Smarter Network Storage - Distribution Network Operator · PDF file7.1 Building Exterior Civil Design 42 ... Although such substation sites are typically classified ... Smarter Network

ukpowernetworks.co.uk

Smarter Network Storage Design and planning considerations for large-scale distribution-connected energy storage (SNS1.2)

2 | Smarter Network Storage - design and planning considerations

6.ObtainingPlanningConsents 34

6.1 PlanningConsentsatLeightonBuzzard 35

6.2 AlternativeLocationsConsideredtoMeet

SequentialTests 35

6.3 Pre-ApplicationLocalConsultation 37

6.4 ConsultationResponses 37

6.5 PreparationandSubmissionofPlanningApplication 38

6.6 NeedforCommunityInfrastructureObligations 40

6.7 KeyComponentsoftheSection106Agreement 40

7.DesignImpacts 41

7.1 BuildingExteriorCivilDesign 42

7.2 FloodMitigationDesign 44

7.3 BuildingSurroundings 44

7.4 StorageFacilityInternalCivilDesign 46

7.5 StorageFacilitySafetyDesign 47

7.6 StorageFacilityElectricalDesign 48

8.LearningObtained,Conclusion

andRecommendations 50

8.1 LearningSummary 51

8.2 Conclusion 53

Appendices 55

Appendix 1 ResidentsConsultationDocument 55

Appendix 2PlanningTimelineSummary 60

Appendix 3OriginalBuildingLayoutDesignfor

8MW/24MWh 62

Appendix 4FinalBuildingLayoutDesignfor

6MW/10MWhProject 64

Appendix 5FuturePotentialBuildingLayout

Designfor8MW/17MWhProject 66

1.Introduction 4

1.1 Background 5

1.2 ReportScopeandObjective 5

2.DesignandProcurementFundamentals 7

2.1 StateoftheBatteryStorageIndustry 10

3.DesignInputs 12

3.1 SiteSelectionforStorage–

Whencanstoragebeused? 13

3.2 SiteLocation–LeightonBuzzardPrimarySubstation 14

3.3 ApplicationRequirements 17

3.4 Safety 21

3.5 Budget 23

4.InitialDesignOutputs 24

4.1 TechnologyandSupplierSelection 25

4.2 ModuleSize 26

4.3 StorageHousing 27

5.ThePlanningProcess 29

5.1 PlanningPermission 30

5.2 Determination 30

5.3 TypeofApplication 31

5.4 Timescales 31

5.5 PlanningClassifications 31

5.6 Conditions 32

5.7 Section106Agreements 32

5.8 DevelopmentControl 32

5.9 NationallySignificantInfrastructure 33

Contents

Smarter Network Storage - design and planning considerations | 3

Figures

Figure1 InteractionofStorageDesignDriversand

KeyDesignChoice/Impact 9

Figure2 High-LevelCriteriaAppliedforInitial

SiteSelection 13

Figure3 LoadProfileforTwoHighDemandDays

in2010atLeightonBuzzardSubstation 15

Figure4 LeightonBuzzardReinforcementOptions 15

Figure5 AerialPhotographoftheLeighton

BuzzardSite 16

Figure6 IllustrationofPeakPowerandEnergy

Requirements 18

Figure7 WinterPeakDemandTrendatLeighton

BuzzardPrimary 19

Figure8 AlternativeSitesConsidered 36

Figure9 SummaryChartofConsultationResponses 39

Figure10 SupportingStudiesandDesignandAccess

StatementStructure 39

Figure11 ProposedVisualisationandElevations

withLandscaping 43

Figure12 ProposedLandscapePlanatWoodmanClose 45

Figure13 Single-LineElectricalDesign 49


Introduction1


development rights by licensed DNOs; in this instance full

planning approval was required for the installation, as the

adjacent landwasandnothistorically used for operational

purposes. This provided the opportunity to generate

additional learning around the preparation and completion

of theplanningprocesswhichmaybe valuable to support

increasing deployments of storage, either by DNOs, or by

third-parties,wheretheneedforplanningconsentsislikely

tobemorecommon.

1.2ReportScopeandObjective

This report provides a summary of the key learning and

considerationsrelatingtothepracticalissuesinthedesignand

planningoflarge-scaledistribution-connectedelectricalenergy

storage. It covers the learning generated from successfully

securingplanningconsenttobuildanelectricalenergystorage

deviceatthetrialsite,adjacenttotheprimarysubstationat

LeightonBuzzard,andhowthisinfluencedthedesignsofthe

storagefacility.

Thisreportrelatestobatterystorageusingtechnologythatis

commercially available in 2013. A number of other storage

technologiesareavailableatdifferentstagesofmaturityand

all have advantages and disadvantages. The Department

forEnergyandClimateChange(DECC)has recentlyawarded

fundingwhichisseekingtoachievecostreductionsandbring

forwardotherpromisingtechnologies.

The report also provides an introduction to the planning

consentprocess,whichisrequiredformostnewstructuresand

buildings,andisalsorequiredforthechangeofuseofexisting

buildingsorsites.TheplanningsystemforEnglandandWalesis

setoutintheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990asamended

bymorerecentlegislation.

Thisdocumentformsoneoftwomaindocumentsthattogether

providetheevidencerequiredtodemonstratecompletionof

1.1Background

Energy storage is a key source of flexibility that can help

addresssomeofthechallengesassociatedwiththetransition

toalow-carbonelectricitysector.Storage,asidentifiedbythe

SmartGridForum,isoneofthekeysmartinterventionslikely

toberequired inthefuturesmartgrid.However,challenges

inleveragingthefullpotentialofstorageontransmissionand

distributionnetworkstobenefitotherindustrysegments,anda

lackofscaledemonstrationsarecurrentlyhamperingtheefficient

andeconomicuptakeofstoragebytheelectricitysector.

TheSmarterNetworkStorage(SNS)projectaimstocarryouta

rangeoftechnicalandcommercialinnovationtotacklethese

challengesandfacilitatemoreefficientandeconomicadoption

ofstorage.ItisdifferentiatedfromotherLCNFelectricalstorage

projects by its demonstration of storage across multiple

parts of the electricity system, outside the boundaries of

the distribution network. By demonstrating this multi-

purpose application of 6MW/10MWhof energy storage, the

project will explore the capabilities and value in alternative

revenue streams for storage, whilst deferring traditional

networkreinforcement.

The project aims to provide the industry with a greater

understandingandadetailedassessmentofthebusinesscase

andfulleconomicsofenergystorage,helpingtoaccommodate

increasing levels of intermittent and inflexible low carbon

generation.Theprojectwasawardedfundingof£13.2million

byOfgem,undertheLowCarbonNetworkFund(LCNF)scheme

inDecember2012andwilllastfouryears,fromJanuary2013

toDecember2016.

The energy storage facility is due to be deployed adjacent

to a typical UK Power Networks 11kV primary substation in

Leighton Buzzard where it is needed to support security of

supply.Although such substation sites are typically classified

as‘operationalland’andthereforeprovideforsomepermitted


thefirstformalSuccessfulDeliveryRewardCriteria(SDRC9.1)

milestonefortheSNSproject.

The SDRC is designed to show that successful early capture

anddisseminationoflearningrelatedtothepracticalissuesin

thedesignandplanningoflarge-scaledistribution-connected

electricalenergystoragehastakenplace,andthisdocument

formsthemainlearningreporttobesharedwithstakeholders.

Other evidence for this SDRC comprises minutes and notes

captured from meetings with the local planning authorities

andenvironment agency, planning consents approval at the

trialsite,anddesignapprovalofthestoragefacilitywhichare

availabletoOfgemonrequest.

Thetargetaudienceforthereportisotherdistributionnetwork

operators who may be looking to deploy further electrical

energy storage capacity to support efficient distribution

network operation; however the report will also have

relevanceforthefollowingstakeholders:

• Third-party storage developers looking to develop and

deploy storage for commercial operation, including selling

flexibilityservicestoDNOs;

• LocalAuthorities,whomayincreasinglyneedtounderstand

thespecificofenergystoragetechnologiesincludedinplanning

applicationsasthenumberofUKdeploymentsincreases;and

• Storagemanufacturersandtechnologyproviders,tofacilitate

understandingofthemainconsiderationsandrequirements

indeployingtheirsolutionswithintheUKnetworkoperator

environment.


Design and Procurement Fundamentals

2


re-purposedfromotherrenewable(e.g.windfarm)applications,

thiswilllimitthechoiceatwhichDCbus-barvoltageissetand

istypicallynon-flexibleforaparticularmanufacturer.Inalmost

alldesigns,batterieswerestackedverticallyandconnectedin

series,sothat,ineffect,thepotentialbetweenthebottomof

thebatterystackatfloorlevelandthetopofthebatterystack

wasequaltotheDCbus-barvoltage.Assuch,thelimitedchoice

ofDCbus-barvoltagedeterminestheextenttowhichafacility

canuseheighttomitigatelandarea.Heightislimitedinthe

reversedirectionbyplanning limitationsbasedonthevisual

impacttoneighbouringbuildings,andinthecaseofSNS,the

needtoraisethebuildingoutofafloodplain.Nevertheless,in

aconstrainedfoot-print,thechoiceofDCbus-barvoltagecanbe

significantandSmarterNetworkStoragehasseenamaterial

impactof7MWhoraround25%-30%betweendesignsusing

differentcellmanufacturersandDCbus-barvoltages.Onspace

constrained sites, the recommendation is to consider theDC

bus-barvoltagewhichwillmaximisetheavailableheight.On

ruralsiteswherethebuildingheightdeterminestheextentof

visualimpact,butlandareaisbothcheaperandmorereadily

available, then consider a DC bus-bar voltage that will

minimiseheight.

Thesecondconstraintistheminimumquantumofstorageand

ratingwhichtheinstallationmusthaveineventofafailure.This

criticallydeterminesthenumberandratingofconverters,since

a space-efficient design with a single converter, if it were

achievable, offers no redundancy. The number of converters

andtheirseparationdictatesthespace(withinaconstrained

footprint)availableforenergyorMWhcapacity.

The third constraint is fire suppression arrangements and

maintenancerequirements.Theprojecthasseenacirca1MWh

impact on a space-constrained site as a result of fire

segmentationand lifting/handling requirements tomaintain

andreplacebatteryracks.Whilstthesecondcanbeviewedas

atrade-offwiththedown-timethatisacceptable;i.e.agreater

Intheprocessofplanninganddesignfordistribution-connected

storagetobeownedandoperatedbyadistributionnetwork

operator, thechoiceofsiteforstorage isclearlyasignificant

decision, and requires some very careful analysis in order to

ensurestorageislocatedappropriately.However,fordistribution

networkscalestorage,thechoiceofsiteislikelytobedrivenfirst

andforemostbynetworkneedandsotheprimaryapplication

willtypicallyberelatedtoresolutionofanetworkissue.

Thefirststeptotake,evenpriortoplanninganddesignofany

energy storage project, is to identify network issues or

operationalconstraintsthatrequireintervention,anddetermine

if energy storage could provide an effective solution as an

alternativetoconventionalupgrades.

Once a network need is identified that can be potentially

resolvedbystorage,thehighleveldesignforthestoragewill

beaffectedbyanumberofdrivers.Thesedriverswillallhave

impactsonthefinaldesignchoices,suchasthenatureofthe

storage technology, the type of supplier(s) approached and

howitisdeployed.Inturntheseimpactsmayhaveareciprocal

impactonsomeoftheotherkeydesignchoicesanddrivers.

Forexample,thechosentechnology,modulesizeandmethod

ofhousingmaywellimpactboththecoolingrequirementand

thenoiselevel.Theywillcertainlyaffectthefootprintofthe

facility and together these will impact any local planning

consentsrequired.

Thiscreatesawiderangeofinteractionsforthefundamental

selection and design of distribution network scale energy

storage. Figure 1 illustrates this interaction between drivers,

designchoicesandimpact.

ThekeyfindingsfromthedesignprocessthatSNShasgone

throughareasfollows:

TheexperienceofSNShasdemonstratedthatconvertersare


packing density can be achieved at the expense of longer

down-timeandmorecomplicatedoperationstoreplacebattery

failures,thefirstremainsanecessitywithcurrenttechnology.

Figure 1 – Interaction of Storage Design Drivers and Key Design Choice/Impact

Drivers ApplicationRequirement

Safety Expansion Site/Location Budget

KeyDesignChoice

Technology LeadSupplier

MainHousing

ModuleSize

Impact Noise LevelCooling

RequirementFlood

MitigationPlanning

RequirementFire

SuppressionFoot print

Need

MeetingNeed

Conventional StorageOther

e.g. DG, DM

ReinforcementRequirement


tochoosefrom;andtheextenttowhichanyindividualdesign

canbetailored(ornot)toaparticularsite.

Thelevelswhichmakeupafunctioningbatterystoragesystem

areshownbelow:

2.1StateoftheBatteryStorageIndustry

Itisimportanttostartbyclarifyingboththeelementsthatmake

upabatterystoragefacilityatdistributionscale,andthestatus

ofthesupplychain.Thisisfundamental,sinceitdeterminesthe

extenttowhichdifferentandcompetingdesignsareavailable

Level

5.

4.

3.

2.

1.

Function

Storagedispatch

Scheduling

Powerconverterfunctions

Battery Cooling Firmware

control control

system system

Batteries Cooling AC/DC

system converter

Comment

Thisallowsoneormoreancillaryservice(s)(suchasfrequency

response)tobeprovidedfromacrossafleetofstoragedevices.

Itisunlikelytobeimplementedwithoutalsohavinganinterface

tomarketmetricsandbuy/sellprices.

Thisallowsadayorweek’sworthofactivitiestobelefttorunon

thestoragedevice.

This implements ‘closed loop’ algorithmic control similar to a

heatingthermostat,allowingthesystemtorespondandadjust

tomeetaset-pointratherthansimplychargingordischarging

blindly.

This level is similar to thedriversonyourPC,needingdetailed

knowledgeofthehardwareitistalkingto.

Thephysicalhardware.


typeofsystemintegratorconcentratingsolelyonstorage(for

example,XtremePower,ZenEnergy)andspecialistsinstorage

controlsoftware(YounicosandGreensmith).

The industry is widely accepted to be at an early stage,

withnewnichesbeginningtoemerge,butyettobeprovenas

long-termpillarsof thesupplychain;andtechnology largely

beingre-purposedfromothersectors.

