 4 m above ground level (on average). The Mound prevents development of the site it occupies and therefore it is necessary to remove the Mound from the land in question and to ensure ground conditions are appropriate for the proposed SEE. A Mound options review has been carried out to examine the potential for either re-use or disposal of the material and the principal evaluation criteria comprised:

• technical feasibility;

• sustainability;


3-8 Issue 7: 64C13376

• regulatory approval;

• costs; and

• risks.

MOUND REVIEW

3.72 The Mound currently occupies an area of approximately 2.4 ha and is calculated to comprise approximately 140,000 tonnes. This material is broadly similar in nature to a low nutrient multipurpose topsoil. However, it is currently generating CH4 and CO2 as a result of the high organic content of the material. Due to the open nature of the site and low gas flow rates the Mound is not considered to pose a risk either to human health or controlled waters in its current form (see also Chapter 11 Ground Conditions).

3.73 Several options were considered as part of the Mound review, including: re-use on site as landscaping material; provide to a third party as a commodity for re-use (residential, industrial or commercial); provide as a commodity for agricultural spreading; provide as a commodity to a landfill operator for use as a restoration material; on-site gas remediation with off-site re-use; and off-site disposal at registered waste landfill site.

PREFERRED OPTION

3.74 The preferred option was identified as the re-use of the material through off-site processing. Consultation with the EA and SHDC will be held in order to confirm this strategy. Transportation of the spoil will be by HGVs, which is addressed in Chapter 8 Transport and Access.

Consideration of Alternatives – Infrastructure Connections

Alternative Gas Pipeline Routes

3.75 SEEL has commissioned a Gas Pipeline Feasibility Study which includes a Pipeline Route Options Report that considers alternative routes for the pipeline that will supply the proposed SEE9.

3.76 Level 1 Routing Studies generally establish possible pipeline route corridors based on the pipeline termination points. A preferred corridor is then selected based on engineering constraints and environmental features such as:

• centres of population and proposed future development;

• engineering considerations such as roads, overhead cables, rives, railways and other major pipelines;

• construction issues such as side slopes and difficult ground conditions arising from geology, hydrology and soils of the area;

• mineral extraction and known areas of landfill or contamination;

• landscape and topography;

• nature conservation, including designated areas and protected species; and

• archaeology.

9 Spalding Energy Expansion – Gas Pipeline Feasibility Study, 21.11.2008. 981230-M-RPT-003. BPA

3.77 However, in this case the existing gas pipeline between the existing Wragg Marsh MOF and the existing SECL power station dictated the pipeline route corridor, as the termination points of the proposed pipeline are close to the existing pipeline’s termination points and this corridor has already have been subjected to the review described above.

3.78 The possible route corridor was taken as being approximately 1 km either side of the existing gas pipeline. Within this corridor four possible route options were considered, taking into account the local environment, topography, number of special crossings, possible interaction with the existing pipeline and future land development.

3.79 The routes were chosen to allow consideration to be given to areas both to the north and to the south of the existing pipeline, within the chosen route corridor. Any excursion further away from the chosen route corridor was not considered, as this would result in an increase in the length of the proposed pipeline and the existing route corridor has already have been subjected to engineering and environmental investigation, as described above.

3.80 The four routes selected are described below and shown on Figure 3.3. The exact location of the start and finish points of the proposed pipeline have yet to be confirmed and two options are shown.

ROUTE 1

3.81 A route set to the north of the existing pipeline. This route allowed the area to the north of the existing gas pipeline to be considered.

ROUTE 2

3.82 A route set to closely follow the existing pipeline route until diverting to the preferred A16 and River Welland crossing point. This route was chosen as it was seen as advantageous to follow the existing gas pipeline as closely as possible.

ROUTE 3

3.83 A straight line route from the MOF to the preferred crossing points of the A16 and River Welland. This was chosen as it is the most direct and the shortest route. It can be seen that the existing pipeline route chosen is very close to being a straight line route, other than slight diversions to avoid habitable buildings and locations of environmental constraints.

ROUTE 4

3.84 A route set to the south of the existing pipeline. This route was chosen as it allowed the area to the south of the existing gas pipeline to be considered.

PREFERRED OPTION

3.85 The Feasibility Study concludes that Route 2 is the preferred route for the following reasons:

• the pipeline would be laid on a proven route with adequate access facilities;

• there will be a minimum of land sterilisation, due to the proximity to the existing pipeline;

• the cathodic protection/AC corrosion mitigation requirements will be more easily manageable, as it is envisaged that the existing pipeline cathodic protection system will be used for the new pipeline; and



64C13376 Issue: 7 3-9

• the route has the least number of special crossings of all of the proposed routes, limiting environmental disturbance.

3.86 It should be noted that this preferred route is a preliminary in nature and will be further refined during the conceptual and detailed design phases of the pipeline project. The conceptual design process has now begun and will inform more detailed routing, for example through the avoidance of specific habitat features and other environmental and engineering constraints. The potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed pipeline are described in more detail in Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

Alternative Overhead Transmission Line Routes

3.87 SEEL initially considered the possibility of using the existing overhead transmission line associated with the existing SECL power station, using a technique known as ‘double-stringing’. However, SEEL was subsequently advised by NGET that this would not be possible for reasons of security of energy supply (based on the current NGET code), in the event of a line failure.

3.88 SEEL has also considered the possibility of undergrounding as an alternative to an overhead line. Again, NGET has advised that they consider there are severe disadvantages to undergrounding, and this is reflected in NGET Policy on Undergrounding. NGET’s approach is to use overhead lines wherever possible, and undergrounding is only given consideration where there are exceptional circumstances, such as dense urban areas or exceptionally constrained rural areas.

3.89 For this reason a new overhead line is the option available to SEEL.

3.90 The consideration of line route options, and selection of the preferred option for an overhead transmission line, is wholly the responsibility of NGET. This is a process which requires consideration of potential environmental impacts as well as feedback from a detailed consultation exercise.

3.91 In the absence of the studies to be carried out by NGET, a preliminary overhead transmission line route options study (see Technical Appendix 15.1) has been carried out on behalf of SEEL to consider options for the preferred route. This study identified four main routes commencing at the proposed SEE site and terminating at various points along the main Walpole-West Burton 400 kV line.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.92 The main evaluation criteria for the line route options study are listed as follows:

• landscape and visual impacts;

• nature conservation impacts;

• cultural heritage impacts;

• land use impacts;

• noise;

• planning constraints;

• length of route corridor;

• benefits of line removal (for redundant section of main Walpole-West Burton 400 kV line); and,

• the interrelationship between these factors.

3.93 Four potential route options have been identified as 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B (see Figure 3.4).

ROUTE 1A/1B

3.94 This route option leaves the proposed SEE and travels in a north easterly direction. It begins by crossing the River Welland, and the A16 and then continues across open farmland approximately 100 m south of the existing transmission line. At the point where the proposed transmission line crosses Stone Gate road, approximately 3 km from the proposed SEE, the proposed transmission line splits into proposal 1A and 1B.

3.95 1A continues in a north easterly direction again approximately 100 m south of the existing transmission line to where it meets the Walpole – West Burton transmission line. The route is approximately 5.5 km long.

3.96 1B continues in an easterly direction, across Hall Gate Road, south of St Lambert’s cottages and across the Moulton Mere Drain to where it connects with the Walpole – West Burton transmission line approximately 500 m south west of Moulton Seas End Village. The route is approximately 5.5 km long.

ROUTE 2A/2B

3.97 This route option leaves the proposed SEE, crosses the River Welland on the same line as the proposed route 1. Before this route crosses the A 16 it turns and travels in a south westerly direction. It then crosses the A 16, the A 151 and Swindler’s Drove road. The route passes south of the village of Weston, across the minor road that heads south of Weston between the nursery and Hollytree farm house, across Delgate Drain, south of New England farm house towards Whittington house. The route then heads due east across the open fields towards Whaplode Fen and the Whaplode River (Drain). The route is approximately 8 km at this point. Here it splits into proposal 2A and 2B.

3.98 2A then changes direction and heads north east across Snaffer’s Lane, across Cranes Gate road, north of Hither Hold farm and joins the Walpole – West Burton line at approximately the point where it crosses Hither Old Gate road. The entire length of route 2A is approximately 10 km.

3.99 2B continues in an easterly direction, over Cranes Gate road north of Hurdletree Bank farm house and south of Arrington house, across the B 1168 (Ravens Gate road), the Frog’s Abbey Gate road and Strong’s Bank road to where it meets the Walpole – West Burton Road north of the Swiss Cottage. The entire length of route 2B is approximately 13.5 km.

PREFERRED OPTION

3.100 Following detailed evaluation of each of the routes against the criteria described in paragraph 3.92, Route 1A has emerged as the possible preferred option. This is primarily on the basis of least landscape and visual impact when compared with the other options, with the other environmental considerations judged to be similar.