Thishastwoimplications:

a) The twomost fundamental components, thebatteryand

thepowerconverter,arelikelytobeinheriteddesignsfrom

othersectors

b)DNOs and TNOs need to seek, and suppliers need

tobewillingtoprovide,informationaboutfinancialstability

throughouttheentiresupplychain

TheSNSprojectincorporatesallthevariouslevelsshowninthe

tableaboveanddoesthisthroughasupplychainconsistingof

S&CElectric,SamsungSDIandYounicos(levels1,2and3),AMT

Sybex(level4),andKiwiPower/SmartestEnergy(level5).

The supply chain as it currently stands can be broadly

characterisedasfollows:

BatteryManufacturers: Manufacturersofcell-leveltechnologies,

forexampleSamsungSDI,DowKokamandA123Systemswho

aresupplyingbatteriestoNorthernPowerGrid’sCustomerLed

NetworkRevolutionprojectfallintothiscategory.

PowerConversionManufacturers:Manufacturersofinvertor

technologies.BothUKPowerNetworkspartneronitsHemsby

project (ABB) and the lead technology supplier on the SNS

project(S&CElectric)fallintothiscategory.

System Integrators: Agnostic of both AC/DC converter and

batterytechnology,thesesystemintegratorsareworkingacross

avarietyoftraditionalsubstation,generationandrenewable

generationprojects.Theymayeitherbemajorexistingplayers

inthepowerindustry,forexample:Siemens,ABB,GE,Alstrom,

orMitsubishi.Alternatively,justemergingisevidenceofanew


Design Inputs3


c)The main constraint driving the upgrade is relieved by

arelativelysmallamountofadditionalcapacityheadroom;

and/or

d)Themainconstraintdrivingtheupgradecanbedeferredbya

reasonableamountoftime(5+years)andnootherconstraints

areforecasttomaterialisewhichmaytriggertheupgrade.

Anumberofrelativelysimplecriteriacanthereforebeapplied

to rapidly determine if storage is likely to be an effective

solution for a particular site, prior to carrying out a more

detailedassessmentoftheoverallsolutionvalue.

WithinUKPowerNetworks,allprimarysubstationgroupsare

categorisedbya Load Index factor (LI) that is ameasureof

the site demand against the firm capacity (defined as the

maximum capacity available during an N-1, or single-fault,

event).ThesefactorsrangefrombetweenLI1forsiteswith

verylittleutilisationtoLI5wherethereisaveryhighutilisation.

ThecriteriasummarisedinFigure2belowwereappliedtosites

withLIinexcessof3inordertodiscountsitesthatwerenot

likelytobenefitfromanyintervention,orwherethestorage

3.1SiteSelectionforStorage-Whencanstoragebeused?

As described earlier, the starting point for any flexible

intervention, such as storage, is to identify network issues

or operational constraints that require intervention, and

determineifenergystoragecouldprovideaneffectivesolution

asanalternativetoconventionalupgrades.

IndevelopingtheSNSproject,anumberofsitesweretherefore

identifiedinaninitialselectionexercisethathighlightedthose

requiringinvestmentforsomeformofnetworkupgradedueto

capacityconstraints.Thesecapacityconstraintscanbearesult

ofmanydifferentfactorsincludinggenerationlevels,demand

growthorevenassethealth.

Ingeneral, storage ismost likely tobeofgreatestvalue for

network upgrade deferral where several of the following

statementsapply:

a)Theupgraderequiredisparticularlycostly,complexortime

consumingtoimplement;

b)The upgrade required would add significant over-capacity

thatwouldremainun-utilisedforalongperiodoftime;

Figure 2 – High-Level Criteria Applied for Initial Site Selection

A. Determine substations that experience over-capacity of a certain duration>100%forecastcapacityfactorasat31March2015fordurationof<500MVAh

C. Filter out substations that have a high projected load growth rate>2%forecastannualloadgrowthratefrom2010/11to2014/15

B. Filter out substations that experience significant over-capacity>120%forecastcapacityfactorasat31March2015


3.2SiteLocation-LeightonBuzzardPrimarySubstation

LeightonBuzzardemergedasthepreferredsiteatwhichtobuild

astoragedevice,andultimatelywasthesitewhereplanning

consentwasgranted,whichisdescribedlaterinthisreport.

Thisprimarysub-stationwasinneedofreinforcementwithin

thenextfewyearsduetothermalcapacityconstraintsofthe

two overhead lines feeding the site occurring at high peak-

demandtimes.PeakdemandatLeightonBuzzardhasexceeded

firmcapacitylimitsbetween9and37daysineachofthelast

fiveyears(typicallyduringperiodsofverycoldweather).The

limitedadditionalcapacityrequiredhascurrentlybeenprovided

bytransfercapacityfromneighbouringsectionsofthenetwork,

howeverpeakdemandatthislocationisforecasttocontinue

togrow,andtransfercapacityislimitedat2MVA.Thismeans

thatlimitsmayshortlybebreachedinfutureyearsandisthe

reasonanupgradeisnowrequired.ThechartinFigure3below

showsthedemandprofileacrosstwoparticularhighdemand

daysin2010,wheresitedemandexceededthefirmcapacity

ratingofthesite.

The conventional reinforcement option to upgrade the site

and mitigate this constraint was evaluated as a third 33kV

circuitfromthefeedingsite,SundonGrid,toLeightonBuzzard

primarysubstation,andathird38MVAtransformerlocatedat

Leighton Buzzard. This reinforcement would provide an

additional35.4MVAoffirmcapacityatLeightonBuzzard,which

is significantly abovepredicted requirements for themedium-

longterm.Thetraditionalreinforcementoption,andalternative

approachusingstorage,asdescribedbelow,isshowninFigure4.

The offset cost of this conventional reinforcement was also

relativelyhigh,againsuggestingthesitewasagoodmatchfor

storageandtherewaslikelytobeameaningfulcontribution

towardsthebusinesscasenecessaryfordistributionnetwork

scalestorage.

solution value was not likely to be economical in deferring

theupgrade; for example, siteswith relativelyhigh forecast

demandgrowthrates.Furtherdetailsonthisprocessandthe

intermediate results were presented in Appendix G of the

originalfundingsubmissionforSNS1.

Another main consideration in the case of the SNS project

was the known availability of land at or near the potential

siteinwhichtolocatethestoragedevice.Thiswasduetothe

requirement for a relatively rapid deployment of storage in

ordertocarryoutthetrialswithinareasonabletimeframeas

partofanLCNfundedproject.Inpracticehoweverthismaynot

necessarilybeaprimaryconsiderationattheinitialevaluation

ofnetworkissuesstageforothernetwork-basedorcommercial

deployments;aslongasthereweresomesuitablehigh-level

optionsavailable for locating theenergystoragedevice that

couldbeexplored.

For example, acquisitionof new landor thepurchase/lease

andadaptationofexistinghousingfacilitiesarestillallviable

solutions which can be factored in to a more detailed cost

benefitassessmentatalaterstage,albeitwithalikelyincrease

tothetypicaltimelineneededfordeployment.

Havingcompletedthisassessmentofnetworkissuesrequiring

intervention,anddeterminingwhichweremost likely tobe

efficientlyresolvedusingstorage,threeprimarysubstationsites

wereidentifiedforfurtherexplorationbyUKPowerNetworks:

a)LeightonBuzzardPrimary,Bedfordshire

b)MarchGrid,Cambridgeshire

c)ShepwayPrimary,Kent

Leighton Buzzard site was identified and pursued as the

preferred site for the SNS project, and is the focus of the

remainderofthisreport.

1 https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/low-carbon-networks-fund-submission-uk-power-networks-smarter-network-storage


Figure 3 – Load Profile for Two High Demand Days in 2010 at Leighton Buzzard Substation

Figure 4 – Leighton Buzzard Reinforcement Options

ToCustomers

OverheadLines

ConventionalIntervention:3rd

LineandTx

EnergyStorage

Primary Substation 33kV to 11kV

GridSupply

GridSubstation132kVto33kV

PowerFlow

45

40

35

30

25

2000:00 12:00 00:00 12:00 00:00

MVA

Key

Demand

Firm Capacity Rating

Leighton Buzzard 20/12/10 - 21/12/10

Time


Althoughthestoragedevicecouldtheoreticallybeconnected

totheprimarysubstationfromaremotelocation,thesitein

thiscasealsohadmorethansufficientlandadjacenttoit,on

whichto locate thestoragedevice,asshown inFigure5. In

addition,therewasfurtherlandavailabletoaccommodatea

new transformerand switchhouse for futureusewhen the

storagedevice reached theendof itsuseful lifeand further

newcapacitywaseventuallyrequired.

This site selection and identified potential location of the

storage facility served to drive some fundamental design

Inthiscase,storagecanbeusedasanalternativetobuilding

anewcircuitand transformerbygivingUKPowerNetworks

theabilitytoreduce(net)peakdemandtake-offatLeighton

Buzzardtomaintaindemandbelowthefirmcapacityrating.

Thereductionofpeakdemandcoulddelaytheneedforthis

upgradeforanumberofyears.Inaddition,weareevaluating

anup-ratingoptionoftheoverheadlineswhichwasidentified

inaparallelinnovationproject,whichifachievedmayfurther

servicethedemandanddelayorpotentiallyavoidtheneedfor

traditionalreinforcementaltogether.

Figure 5 – Aerial Photograph of the Leighton Buzzard Site


capacity available (‘firm capacity’) at the site in the event

of a single fault (termed ‘N-1’). Licence conditions require

UK Power Networks to provide a level of security of supply

which is defined by Engineering Recommendation P 2/6.

This sets out the minimum demand that needs to be met

followingthelossofoneormorecircuitsatasiteor“Group”.

Thisrequiresalevelofredundancy,appropriatetothegroup

demand, such that in the event of one or more failures a

certain proportion of group demand can still be met. At

Leighton Buzzard only the “N-1” single failure situation

requires consideration. The site firm capacity is currently

restricted by the thermal rating of the 33kV OHLs and is

therefore35.4MVA.

At Leighton Buzzard, the P2/6 requirement is for the first

2/3rdsofgroupdemandtobemetwithin15minutes,withthe

remainingtotalgroupdemandtobemetwithin3hours.This

means that, incombinationwith the2MVAtransfercapacity

describedearlier,theallowablecapacityinordertokeepwithin

P2/6limitsis37.4MVA.

Althoughthereisthislimitedtransfercapacityavailableatsite,

itisdesirabletoavoidrelyingonreconfigurationofthenetwork

toachievethis.Ideally,thisthereforemeansthatthestorage

facilitymust,ataminimum,becapableofmaintainingpeak

demandsbelow35.4MVA.

Noteithasbeenassumedthatwithabatteryenergystorage

device installed, improved power factor can be achieved

through the independent provision of reactive power from

theinvertors.Therefore,whilstfornetworkplanningpurposes

MVAistypicallyused,itwasassumedthattheserequirements

broadlytranslatetoMW(andMWh)requirementsforbattery

choices due to a number of challenges associated with the

landadjacenttotheprimarysubstation.Primarilythesewere

theproximitytoClipstoneBrook,asmallstreamclosetothe

site,whichmeantsomeofthislandwasinahigh-riskflood

areaasdesignatedbytheEnvironmentAgencyandthefact

thatthesitewaslocatedrelativelyclosetoresidentialhousing,

ascanbeseen inFigure5.Thismeantvisualconsiderations

werelikelytobemoreimportantthanifthestoragewasto

belocatedataremote,ruralsubstationoroneinanindustrial

area,forexample.Thishasafinancialconsequenceinterms

ofmitigationforbothfloodriskandappearanceassuch,SNS

canbeseenasavaluablestresstestfortheindustryandthe

businesscaseforstorage.

3.3ApplicationRequirements

Havingdeterminedthatenergystoragemayplayavaluable

roleinsolvingaparticularnetworkissueatasuitablesite,the

nextstagewastocarryoutfurtheranalysistohelpdefinethe

technicalapplicationrequirementsforitsresolution.

Thisprocessbeginstoidentifysomeofthefurtherkeydesign

considerationsforthesolutionandisdescribedfurtherinthis

section.InthecaseofSNS,thelevelofsitedemand,technical

detailsof thefirmcapacityconstraintandexpecteddemand

growthwerekeyindeterminingtheappropriateratingofthe

energy storage system, as this was the primary or ‘anchor’

applicationinthisinstance.

3.3.1PeakShaving

As previously described, Leighton Buzzard substation

comprisestwo33/11kV38MVAtransformersfedbytwo33kV

overheadLines(OHLs)fromSundonGrid,eachwithawinter

rating of 35.4MVA that are currently the limiting factors to


Buzzard,anassessmentofthedailydemandprofilewascarried

outtoestimatethehighestpowerandenergydemandthat

wouldberequiredtobeinjectedtokeepoverallsitedemand

within the firm capacity limits. This is illustrated further in

Figure6,whichshowsthedemandprofile(inpurple)for20

December2010;onwhichthegreatestenergyandpeakpower

wouldberequired(greenshadedareaunderthecurve)ifthis

was supplied by the storage to keep demands below firm

capacitylimits(theredline).

energy storage systems. This is because power factor will

beclosertounity,andalsoasthemarginofsafetybuiltinto

networkdesignsandcapacitythresholdswilltypicallybelarger

thananyadjustment.

Unlikeconventionalnetworkassetsanddesignphilosophies,

whichtypicallyconsiderpowercapacityonly,boththepower

and energy need to be considered for storage. In order to

assesstheminimumrequirementsforthestorageatLeighton

Figure 6 – Illustration of Peak Power and Energy Requirements

Key

MVAh overfirm

Capacity Threshold

Adjusted Total MVA

45,0

40.0

35.0

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

00:0

0

01:0

0

02:0

0

03:0

0

04:0

0

05:0

0

06:0

0

07:0

0

08:0

0

09:0

0

10:0

0

11:0

0

12:0

0

13:0

0

14:0

0

15:0

0

16:0

0

17:0

0

18:0

0

19:0

0

20:0

0

21:0

0

22:0

0

23:0

0

MVA


combination with the desired period for deferral of the

network upgrade. The inherent uncertainty in demand

growth at individual locations, and the impact of low-

carbon technology adoption on demand patterns make this

particularlychallenging.

3.3.2FutureExpansion-EstimatedLoadGrowth

Thegraph in Figure7 shows the latest longer termviewof

winter peak demand at Leighton Buzzard, including local

connectiongrowthestimates.

Inthiscase,themaximumpeakpoweroutputofthestorage

neededisapproximately40MVA(themaximumheightofthe

demandlevelabovethethreshold),andtheenergycapacity

required is approximately 12MVAh. This essentially provided

theminimumsuitableboundsof power andenergy for the

storagedevicetobeaneffectivesolutionforpeakshavingand

removingtheconstraintatthesitein2010.

To determine the upper bounds, the impact of additional

demand growth and future constraints was considered in

Figure 7 – Winter Peak Demand Trend at Leighton Buzzard Primary

48

46

44

42

40

38

36

34

32

30

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

MVA

Key

Limit to maintain P2/6 Compliance - No intervention MVA

Site Firm Capacity (N-1) - No intervention

Local Load Growth Estimates

Local Load Growth Estimates


minimumlevelofenergydurationcanbeachieved.Thechoice

ofmaximumrealandreactivepowerandenergyistherefore

also an important factor in the overall business case for

multi-purposeusestorage.

Itbecameevidentduringtheprocurementprocessthat,inthe

caseof battery energy storage, the costwasmost sensitive

to increases inenergy storage capacity, rather than theMW

capacityrating,reflectingthefactthatthecostofthebattery

unitsistypicallyagreaterproportionofthetotalcostthanthe

inverterunits.

Following this analysis although based on earlier published

planningdate,itwasthereforedeterminedthatanappropriate

initialstorageratingwas6MW/10MWh.Thisprovidedforan

optimumamountofenergydurationtoinitiallymeetcurrent

andsomefuturepeakdemandatsite,dependingonthelevel

offutureloadgrowth,whilealsoprovidingforapeakpower

greaterthanstrictlyneededforthenetworkconstraintinorder

tomaximiseadditionalvaluestreams.

Itshouldbenotedthatwithmanyenergystoragetechnologies,

it is possible to add further power and energy capacity

throughout its operational life, therefore capacity for future

expansionneednotbe installedondayone. In the caseof

batteryenergystoragethisispossiblethroughtheconnection

ofadditionalinvertersandbatteryracks.

Attheearlydesignstage,itwasthereforedecidedtodesign

the building to accommodate further future expansion of

bothpowerandenergytoprovidegreateroptionality in the

faceofuncertainloadgrowthandprofileshape.Basedonan

assessment of potential maximum energy and power limits

requiredtoprovideasignificantperiodofdeferral(10+years),

and using indicative estimates provided by manufacturers,

the building was initially designed to accommodate future

expansion up to 8MW/24MWh, as illustrated in Appendix 3.

Fromtheseestimates, itcanbeseenthat,duetoanumber

ofeconomicfactors,theoveralltrendindemandgrowthhas

beenareductioninoverallmaximumdemandsince2009.This

suggeststhattheminimumpowerandenergyboundsof4MVA

/12MVAhrequiredfromthe2010profileinFigure6wouldin

factalreadyprovidesomefuture-proofing.However,demand

growth is expected to return as the economic environment

improves,andsoitwasdeemedimportanttoprovidefurther

future-proofingofthesolution.

Itshouldbenotedthatthe local loadgrowthestimatesalso

showed that, without intervention, demand is expected to

exceedthesitecapacitylimitaround2016/17,andtherefore

therewasarequirementthatanysolutionshouldbecapableof

beingdeployedwithinthistimeframe.

Determininganappropriateenergycapacitytocaterforfuture

growth ischallengingbecauseoftheuncertainty intheway

that the shape of demand will change in the future. If, as

expected,electricvehiclesbecomemorecommonplace,then

thisislikelytoresultin‘peakier’demandprofilesandtheneed

forahigherpeakpowerratingforenergystoragetomitigate

resulting constraints. Alternatively, if consumption increases

relativelyproportionatelyacrossthedailyprofile,itislikelyto

beenergycapacitythatbecomesthelimitingfactor.

Itisthereforedesirabletobuildinsomeallowanceforgrowth

inboththesedimensionstoprovidethegreatestoptionality.

Naturally,providingforgreaterpowerand/orenergycapacity

hasanimpactonthecostandfootprintofanystoragesolution,

andsotheallowanceformaximumpossiblefutureexpansion

must be balanced with the overall solution value and

cost-benefitcomparedtothetraditionalupgrade.Inaddition,

many of the current ancillary services are capacity based,

whichmeansthevalue,andthereforetheadditionalbenefits

achievableisproportionaltoMWratherthanMWh,assuminga


•Ability todeliverat least3MWoutput forat least2hours

duration(6MWh)(asrequiredbySTORservice)

These application requirements, in conjunction with the

determinedstorageratingsasdescribedinSection3.3.2,were

used to guide the procurement process and therefore were

additional key drivers in the resulting storage technology

selectionanddesign.

3.4Safety

Safetyisaprimaryconsiderationforallnetworktechnologies

andinterventionsbyDNOs,andsoalsoimpactedtheselection

of storage technologiesduring theprocurementprocessand

finaldesignsofthefacility.

There was a wide range of technology proposals that were

receivedduringthetenderprocess,whichisdescribedfurther

inSection4.1;eachofwhichhavedifferentcharacteristicsand

safetyconsiderationsassummarisedonthefollowingpage:

(Following a subsequent necessary change of battery cell

supplier, during further detailed design it became evident

thatitwasnolongerpossibletoaccommodateupto24MWh,

which led to a revised layout design as described later in

thisreport.)

3.3.3SecondaryApplications

InthecaseofSNS,asdescribedinSection3.3.1,thethermal

capacityoftheoverheadlineswastheconstrainttriggeringthe

needforreinforcementatLeightonBuzzardandshortlyfollowed

bythethermallimitofthetransformersbeingreached.

However,thereisalsoadesiretomaximisethevalueofthe

storagecapacity,anddetermineifadditionalapplicationscould

help to improve the business case for storage. In addition,

the storage is to be used as the means to explore a range

of innovative commercial arrangements for the ownership

andoperationofthestoragedevice.Assuch,theprojectwas

interestedinexploringtheuseofanytypeofstoragetechnology

ofsufficienttechnologicalreadinesstobesafelyandeffectively

deployedatdistribution-networkscale.

Theseadditionalapplicationrequirementswerespecifiedinthe

technologytenderintheformofancillaryservicesthatwere

desirableforthestoragesolutiontobecapableofperforming

andincluded:

• Short-TermOperatingReserve(STOR)

• DynamicandNon-DynamicFastFrequencyResponse(FFR)

• PowerFactorCorrection–throughtheprovisionofreactivepower

Theseadditionalservicesplaceadditionaldesignconsiderations

onthestoragesolutionintermsofthecapabilitiesandresponse

timesincluding:

•Abilitytoprovidereactivepower(VArs)(toprovidepower

factorcorrection)

•Abilitytoprovidepoweroutputresponsewithin2seconds

(asrequiredbyFFRservice)


StorageTechnology

VanadiumRedoxFlow

LeadAcid

Sodium-nickel-chloride(NaNiCl2)

LithiumIon

SodiumSulphur(NaS)

Lithiumironphosphate(LiFePO4)

LiquidAir

Characteristics/SafetyConsiderations

Arechargeableflowbatterythatusesvanadiumionsindifferentoxidationstatesto

storechemicalpotentialenergy.Theelectrolytescontainsulphuricacid,whichisstored

inexternaltanks.Thispresentssafetyandenvironmentalconcerns,especiallyifleakage

toawatercourseispossible.

Theseuseleadplatesinanelectrolyteofsulphuricacid.Theyhavearelativelygood

efficiencyandarelowcost.Theleadandsulphuricacidaretoxicandsopresentsafety

andenvironmentalconcernsforbothnormaloperationandintheeventofleakage.

Thisisamoltensaltbatterywithgoodthermalcyclingproperties,buttherearesome

thermalmanagementsafetyconcerns.

Typicallysolidorpolymer-basedelectrolytethatresultsinlimitedriskofspillageor

leakage.Lithiumisflammable,resultinginrelativelyhighfireriskintheeventof

overchargeorcatastrophicfailureconditions.

Thisisalsoatypeofmolten-saltbattery(constructedfromliquidsodiumandsulphur)

withahighenergydensity,highefficiencyofcharge/dischargeandlongcyclelifetime.

Howevertherehavebeensomerecentsafetymanagementconcernsbecauseofthe

corrosivenatureofthecomponents.

ThisvariationofaLithium-Ionbatteryhasalowerenergydensitythanthemore

commondesignusedinconsumerelectronics.Becauseofitslowcost,non-toxicity,

thehighabundanceofironanditsexcellentthermalstabilityithasgainedmarket

andsafetyacceptance,butlimiteddeploymentsatlargescale.

Cryogenicbasedsystemoperatingatlowtemperaturesandhighpressure.

Non-hazardousandnon-toxicelectrolytematerials,althoughlowerenergydensity

thansometechnologiesresultsinalargefootprint.


It is hoped that this learning will help to support other

distribution network operators in the economic analysis of

storagedeploymentstodetermineifitislikelytobeaviable

alternative.AspartoftheSNSproject,anInvestmentModel

Template2hasalreadybeendevelopedaspartofaconsultation

relating to the potential business models for storage, which

providesa tool forassessing thebusinesscase forastorage

installation when it is deployed for a range of system-wide

servicesundertwodifferentbusinessmodels.

An understanding of the business case for storage, and the

possible ranges of additional value that may be achieved,

will help network operators, and/or third-parties deploying

storage, to determine the upper bounds for the budget

that can be tolerated for storage to be an economic

alternativeataparticularsitefortheresolutionofaparticular

networkissue.

Itisoutofthescopeofthisreporttoevaluatethefullbusiness

casefortheinstallationatLeightonBuzzard,asfurtherlearning

isyettobegeneratedrelatingtotherealbenefitsthatcanbe

achievedfromoperationonthenetworksandintheancillary

markets.Forfurtherinformationontheoriginalassessmentof

thebusinesscase,theSNSfundingsubmission3analysedthe

estimated potential business case of the installation at this

trialsiteanddemonstratedthatwithancillaryvaluestreams,

onceprovensuccessful,itwaspossibleforthedeploymentto

providebenefitsforcustomers.

For business-as-usual deployments, it is therefore expected

that this evaluation would be carried out following site

identificationtodeterminewhetherstorageshouldbeusedto

meetthenetworkneed,andbeforeproceedingwithfurther

storagedesign.

Thespecificsitelocationwasalsoadriverintermsofsafety

considerationsbecauseoftheproximitytothewatercourseand

residentialbuildings,andduetothesitebeinginahigh-risk

flood area. This would have specific implications for safety

hazardsconnectedwith theproposed technology, in relation

toitsconstructionandimpactsconcerningitsoperationandso

forUKPowerNetworks thisguidedthe technologyselection

away from those solutions based on liquid electrolytes, or

wheretherewassome(albeitsmall)riskofhazardousliquids

beingreleased.

Naturally, the safety of employees and the public will be of

primary concern in all distribution-connected storage

deployments.Howevertheriskappetiteforcertaintechnologies

willdependontheindividualorganisationandmaybehigher

forinstallationsinremoteorhighlyisolatedlocationswherethe

consequencesofcatastrophicfailuremaybesignificantlylower.

3.5Budget

Budget is likely toplayakeypart indeterminingsomekey

design choices, including supplier selection and technology

type.For storage tobeaviablealternative theremustbea

robustbusinesscasethatprovidesforalowercostalternative,

oradditionalbenefitsovertheconventionalupgrade.

Whileitistypicallynoteconomicaltodeploystorageinisolation

(i.e.for investmentdeferralalone)foradistributionnetwork

operator,itisoneofthemainaimsofSNStogeneratelearning

relating to the wider business case for the multi-purpose

application of storage. This includes how the provision of

ancillaryservicesmaycontributetowardstheoverallbusiness

case for storage and determine whether these additional

benefits,inconjunctionwithinvestmentdeferral,providefora

viablelowercostalternative.

2 http://www.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/internet/en/community/smarter-network-storage/3 https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/low-carbon-networks-fund-submission-uk-power-networks-smarter-network-storage


Initial Design Outputs4


4.1TechnologyandSupplierSelection

AtthestageoftechnologyselectionapreferredsiteatLeighton

Buzzard, albeit requiring planning permission, had been

identified as previously described. Although the eventual

installation site might have had to alter, depending on the

planningconsentoutcome,itwasneverthelesshelpfultohave

suchareferencesiteandlocationtousewhenputtingtogether

thetender.

Thecapacityrequirementofthedevicehadbeenassessed,as

described in Section 3.3.2. In order to assess potential for

improvements in the future commercial operation of the

device,variations foralternativeconfigurations for increasing

the rated capacity were also sought from suppliers. Where

alternativeswereproposed,explanationoftheimplicationsof

the varying cost structures were requested so that a cost/

benefitanalysiscouldbeundertaken.

Thestoragedevicemanufacturerwoulddesign,manufacture,

workstest,supply,delivertosite,supervisetheerectionand

installation, test and cold commission the system. Further

testingwouldberequiredtodemonstratethatthecomplete

installationwilloperatesafelyandnothaveanydetrimental

impactonconnectedcustomers.Arangeoffurtherappropriate

tests from international standards would be required and

agreedwithUKPowerNetworks.Thesewouldincludepower

frequency tests as well as lightning impulse tests and the

installationwouldneedtoconformtotheDistributionandGrid

Coderequirements.

AtenderwaspreparedandissuedinApril2012,forresponses

six weeks later. Responses were received from 15 suppliers

offeringbetweenthem23differentsolutions.Allbutoneofthe

proposalswerebasedonaformofelectrochemicalbattery.The

majority,11ofthe15suppliersofferedtheirownmanufactured

battery solution, whereas the four non-manufacturers who

essentially bought in the battery technology hardware were

abletoofferamuchgreaternumberofpotentialsolutionsand

wereessentially system integratorswhowereneutralabout

thechoiceofbatterytechnology.Thetechnologyofferedranged

right across the electro-chemical batteries spectrum from

technically and commercially mature lead-acid batteries

throughnickelcadmiumtoadvancedlithium-ion.Thesolutions

offeredwereevaluatedagainstsevencriteriawithfoursuppliers

making the short-list. This was later reduced down to two

preferredsuppliersbasedonthetechnology.

Thetechnologysolutionthatratedhighestwaslithium-ion,in

partduetothesafetyfeaturesproposed.Thisappearedtohave

keybenefitswhencomparedagainstthealternativetechnologies,

andusingtheproject’sdesigninputsdescribedearlier.Ofthe

twopreferredsuppliers,thekeybenefitsthattheseproposals

containedwere:

• Proventechnologywithsuitablereferencesitesandsafety

record,usingtechnologythathadnopossibilityofpolluting

floodorrivercoursewater;

• Physical size, weight and foot print area aligned with

identifiedsitelocation;

• Quickramp-upresponsetimeofsolution,allowingforwide

rangeofapplications;

• Ability to be housed in a variety of structures, including

buildingalignedwithsitelocationrequirements;

• Abilitytoberaisedabovethegroundonstilts,tomitigate

floodingrisks;and

• Valueformoney.