3-10 Issue 7: 64C13376

3.101 It should be noted that the preferred option as presented in this ES is indicative and subject to change, following more detailed studies to be carried out by NGET. The potential environmental impacts associated with the Route 1A transmission line are described in more detail in Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

DO-NOTHING OPTION

3.102 The “do nothing” scenario is a hypothetical alternative conventionally considered, albeit briefly, in EIA as a basis for comparing the development proposal under consideration. In this situation, the most likely do nothing scenario would comprise the site remaining in its current use for the short to medium term, followed by potential industrial development in the long term. How the proposed SEE site might evolve over time is open to question, but it is reasonable to assume that if the proposed SEE site remains vacant in the short term to medium term, either on-going maintenance by SECL or subsequent owners will continue or if the proposed SEE site is left unmanaged, ecological succession will occur. In terms of environmental impacts, this would mean that the Mound would remain on the proposed SEE site and ground gas would continue to be generated by the material in the Mound. Whilst breeding birds use the proposed SEE site, ecological benefit is constrained due to its current managed state. If management of the site were to cease, habitats would be anticipated to develop slowly. Habitat management (e.g. for invasive weeds) would likely be required in order for any biodiversity benefits to be properly realised. Ecological succession may also look unsightly and have negative effects on close views and encourage illegal activities such as fly tipping.

3.103 It is assumed that the proposed SEE site will ultimately be developed for industrial use because the land is designated for ‘Employment Use’ in the LP and is surrounded by existing industrial use. A planning application has recently been approved by SHDC for a petrol station and car showroom on vacant land located to the east and south of the proposed SEE site (please see the Planning Statement accompanying the ES for more detail on this application, as well as Chapter 2 EIA Process & Methodology and Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects). This supports the view that in the longer term the site will eventually be developed for industrial use. The nature of any future industrial development at the site will determine any impacts on local noise, air quality and traffic.

Summary

3.104 Following careful consideration of the various alternatives described above, InterGen has decided that the most economic and environmentally appropriate option is to construct a gas-fired CCGT plant adjacent to its existing SECL power station. This location has been selected because:

• it offers the opportunity to utilise existing infrastructure where possible;

• the skilled workforce at the existing SECL power station will be available for training new employees;

• the electrical grid connection, east of Spalding is accessible to key areas of UK electricity demand;

• the gas supply pipeline east of Spalding is accessible and has capacity;

• there is sufficient land available for CCS and transport of CO2 from this location appears to be feasible;

• the land use characteristics of the adjoining industrial estate and the existing SECL power station site provide an appropriate environment for the development of the proposed SEE; and

• the site is located within close proximity to potential heat and power off-takers.

3.105 The primary reasons for selecting gas-fired CCGT technology are summarised below:

• CCGT plants are highly efficient and result in lower emissions of CO2, SOX, NOX and particulate matter compared to alternative fossil fuels;

• CCGT technology is reliable, flexible and capable of generating a nominal 900 MW at the proposed SEE site;

• CCGT plants are relatively low cost to construct;

• CCGT plants require minimal landtake and smaller structures than many other forms of generation technology;

• natural gas is a secure fuel supply that can be easily transported to the proposed SEE site via pipeline;

• CCGT plants do not produce material amounts of solid waste in the combustion process;

• the use of ACCs will result in minimal water consumption - abstraction of large amounts of cooling water will not be required; and

• CCGT plants operate with low noise emissions.

Client



SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC March 2009

Figure 3.1Sites Considered For Existing SECL Power

Station

4ENVIRON UK Limited



N

Site A

Site C

Site B

Client



SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC March 2009

Figure 3.2CHP Assessment: Area of Search

1ENVIRON UK Limited



N

Zone 1

Zone 2

Zone 3

ENVIRON UK Limited


Figure 3.3Gas Pipeline Route Options

Client: SEEL

Scale: NTS Drawn By: KR Date: March 2009

Project No: 64C13376 Version Control: 6

LEGENDGas Pipeline to existing SECL Power Station

Possible Route 1 for New Gas Pipeline

Possible Route 2 for New Gas Pipeline (preferred)



Existing National Grid Feeder No.7

Proposed SEE site

±© Crown copyright,

All rights reserved 2009Licence number 0100031673

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 KJ

March 2009

Figure 3.4 Overhead Transmission Line Route Options


ENVIRON UK Limited


Version Control 5

Ex

1A

1B

2A

2B

LEGEND

The Proposed SEE Site

Walpole to West Burton 400kv Overhead Line

Existing SECL Power Station Grid Connection Line

N



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-1

4 Development DescriptionIntroduction

4.1 This chapter provides a description of the physical characteristics of the proposed SEE, including an estimate of residues and emissions, for the purposes of identifying and assessing the main environmental impacts. A description of the physical layout of the proposed SEE, the plant to be employed, and the associated infrastructure that will be required, alongside the estimated emissions and arisings is given, in accordance with the requirements of the EIA Regulations. A general description of the proposed SEE site and surrounding landuse is provided in Chapter 1 Introduction, with more detailed descriptions of estimated emissions provided in the relevant technical chapters.

Section 36 Consent Application

4.2 The applicant seeks Section 36 Consent principally for the following:

1. Up to a nominal 900 MW CCGT Power Station (the proposed SEE)

2. GRF within proposed SEE site

3. Substation (Air Insulated)1

4. Infrastructure (internal roads, utilities etc.)

5. Site clearance, ground stabilisation, demolition (for further information on the removal of the existing Mound, see also Chapters 5 (Construction), 6 (Environmental Management) and 11 (Ground Conditions)

6. Landscaping and biodiversity enhancement

7. Highways and transport works

8. Drainage works, including SUDS pond(s)

9. Engineering Operations

10. Associated and ancillary works

4.3 The Section 36 Consent application is seeking determination for the process, form and maximum scale of the proposed SEE. Details such as cladding, colour schemes and lighting will be agreed with SHDC, CLG and in consultation with other stakeholders where relevant.

4.4 The application will seek Section 36 Consent for the construction and operation of up to a 900 MW combined cycle gas turbine generating station comprising:

• two gas turbines;

• two HRSGs2;

• one or more steam turbines;

• one or more auxiliary boilers;

• one ACC and ancillary cooling;

• two or more transformers

• 400 kV sub-station;

• ancillary plant and equipment3;

• water treatment plant;

• two water tanks; and

• buildings (including administration offices) and civil engineering works.

4.5 The elements of the proposed SEE are described in a series of parameter plan (Table 4.1) submitted with the application for approval.

4.6 The conceptual design of the proposed SEE has been concluded. However the final detailed design of the proposed SEE will not be completed until a construction contract(s) is in place and, therefore, the final configuration of the plant cannot be confirmed until then. Thus, a degree of flexibility, within the confines of the parameter plan, with regard to the positioning and scale of the components for which SEEL is seeking consent, is required to allow for minor changes to the layout as the project progresses. As such, a ‘Parameter block model layout’ has been developed to establish the maximum extent of the physical development of the proposed SEE (Figure 4.1).

4.7 The parameter block model layout consists of a block model of the proposed SEE, demonstrating the maximum deviations that may occur within a series of three dimensional envelopes. This parameter plan comprises five distinct envelopes of varying heights based on

Table 4.1: Definitive Parameter Plan

Drawing No. Drawing Title Type Scale

ES Figure 1.1 Location of Proposed SEE site Definitive Not to Scale

2544/C/1 Application boundary* Definitive 1:2,500

ES Figure 4.5 Access Definitive Not to Scale

ES Figure 7.6 Parameter block model layout Parameter Not to Scale

ES Figure 7.19 Landscape Parameter Plan Parameter Not to Scale

ES Figure 12.3 Drainage Parameter Plan Parameter Not to Scale

* This drawing is provided as part of the application for Section 36 Consent

1 The substation is located within the red line application boundary for the proposed SEE, but procedurally will form part of the Section 37 consent application for the new transmission line to be submitted by NGET. 2 Including associated 2 main stacks 3 Including gas reception facility


4-2 Issue 8: 64C13376

the maximum height of structures or buildings that may occur within each area of the proposed SEE site. Despite the potential variation in site layout, the anticipated electrical generation capacity of up to a nominal 900 MW remains the same.

4.8 As described in Chapter 2 EIA Process and Methodology, the EIA is based on the parameter plan to ensure that the environmental effects of the possible layout variants and plant types have been considered. This approach allows for assessment of the ‘worst-case scenario’ in terms of the potential impacts. Through the detailed design process the proposals for the proposed SEE will be refined and it is likely that the eventual effects will be lower than those predicted, particularly with regard to the Landscape and Visual Assessment.

Land Use

4.9 The proposed SEE site is located in Spalding at National Grid Ref. TF 259 249 (Figure 4.2). The proposed SEE is an expansion of the existing SECL power station and it is intended that there will be a number of shared elements between the two projects. Therefore, a basic description of the existing SECL power station site is required in order to understand the SEE proposal. The location of the two sites in relation to one another is shown on Figure 4.3. Both sites are bounded to the east by West Marsh Road and to the west by Vernatt’s Drain.