Therewaslittledifferencebetweenthetwopreferredsuppliers

intermsofboththetechnologyandthepriceoffered.Onewas

abatterycellmanufacturer,whowasproposingtoappointan

established power systems company subcontractor as their

secondtiersupplier to integratethesystemandprovidethe

necessarypowerelectronics.Theotherwasapowerelectronics

systemscompanywhowouldsubcontractoutthebatterycell


manufacturetoasubsidiaryofamajorchemicalcompanyable

toprovidethenecessarybatterycells.Thesecategorisationsare

describedearlierinSection2.1.

Followingfurthercommercialdiscussions,theleadsupplierS&C

Electric Europe was appointed. S&C Electric then formally

appointedsecond-tiersuppliersofSamsungSDI(forthebattery

cells)andYounicos(forthecontrolsystemaspects).

Whilethechoiceoftechnologymayultimatelydrivethetypeof

mainsupplierselected,itwasnotedinthefirstSNSprogress

report4thatthesupplychainforenergystoragesystems,and

batterystorage inparticular,hasbeenfoundtoberelatively

immature.Acomplexsupplychainofsecond-tiersuppliersis

required for a fully integrated storage system, covering, for

example, power-conversion equipment, battery cells and

assemblies, advanced control systems, fire-suppression and

coolingsystems.Currentlythereareexamplesofplayerswitha

historyineachoftheseareaswhoaretargetingthemarketfor

fully-integratedsystems,andallhavethepotentialtobelead

suppliers. It is not yet clear howeverwhich segment of the

supply chain will eventually dominate in the supply of

integratedsystems,soitislikelytherewillbefurthershake-ups

andconsolidationinthecomingyears.

Basedontheexperienceofthisprocurementexercise, there

would appear to be merit in selecting a supplier who can

provide a fully integrated solution, with some maturity as

primary lead supplier. When the supplier S&C Europe was

appointed, their original battery cell second tier provider

fell out of the running through their ownparent company’s

choice. S&C however were able to find and select a

replacement second tierbattery cell supplier,whichhadnot

been identified at the start of the original procurement

process.Thereforethistime,itwaspossibletocontinuewith

the primary supplier chosen. The lack of financial strength

of suppliers in this market has been evident and

therefore significant effort should be placed on conducting

financialduediligence.

Thiscreatesprocurementchallengesforenergystoragesystems

anditwasfoundthatprocurementdatabases,suchasAchilles,

do not necessarily capture the best or latest view of the

potentialsupplierlandscape.Toovercomethis,itissuggested

that alongside existing procurement approaches, further

marketresearchiscarriedouttoidentifyandcaptureadditional

emergingplayers,aswascarriedoutinthebid-phaseofthe

SNSproject.

4.2ModuleSize

Modularityofdifferentenergystoragetechnologiesvaries,but

anotherkeyadvantageofbatteryenergystoragetechnologies,

suchasLithium-Ion,istheflexibilityinsizingandconfiguration.

Different manufacturers have different specific common

inverter or battery module sizes that provide for certain

configurationsthataremorecosteffectivethanothers.Inthe

caseoftheselectedtechnologysupplier,inverterunitsof1MW

(1.25MVA)wereavailablethatcouldbecombinedtoprovide

modular 2MW (2.5MVA) inverter units. This meant overall

solutions of 2MW increments were optimal, and helped to

determinetheoptimaldesignofthefutureexpansionofupto

8MWpowerrating.

FortheSNSsolution,initiallythreesetsof2MWinverterunits

willprovidethe6MWpoweroutput.Independentconnection

ofthese2MWunitsprovidesfortheabilitytotakeunitsoutof

serviceandstillhavepowerandenergyavailable.

Similarly,batteryenergycapacitycanbeaddedincrementally

toeachinverter,althoughitisdesirabletohaveanevenbattery

capacityacrosseachmain inverterunit tofacilitatetheeven

balancingofstateofchargeacrossthefullsystem.Thesmallest

modularunitfromSamsungisdefinedasa‘tray’andconsistsof

4 https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/electricity/distribution-networks/network-innovation/low-carbon-network-fund/second-tier-projects/uk-power-networks


16 individual battery cells, providing for a nominal energy

capacityofaround3.5kWhpertray.FortheSNSinstallation,132

racks,comprising24trayseacharethendistributedacrossthe

inverter units to provide the total energy capacity for the

installation(includingapproximately1MWhnominaladditional

capacitytoallowfornaturaldegradation).

4.3StorageHousing

Several large-scale battery energy storage providers offer

standardised solutions based on batteries installed in ISO

shippingcontainers.

Attheidentifiedsite,theelectricalenergystoragefacilityisto

be located in close proximity to public rights of way and

residential housing, so it was determined at an early stage

that a containerised solution was unlikely to be acceptable

to the community, and also therefore to the Local Planning

Authority, and so a building-housed solution would

benecessary.

Duetothefloodriskatsite,itwasalsodeemednecessaryto

specifythatthestoragebuildingmustberaisedofftheground

toallowanyfloodwaterstoflowfreelyunderneathsoasnotto

increasefloodriskthroughdisplacingwater,oritselfbeatrisk

offlooding.

In order to ameliorate the visual impact of the proposed

development,theoverridingconsiderationwastominimise,as

faraspossible,thesizeandvolumeofthebuilding.Thesecond

designconsiderationwastodesignanyfacadeofthebuilding

suchthatitminimisedtheapparentbulkofthebuildingwhen

seenfromkeyviewpoints.

Finally, it was deemed necessary to provide some form

of effective landscape screening to the resulting

development, including the security fence around the new

substationcompound.

4.3.1StorageHousing-DesignCriteria

There were a number of design criteria that needed to be

followed, based on UK Power Networks requirements and

those anticipated to be important for securing planning

consents. A range of surveys and studies at the Leighton

Buzzardsite,wereconductedinlinewithUKPowerNetworks

civilstandardshelptodefinearangeofinitialdesigncriteria.

Thefollowingresultingconsiderationswerethereforeimportant

designfactors:

• Keepingthevolumeandheightoftheproposedsubstation

structure(s)toaminimumsoastokeepthevisualimpactof

thefacilitytoaminimum;

• Keepingthecostofconstructiontoaminimum;

• Useofgoodqualityfacingmaterialsthatwill result inthe

minimumofmaintenancebeingrequiredandextendingthe

lifeofthefacility;

• Facingmaterialsthatwillhelpthebuildingblendinwiththe

surroundingarea;

• Useoflandscapingtoameliorateanynegativevisualimpact;and

• Existing33kVunderground cables on site, so nobuildings

shouldbelocatedoverthesecables.

In order to mitigate flood risk, the following factors were

requiredinthedesign:

• Noraisingofthesitegroundlevel;

• Aclearvoidunderthebuildingtoallowforfloodwaterto

passfreelyandoccasionalaccessformaintenancepurposes;

• No amendments should be made to the cross-sectional

alignmentofthebankofClipstoneBrook;

• Notree-plantingclosetothewatercourseedge;

• Nobundingofanykindisincludedinthedesigntoprevent

displacementofpotentialfloodwaters;and

• Aneasementbetweentheperimeterfence,alonglevelground,

totheedgeofthewatercoursetoallowaccessformaintenance.


Forvisualameliorationpurposes,itwasproposedtointroduce

landscapingalongthreeofthefourboundaries:alongWoodman

Close,alongtheboundaryfacingtheriverbank,andalongthe

boundaryparallelwiththeexistingsubstationboundary(north-

easternboundary).

Other considerations, relating to security and environmental

impactsincluded:

• Withinthesecurecompound,anyelectricalplantshouldbe

keptatleast2mawayfromthesecurityfenceinaccordance

withUKPowerNetworkscivilengineeringdesignstandards;

• Tosafeguardanareaforwild life, itwasadvisedthatany

newdevelopmentshouldbekeptfrombetween5mto8m

fromthetopoftheriverbank;

• An area of open land within the secure compound is

required for circulation and temporary storage of surface

waterrunoff;and

• No trees should be planted closer than 2m from the

demarcationfenceincasetheyareusedasclimbingaids.

Someoftheresultantarchitecturalfeaturesofthesubstation

buildingreflectthefunctionofthebuilding,namely:

• Therearenowindowstothebuilding;

• Highsecuritydoorstothebuilding;

• A3m-highsecurity‘Weldmesh’fencearoundtheperimeter

ofthecompoundforsecurity;and

• A 1.2m-high secondary ‘demarcation fence’, with a 2m

clearancebetweenitandthe‘Weldmesh’fence,withshingle

onthecompoundarea.


The Planning Process5


although an application for a mining operation, minerals

extraction,orawastemanagementfacilitywouldbedecided

bythelocalcountycouncilinnon-metropolitanareas.Withina

national park planning applications are submitted to the

nationalparkauthority.

InthecaseofSNS,theLPAfortheLeightonBuzzardsitewas

CentralBedfordshireCouncil.

All LPA’s have their own websites which provide access to

relevantapplicationforms,contactdetailsandotherrelevant

documents. LPAs are generally receptive to pre-application

discussion inorder toclarifywhetheraproposalwill require

planningpermissionand,assumingthatitdoes,theprobability

ofsuchplanningpermissionbeinggranted.Thesepreapplication

discussionsareoftencalled“place-maker”meetings.

5.2Determination

Thelawrequiresthatallapplicationsforplanningpermission

should be decided in accordance with the policies of the

“developmentplan,”unlessmaterialplanningconsiderations

indicateotherwise.Thedecisiononanyplanningapplicationis

therefore“policy-led”ratherthan“influence-led”.Althoughthe

publicandnearbyresidentswillbeconsultedaboutalmostany

planning application, the decision will not be made on the

grounds of popularity or unpopularity. The framing of the

decisionbyreferencetopublishedplanningpolicypreventsthe

decision on a planning application being made on grounds

whichareperverseandarbitrary.

It is therefore most important that applicants for planning

permission satisfy themselves about the relevant local

developmentplanpoliciesbeforemakinganapplication.These

canalsobeviewedviatheLPA’swebsite,ortheUKGovernment’s

PlanningPortal,whichprovidesanationwideclearinghouseon

planninginformationandadviceforbothGovernmentandlocal

planningpolicies.Asapracticalmatteritisadvisabletodiscuss

5.1PlanningPermission

ObtainingplanningconsentistheprocessrequiredintheUKin

ordertobeallowedtobuildonland,orchangetheuseofland

orbuildings.WithintheUK,theoccupierofanylandorbuilding

willneedtitletothatlandorbuildingi.e.“ownership”,butwill

alsoneed“planningtitle”orplanningpermission.Planningtitle

wasgrantedforallpre-existingusesandbuildingsbytheTown

andCountryPlanningAct1947,whichcameintoeffecton1July

1948. Since that date any new development has required

planningpermission.TheplanningsystemforEnglandandWales

issetintheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990asamended.

Development as defined by law consists of any building,

engineeringorminingoperation,orthemakingofamaterial

changeofuseinanylandorbuilding.Certaintypesofoperation

suchasroutinemaintenanceofanexistingbuildingarespecifically

excludedfromthedefinitionofdevelopment.Specifiedcategories

ofminororinsignificantdevelopmentaregrantedanautomatic

planningpermissionbylaw,andthereforedonotrequireany

applicationforplanningpermission.Thesecategoriesarereferred

toaspermitteddevelopment.Electricityundertakings,suchas

licensed distribution operators are also permitted to make

developments on their own property under a General

DevelopmentOrder,undertheElectricityAct1988.Someother

developments,suchaspowerstationsandoverheadlinesrequire

consentsundertheElectricityActandnottheTownandCountry

PlanningAct.

Inthecaseofanyproposalthereisthereforeatwostagetest:

Istheproposaldefinedasdevelopmentand,iftheproposalis

development, “is it permitted development?” Only if a

development is not “permitted development” would an

applicationforplanningpermissionberequired.Anapplication

for planning permission should then be made to the Local

PlanningAuthority(LPA).

LPAs are generally the local borough or district council,


5.3.5RemovalorAlterationofaPlanningCondition

asamatterof law,conditionsshouldonlybe imposedona

grant of planning permission when compliance with that

condition isessential tomakeanunacceptabledevelopment

acceptable,soitwouldberefusedplanningpermissionwereit

notforthatcondition.Iftheapplicantordeveloperwishedto

proceed with a development without compliance with a

condition,orperhapswiththeconditioninanalternativeform,

then an application can be made to “vary” the condition

concerned, possibly by deleting it or offering an alternative

formofwords.Note that the LPAcannotalteranyplanning

conditionwhichimposesatimelimitwhenthedevelopmentis

tobecommenced.Thatwouldrequireare-applicationforfullor

outlineplanningpermission,butsinceOctober2009ithasbeen

possibletoapplytoextendanexistingconsent.

5.4Timescales

Eachtypeofapplicationhasatimescaleforwhenadecision

has tobemade. Theseare setby theGovernmentandcan

rangefrombetweenfourweeksand16weeks.Councilsare

permitted to agreewith the developers for an extension of

time,providingbothparties canagree,although theprecise

mechanism appears to differ depending on the LPA. If the

Councilfailstomakeadecisionwithinthenecessarytimeframe

ortheagreedtimeextension,theapplicantcanappealtothe

SecretaryofStatefornon-determinationofanapplication.Full

planning or outline planning applications must ordinarily be

determinedwithineightweeksof itssubmissionunless it is

deemedtobeamajorapplication.Thistimecanincreaseto16

weeksiftheapplicationincludesanenvironmentalstatement,

althoughaswastheexperiencewithintheSNSprojectthereis

thepotentialforthesetimelinestobeextended.Thetimescale

forachangeofuseapplicationiseightweeks.

5.5PlanningClassifications

Usesoflandandbuildingsareclassifiedinto“useclasses”and

proposalswiththeLPAbeforeincurringthefeesandothercosts

that are involved in making a planning application, or the

delaysandabortivecoststhatwouldarisefromtherefusalof

planningpermission.

5.3TypeofApplication

A number of different types of planning permission can be

appliedfor:

5.3.1FullPlanningPermission

Fullplanningpermissionwouldgrantpermissionforallaspects

oftheproposeddevelopment,althoughitwouldgenerallybe

subjecttovariousconditions(seebelow).

5.3.2OutlinePlanningPermission

Thiscannotbegrantedforaproposedchangeintheuseofland

or buildings. It might be appropriate when an applicant

is seeking an agreement “in principle” to a proposed

development,withoutbeingcommittedtoaparticularformof

designorlayout.

5.3.3Approvalof“ReservedMatters”

Seekingpermissionforthoseaspectsthatwerenotdealtwith

in an outline planning permission or seeking approval of

aspectsofadevelopmentwhichwerereservedbyaplanning

conditioninanearliergrantoffullplanningpermission.