The Existing SECL Power Station Site

4.10 The existing SECL power station site comprises a developed area which is accessed from the north via security controlled ‘Site Entrance A’ on West Marsh Road. There are two further secure site entrances (B & C) which are accessed via West Marsh road on the eastern side of the facility. These access points are shown on Figure 4.5. The majority of the existing SECL power station site is hardstanding, although gravelled areas are utilised in external areas around buildings and operational plant and equipment. There is a single surface water pond located in the northern corner of the existing SECL power station site, adjacent to the car park and security gatehouse.

4.11 The main buildings and plant are laid out from north to south as follows (Figure 4.4):

• an ACC structure is located just beyond the entrance to the existing SECL site, with an office, workshop and warehouse situated to the west;

• two HRSGs and associated stacks (78 m high) are located to the south of the warehouse building, across an internal road;

• the turbine hall is situated adjacent to the south of the HRSGs and houses two gas turbines and one steam turbine;

• the control room is attached to the turbine hall; and

• the three main transformers are located beyond the turbine hall to the south.

4.12 A NGET 400 kV substation is located at the southern extent of the existing SECL power station site.

The Proposed SEE Site

4.13 The proposed SEE site is located immediately to the south of the NGET substation on brownfield land and occupies an area of approximately 14 ha. Within this total area, 4 ha to the

south of the site has been optioned by SEEL to provide additional area for future CCS requirements. The option agreement allows access along the eastern boundary of the option land if required.

4.14 The proposed SEE site is predominately open and grassy in nature, with the exception of a group of buildings and bowling green owned by SECL and leased to the BSSSC, and a mainly disused office block. It will be necessary to demolish these facilities as part of the development of the proposed SEE.

4.15 The office block is owned and used on an ad hoc basis by the operator of the existing SECL power station, and is located on the eastern boundary, adjacent to West Marsh Road. This building is in poor condition. An internal access road is located within the proposed SEE site, and there are currently four tents used for storage purposes, situated adjacent to the western boundary.

Parameter Block Model Layout

4.16 Table 4.2 identifies the main structures and plant located within the blocks of the parameter block model layout (see Figure 4.1). These have been described from a grade level of 6.5 mAOD to avoid flood risk from a 1:200 year tidal event. Site levels are discussed further in paragraphs 4.33 – 4.34.

Table 4.2: Description of Parameters (refer to Figure 4.1)

No. Block Main Elements Max Height* (m) Area (m2)

1 Blue

Substation and GRF Substation GRF Refuse and storage area Pylon

14 m Parameter allowance for pylon structure of 65 m.

27,000 m2

2 Green

Water Storage Tanks Demineralised water storage tank Raw/firewater tank Water treatment plant Possible admin/warehouse

23 m 5,000 m2

3 Purple

Admin block: Warehouse, maintenance, admin and

control building Car parking Landscaping

17 m 8,750m2

4 Yellow

Main CCGT Plant: Gas turbine area Steam turbine area Heat recovery steam generator Transformers Air cooled condenser Car parking

39.5 m 36,400 m2



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-3

Table 4.2: Description of Parameters (refer to Figure 4.1)

No. Block Main Elements Max Height* (m) Area (m2)

5 Blue Hatch Main Stacks: The zone of deviation in which the location of the main stacks may move

82 m 5,250m2

*All heights are above a proposed grade level of 6.5 mAOD. Note: A SUDS pond or SUDS ponds to be located on the proposed SEE site as appropriate, in consultation with the EA.

Site Layout

4.17 As described above, the detailed design of the proposed SEE will not be completed until a construction contract is in place and therefore a degree of flexibility within the confines of the parameter plans in the final plant layout is required. As such, the areas within the parameters block model (Figure 4.1) in which various items of plant will be located have been identified and are described in Table 4.2.

4.18 The main gas turbines and steam turbine(s) will be located in the central part of the proposed SEE site and enclosed within the main power building (yellow block, Figure 4.1). The HRSGs will be situated outwith the turbine hall, however they will be enclosed within acoustic walls to provide noise attenuation. The stacks will be situated close to each CCGT and will be between 78 – 82 m in height. Note that for the purposes of the landscape and visual assessment the stacks have been assumed to be 82 m height, which presents the worst case scenario. However for air dispersion modelling the stacks have been modelled at 78 m in height, which presents the worst case scenario in terms of emission dispersion.

4.19 The ACC will be located close to the steam turbines to allow for an appropriate air flow to the condenser intakes (yellow block, Figure 4.1).

4.20 Export of electricity will be achieved via a new substation located in the northernmost area of the proposed SEE site, adjacent to the substation for the existing SECL power station (blue block, Figure 4.1).

4.21 Maximum plant dimensions are shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Maximum CCGT Plant Dimensions

Plant Height Area (m2)

HRSG 39.5 m 1,600 m2

Steam Turbine Area 36.5 m 2,250 m2

Gas Turbine Area 36.5 m 2,300 m2

Substation 12 m 22,500 m2

ACC 36 m 6,400 m2

Access and Traffic Movements

Access

4.22 The preferred primary site access for staff and visitors during operation will be via the security controlled Gate A on West Marsh Road, which is also the main access to the existing SECL power station site. An alternative is to have a security-controlled Gate C on West Marsh Road as the primary access in the event that the proposed SEE site is operated as a wholly stand alone power station. In terms of servicing, it is proposed that all deliveries will be made via Gate B from where deliveries will be distributed to both the proposed SEE and the existing SECL power station as appropriate.

4.23 HGVs for skip uplift will be by arrangement via Gate C, also situated adjacent to West Marsh Road. Gate C will normally be locked, as is currently the case for Gate B, unless a delivery is scheduled. Access for emergency vehicles during both construction and operation of the proposed SEE will also be via either Gate C or Gate A.

4.24 A car parking area for approximately 56 vehicles will also be provided on the proposed SEE site, along with:

• secure cycle storage for ten bicycles;

• three disabled car parking spaces; and

• six motorcycle parking spaces.

4.25 During construction it is proposed that all construction traffic will access the proposed SEE site from Gate C. This access already takes the form of a priority junction, constructed to current design standards with an 8.8 m carriageway width and 12 m kerb radii, and benefits from very good visibility splays in both southbound and northbound directions.

Traffic movements

4.26 It is estimated that approximately 15 - 20 direct FTE staff will be employed at the proposed SEE site once operational with the equivalent of a further 28 indirect FTE jobs for contracted engineering staff during regular maintenance shutdowns during the operational life of the proposed SEE. Alternatively, in the event that the proposed SEE site is operated as a wholly stand alone power station, the direct FTE staff would increase to approximately 40. During certain maintenance operations, there may be a peak of up to 250 direct and contract maintenance staff on-site, for a period of up to 4 weeks.

4.27 It is anticipated that there will be approximately 10 direct employees working day shift hours (0800 - 16.15). The balance of the direct staff will work either 0700 - 1900 or 1900 - 0700, with a security staff member working either 0500 - 1700 or 1700 - 0500. These employees will access and exit the proposed SEE site via Gate A. In addition, there are expected to be up to a further 15 visitor trips daily, all entering the proposed SEE site via Gate A. Alternatively, if the proposed SEE site is operated as a wholly stand alone power station the employees and visitors will all enter and exit via Gate C.


4-4 Issue 8: 64C13376

4.28 The proposed SEE site is accessible by pedestrians, with a footway present on the west side of West Marsh road. The proposed SEE site lies within 20 - 25 minutes walk of Spalding town centre and the residential areas to the south and north of the A151 Holbeach Road.

4.29 West Marsh Road also benefits from an off carriageway cycle lane connecting to the A151 to the south in Spalding and on Wardentree Lane to its north. It is anticipated that cyclists can access the proposed SEE site in less than 15 minutes from anywhere within Spalding.

4.30 Bus and rail services are also available to provide public transport options to access the proposed SEE site. The closest bus stop is located on West Marsh Road, approximately 1 km to the south of the proposed SEE site, with Spalding railway station situated approximately 3 km to the southwest.

4.31 All delivery of natural gas to fuel the proposed SEE will be via a new gas pipeline therefore the only HGV movements arising from the operation of the proposed SEE will be associated with the delivery of process materials, for example water treatment chemicals, or maintenance equipment associated with its servicing needs. It has been identified that up to 10 HGVs may visit the proposed SEE site daily, and most of these movements are expected to be outside of the AM (0800 - 0900) and PM (1700 - 1800) peak hours.

4.32 The layout of the proposed SEE site has been designed with its servicing in mind and sufficient space has been provided for a large refuse vehicle to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. Service vehicles such as these are expected to be very infrequent and will access the proposed SEE site via Gate C by prior arrangement.

Landscaping

Site levels

4.33 Site levels have been developed carefully to mitigate flood risk and to ensure accessibility standards are met throughout the development. The design flood level for the proposed SEE site, taking account of climate change and freeboard, is 6.5 mAOD and the whole site will be regraded to this level, except where it must tie in with adjacent land along the boundary of the site.

4.34 It is not feasible technically to build the substation up to 6.5 mAOD as it must be of a similar elevation to the existing SECL substation (4.8 mAOD in height) to facilitate interconnection between these structures. As a result of the breach assessment undertaken as part of the FRA, it has been determined that the substation will be 5.3 mAOD in height to ensure that this structure is not flooded in a 1 in 200 year flood event. However, the substation has been modelled at 6.5 mAOD in the parameter block model layout to allow for a worst case scenario in terms of landscape and visual impacts.

Planting and Ecological Enhancement

4.35 The exact details of the landscaping strategy will be confirmed post-consent in consultation with SHDC. A landscaping parameters plan (Figure 4.6) has been developed to demonstrate where landscaping could be incorporated across the proposed SEE site.

4.36 The landscaping strategy will aim to enhance the ecological resource of the proposed SEE site and to maintain connectivity to ecological resources in the wider area.

4.37 The landscaping proposals will incorporate native species and include the following, or similar:

• planting of hedgerow and hedgerow trees along the boundary with West Marsh Road to provide screening of the perimeter security fence and low level elements of the proposed SEE. Poplar species may be suitable as they are fast growing, provide excellent screening and are in keeping with the surrounding landscape (poplars are present immediately across Vernatt’s Drain);

• planting of woodland, trees and shrubs to create screening and enhance Vernatt’s Drain habitat corridor. Native oak species would be appropriate;

• shrub planting in various locations around the proposed SEE site (e.g. car parking areas), incorporating berried species to encourage birds into the site. Native berry-bearing species could include rowan, holly, whitebeam, spindle, dog rose, guelder rose, elder, hawthorn, honeysuckle or ivy. Non-native species which could be used in the landscaping as good berry bearers include cotoneaster, pyracantha and berberis; and

• the CCR area will be planted as a mixed species grassland following construction. A mixed species, herb-rich grassland would provide habitat for birds, invertebrates, reptiles and small mammals and would need minimal maintenance once established.

4.38 The proposed SEE will include a new SUDS water feature(s) of approximately 1,000 m3 in total. This feature(s) will be planted with a fringe of emergent and marginal vegetation such as common reed, rushes, reed sweet grass, marsh marigold, yellow iris, water mint and other wetland species to provide similar wildlife habitat to that used by birds and invertebrates along Vernatt's Drain and the River Welland, as well as treating and detaining water on the site as required.

4.39 All planting is proposed at a distance of greater than 9 m from Vernatt’s Drain, as required by the WDIDB.

Plant and Process Description

CCGT Technology

4.40 A schematic showing the key processes of CCGT power generation is shown on Figure 4.7. The first phase of the CCGT process takes place in the gas turbines where natural gas is burnt to drive the turbines. Each turbine is coupled to an AC generator that generates electricity as it is rotated by the turbine. The hot exhaust gases from the combustion process enter a HRSG which produces high pressure steam to power a steam turbine and generate further electricity. The low pressure steam leaving the steam turbine is then condensed in a cooling system and passed back to the HRSGs as water as part of a continuous loop.

4.41 The use of a HRSG and steam turbine to utilise the additional heat remaining from the gas turbine exhaust to generate electricity gives rise to the term 'combined cycle'. Proven CCGT technology can result in cycle thermal efficiencies of up to around 55%.

Power Station Design

4.42 The proposed SEE will utilise proven CCGT technology and the layout and design gives consideration to environmental impacts, in particular noise, emissions and visual appearance.



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-5

Many of the same technologies used within the existing SECL power station will be employed and the plants will be of a similar size. All equipment used in the plant will be modern and proven in the power generation industry.

4.43 The proposed SEE will incorporate a number of sustainability design and specification measures, for example low energy building design, brown/green roofs, habitat creation, rainwater harvesting, specification of materials with recycled content, SUDS pond(s) etc.

4.44 A stakeholder and community consultation strategy has been developed to ensure that there is effective consultation as the project advances through the various regulatory approval and consent procedures. This consultation will continue to feed into the detailed design process.

4.45 As described in Chapter 3 Alternatives and Design Evolution, it is proposed to utilise either single shaft or multi-shaft CCGT technology for the proposed SEE. Single shaft refers to the arrangement of the steam and gas turbines, which are directly coupled to the same generator such that the CCGT powertrain4 is contained on a common single shaft. For the proposed SEE, two complete single-shaft units would be required if the single shaft option is utilised.

4.46 Multi-shaft CCGT comprises gas turbines and steam turbines arranged with individual generators. The multi-shaft CCGT plant designs are generally more flexible due to the larger range of steam turbines and generators that can be utilised.

4.47 The principal difference between the single shaft and multi-shaft configurations is that two small steam turbines are required for the former, whereas one large steam turbine is required for the latter.

Main Plant

4.48 The main process plant of the proposed SEE is summarised below and will include:

• two gas turbines;

• one or more steam turbines5;

• two HRSGs6;

• one or more auxiliary boilers;

• one ACC and ancillary cooling;

• two or more transformers;

• 400kV substation;

• balance of plant equipment7;

• water treatment plant; and

• two water tanks.

4 The powertrain converts the linear motion of the pistons into rotational motion of the crankshaft

5 For the purposes of the EIA there is no difference between the options 6 Including associated two main stacks 7 Including gas reception facility

GAS TURBINES

4.49 Each gas turbine will comprise an air intake system (including a high efficiency air filter and silencer), a compressor, combustion chamber, power turbine and exhaust system. The gas turbines will utilise DLN technology burners to control the formation of NOx.

HEAT RECOVERY SYSTEM GENERATORS

4.50 Each of the two HRSG units are likely to comprise high, medium and low pressure steam circuits with the necessary integral pipe-work, equipment and instrumentation required for safe and efficient operation of the plant. After passing through the HRSGs, the exhaust gases will be discharged into the atmosphere through the main stacks. The height of the main stacks has been selected to minimise the ground level concentrations of NOx during start-up and normal operations.

4.51 Water in the HRSGs evaporator section boiler-circuit will be blown down to avoid the build up of dissolved solids. This water will be replaced using potable supplies.

4.52 Supplementary duct firing, whereby additional gas is burnt in the HRSG, may be employed to allow production of more steam which in turn produces more output from the steam turbine.

STEAM TURBINE(S)

4.53 Steam from each of the HRSGs will be conveyed to a steam turbine plant where high-pressure steam will be passed through a high-pressure turbine. The exhaust from the high-pressure turbine will then be mixed with steam from the intermediate section of the HRSG and will be passed through the intermediate section of the steam turbine and then passed through the lower pressure section of the steam turbine. The proposed SEE will have the ability to bypass the steam turbine(s) for a short period (up to a few days) during abnormal conditions. This steam bypass facility enables steam to be routed straight from the HRSGs to the ACC without having to pass through the steam turbine.

AUXILIARY BOILER(S)

4.54 The proposed SEE will be designed to include one or more auxiliary boilers. The boiler(s) may be used to provide condensate and/or steam that would normally be provided by the HRSG, for deaeration of the feed water/condensate before its introduction into the main boiler, to warm the steam piping and to supply the steam gland system.

4.55 When the facility is shut down, the condensate and/or steam from the auxiliary boiler improves start-up time by maintaining a steam supply to the steam turbine seal system and vacuum raising plant. Sparging steam is also provided to each of the HRSG lower headers to maintain elevated temperatures to the ACC condensate collection tank, thus allowing the plant to maintain a vacuum during periods when steam is not available from the HRSGs. Keeping these sections of the plant “warm” whilst it is not fully operational enables electricity generation to begin quickly when required, and avoids higher air emission concentrations associated with a cold start.

4.56 Using an auxiliary boiler also has other benefits for emissions, efficiency and maintenance:

• less energy is required to take the plant to electricity generation from a warm rather than a cold start using auxiliary boilers; and


4-6 Issue 8: 64C13376

• the number of cold starts falls, reducing emissions and maintenance requirements.

4.57 The auxiliary boilers will have small stacks up to 39.5 m in height. The stack heights for the auxiliary boilers have also been selected to minimise ground level concentrations of NOx during operation of the auxiliary boiler when the main power plant is shut down.

AIR-COOLED CONDENSER

4.58 The final exhaust steam from the steam turbine plant will be conveyed to the ACC system. After passing through the ACC, condensed steam will be collected, de-aerated and returned to the inlet of the HRSGs.

4.59 The use of an ACC eliminates the need for a large cooling water source and reduces environmental impacts associated with cooling water consumption and discharge. The ACC will comprise lines of fin tubing mounted in ‘A’ formation on steelwork frames above a number of slow speed fans that force air up over the tubes - in principle the design is similar to that of a car radiator. The steam in the tubes is condensed and the water formed returns by gravity to a condensate tank. The fan platform will be elevated to provide free air access to the fan intakes. The control system will prevent freezing under all conditions of operation.