5.3.4RenewalofPlanningPermission

This would arise when an earlier outline or full planning

permissionwassubjecttoatime-limitingconditionwhichhas

since expired. In essence this requires the entire planning

application to be reviewed in light of current rather than

previousplanningpolicies.Applicationsforrenewalofanearlier

planningpermissionareusuallygrantedanew,unlesstherehas

beenasignificantchangeintherelevantmaterialconsiderations

whicharetobeweighedinthedecision.


approvedbythelocalauthority.Someofthesewillneedtobe

compliedwithbeforeanyworkstartsonsite;otherswilltake

effectoncethedevelopmentiscommenced,orlater.

Mostconditionsimposedonagrantedplanningpermissionwill

relatetoimplementationofworkswithintheactualsiteofthe

application(theedgesofwhichmustbedefinedbyaredline

markedon an accurately scaledmapof the site, usually an

Ordnance Survey extract, accompanying the application). If

thereisaneedtocontrolaspectsofthedevelopmentwhichare

requiredtooccuroutsidethedefinedapplicationsitesuchas

relatedhighway improvements, then the implementationof

thoseaspectscanberequiredbya‘Grampiancondition’.This

wouldbeworded to theeffect that thedevelopmentbeing

permittedmustnotbecommenced(ormustnotbeoccupied,

as appropriate), until the required off-site works had been

completed.

5.7Section106Agreements

Planningconditionsareimposedtorequirethatsomethingis

done or not done by the developer in order to make the

developmentacceptable.Sometimes,planningpermissionwill

onlybegrantedsubjecttotheapplicantenteringintoalegal

agreementunderSection106oftheTownandCountryPlanning

Actrequiringthatcertainthingsbedoneormoneybepaidto

the local planning authority e.g. to contribute towards the

improvementofahighwayjunctionservingthedevelopment

before thedevelopment commences. Such contributions can

onlyberequirediftheyarenecessarytomakethedevelopment

acceptableandrelatedirectlytothedevelopmentproposed.

5.8DevelopmentControl

Developmentcontrolorplanningcontrolisthesystemoftown

andcountryplanningthroughwhichlocalGovernmentregulates

landuseandnewbuilding.Itreliesona“plan-ledsystem”whereby

development plans are formed and the public is consulted.

Subsequentdevelopmentrequiresplanningpermission,which

any change from one use class to another use class is

automatically a “material change of use” amounting to

development.Somesmallscalechangesbetweenuseclasses

arenevertheless“permitteddevelopment”andhencedonot

requireplanningpermission.Certaintypesofuseoractivitydo

notfallintoaspecificuseclassandaretermed“suigeneris”.

“Suigeneris”wastheclassificationdeemedmostappropriate

fortheapplicationattheLeightonBuzzardtrialsiteas,similar

tothenatureofthecurrentelectricityregulatoryframeworks,

theclassificationofenergystorage isnotexplicitlyorclearly

covered.Forexample,thereisaplanningpermissionuseclass

entitled‘StorageorDistribution’5,howeverthistypicallycovers

the physical storage of equipment or materials, such as oil

drums,tyresorlogistics/distributioncentresandmaytherefore

carry some negative connotations with local stakeholders

whichwouldnotnecessarilyberepresentativeoftypicalenergy

storagedeployments.

ItisnotclearifallLPA’swouldcategoriseanelectricalstorage

devicedevelopmentbyanon-DNOorelectricityutilitycompany

asrequiring“suigeneris”useandthereappearstobesome

leewayintheirassessment.Anychangeofuseof“suigeneris”

landrequiresplanningpermission.Inpracticemostusesarea

compositeof several uses so that, say, a factorymightwell

haveanancillaryofficeandperhapsstorageuses,allwithinthe

samepremises.Insuchacasehowever,theprimaryusewould

bethatofafactory(useclassB1orB2).

5.6Conditions

Planningpermission isusuallygrantedsubject toaplanning

conditionwhichrequiresthedevelopmenttobecommenced

withinthreeyears.Typicallytheywillalsoincludeanumberof

other conditions, for example the scheme to be built in

accordancewiththeapproveddrawings,treestobeplantedas

perthelandscapeschemeandreplacediftheydieinthefirst

fewyears,orthecolourandfinishofexternalmaterialstobe

5 http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/permission/commonprojects/changeofuse/


isgrantedorrefusedwithreferencetothedevelopmentplanas

amaterialconsideration.Ifthelocalplanhaddesignatedthe

proposeddevelopmentsiteaslandforsomethingotherthan

utilityservices,aswasthecaseatLeightonBuzzard,then in

spiteofthefactthatUKPowerNetworksownedthelandand

hadalwayshelditforfutureoperationaluse,thisalternative

designation in the local plan could dissuade the planning

officersfromgrantingapproval.Tocounteractthisitisusefulto

monitorandcommentonlocalplansateachpublication.

5.9NationallySignificantInfrastructure

ThePlanningAct2008introducedanewplanningsystemfor

nationallysignificantinfrastructureprojects.TheGovernmentis

producingaseriesof twelveNationalPolicyStatementsthat

willexplainitspolicyoneachtypeofinfrastructureproject.A

numberofNationalPolicyStatementshavebeenintroduced,

coveringmajorenergyprojects(oil,gas,coal,nuclearpower

andrenewableenergyfromthingslikewindfarms),ports,and

sewagetreatment.

Developerswantingtoapplyforconsentforaprojectmustfirst

consultlocalcommunitiesandgroupsthatmaybeaffectedby

the project. Applications are generally dealt with by the

PlanningInspectorate’sNationalInfrastructureDirectorate,toa

timetabledprocedure.

PlanningInspectorstakedecisionsonbehalfoftheSecretaryof

State.TheyapplythepoliciesintheNationalPolicyStatements

when making decisions. They take into account any matter

theyconsiderimportantandrelevant.Thiscouldincludeadraft

NationalPolicyStatement,wherethefinalstatementhasnot

yetbeenadopted.

It is unlikely that the scale of most distribution-connected

energy storage would fall into the category of nationally

significantinfrastructure,andisthereforenotconsideredfurther

inthisreport.


Obtaining Planning Consents6


ofUKPowerNetworks.Itwasthereforenecessarytoprovide

additionalanalysisintothefinancialandtechnicalviabilityof

alternative theoretical locationsoverandabove thatalready

provided.Thisassessmentwascrucialtoensurethe‘sequential

test’requiredbytheNationalPlanningPolicyFrameworkwas

satisfied, which is designed to ensure that development is

locatedinthemostsustainablelocationfirst,beforeother,less

sustainablelocationsarechosen.

Ideally the best technical solution was to locate the storage

deviceimmediatelyadjacenttotheexistingprimarysub-station

asdescribedearlier.However,with thepotential offlooding

andthecloseproximityofresidentialhousingitwasnecessary

to consider potential alternatives, of which there were two.

Either locating the storage device at a normal open point,

withintheprimarynetworkoralternativelyfindingasuitable

satellitesiteatwhichtolocatethestorageandconnectingit

backtotheprimarybywayoftwoseparate11kVcircuits.

Six normal open points (NOPs) within the Leighton Buzzard

Primarygroupwereidentifiedasbeingpotentiallysuitablefor

connecting the storagedevice, theseare shown inFigure8.

However, on further analysis none of themproved suitable.

Therewaseithertoolittlelandorspaceavailable,againdueto

theurbanlocationofeachandtheirproximitytohousing,or

the existing feeders through which a device would be

connected would require significant upgrading or

replacement.Inoneinstancetherewerealsosecurityconcerns

relating to the locationof thecablesandroutesback to the

primarysubstationwhichwouldbeathighriskofdamageby

anystreetworks.

6.1PlanningConsentsatLeightonBuzzard

Worktodeveloptheplanningapplicationforthetrialsiteat

LeightonBuzzardbeganinMay2012duringtheearlyproject

bid phase, when pre-application guidance was sought from

CentralBedfordshireCouncilbasedontheinitialdesignsofthe

exteriorofthestoragehousing.Theguidanceprovidedatthis

placemakermeetingofferedtherangeofrelevantpoliciesthat

shouldbeconsideredinthefullapplicationandalsoincluded

initial comments froma rangeof keyexternal stakeholders,

suchastheEnvironmentAgencyandlocalHighwaysOfficer.

Planningconsultants,AdrianSalt&Pang,wereappointedbyUK

PowerNetworkstoassistinthisprocess,providingguidancein

compiling the planning application. In order to maintain

consistencytheyhaveremainedthemain interfacewiththe

council’sPlanningCaseOfficer.

Atanearlystage,UKPowerNetworksagreedwithitsplanning

consultantsthatplanningpermissionwouldbesoughtunder

theTownandCountyPlanningAct.astheproposeddevelopment

wasnotcoveredunder thescopeofageneraldevelopment

orderwithintheElectricityAct.

6.2AlternativeLocationsConsideredtoMeetSequentialTests

From this initial pre-application guidance, as engagement

continued with the council it became clear there were

outstanding concerns relating to the basic need for the

developmentat thespecificsiteand location identified.This

wasparticularlyduetofloodriskatthesite,andthefactthat

thelandwasreservedforgreen-spaceaccordingtothecouncil’s

LocalPlanReviewPolicy,despiteitbeingundertheownership


Figure 8 – Alternative Sites Considered


screeningoftheproposedbuildingwithmoreandtallertrees

tohidethebuildingasmuchaspossible.

One thirdof responsesaskedquestions relating to safety, in

particular therewasconcernoveranychemicalsused in the

storage device; regarding displaced water in the event of

flooding,intheuseofsecuritylightingorinonecaserelatingto

electricalemissions.

Regarding the specific questions that were asked in the

consultationmorethanhalfhadsuggestionsrelatingtotheuse

ofthesurpluslandandtherewereanumberofissuesraised

relatingtoacyclewaythatCentralBedfordshireCouncilwere

keenonextendingtorunbetweentheexistingsubstationand

newstoragedevelopment,andtheriver,ClipstoneBrook. In

general residents wanted the land improved and better

maintained, two specifically wanted allotments and one

wanteditleftnaturalforwildlife.

Four responses specifically did not want a cycle path along

ClipstoneBrook,whichrunsalongthesoutheasternboundary

ofthesite.Thereasonsrangedfromthepathwaywhichwould

be out of sight, encouraging various forms of antisocial

behaviour,reducingthesoakawayduringflooding,theeffect

on the wildlife and safety concerns in relation to speeding

cyclistsandsmallchildrenwhoplayinthearea.

Fourrespondentseithersupportedwhathasbeenproposedor

did not object to the principle of the development. Two

residents stated that they would be writing to Central

BedfordshireCounciltoobject,threewouldlikeustorespondto

themandtwowouldlikealocalpublicmeetingtodiscussthe

matter. Two residents wanted to know what other sites UK

PowerNetworkshadspecificallyconsidered.

6.4ConsultationResponses

AsummaryoftheresponsestotheLocalConsultationleaflet

Analternativesatellitesiteexistedatalocation2kmfromthe

LeightonBuzzardprimaryonexistingfarmland,atasiteeastof

Leighton Linslade that was designated for Industrial use.

However,thelandtherehadnotbeenacquiredbyanypotential

developernorwasthereanycertaintythatUKPowerNetworks

couldacquireanythingsuitable.Noplanningapprovalevenin

outlinehadbeengrantedandthesitewouldrequiretwonew

11kVcircuitstobeconstructed,creatingmajordisruptiontothe

roads in the centre of Leighton Buzzard. This would quickly

mitigate one of the key benefits of using storage as an

alternative to conventional reinforcement: avoiding major

disruptionfromtheneedforathirdEHVcircuitfeedingLeighton

Buzzardprimary.Theconclusionwasthatthemostappropriate

andfeasiblelocationtoinstallstoragewasasinitiallyidentified,

adjacenttotheprimarysubstationlocatedinWoodmanClose.

6.3Pre-ApplicationLocalConsultation

InNovember2012andpriortothesubmissionofaplanning

application,alocalconsultationexercisewascarriedoutwhich

involveddistributingaleaflettolocalresidentsandbusinesses.

This leaflet was distributed to approximately 100 residents,

localbusinessesandthelocalschoolintheimmediatevicinity

oftheexistingsubstation.Thecirculationlistwasadvisedbythe

Local Planning Authority, Central Bedfordshire Council. Three

local councillors were also sent a copy of the leaflet. The

consultationwasrequiredinordertoseekviewsandfeedback

ontheproposeddevelopmentwhichcouldthenbeincorporated

inthedesignsandplanningapplication.Theleaflet,whichis

giveninAppendix1,explainedtheneedforthedevelopment,

detailsofthedesignandtheimpactofthestoragesolution.

BytheendofNovember2012,17responseshadbeenreceived

andthesehighlightedanumberofkeyareasofconcernthat

were to be addressed where possible in the full planning

application, as illustrated below. The general theme of the

responsescentredontheaestheticsoftheproposedbuilding

and on safety. Two-thirds of the respondents wanted better


• Arethereanychemicalsintheequipmentbeingusedwhich

couldcauseahealthriskiftheareaweretoflood?

• Would there be a massive discharge of electricity if an

accidentoccurred?

• WilltherebemorevehiclesparkinginWoodmanClose?

• Whatplanninghasbeendonesothattheexistinghousingis

not affected by floods? Do you intend to increase the

flooddefences?

• Canyouconfirmtherearenohealthriskslivingsoclosetoa

powerstation?

• Whateffectwill thesecurity lightinghaveon thehousing

andwilltherebeanyshadingofit?

6.4.6PropertyValues:

• House values will go down as a result of this. What

compensationwillbeavailable?

6.4.7PublicMeeting:

• Wouldtherebeapublicmeeting?

6.5PreparationandSubmissionofPlanningApplication

TheplanningapplicationforLeightonBuzzard,incorporatinga

numberofstudiesdetailedbelow,wassuccessfullycompleted

andregisteredwithCentralBedfordshireCouncilon8February

2013.EngagementcontinuedwiththeLocalPlanningAuthority,

Central Bedfordshire Council and the Environment Agency

throughouttheapplicationperiod.

Asignificantnumberofstudiesandanalyseswerecompleted

during the period May 2012 – February 2013. These were

managedbyUKPowerNetworks’ Capital Programme team,

whowillbemanagingthesiteconstructionworks.Thisensured

thatadetaileddesignandaccessstatementcouldbecompiled

for the full planning application. A summary of the various

component studies and documentation that was required is

illustratedinFigure10right.

areshownbelow.Thesearegroupedintodifferentcategories

foreaseofreviewandarealsoincludedinapiechartshownin

Figure9right.

6.4.1TheSite:

• Whydoweneedanothersubstationinthearea?