4.60 The preferred design for the ACC positions the heat exchangers above the fan units, with a top height of up to 36 m above the ground surface.

AUXILIARY COOLING

4.61 A Fin-Fan air cooler will be used to cool the auxiliary equipment such as the generator cooling, the turbine lubricating oil circuits and other closed circuit heat exchangers.

GENERATORS

4.62 The generators will be of the cylindrical rotor type and may be cooled by either air or hydrogen in a closed circuit cooling arrangement. They will include excitation system, controls, neutral grounding equipment and all other auxiliaries.

TRANSFORMERS

4.63 Power generated in the gas and steam turbines at 16 – 24 kV will be stepped up through transformers for export to the National Grid at 400 kV. Each transformer will be oil filled and will be surrounded by a containment bund that will be capable of containing all the transformer oil in the event of a spillage.

SUBSTATION

4.64 A sub-station (air insulated) compound will be located to the north of the proposed SEE site. NGET will be responsible for the final design of the substation, which will house high-voltage switchgear, surge protection, controls and earthing system, and metering. Although described here, the detailed design of the substation will form part of the Section 37 Consent application for the transmission line.

BALANCE OF PLANT EQUIPMENT

4.65 The remainder of plant will consist of air compressing equipment, a gas reception station, electrical switchgear and control equipment.

4.66 The compressed air system will be used to compress and deliver air of a quantity and quality suitable for all general, instrument and control purposes at all appropriate points of the plant.

Support Systems

4.67 There are various services that could be shared with or obtained from the existing SECL power station and are considered within the impact assessment process. An Interconnections Study will be undertaken during the detailed design phase to identify which of these services the proposed SEE could procure.

CHEMICAL DOSING

4.68 The proposed SEE will require a chemical dosing system to provide water and boiler treatment e.g. ammonia solution to adjust pH; volatile oxygen scavenger; sodium phosphate for boiler drum and corrosion protection. The water treatment chemicals include ammonia solution, sodium hydroxide and sulphuric acid and these will be fed from a bunded chemical treatment skid on the proposed SEE site, and it may be possible to provide demin water from the existing SECL site.

WATER SUPPLY

4.69 The proposed SEE will have a daily operational requirement of approximately 785 m3 of water. As described above, the plant will be air-cooled and, therefore, will not require large volumes of cooling water for its operation. Water-cooling will be restricted to closed circuit cooling systems, containing biocide and a water-antifreeze mixture, which will be subject to scheduled replacement8.

4.70 Minor quantities of water will be used for potable purposes (drinking, washing, etc.).

4.71 It is anticipated that the water supply will be provided from a mains water supply either utilising the existing SECL infrastructure or taking a separate mains water connection. The main water supply will be used for domestic supply, HRSG make-up water and fire protection. It is anticipated that HRSG make-up water will be treated in either the existing SECL power station demineralisation plant or a new demineralisation plant situated on the proposed SEE site (as described in paragraph 4.68 above). It will be stored in a new demineralisation storage tank dedicated to the proposed SEE site. The existing SECL power station demineralisation plant uses trailer-based water treatment units to produce demineralised water.

4.72 Rainwater harvesting will be used to reduce the requirement for mains water supply, and will serve low sensitivity water uses, e.g. toilet flushing in the administrative building and landscape irrigation.

WASTEWATER TREATMENT

4.73 The proposed SEE will generate process effluent from the auxiliary boilers and HRSG blowdown, de-ioniser and reverse osmosis plant. It is proposed that these wastewaters are collected for inspection, potentially using the existing SECL power station concrete process water pond, prior to discharge to the mains sewer. Sanitary waste will also be generated by the proposed SEE and discharged directly to the mains sewer.

8 Note that the cooling water that is replaced (blow down) will be discharged to foul sewer to avoid any impacts associated with biocide and antifreeze.



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-7

SURFACE DRAINAGE

4.74 It is proposed to use a mix of SUDS measures to attenuate and treat surface water drainage from areas of hardstanding. These measures include permeable paving with a porous sub-base, filter drains, swales, and a balancing pond or ponds, prior to ultimate discharge via a new underground drainage pipe into the River Welland. This new discharge point will be regulated by the EA as part of the EP for the proposed SEE.

ELECTRICITY

4.75 There is various plant and equipment onsite, which will require an electrical load, that is either associated with the main CCGT plant (e.g. gas turbines and HRSGs) or with the auxiliary equipment, including e.g. the ACC. The annual on-site electrical requirements are estimated to be approximately 85,000 MWh, equivalent to approximately 1% of the total (gas) energy used at the site to generate electricity.

CONTROL ROOM

4.76 It is anticipated that the proposed SEE will be controlled from the existing SECL power station control room, which has sufficient space to accommodate the additional operational equipment and staff required for the proposed SEE.

4.77 The proposed SEE will have the facility to control the equipment locally should there be an issue with the remote control function and a dedicated ‘basic’ control room will be maintained on the proposed SEE site. This may be developed into a full control room should the need arise.

SECURITY

4.78 The proposed SEE site will be secured with a 2 m high steel palisade boundary fence. There will be a permanent onsite presence of dedicated security personnel who will control the access points to the proposed SEE site and carry out routine security patrols, and a system of CCTV cameras will be used for surveillance purposes.

4.79 The security system, including the CCTV system will be extended from the existing SECL system to cover the proposed SEE. The main access point for the proposed SEE site will either be the security-controlled access at Gate A or alternatively a new security-controlled access at Gate C..

FIRE FIGHTING

4.80 A dedicated fire fighting system will be required for the proposed SEE and a raw/firewater storage tank containing approximately 9,800 m3 of water will be situated in the northwestern area of the proposed SEE site (see Table 4.2).

LIGHTING

4.81 Unless otherwise agreed with SHDC, it is proposed that the external lighting will be designed in compliance with guidance published by the ILE9. The objectives of this guidance are to limit:

• the average upward light ratio of luminaries to restrict sky glow;

• illuminance at the windows of nearby sensitive properties; 9 Institution of Lighting Engineers (ILE) (2005) Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light

• the intensity of each light source in potentially obtrusive directions; and

• the average illuminance of a building, where it is floodlit.

4.82 Specific design guidance is also given, in terms of the limitations for exterior lighting installations and recommending that a professional lighting design engineer be appointed to design any exterior lighting. The guidance is included at Appendix 4.1.

4.83 Other best practice lighting guidance which will be used to inform the lighting design such as the publication by the Department for Communities and Local Government (2006): Lighting in the Countryside: Towards Good Practice – Main document

4.84 The proposed SEE will be operational 24 hours per day, however, between 2300 and 0700, the external safety and security lighting levels will reduce to lower levels of lighting, as recommended by the ILE.

4.85 The plant lighting will mainly be provided for access areas as required, the main areas being the HRSG staircase and platforms and the outer access platform and staircase of the ACC. The lighting is expected to be inward facing and the overall lighting design will be undertaken during the plant design phase by a professional lighting design engineer and the design principles will follow the guidance as discussed above.

OTHER

4.86 Other services and infrastructure that will be required for the proposed SEE are listed below. These are already in place and may be shared with the existing SECL power station:

• storehouse services;

• workshops; and

• communication systems.

Combined Heat and Power

4.87 As described in Chapter 3 Alternatives and Design Evolution, SEEL has undertaken a CHP assessment in line with DECC guidance10. This included consultation with potential heat users in the immediate vicinity of the proposed SEE. To date two potential users of heat, electricity and CO2 from the proposed SEE have been identified. These include provision of heat to the new South Holland Community Hospital, which is currently under construction around 1 km away from the proposed SEE, and provision of heat, electricity and CO2 to a future horticultural development currently being considered by a large multinational (Host E).

4.88 PB has carried out an assessment on behalf of SEEL to investigate the technical feasibility of implementing a CHP scheme to supply heat, electricity and CO2 to the above users, and any other potential users within the locality. This is discussed in more detail below.

HEAT

4.89 Heat would be supplied to end users in the form of hot water. In order to supply heat from the proposed SEE to the new South Holland Community Hospital, a hot water network would be installed linking the two sites. This would consist of small diameter supply and return pipework

10 Department of Trade and Industry, Guidance on background information to accompany Notifications under Section 14(1) of the Energy Act 1976 and Applications under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, December 2006


4-8 Issue 8: 64C13376

that would be laid overground or buried. It is likely that this pipework would be routed alongside Vernatt’s Drain. The hot water network would be a closed system - the water would not be directly derived from, or returned to, the proposed SEE’s steam/water cycle. Instead, heat exchangers would be used to heat the water contained within the hot water network. This is because the proposed SEE requires demineralised water to operate, and SEEL would not have any control of the water quality once it leaves the proposed SEE site. The hot water supply and return pipework within the proposed SEE site would be either buried or connected from the heat exchangers to the boundary by overhead pipe racks.