• Whydoesithavetobeinaresidentialareaandnotnearthe

developmentsitisbeingbuilttosupply?

• Fencingshouldberepairedandvandalproof,sothatpeople

donottiprubbishoruseitasa“shortcut”particularlyifthere

isacyclepath.Itshouldbehighfencing.

• Mixed feelings about having a cycle path because of the

childrenplayingthere.

• Whichothersiteswereconsidered?

6.4.2TheBuilding:

• Coulditbebuiltinbricksoitblendedinwiththehousing?

• Coulditeitherbecolouredvariousshadesofbluefromdarkto

lighterfrombottomtotoptoblendinwiththeskylineorgreen

toblendinwiththetreesandshrubberyusedtoscreenit?

• Couldmaturetreesandshrubsbeusedtoscreenthebuilding

ratherthanwaitingfornewtreestogrow?Howhighwillthe

screeningbe?

• Willtherebesolarpanelsontheroofofthebuilding?

• Whatwillhappentotheoldbuilding?

• Willthebuildingbesilent?

6.4.3TheLandscapeandWasteLand:

• Willtherebeon-goingmaintenanceofallthelandscape?

• Couldsomeofthewastelandbeusedasallotments?

6.4.4TheConstruction:

• Howlongisitgoingtotaketobuild?

• Willtherebenoiseanddisruptionwhileitisbeingbuilt?

6.4.5HealthandSafetyissues:

• WhatkindofcablingwillbeusedtoconvertDCtoACandwill

itbeunderground?


Figure 9 – Summary Chart of Consultation Responses

Figure 10 – Supporting Studies and Design and Access Statement Structure

CONSULTATIONRESPONSES 45% Visual

9% Support/No concern (in principle)

5% Project Build (period)

25% Social impact (local)

16% Technology (safety)

Supporting Studies

PrelimContamination

Assessment Report

GeoenvironmentalAssessment Report

Local Consultation Exercise and

Analysis

Flood Risk Assessment

Ecological Study ArboricultrualReport

ArchaeologialSurvey

Construction Traffic Management Plan

Background Noise Study

Land Valuation

Design and Access Statement

Rationale forDevelopment - Analysis

of Strategic Options

Design Criteria, site Layout and Design

Landscaping Plans and Planting Specification

Environmental Impact Assessment and Sustainability

Conformity with Strategic and Local Planning Policies

S106 Agreement - Heads of Terms


Followingre-submissionoftheplanningapplicationafterthe

initialstatutoryperiodhadexpired,ameetingwasheldwith

theCouncilon8April2013todiscussthetermsfurther.Atthis

session,thetermsofthes106agreementwerefullyagreed

andfullplanningconsentswaslaterissuedbythecouncilon7

June2013,subjecttoarangeofpre-commencementconditions

ands106terms.

Asummaryof theoverall timeline for theplanningprocess,

includingthemainengagementpointswiththeLPAandEAand

themainstudiescompletedisshowninAppendix2.

6.7KeyComponentsoftheSection106Agreement

ThefollowingprovisionsarecontainedwithintheSection106

AgreementmadewithCentralBedfordshireCouncil:

1.LeasetoCentralBedfordshireCounciltheremaininglandnot

usedinthedevelopmentforrecreational/leisurepurposesof

thelocalcommunity.Thisleaseisfor99yearswithabreak

clauseanytimeafter20years.

2.Transfera5mwidthstripoflandthatrunsalongthebankof

ClipstoneBrooktoCentralBedfordshireCouncilfortheiruse

inconstructingacyclewaypath,ifandwhentheysochoose.

3.UK Power Networks will during the next planting season

followingthephysicalcompletionofthedevelopment,plant

extratreescreeningroundtheexistingsubstationinorderto

improvethevisualaspectsofthewholearea.

4.UK Power Networks will reinstate fencing between the

leasedlandinpoint1aboveandtheroadWoodmanClose.

Itwillalsoprovidesomenewfencingacrossthecornerof

the existing sub-station site and South Street to aid the

Councilinbuildingacyclewayentrance.

5.UKPowerNetworkswillmakeaoneofffinancialcontribution

towardstheupkeepofthelandleasedtocentralBedfordshire

Councilinpoint1above.

The initial date set for a decision was 5 April 2013. As this

applicationwasnotconsideredtobeamajorapplicationthe

decisiondatewasbasedonthestatutoryplanningtimescales

ofeightweeks.HoweveratthebeginningofAprilthecouncil

requested thatUKPowerNetworkswithdrawand re-submit

the application to allow them more time to conclude

outstanding matters regarding the application. This included

thetermsofthes106agreementwhichwerenotyetfinalised,

asdescribedfurtherbelow.Althoughstrictlynotnecessary,asin

theory, the council could have looked to mutually agree an

extension, theapplicationwassuccessfully re-submittedand

re-registered by the Council on 12 April 2013 and this

gave Central Bedfordshire a further 8 weeks to conclude

theirenquiries.

6.6NeedforCommunityInfrastructureObligations

The pre-application guidance highlighted early-on; the

requirement to enter into a legally binding ‘section 106

agreement’ (s106)due to thescaleof thedevelopment,as

describedinSection5.7.

It was proposed this s106 should cover some suggested

communityinfrastructurecontributions,duetothelossofsome

ofthegreen-spaceforthecommunity,includinguseoftheland

ownedbyUKPowerNetworkswhichwasnotspecificallytobe

coveredwithintheapplication.

Negotiations relating to these financial contributions took

significantly longer thanexpectedwhichwas inpartdue to

feedbackreceivedduringthelocalconsultationwhichhighlighted

thatanumberofresidentswerenotinfavourofacycleway.The

provisionof a cycleway,or funding towards it,washowever

highlighted as desirable during the initial pre-application

guidancefromthecouncilbutwasnotdeemedappropriateor

relevanttothedevelopmentbyUKPowerNetworks.


Design Impacts7


Thehighestpointofthebuildingis8.3mabovegroundlevel,

with the lowest point, where the building fronts Woodman

Close,being6.6m(thiscomparesto5.5mwhichistheheight

toeaveslevelofthehousesonWoodmanClose).

The localgroundconditionsandmassof thestoragesystem

requireapiledfoundation.Abovegroundthebuildingstructure

willbeacombinationofsteelbeamsandreinforcedconcrete.

Theexternalappearanceofthebuildingwasadjusted,having

originallybeenproposedtobecladinshadesofblue.Following

feedbackfromlocalresidents,thepatternofthecladdingwas

adjustedandthecolourisnowinshadesofgreenasshownin

thefollowingdiagrams,Figure11.

Thisgradationincolour,combinedwiththepatterning,accords

with, and reinforces, the dark colour of the proposed

landscaping,setagainstthesky.Theoveralleffectistoreduce

theapparentbulkofthebuilding.

Thissectiondescribesthefinaldesignsofthestoragefacility,

following public consultation and planning consents and

incorporatingthevariousdesigndriversdescribedaboveand

fromthewiderangeofstudiesandassessmentscarriedoutat

thelocalsite.

7.1BuildingExteriorCivilDesign

Thebuildingcomprisesamono-pitchedsingle-storeybuilding

ofapproximately40mx20minplan,basedonkeydesign

advice received from the Council during the pre-application

guidancestage.

Thesedimensionswerespecificallydesignedtoallowforthe

storagedevicetoexpandinfuture,andbasedonfurtherdetailed

layoutdesignallowthecapacityofthedevicetoincreaseby

2MWandthestoragecapacitytoextendupto17MWh.This

limitationisdescribedfurtherbelowinSection7.4.


Figure 11 – Proposed Visualisation and Elevations with Landscaping

SOUTH-WEST ELEVATION

NORTH-EAST ELEVATION

NORTH-WEST ELEVATION - VIEW FROM WOODMAN CLOSE

SOUTH-EAST ELEVATION - VIEW FROM CLIPSTONE BROOK


consent,afloodmaintenanceplanhasbeenputinplacethat

ensuresaprocessismappedoutfortheclearanceandremovalof

anydebrisfollowingfloodevents.Thedesignalsoincorporates

afloodalarm tobe installedat site,whichalertsUKPower

Networkscontrolengineersintheeventofafloodatsite.

Thisraisedbuildingdesignalsoneededtobebalancedwiththe

needtominimisethevisualimpactofthebuildingandkeepit

below the levels of existing housing. Fortunately, battery

energy storage technology with its flexible and modular

configurationofracksmeansthatrackheightscanbeadjusted

accordingtoneed.Themaximumheightofthebuildinginthe

SNS case is driven by the under-floor void dimension, floor

thickness and height of the battery rack and switchgear

equipmentinternaltothebuilding.

7.3BuildingSurroundings

Otherexternalelementsoftheproposeddevelopmentincludea

loadingbayandanaccessroad.Thisaccessroadwillconnecttothe

existingsiteaccess toWoodmanClose–nonewpermanent

vehicularaccessisrequired.Wherepedestrianaccessisrequired

hardpavingwillbeusedotherwisetheremaininglandwithin

the site boundary will be covered with 40mm shingle to

maintain drainage and reduce weed growth. Sustainable

drainagesystemswillbeusedtoensurethereisnoincreasein

floodrisktootherareas.

To prevent vandalism, maintain public safety and meet the

requirements of the Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity

Regulations(2002)perimeterfencingisrequired.Thisistobe3m

high“weldmesh”typefencingcolouredHollyGreentoreinforce

the proposed landscaping and minimise the overall visual

impactofthesite.

In order to ameliorate the visual impact of the substation

buildingand the3m-highsecurity fencing,acomprehensive

landscapingschemewasdesignedandformsanintegralpart

7.2FloodMitigationDesign

The consultation with the Environment Agency during the

planningprocess led to thedesignof thebuilding raisedon

stilts to ensure that any potential flood waters were not

displaced,increasingtheriskoffloodingelsewhere.

Basedon theflood-riskassessmentworkcarriedout for the

EnvironmentAgency,the100-yearworst-casepredictedflood

levelswereestimatedataround0.66mabovethegroundlevel

ofthedevelopment.Inordertopreventanywaterdisplacement

andincreaseinfloodrisk,itwasthereforenecessarytoraise

the building by at least this amount. However, health and

safetypolicieswithinUKPowerNetworkswouldmeanthatany

voidunderthebuilding lessthan2mwouldbeclassedasa

confined space. In this case, additional measures must be

employedwhen carryingoutmaintenanceor otherwork to

ensuresafetyofoperationalstaff.Itwasthereforedesirableif

possibletoensurethevoidwasnotaconfinedspacetoensure

easiermaintenanceandaccessifneeded.Forthisreason,the

decisionwastakentoraisethebuildingby2m(atthelowest

groundlevelpoint),whichservestoprovideforeasieraccess

andmitigatesagainstthepredicted1000-yearfloodingevent.

Theunder-floorvoidtothebuildingwillbeenclosedonthree

sideswithsteelpalisadesecurity fencingbutclad toground

levelontheroadfrontageelevation.Inthiswaythebuilding

willappearsolidwhenseenfromtheroad.

TherewasinitiallysomeconcernfromtheEnvironmentAgency

regarding thepotential for debris tobecome trapped in the

palisadefencingwhichmayimpedetheflowofwatersunder

thebuildingintheeventofaflood.However,thiswasultimately

resolvedthroughbilateraldiscussionsandamendmentstothe

fencingdesignwhichincludedwidergapsbetweenpalesandan

increasedgapbetweenthegroundandbottomofthefencing.

Inaddition,aspartoftheplanningconditionsassociatedwith


thatthereisalreadyatreescreenontheoppositesideofthe

brook, and also a requirement of the Environment

Agency to prevent blocking access to the brook for

maintenance.

The extent of landscaping was increased from that initially

developed,asa resultofadditional feedback from the local

consultation during the planning process. Due to comments

relatingtothelookoftheexistingsubstation,aspartoffurther

contributions covered in the s106 agreement, it was also

proposed to include additional landscaping of the existing

primarysubstationforthebenefitofthecommunity.

ofthedesign.Thelandscapinghasbeendesignedtoprovidea

visualscreentotheproposeddevelopment,onethatwillbe

effectivethroughouttheyearandcomprisesscreenplantingof

treesandshrubsonthreeofthefoursidesofthecompoundas

illustratedinFigure12.

A7m-wideplantingstriphasbeenlocatedalongtheWoodman

Close frontage, and a 6m-wide strip is proposed along the

north-east boundary. Both these landscaped areas would

include trees. Along the south-east boundary, the side of

ClipstoneBrook,itisproposedtointroducea3m-wideplanting

strip, but with no trees. This was as a result of the fact

Figure 12 – Proposed Landscape Plan at Woodman Close


Forsafetyandsecuritypurposestherewillbeexternallighting

withinthesite,incasethatengineersneedtovisitthesiteout

ofhours.Inordertoreducelightpollutioninthearea,thisis

designedtofacedownwardsandbedesignedtolimitthelight

spread.Thelightscanbeoperatedmanuallywhenthereare

authorisedpersonnelonsiteandonlyforalimitedperiod.They

canalsobe triggeredautomatically ifunauthorisedaccess is

detectedtosupporttheuseofCCTVwithinthesite.

Oncethefacilityisinfulloperation,thereisnoneedforstorage

installationstobemanned,withonlyoccasionalvisitssimilarto

theexistingsubstation.Maintenanceengineerswillarriveby

van and will park within the compound. Access to the site

duringfloodconditionswillnotberequired.

7.4StorageFacilityInternalCivilDesign

Theoverallconceptforthefacilitylayoutdesignwastosplitthe

facilityintotwomainsections,withonehalfhousingthebattery

racksandonehalfhousingtheinvertersandstep-uptransformers.

Thiswastofacilitaterobustmethodsofrestrictingoperational

accesstothedifferenttypesofequipment,giventhedifferent

operational training required for the various storage system

components.Additionalseparateroomswerethenincludedforthe

HVswitchgear,SCADAandcontrolequipment,fire-suppression

equipment and Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning

(HVAC)equipment,basedoninitialrequirementsandestimates.

The internaldesignand layoutof thestoragefacilitydidnot

needtobepresentedaspartoftheplanningconsentprocess,

whichfocussedmoreontheexternalvisualimpacts.However,

aninitialdesignforthelayoutwasrequiredtohelpdetermine

theappropriatesizeandwasdevelopedinconjunctionwiththe

manufacturer.ThisinitiallayoutisshowninAppendix3,basedon

themaximumfutureexpansionofthestorageupto8MW/24MWh.

The final layout designs of the facility, for both the initial

configurationof6MW/10MWhandpotentialfutureexpanded

configuration are shown in Appendix 4 and Appendix 5

respectively.