4.90 PB has identified a number of options for sourcing heat from the proposed SEE, including waste heat from the exhaust stacks or heat extracted from the steam cycle. It is likely that heating on-site will take one of the following forms:

• Option 1: heating of return water by use of a heat exchanger located in the stack (if the correct conditions can be obtained from the stack flue gases); and

• Option 2: heating of return water by use of a heat exchanger connected to a suitable point in the steam cycle. There are numerous opportunities to extract heat from the steam cycle, this typically occurs via connection ‘T’ pieces in the high pressure steam turbine exhaust (known as the cold reheat pipework) and low pressure steam turbine inlet pipes.

4.91 These options are shown conceptually on the Process Flow Diagram provided as Figure 4.7. If appropriate, a heat exchanger located within the stack is the preferred option, as this would utilise waste heat, with no impact on plant performance. However, the inclusion of more than one connection piece ensures the opportunities for heat extraction are optimised.

4.92 The CHP scheme would be sized to allow delivery of up to 10 MWth of heat from the proposed SEE to Host E and to the new South Holland Community Hospital and any other potential heat users in the locality, subject to commercial CHP agreements being in place. 10 MWth is expected to be sufficient to cover the needs of the new South Holland Community Hospital and all other future users currently located within the two adjoining areas of commercial/industrial development (Zones 1 and 2) described in Chapter 3 Alternatives and Design Evolution. Supply and return pipework along Vernatt’s Drain would be extended to the north of the plant to allow any future users in the northern part of Zone 1 to use the available heat.

CO2

4.93 CO2 would be sourced from the flue gas in the stacks. As the potential user requires the CO2 to be cooled, the heat would be extracted from the flue gas by transfer to the user’s hot water circuit. The potential user requires sufficient CO2 to increase the typical levels obtained in air by a factor of four within their horticultural facility. A connection to the stacks would be required to allow the flue gases to be extracted for heat and CO2.

ELECTRICITY

4.94 Electricity would be delivered directly to the potential user via an underground cable connection from the 400 volt distribution system installed at the proposed SEE to drive small auxiliary loads. The potential user would require up to 1 MW of electricity and the proposed SEE would act as a trading site to facilitate the electrical supply.

POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHP SCHEME

4.95 The proposed CHP scheme will be of a small scale in the context of the overall development, and will not result in any significant emissions or other environmental impacts.

4.96 The proposed scheme will be a closed system within which water is continually recirculated, and therefore will not result any material additional water consumption or discharges. There will be no additional noise or air emissions associated with the proposed scheme. The heat exchangers will be located within the stack and therefore will not be a visible feature. Supply and return pipework will be small diameter and will only be visible if located above ground.

4.97 Operation of a CHP scheme will not require any additional fuel usage and will increase the overall energy efficiency of the plant by providing a use for waste heat.

4.98 SEEL will continue discussions with potential heat users in the vicinity of the proposed SEE post application submission, and will implement a CHP scheme if it proves technically and economically feasible to do so. The off-site pipework elements of the CHP scheme are considered in Chapter 15, Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

Operation and Maintenance

Operating Modes and Control System

4.99 It is anticipated that operation of the gas turbines, HRSGs, steam turbines, auxiliary boiler and other BoP equipment will be accomplished primarily from the existing SECL main control room, however, a small auxiliary control room will be dedicated to the proposed SEE site (which could be developed into a full control room should the need arise).

4.100 The plant will be operated and maintained using a set of written procedures and guidance developed, where appropriate, from the manufacturer’s operating and maintenance manuals, as well as the operations, maintenance and HSE policies of InterGen. A system will be in place to maintain and update these procedures where necessary, to ensure control of content and to define clearly the responsibilities of each individual on the proposed SEE site.

4.101 Directly employed plant staffing will consist of approximately 15 - 20 staff, assuming a shared management team for the existing SECL power station and the proposed SEE. Alternatively, if the proposed SEE is operated as a wholly stand alone power station the number of directly employed staff will increase to around 40.

4.102 The operations staff will consist of highly trained individuals responsible for the safe operation of all plant equipment within regulatory and environmental requirements. Operation and monitoring of the prime movers and selected process equipment will be from the main control room through use of a distributed DCS. Minor process equipment will be controlled either from the DCS or locally.

4.103 Emissions to air, and discharges to water (pH and volume only), will be monitored by a CEMS. Data from the CEMS will be integrated into the power station DCS with relevant signals operating control-room alarms. Operational staff will have access to environmental information and will be trained to ensure compliance with regulatory limits. Historical records of up to ten years will be stored within the DCS and are retrievable on demand.



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-9

Startup and Shutdown

4.104 The start sequence comprises two distinct operations: start-up to synchronising speed and synchronising followed by increasing load to the instructed output level. The whole operation will take up 24 hours to full load from a cold start. Operation at start-up and low load uses diffusion flame burners. Thus, during start up of the gas turbine, NOx emissions will be slightly higher than the full load value.

4.105 Once the unit is synchronised, it can be ramped up to the instructed load. The rate of loading of the gas turbine depends upon the metal temperatures of the steam turbine and boiler and the rate at which steam can be introduced. Once gas turbine load is reached, combustion is switched to pre-mix burners and the NOx emissions will attain the full load levels.

Abnormal Operation

4.106 The unit protection systems will be designed to ensure safe plant start up, to prevent the initiation of events leading to hazardous operating conditions and to execute emergency shut down of the power station in the event of fault conditions in the equipment. The DCS will receive signals from all critical areas of the power station and alarm abnormal conditions. In the event that hazardous circumstances arise the DCS system will be programmed to shut down a system, a unit or the power station, whichever is appropriate.

4.107 In the event of loss of natural gas pressure, the power station will shut down in an orderly manner and disconnect from the main electrical output network.

4.108 If the main electrical supplies to the station are lost, battery back-up power and back-up generators will be provided to ensure continued operation of essential services (e.g. oil pumps) and to allow a controlled shut down of the power station.

4.109 Fire detection systems will be installed that will allow operators to shut down the gas line promptly in the event of an incident. The proposed SEE will operate on natural gas only and, therefore, there will be no large fuel storage tanks on the proposed SEE site.

4.110 As described in paragraph 4.80 a dedicated storage of raw/fire-fighting water will be retained on the proposed SEE site.

4.111 Emergency procedures will be developed in conjunction with the local emergency services, the emergency planning officer and adjacent site users. The plans will be tested periodically. The station management policy will provide a mechanism for preventing spills and managing the consequences of any such incident. It also provides a mechanism for identifying onsite materials that possess significant impacts or risks and for discovering alternatives where economically viable. All spillages will be retained within the bunded areas and treated as necessary. Disposal will occur offsite at a suitably licensed site.

4.112 InterGen is committed to a high standard of HSE management and will implement a HSE management system for the proposed SEE. The HSE management system will include policies and procedures to prevent and manage accidents and emergencies.

Maintenance

4.113 Process reliability is a key issue because of the need to supply electricity continuously. One of the key means of aiding reliable plant operation will be the implementation of a preventative

maintenance regime. An appropriate maintenance schedule will be implemented to facilitate optimum operation of the power station in terms of environmental performance and efficiency. On-line monitoring equipment will automatically generate work order cards which will prompt maintenance technicians to service, maintain and calibrate equipment. The frequency of the work will be based on recommendations given in the manufacturer’s instructions.

4.114 The maintenance cycle will include regular planned major and minor outages which will allow major items of equipment such as turbines to be inspected, maintained and repaired. This will be on a rolling schedule, with consideration given to the effect of start ups and shut downs.

4.115 Maintenance staff will be responsible for conducting all preventative and routine maintenance for the facility utilising equipment manufacturers’ recommended maintenance criteria. Major maintenance conducted on a periodic basis, will be completed by specialist outside contract staff brought in specifically to undertake the work. This type of maintenance may occur on an annual basis or as periodic as once every five to six years in the case of gas turbine and steam turbine major maintenance.

4.116 This high standard of maintenance is intended to enable the proposed SEE to operate as designed and will help to minimise the probability of all types of accidents, including those with potential environmental consequences.

Decommissioning

4.117 At the end of the operational life of the power station (approximately 35 years), the proposed SEE will be decommissioned in accordance with the regulations pertinent at the time. If market conditions are such that it would be appropriate to extend the life of the plant, then decommissioning may be deferred to a later date and the plant would be re-engineered and re-permitted as required.

4.118 Decommissioning will be in accordance with the SCP prepared as part of the EP application for the proposed SEE. The SCP will be developed with the objective of returning the ground to its former condition prior to issue of the original EP and maximising all opportunities to recycle materials. The SCP will follow the below principles:

• drainage of all vessels, pipework and other containment;

• removal of plant;

• removal of cables;

• removal of buried components;

• reuse of removed fluids and materials wherever possible;

• disposal of other materials to appropriate sites by licensed contractors; and

• backfilling and making good ground.