7.4.1ImpactsonFutureExpansionLimit

Onceconsentswerereceived,this ineffect lockeddownthe

building dimensions and constrains the maximum space

availablefortheenergystoragesystem,iffurtherengagement

withtheCouncilwastobeavoided.

Itwasfollowingthisstagethatthebatterycellsupplierwas

changed due to financial issues with the initially appointed

supplier.Thismeantthatbatteryrackdimensionsneededtobe

amended. Further design work with the new battery racks

showedthataslightlyincreasedfootprintwasneededwhich

meantthefull24MWhcouldnownotbeaccommodatedinthe

currentbuildingsize.

Alower-voltageDC-buswaschosenwhichmeantfewercells

perrack,andhenceaslightlylowerrackheightthanoriginally

anticipated(althoughthereisthepossibilityofhigherracksin

thefuture).Alsotherequirementtoaccommodatea5-panel

11kV switchboard with overhead cable access increased the

floorspacerequirementsforauxiliaryequipment.

While technically feasible to expand the storage facility to

accommodateup to approximately 20MWhwith changes to

theinternallayoutofthestoragebuilding,aninternalreview

determinedthatthisprovidedinsufficientclearancebetween

racks to allow for safe access and replacement of battery

modules.Themaximumfuturecapacitythatthebuildingcould

safelyaccommodate,usingthissametechnology,wastherefore

deemedas8MW/17MWh,asshowninAppendix5.

BasedontheexistingdemandprofileatLeightonBuzzard,the

initial storage capacity of 10MWh is estimated to provide

sufficientenergytohandlearound3.5%proportionategrowth

from the highest historical peak demand observed in 2010.


Analysis demonstrated that a wide range of potential peak

demandprofilescanbesupportedintothefuture,andevenwhen

limitedto8MW/17MWhthefacilitycouldprovidesupportfora

highsymmetricalmorningandeveningpeakoflimitedduration.

Itwasalsonotedthattherearelikelytobesignificantstorage

technologychangesoverthecomingyears,whichmayfurther

improvetheexpandabilityofthefacility.Forexampleanew

generationofbatterieswithhigherenergydensitymayallowa

morecompactandspace-efficientdesign.

Forthesereasons,thedesignofthebuildingtoaccommodate

atleastthemaximumpracticalnumberofbatteryracks,using

“today’s” technology was considered to be the optimum

solution. It was however proposed that the designed floor

loadingcapabilitywasnotreducedasaresultofthischange,in

order to leave flexibility to use a denser energy storage

technologyshouldchangesinbatterytechnologyallowforup

to24MWhinthefuture.

7.4.2ImpactsonInternalLayout

Anumberof furtherdesign changesweremadeduring the

designprocess,comparedtotheinitialproposedlayoutshown

inAppendix3.

Asaresultoftheplanningprocess,itwasapparentthathigh

levelsofair-conditioningrelatednoisewouldnotbeacceptable

due to theproximity to residential housing.As a result, air-

conditioningandventilationextractionpointswerepositioned

onthesouthernfaceofthebuilding,directedawayfromthe

road and residents. Significantly, thepositionof the inverter

unitsandstep-uptransformerswasthenswappedsothatthey

occupythesouthernhalfofthebuilding,withthebatteryracks

nowoccupyingthenorthernhalf.Thiswasaresultofthegreater

heat output of the inverter units requiring increased cooling

with more ventilation available on the southern face of

thebuilding.

Thischangeoforientationhasimplicationsfortheinstallation

oftheequipmentasitwasoriginallyenvisagedthatthelarge

inverter units and transformers would be delivered through

largeaccessdoorsonthenorthsideofthebuilding,wherethe

access road allows for delivery vehicles. The battery racks,

beingmodularcanbeinstalledincrementallywithouttheneed

forlargeaccess.Thechangeoforientationmeantthiswouldno

longerbepossiblefromthesouthernside,andsoinstallationwill

nowbecarriedoutbycraningintheinvertersandtransformers

throughtheroofofthefacility,priortocompletionoftheroof.

Otherfactorsamendedduringthedesignprocessincludedthe

internalcablingforthefacility.Althoughthevoidunderneath

thebuildingtechnicallyprovidedspacetoruncablingbetween

the component parts, the high weights of the equipment

meantthatitwasdesirabletoavoidpenetrationsinthefloor

whichwouldcomprisetheintegrityofthestructure.

Each battery rack weighs around 1,500 kg, so for 10MWh

configurationtheweightofallthebatteryracksisapproximately

198,000kgand459,000kgfor24MWhofenergycapacity.Each

inverter unit is approximately 9,500kg and each step-up

transformerisapproximately7,500kg.

Tohelpavoidlargepenetrationsinthefloor,overheadcabling

linkingtheinverterstoaninsulatedoverheadDC-busbarsystem

acrossthebatteryrackswillbeused.Whilethisincreasesthe

loadingneededtobesupportedfromtheroofofthebuilding,it

preventsadditionalcostinprovidingforsignificantpenetrationsin

thefloor.AninsulatedoverheadDC-busbarsystemalsoallowsfor

simplerisolationanddisconnectionofbatteryracksfromthesystem.

7.5StorageFacilitySafetyDesign

Thesafeconstruction,operationandmaintenanceofalloperational

sitesisofutmostimportancetoUKPowerNetworksinlinewith

itsresponsibilitiesasalicensednetworkoperatorandvisionto

bean‘EmployerofChoice’.


Thepredominantsafetyaspectsthathaveneededconsideration

duringthedesignprocessareasaresultofthehazardsandrisks

associated with new battery energy storage and inverter

technology. While the risks and mitigating safety features

associated with the ancillary plant, such as high voltage

switchgearandtransformers,isrelativelywellunderstoodby

UK Power Networks, there is less experience with those

associated with energy storage technologies, with just one

otherbatteryenergystoragefacilityinstalledonournetworks

todate.Themainriskassociatedwithlithium-ionbatterycell

technologyisfire,andinparticularuncontrolledpropagationof

firefromonecelltoanother.Whilstitwasarequirementofthe

tenderprocessthatrespondentsprovidedsolutionswhichhad

multiple layers of defence, starting with the fundamental

designofthebatterycellsthemselves,itisnecessarytocarryout

analysisofworstcase(andthereforehighlyunlikely)scenarios.

Anumberofexercisesandstudieshavebeencarriedout to

ensurethatrisksarewellunderstood,andmitigatedasfaras

possible.Thesehaveincluded:

• Astructured‘So-What-IfTest’andanalysis(SWIFTanalysis)to

helpidentifyinastructuredwaythemainhazardsandrisks

ofthecompletestoragesystem;

• HazardElimination&ManagementListreview;

• Fire Risk Assessment Review of gas analysis from cell

safetytests;

• FireEngineeringAnalysisandAssessment;and

• LiveFireTestofbatterytrays,inordertoinformmodels&

extinguisherspecifications.

Theresultsoftheseactivities,inconjunctionwiththeUKPower

NetworksFireProtectionEngineeringStandardforoperational

sites,havehelpedtoguidethesafety-relateddesignfeaturesof

thefacility,whichinclude:

• Adequatemeansofescapeforallpersonsonthepremises,

viamultipleegressroutesfromallzoneswithinthefacility;

• Azoneddesignprovidingareasofcontainment;

• Appropriatelevelsoffireresistingconstructiontocontainany

firethatoccurs.Inparticularthemainstructuralcomponents

ofthebuildingwillhave60minutesoffireresistancecapability;

• Fixedfiredetectionandsuppressionsystemforeachzone,

utilising an inert gas suppression system to contain and

controlanyfireintheeventofacatastrophicfailure;

• Themeansofescapewillbeilluminatedandprovidedwith

emergencylighting;

• Thepremiseswillbeprovidedwithautomaticdetectionand

alarm, in accordance with BS5839 Part 2, for warning all

personsonsiteincaseoffire;and

• Handheldfireextinguisherswillbeprovided,inlocationsto

beagreedwiththeapprovalAuthorities.

Itshouldbenotedthatthereareimplicationsfortheon-going

operationalcostsofstorageinstallationsofsuchmeasures,as

all necessary systems required as part of the general fire

precautions are required to be satisfactorily maintained and

periodicallytestedbyspecialistcontractorstoensureadequate

protection is maintained. However, DNOs are in a strong

positiontomitigatetheserisksandcostsgiventheirfiresafety

requirementsacrossmanyoperationalsites.

TheFireEngineeringAnalysisstudyalsoprovidedanassessment

oftheimplicationsofaworstcasescenariofire.Theanalysis

involveda3Dradiationmodeltopredicttheimpactofaworst

casefireonsurroundingassetsandproperty.Fromthestudy,it

wasconcludedthatafireinvolvingthestoragesystemisnot

expectedtoresultindamageorfirespreadtoadjacentfacilities

orproperties,andthatthesafetyfactorsincludedintheanalysis

provideadequatedemonstrationthatafirescenarionecessary

tocausefirespreadisnotcredible.Althoughnotthecaseforall

storagetechnologies,itwasalsonotedthatitisacceptableto

usewateronLithiumIonbatterycelltechnology.

7.6StorageFacilityElectricalDesign

Asimplifiedsingle-linediagramoftheelectricaldesignforthe


Figure 13 – Single-Line Electrical Design

installationisshowninFigure13below,withtheexisting11kV

primary(LeightonBuzzardPrimary)shownatthetopleft.

Thestorageinstallationwillbenamed‘LeightonBuzzardSNS’and

is shown schematically within the box towards the bottom.

Startingfromthecommonpointofcoupling,thestoragefacility

connectstothe11kVbusbarsattheexistingprimarysubstationvia

twocablesandswitchgearwhichwillbeusedtobothprotect

thefacilityfromnetworkfaults,andvice-versa.Twopointsof

connectionaretobeprovided,oneachsideofthebussection,to

ensurethatthestoragedevicecancontributetosecurityofsupply

evenintheeventthatthebus-sectioncircuitbreakerisopen,

isolatingonehalfofthebusbar.Foradditionalredundancy,an

additionalcircuitbreakerisprovidedontheincomingfeederwithin

thestorageinstallationforfurtherprotectionandisolation.

Withinthefacility,theswitchboardhasfourpanelsforconnection

tothetransformersandinverterunits.Asdescribedpreviously,

threeindependenttransformerandinverterunitgroupswillbe

initiallyconnected,toprovidethe6MWpowerrating,withthe

optionforafourthgrouptobringthepowerratingto8MW.Each

oftheseindividualinverterfeeders,labelled‘11kVPCS0X’has

its own isolating circuit breaker to allow disconnection and

isolationofanyindividual2MWgroup.

On the DC-side, each inverter will have battery 44 racks

(consisting of 24 trays each) connected, each of which is

individuallyisolatablefromanoverheadDC-busbarsystem.This

helpstheinstallationconformtoUKPowerNetworksDistribution

SafetyRuleswhichideallyrequiresapointofisolationwherea

visualconfirmationofdisconnectioncanbeprovided.

LBPrimaryT2

LBPrimaryT1

IncomingCables/OHLsfrom

SundonGrid

“Leighton Buzzard Primary”