4.119 The complexity of the SCP will be minimised by:

• the nature of the installation;

• the absence of hazardous materials including asbestos:

• the absence of landfill;

• plant design that enables simple dismantling;


4-10 Issue 8: 64C13376

• thorough knowledge of the location of buried components; and

• maintenance of the EMS, including cleaning up after accidents as they occur.

4.120 During the period of operation of the plant, records will be kept of relevant incidents, effluent concentrations, construction and site investigations so that an adequate understanding of the extent of any contamination of the land is maintained. This will facilitate the implementation of the SCP, prevent environmental incidents and minimise pollution.

Description of Operational Residues and Emissions

4.121 The proposed SEE will require an EP to operate. The EP will cover the operation and final decommissioning of the proposed SEE and will be regulated by the EA. The proposed SEE is defined under the EPR as a Part A(1) Process under Schedule 1.1 – Combustion Activities Part A(1) (a) “burning of any fuel in an appliance with a rated thermal input of 50 megawatts or more” and as an EU ETS Installation as defined by the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme Regulations 2005. The proposed SEE will also be required to meet the emission requirements under the EU’s LCPD.

4.122 Under the EPR the proposed SEE will be required to submit an EP application which shows that BAT have been used in order to control emissions to air land, water and noise. The IPPC sector guidance note (Version 2.03) for Combustion Activities identifies the detailed requirements to be met11. Extensive modelling indicates that none of the emission limits identified as part of the permitting process will be exceeded by the proposed SEE, either alone or in combination with the existing SECL power station, and this is discussed in more detail in Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration and Chapter 10 Air Quality.

4.123 As previously discussed, the final design of the proposed SEE will not be confirmed until after the application for Section 36 Consent has been determined, and once proposals from contractors have been received and evaluated. Therefore, emissions modelling has taken a worst-case scenario approach to account for the possible variations in plant design. It is, therefore, possible that the actual impact will be less than that predicted in the relevant assessments.

Energy Usage

4.124 The proposed SEE’s predicted energy usage during operation is shown in Figure 4.8.

Climate Change

4.125 Government has pointed to climate change as one of the most significant challenges facing the world; it requires that planning should address the means by which CO2 emissions can be reduced to help to stabilise changes that will occur. From a planning policy perspective, PPS23 - Planning and Pollution Control (2004) highlights climate change as one of the most serious environmental problems we face; similarly, the Supplement to PPS1 - Planning and Climate Change (2007) encourages renewable and low carbon forms of energy generation and infrastructure. PPS25 - Development and Flood Risk (2006) recognises that planning should avoid flood risk and accommodate the impacts of climate change and, in Annex B, notes that

11 IPPC Sector Guidance Note, version 2.03 dated 27th July 2005 published by the Environment Agency.

accumulated emissions of greenhouse gases will cause significant global climate change this century.

4.126 The Energy White Paper 2003 addresses the requirement for the UK to achieve reductions in CO2 of some 60% by about 2050; the theme is continued through the UK Climate Change Programme 2006, 2007, 2008 and The Energy White Paper 2007. More recently, the Climate Change Act 2008 has adopted an obligation to ensure “the net UK carbon account for the year 2050 is at least 80% lower than the 1990 baseline” (Section 1(1)) and this is reflected in the “Energy Markets Outlook Report 2008” published by DECC and Ofgem's “Sustainable Development Report”. The Ofgem 2007 Report also notes that, while the country is likely to meet its present greenhouse gas emissions targets of 12.5% below base year (1990) levels by 2008-2012 under the Kyoto Protocol, this has been “largely driven by switching from coal to gas fired electricity production over this period.” Tackling of climate change through achieving CO2 reductions has been recently supported by the European Parliament’s decision to introduce legislation requiring proposals for new generating plants in excess of 300 MW to demonstrate that they are CCR.

4.127 The existing SECL power station produced 1.8 million tonnes of CO2 in 2007 and 1.99 million tonnes in 2008. However, as described in Chapter 3 Alternatives and Design Evolution, gas fired power stations produce a lower volume of CO2 per unit of electricity produced than for other types of fossil fuel power stations, such as coal or oil.

4.128 To maximise the efficiency of the proposed SEE and to mitigate its potential impact on climate change, SEEL proposes to supply CHP to potential heat users within the vicinity of the proposed SEE (as described in paragraphs 4.87-4.92). This will further increase the efficiency of the fuel used by the proposed SEE.

4.129 Furthermore, SEEL has set aside an area of land to ensure the proposed SEE is CCR (see paragraphs 4.168-4.173). This has the potential to reduce CO2 emissions released to atmosphere by up to 90% in the event that CCS proposals are taken forward in the future.

Air Emissions

4.130 Emissions to air from point sources will comprise of:

• Emissions from the main stacks (flue gases containing water vapour, CO2, CO, NOx, traces of particulate matter and volatile organic compounds when gas firing);

• Emissions from safety vents on the natural gas system;

• Emissions of CO2 from steam condenser/de-aerator; and

• Emissions of steam from de-aerator/steam vents.

4.131 Apart from the emissions of flue gas from the main stacks all other point source emissions are minor and will have no significant impact on the environment.

4.132 Under certain infrequent weather conditions, comprising cold days with high humidity, the gaseous discharges from the stack may be visible.



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-11

NITROUS OXIDES

4.133 The term NOx implies two major oxides, NO and NO2. In combustion, NO is the dominant of the two; NO2 is mainly a downstream derivative of NO. There are three main mechanisms of NO production from combustion processes:

• From the reaction of nitrogen in the fuel air with oxygen at the high temperatures of a burner chamber;

• From nitrogen existing in the fuel; and

• From reactions of fuel-derived radicals with nitrogen

4.134 To control NOx emissions effectively, the dominant formation mechanism must be known. There are a number of ways of subsequently controlling the NOx emissions. The dominant formation mechanism in a gas turbine is the reaction of nitrogen in the air with oxygen at high temperatures.

4.135 Owing to the reactions that take place when burning fuel, and the fact that it has been observed that NOx formation does not occur to a significant extent below 1800K, burner design needs to balance the combustion process requirements with NOx formation. This can be achieved by reducing the peak flame temperature, which can be achieved by recirculating the flue gas or staged combustion. The plant selected for the proposed SEE will have this capacity.

4.136 When operating on natural gas the plant will utilise a DLN combustion system which is considered best practice as the DLN burners reduce the peak flame temperature.

4.137 Emissions of NOx as NO2 are not expected to exceed an hourly average of 50 mg/rn³12 during normal (greater than 60%) load operation on gas fuel, with no water or steam injection. The exhaust flow and emission rate will depend on the throughput of gas and air in the gas turbine, as these are functions of ambient temperature, pressure and load.

CARBON DIOXIDE

4.138 CO2 is produced during the combustion of natural gas. As described in Chapter 3, Table 3.3, natural gas produces less CO2 than coal or oil per unit heat content, owing to the higher hydrogen content. In addition, the higher thermal efficiency of the plant reduces the emissions per unit of electricity generated compared to conventional oil and gas plant. See also paragraphs 4.168 – 4.173 for a detailed explanation of CCS with regard to the proposed SEE.

CARBON MONOXIDE

4.139 CO is a gas formed by the incomplete combustion of carbon containing fuels. In the presence of an adequate supply of oxygen, any CO produced during combustion is rapidly oxidised to CO2. Good management of the combustion within the gas turbine will ensure that CO emissions are minimised.

12 at standard reference conditions of 15% oxygen, dry, 0°C, 1013 bar a

SULPHUR DIOXIDE

4.140 SO2 will be released into the atmosphere in negligible quantities because of the very low sulphur content of the natural gas fuel supplied to the gas turbine. No abatement control equipment is necessary for SO2 emissions.

PARTICULATES

4.141 Particulate concentrations at the stack exit are expected to be negligible during operation.

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

4.142 VOCs comprise a wide range of chemical compounds including hydrocarbons (alkanes, alkenes, aromatics), oxygenates (alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, ethers) and halogen containing species. Most VOCs are non-toxic or are present at levels well below guideline values, and VOCs have not been assessed as part of the EIA process due to their very low predicted concentrations from the proposed SEE.

NATURAL GAS

4.143 CH4 is the major component of natural gas. A number of intermittent operations in support of normal plant operation will be carried out on site and result in minor emissions of CH4. These include gas venting of lines during start-up and shutdown to avoid dangerous air/gas mixtures being present at critical operation stages. These releases will be minimised as part of a scheduled maintenance regime.

4.144 All such releases will be intermittent and a function of the operating regime of the proposed SEE.

Emissions to Water

HRSG BLOWDOWN

4.145 Some effluent from the HRSG system is inevitable. It is not feasible technically to eliminate all such discharges. The water quality in the HRSG circuit is of high purity, containing very small quantities of corrosion and scaling prevention chemicals. However, to control the build up of impurities in the HRSG water, it is necessary to discharge some steam/water from the system as blow-down. Any losses are made up with high quality feed water from the town’s water main, which will be demineralised in the water treatment plant prior to use.

4.146 As the feed water will be of high purity, the quantity of blow-down discharged from the boiler will be small (on average approximately 330 m3/day). The blow-down is discharged at boiler temperature and pressure. Some of the blow-down flashes off to steam in the boiler blow-down vessel, reducing the volume still further.

4.147 Other water/steam losses from the steam/water circuit of the HRSG will be minimised by good maintenance.

DRAINAGE

4.148 There will be four drainage systems onsite: the process wastewater system (i.e. water treatment plant effluent); the surface water drainage system; the oily water drainage system; and the sewerage system.


4-12 Issue 8: 64C13376

4.149 Process wastewaters are generated by the auxiliary boilers and HRSGs blowdown, de-ioniser and reverse osmosis plant. It is proposed that these wastewaters are to be collected for inspection, potentially using the existing SECL power station concrete process water pond, prior to discharge to the mains sewer. This will require a Trade Effluent Discharge Consent.

4.150 The surface water drainage system will drain areas of the proposed SEE site unlikely to be contaminated with oil. A mixture of SUDS measures will be used including permeable paving with a porous sub-base, filter drains, swales, and a balancing pond. The majority of the surface water drainage will be uncontaminated and typical of surface water run-off from areas of paved road. Discharge will be to the River Welland under the EP from the EA.

4.151 An oily wastewater drainage system will drain all areas where oil spillages could occur. The design will incorporate oil interceptors and traps. The traps will discharge with the other surface water drainage, into the River Welland. The water will be checked for visible oil prior to being pumped into the River Welland.

4.152 The areas potentially liable to oil spillage are:

• areas adjacent to the lubricating oil storage tanks;

• areas around the lubricating oil storage tanks;

• electrical transformers (which will contain insulating oil); and

• car parking areas.

4.153 All the above areas with the exception of the car park will be protected by bunds to contain possible spills. Any spillage events occurring in the car parking area are likely to be minor as they would involve only passenger vehicles, and a petrol/water separator will be present.

4.154 Adequate facilities for the inspection and maintenance of oil interceptors will be provided and the interceptors will be regularly emptied and de-sludged to ensure efficient operation. Further operations include:

• a qualified contractor will dispose of the sludge off-site; and

• all elements of the treatment systems will be regularly monitored to ensure optimum performance and maintenance.

4.155 A site drainage plan will be produced as part of the power plant construction contract. A copy will be supplied to and agreed with the EA. This plan will also show the location of all bunded areas.

4.156 Fire-fighting water will discharge to the surface water drain. As the drainage system will be designed to deal with a 100-year storm event, it will be able to accommodate the fire-fighting water.

4.157 From time to time, it will be necessary to wash the blades of the air compressor section of the gas turbines to remove debris that has penetrated the inlet air filters and lodged itself on the compressor blades. This will occur approximately twice a year and can be done in two ways: by online washing, where a fine spray of water is allowed to pass through the gas turbine, or by off-line washing, where the compressor blades are rotated slowly through a detergent solution. In the later case, approximately 15 m³ per unit of wastewater-containing detergent will be discharged to sewer in compliance with a Trade Effluent Discharge Consent.

4.158 All sanitary waste will be discharged to the foul sewer network under a Trade Effluent Discharge Consent. .

Key Sources of Operational Waste

4.159 An inherent characteristic of the proposed SEE is that waste quantities will be small and minimised by plant design. CCGT plants are recognised as one of the most efficient users of raw materials for the production of electrical power. The use of gas as fuel ensures no solid waste is produced in the combustion process. Use of the town’s water for deionisation will ensure there is no solid waste stream from the water treatment process.

4.160 There will be no direct emissions to land from the proposed SEE, however, limited solid wastes will be generated by site operations. These wastes will be collected by registered waste carriers for off-site recycling, treatment and disposal as appropriate.

4.161 Clearly labelled waste containers will be located in appropriate areas to ensure safety and security given the site risks. Storage areas will be clearly marked and signposted. The maximum storage capacity will be stated and any special facilities provided. Containers will be complete with lids, where appropriate, and will be regularly inspected.

4.162 The most accurate estimate of the solid waste that can be expected to be produced by the proposed SEE can be obtained from review of the existing SECL power station’s waste reports. Table 4.4 below provides a summary of the existing SECL power station’s waste streams, quantities and ultimate disposal routes. The year 2007 included some demobilisation wastes which would not be generated as part of the routine operations.

Table 4.4: Waste disposal during 2007 and 2008

EWC Code Waste Type Total (Tonnes)

2007 Total (Tonnes)

2008 Treatment/Disposal

06 01 04 Phosphoric and Phosphorous acids 0 0.005 Used off-site as a fuel

11 01 13 Degreasing wastes 0.9 0.275 Stored onsite pending off-site use as a fuel or being recycled

13 02 05 Mineral-based non-chlorinated engine, gear and lubricating oils

5.6 8.5 Used off-site as a fuel

13 03 07 Mineral-based non-chlorinated insulating and heat transmission oils

0.6 0.03 Stored onsite pending off-site use as a fuel or being recycled

13 05 03 Interceptor sludges 22.7 0 Physio-chemical treatment followed by recovery/disposal

13 05 07 Oily water from oil/water separators 27.0 18.025 Physio-chemical treatment

followed by recovery/disposal

13 08 99 Oil wastes not otherwise specified (in EWC) 9.0 0

Stored onsite pending collection for off site incineration, storage, treatment or release to the environment

14 06 03

Other solvents and solvent mixtures (not CFCs, HCFC, HFC, other halogenated solvents and solvent mixtures)

0.075 0 Stored onsite pending use off-site as a fuel or being recycled



64C13376 Issue: 8 4-13



2007 Total (Tonnes)


15 01 10 Packaging containing residues of or contaminated by dangerous substances

0.28 0.03


15 02 02

Absorbents, filter materials (including oil filters not otherwise specified), wiping cloths, protective clothing contaminated by dangerous substances

5.3 0.845 Physio-chemical treatment followed by recovery/disposal

15 02 03

Absorbents, filter materials, wiping cloths and protective clothing other than those mentioned in 15 02 02

11.0 0 Physio-chemical treatment followed by recovery/disposal

16 01 07 Oil Filters 1.2 0 Blend/mix followed by recovery/disposal

16 02 13

Discarded equipment containing hazardous components other than those mentioned in 16 02 09 to 16 02 12

0.8 1.6 Stored onsite pending recycling or off-site use as a fuel

16 03 03 Inorganic wastes containing dangerous substances 1.51 0.35


16 03 05 Organic wastes containing dangerous substances 2.82 0


16 05 04

Gases in pressure containers (including halons) containing dangerous substances

0.075 0


16 05 08

Discarded organic chemicals consisting of or containing dangerous substances

0 0.029


16 06 01 Lead batteries 0.55 0 Recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds

16 06 02 NiCd batteries 0.04 0 Recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds

16 10 01 Aqueous liquid wastes containing dangerous substances

6 3 Physio-chemical treatment followed by recovery/disposal

16 10 02 Aqueous liquid wastes 33.3 6 Physio-chemical treatment followed by recovery/disposal



2007 Total (Tonnes)


17 05 03 Soil and stones containing dangerous substances 0 12 Physio-chemical treatment

followed by recovery/disposal

20 01 21 Fluorescent tubes and other mercury-containing waste

0 0.04


20 01 23 Discarded equipment containing chlorofluorocarbons

0 0.09 Stored onsite pending off-site use as a fuel or being recycled

20 01 38

Wood other than that mentioned in 20 01 37 (i.e. not wood containing dangerous substances)

37.7 0 Used as a fuel

20 01 40 Metals 95.68 0 Recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds

20 03 01 Mixed municipal waste 109.3 58.61 Deposit to landfill/use as fuel/recycled/reclaimed

20 03 04 Septic tank sludge13 18.0 0 Biological treatment

Key Sources of Noise

4.163 The principal sources of steady state noise during operation of the proposed plant will be:

• Air inlets;

• Gas turbines;

• Exhaust stacks;

• HRSGs;

• Steam turbine plant;

• Air-cooled condenser;

• Generators;

• Transformers; and

• GRF.

4.164 The noise will be of a steady nature, and similar to that of the existing SECL power station.

4.165 The BAT and operating techniques will be addressed in the plant design to ensure appropriate noise attenuation measures. These are likely to include the following measures, or their equivalent:

• High performance splitter silencer to the gas turbine inlet providing maximum attenuation at high frequencies, and abatement of the compressor whine, in particular;

13 A temporary septic tank was installed in 2007, however, there is no longer a septic tank present on the proposed SEE site.

Spalding Energy Expansion · 2019-11-13 · Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL Issue 3 64C13376 DCS...

Documents

Transcript of Spalding Energy Expansion · 2019-11-13 · Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL Issue 3 64C13376 DCS...