IncomerCB

IncomerCB

LeightonBuzzardSNSFeederCB

OutgoingCables/11kV

Feeders

BusSectionCB

LeightonBuzzardPrimaryIncomer11kV

CB

11kVPCs04CB

11kVPCs02CB

11kVPCs01CB

11kVPCs03CB PCST3

PCST2

PCST1

~~~

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

LeightonBuzzardPrimarySwitchboard

11kVCabling-ESSFeeder

ESSHVPanel

Internal11kVCabling-InverterFeeders

Step-UpTransformers

Inverter-TransformerLVCabling

PCS/Inverters/SMSUnits

DCCabling

BatteryRacks

“Leighton Buzzard SNS”


Learning Obtained, Conclusion and Recommendations

8


8.1LearningSummary

Thefollowingtablesummarisesspecificlearningthatisrelevant

tothesecuringofplanningconsentsatLeightonBuzzardand

theimpactondesign.

Ref

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Learning

Theenergystoragesystemsupply

chainisimmatureandevolving-

existingprocurementdatabases,

suchasAchillesdonotprovidethe

bestviewofpotentialsuppliers

(thisalsoappliestootherinnovative

technologies).

Thereareseveraldifferent‘types’

oforganisationthatcansupply

energystoragesystems,buteachhas

expertiseindifferentareas.Itisnot

yetclearwhowillevolvetobethe

besttypeofleadsupplier

Highcapitalinvestmentsforstorage

technologymanufacturers,in

combinationwithweakmarket

conditionscancauseweaknesses

infinancialstability

Commerciallyavailablecreditreports

arenotadequatefinancialdue

diligence.

Theplanningconsentsprocesstakes

moreeffort,costandtimethan

expected.Thisturnedouttobelonger

thanstatutorytimescales

LPApoliciescandifferwidelybetween

areas;andpoliciescanbesetforland

thatisnotwithintheirownership

Impact

Supplierswithrelevantsolutions

maybemissed

Supplierswithrelevantsolutions

maybemissed

Riskstofinancialstabilityof

supplierpartners

Riskstofinancialstabilityof

supplierpartners

Increasedspendonplanning

process,andanextensionofthe

timerequiredtosecureplanning

consents

Inconsistenciesbetween

requirementsforstorage

deployments

PossibleSolution

Ensureareviewandmarket

researchofthecurrentmarketand

alternativepotentialsupply-chain

partnerstoensurenewplayersare

incorporated,asthemarketplaceis

changingrapidly

Ensuremarketresearchiscarried

out.Considertheadvantagesand

disadvantagesofsupplyfrom

differenttypesoforganisations

Ensurefinancialduediligenceof

technologypartners,including

sub-contractors

DNOsandTNOsneedtoseek,

andsuppliersneedtobewilling

toprovide,informationabout

financialstabilitythroughoutthe

entiresupplychain

ConsultwithLPAearlyinthe

process.Ensureadditionaltimeand

budgetisfactoredinforalternative

storageinstallationinvestigations

Supportthedisseminationof

learningandeducationaround

storagetolocalauthorities


Ref

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

Learning

Thereisaneedtobemindfuloftime

constraintswhenindiscussionswith

LPAoveranysection106agreement

provision

Stakeholderconcernsintheplanning

processfromstorageweremore

focussedonlocalissues,suchascycle

ways,thanspecificsofthestorage.

Mainthemeswerelocalissues,

visualsandhouseprices

Atight-timescalecanputpressure

onnegotiationsrelatingtoplanning

obligations

Operationalsitescanpotentiallybe

retained‘operational’ifboundaries

areestablishedearly/historically,

avoidingtherequirementfor

planningpermissionforDNOs

Footprintsforsimilarbattery

technologiescandifferbetween

manufacturers.Hence,estimatesof

footprintsforacertainenergycapacity

areonlyvalidforasinglesupplier

Havingobtainedplanningconsents

forasitewilllockdowntheexternal

sizeanddesignofthebuilding

Developmentcontrolwithinlocal

plan,maydesignateintended

operationallandfornon-electricity

undertakingpurposes

Fundamentalcomponents,in

particularthebatteryandthepower

converter,arelikelytobeinherited

designsfromothersectors

Impact

Increaseintimeandcostofstorage

deployments

Highercostsofplanningpermission

obligations

Improvedtimescalesforstorage

deployments

Opportunitytoincreasethebattery

sizeinthefuturemaybelimited

Thiswilllimitmakinganychanges

totheexternalappearanceofthe

structure,unlessapprovalisobtained

fromtheLPA

Maymakeobtainingplanning

approvalharder

Limitedabilityforpurchasersto

dictateDC-busbarvoltages;which

inturnimpacttheheightand

footprintrequiredforaninstallation

PossibleSolution

Appropriatebudgetshouldbe

consideredwherenecessary

Exploreandunderstandthelocal

issuesbeforedevelopmentsand

lookforpreviousapplications/

presscomments

Ensureengagementorplanning

processbeginsearly.Ifatallpossible

buildintimeontheexpectationof

needingtoappeal.Seeplanning

timelineinAppendix2asaguide

Ifoperationalsitesarerequired

forlong-termdevelopmentthey

shouldbeutilisedwherepossible;

althoughthiswillnotbepractical

forthird-partydevelopers

Allowforsomemargininhousing

dimensionstoallowforfuture

expansion

Ifunavoidableseekapprovalfrom

theLPA

Monitorandcommentonlocal

planswhenpublished

Ensureearlyunderstandingofthe

DCvoltagesandrackconfigurations


8.2Conclusion

SNSisaLowCarbonNetworkfundedprojectwhichisexploring

the economics of using electrical energy storage to defer

network reinforcement at a selected trial site adjacent to a

primarysubstationinLeightonBuzzard.Havingcommencedin

January2013,theprojectrunsforfouryears.Thefirsthalfofthe

project timeline concentrateson the selectionanddesignof

the storage device and the construction and installation of

thefacility.

This report has documented early learning gained from the

project,concentratingonthedesignandplanningconsiderations

which are necessary for large scale distribution connected

electrical energy storage. It provides the considerations

necessaryinsecuringplanningpermissionatthetrialsiteand

howthishasimpactedthedesignbothatLeightonBuzzardand

moregenerallytheconsiderationsthatwouldbenecessaryfor

a DNO or other storage device developer to make when

consideringtheuseofdistributionscaleelectricalstorage.

Thechoiceanddesignofastoragedeviceisdrivenbyawide

range of factors, but initially derived from the primary

requirement of meeting or deferring a reinforcement

requirement.Anumberoffactorsincludinglocation,capacity

requirementincludingpredictedandspeedofgrowth,safety

andeconomicbenefitswilldefinetheneedandselectionof

technology, who can provide it and how it should be

accommodated.Thesedesignrequirementswillcreatevarious

impacts each of which will determine more specific

requirements in the design such as footprint, cooling

requirementordetailedplanningrequirements.

Storageismostlikelytobeofvaluewheretheconventional

upgrade is complexandcostly, itwouldaddsignificantover

capacity, the constraint can be met by a small amount or

additional capacity or will defer further investment for a

reasonableperiod(5+years)oftime.

Baseduponanalysisasaresultofthermalcapacityconstraints

andavailabilityspace,LeightonBuzzardemergedasthepreferred

siteatwhichtobuildthestoragedevice.Althoughalternative

siteswereconsidered,thissitewouldprovidemostneedandwas

bestplacedtodemonstratetheeconomictestsrequiredforthe

project.Thislocationwouldrequireplanningpermissionandthis

fact together with the specifics of the location drove some

fundamentaldesignchoices.Primarilytheproximityofthesite

toalocalwatercoursemeantthatthelandwaslocatedina

high-riskfloodlocation.Itwasalsolocatedclosetoresidential

housing.Thismeantthatbuildingdesignespeciallyvisualaspects

wouldbeimportant.Theinitialratingsizeofthestoragedevice

wasdeterminedtobe6MW/10MWh.Thiswouldinitiallyprovide

anoptimumamountofenergycapacityandduration.LithiumIon,

whichhadgoodsafetyfeaturesrelevanttothelocation,was

thetechnologychosenandtogetherwiththesizeofbuilding

designwouldprovidethecapabilitytoexpandthedeviceata

laterdateto8MW/17MWh.Thiswouldbelessthanoriginally

planneddue toanecessary changeofbatterymanufacturer

whichoccurredfollowingthecompetitiveprocurementprocess.

Planningpermission is requiredformostnewstructuresand

buildings,andisalsorequiredforthechangeofuseofexisting

buildingsorsites.TheplanningsystemforEnglandandWalesis

setoutintheTownandCountryPlanningAct1990.Itisalmost

certainthatanynewortemporarybuilding,forexample,the

siting of shipping containers, required to house a grid-scale

electricalenergystoragesystem,willrequireplanningconsent.

Theexceptiontothisisasitethathaspermitteddevelopment,

for example, by virtue of its operational use, such as an

operational substationwithexisting spacewithin itsexisting

curtilage. It isalmost certain thatanynewdistribution scale

storagedevicewouldrequireplanningpermission.

AplanningapplicationfortheLeightonBuzzardsitewasinitially

submittedtoCentralBedfordshireCouncilinFebruary2013.It


followed a local consultation on the development which

concluded that some changes to the visual aspects of the

proposedbuildingand its screeningshouldbemade. Itwas

also necessary to provide significant detail on the required

development and benefits of the chosen location over

alternatives.Thesechangestogetherwithadvicereceivedfrom

theLPAandEnvironmentAgencyonprovisionsnecessary to

mitigatefloodinghadbeenincorporatedintheapplication.A

section 106 agreement was negotiated with the LPA and

becameaconditionoftheplanningapprovalthatwasfinally

granted,followinganextensiontothestatutorytimescales,in

June2013.

TheexternaldesignoftheLeightonBuzzardbuildingwasfixed

aspartoftheplanningapplication.Ithaddevelopedfromthe

equipment it was intended to house, flood mitigation

requirementsandtheneedtobuildsomethingthatwouldbe

acceptableincloseproximitytoresidentialhousing.Tofurther

mitigateanyadversevisualconcernsextratreeplantingwas

incorporatedintotheoveralldesign.

Themainlearningpointscentredaroundprocurementandthe

selectionofastoragetechnologyprovideraswellastheneed

to takedueregard inallaspectsof localauthorityplanning,

includingtheneedtobevigilantonreviewinglocalplansand

ensuringthataplanningapplicationisrobustonsubmission.


Residents Consultation DocumentAppendix 1


Introduction

UKPowerNetworks(Operations)Limited(“UKPowerNetworks”)

onbehalfofEasternPowerNetworksplc,thelicenseddistributor

ofelectricityintheEastofEngland,planstobuildanextension

toitsexistingsubstationatWoodmanClose,LeightonBuzzard.

Thisleafletexplainsthereasonswhyanextensiontothesubstation

isneededandgivesabriefdescriptionoftheproposals.Preliminary

advicehasbeensoughtfromCouncilofficers,Membersandthe

EnvironmentAgency.Commentsfromthelocalcommunityare

nowbeingsoughtbeforeanapplicationforplanningpermission

issubmittedtoCentralBedfordshireCouncil.

WoodmanCloseSubstation,LeightonBuzzard

The existing Woodman Close Substation is situated on the

north-eastsideofSouthStreet,betweenClipstoneBrookand

WoodmanClose,asshowninFig.1:LocationandSitePlan.The

adjoininglandwasacquiredin1970forthepurposeofproviding

electricityandpotentialfurtherexpansion.Whilstthelandwas

notrequiredforelectricitysupplypurposes,itwasleftasopen

landand,atonetime,wasusedforallotmentsbylocalresidents.

Thatusehasnowceased.

TheNeedfortheSubstationExpansion

TheWoodmanCloseSubstationisreachingitscapacitydueto

an increase in demand for electricity in the local area. To

maintainreliablepowersuppliesintothefuture,thesubstation

needstoexpand.Afterassessinganumberofpotentialsites

using a series of technical, engineering, environmental and

planningcriteria,WoodmanClosewas identifiedas theonly

suitable site toprovide thisessential infrastructure,one that

wouldincurtheleastdisruptiontotheexistingsupplyandbe

builtwithinthenecessarytimeframe.

Closeproximity to theexistingWoodmanCloseSubstation is

absolutelyessential.Asthesiteisalreadyinourownershipand

wedonotneedtoacquireadditionalland,italsoallowsusto

meettheregulatoryrequirementstodeliverbest-valuetoall

our electricity customers in Bedfordshire and the East of

England.Astheexistingandnewfacilitiescanallbeenclosed

within a secure compound, this offers the highest level of

securityforcontinuedelectricitysupplyaswellasfromtheft

andvandalism.

Proposed substation expansion for Leighton Buzzard

Fig.1 Location and Site Plan

The existing Woodman Close Substation


Newtechnology

Theextensiontothesubstationwilluseanelectricalstorage

deviceinplaceoftraditionalsubstationequipment.Thisnew

technologyprovidesamoresustainablewaytoreinforcethe

electricity network. It reduces the need to create additional

powerlinesfeedingthesubstationandremovestheneedto

installnewtransformersonthesite.Electricalstoragesupports

the increasing use of electricity generation from wind

turbines and solar panels, smoothing out the peaks and

troughsonthelocalnetworkcausedbythevaryingstrengthof

windandsun.

Proposeddevelopment

Wearethefreeholdownerof11,000sq.mofthelandoutlinedin

blueinFig.1.Planningpermissionwillbeneededforthenewarea

ofdevelopmentfortheextensiontothesubstation.Thisarea

(outlined in red inFig.1andcoveringanareaof3,000sq.m)

adjoinstheexistingsubstationcompoundonitsnorth-eastern

boundary.

Theproposeddevelopmentincludesasingle-storeybuildingwith

afootprintofabout40mx20mandamaximumheightof8.3m

above ground level. The shape and volume of the proposed

building is dictated by the electrical plant that needs to be

housedwithinit.Thesubstationcompoundwillbesurrounded

bya3m-highsecurityfenceandlandscaping.

Floodpreventionmeasures

Except for a small part of the Woodman Close Site in the

northeastern corner that is above the flood plain, a large

proportion of the site is in a flood risk area. Consequently,

special precautions have to be taken in the design of any

developmentwhichneedstoberaisedabovepredictedflood

levels.FollowingconsultationswiththeEnvironmentAgency,

the proposed extension to the substation incorporates a

2m-highvoidbeneaththeelevatedgroundfloor,thusraising

theoverallheightto8.3mabovegroundlevel.

Designandlandscaping

Theproposedbuildinghasamono-pitchedroofandapatterned

facadeonthreesides.Thefacingmaterialwillbecolour-coated

metalpanels. Thechoiceof coloursof thebuildingcouldbe

changedasaresultofthisconsultation.

Theproposedbuildinghasanelevationaldesignthatisintended

tohelpitblendinwithitssurroundingsandtominimisethe

visualimpactasfaraspossible.Thepatterneddesignaimsto

introduce an interesting pattern to the streetscape. We

will use good quality facing material that will require

minimalmaintenance.

It is proposed to screen thedevelopmentusing landscaping

along the Woodman Close north-western elevation and the

northeasternelevationfacingtheopenland.Thisscreen,which

will be a minimum of 5m deep, will include trees and

evergreenshrubs.

Impacts

Noise

There will be no increase in noise above the present levels

resultingfromtheproposedexpansionofthesubstation.

Lighting

Minimal security lighting will be used in order to minimise

disturbance.

Wildlife

Arecentwildlifesurveyofthesitefoundnoprotectedspecies.

OurEcologisthasrecommendedthat(i)therivercorridorshould

be reserved foramphibians;and (ii)partof thevacant land

should be retained for toads, frogs and other wildlife. This

wildlife area will not be landscaped but managed to

preventovergrowth.

Fig.1 Location and Site Plan

The existing Woodman Close Substation


ViewfromWoodmanClose

Existing

Proposed (illustrative only)

Existing

Proposed (illustrative only)

ViewfromtheVacantLand


HealthandSafety

Thetypeofenergystoragesystemtobeinstalledemploysa

safeformoftechnology.Theextensiontothesubstationwill

exceedthestringenthealthandsafetyrequirementsandfire

preventionmeasuresrequiredforsubstations.

EMF’s

ThisfacilityisprimarilyaDirectCurrent(DC)facility,therefore

therewillbenoincreaseinthelevelofEMF’s(Electromagnetic

fields)abovethepresentlevelsfromtheproposedexpansion.

TheSubstationinOperation

Theproposedbuildingwillonlyhouseelectricalplant.Exceptfor

occasionalvisitsforinspectionandmaintenancepurposes,no

personnelwillbeworkingonthesite.Exceptduringtheconstruction

andcommissioningperiod,nolorriesarelikelytovisitthesite.

VehicularAccess

Thevehicularaccess intothenewcompoundwillbeviathe

existingsubstationaccesspoint.Therewillbeon-siteparking

foroccasionalvisitingoperators.

CommunityBenefits

The extension to the substation will include sustainable

technologytohousealowcarbon,energystoragesystem.A

keybenefittothelocalcommunityisourincreasedabilityto

providereliablepowersuppliesinthefuture.

SharedFootpathandCycleway

TheCouncilwishestosecureastripoflandalongsideClipstone

Brookforasharedfootpath/cyclewayonpartoftheEastern

PowerNetworkssite(seeFig.1).Thedetailedrouteandlease

arrangementsaretobediscussedwiththeCouncil.

AboutUKPowerNetworks

UKPowerNetworksdistributespowertoaquarterofBritain’s

populationthroughitselectricitynetworksservingtheEastof

England,SouthEastandLondon.Thecompany’s5,000employees

arededicatedtodeliveringasafe,secureelectricitysupplyto

abouteightmillionhomesandbusinessesviaitsnetworkof

substations,overheadlinesandundergroundcables.

Theindustryregulator,Ofgem,placesconditionsonUKPower

Networks,forexample,itmustensuresafeandreliablepower

supplies to its customers, and cater for future technological

changesandgrowthindemand.ThisyearUKPowerNetworks

isinvesting£360millioninitselectricitynetworksandaround

£1.8billioninthefiveyearsto2015.

NextSteps

We are currently preparing the scheme for a planning

applicationsubmission,taking intoconsiderationadvicefrom

theCouncil,theEnvironmentAgencyandthepublic.Itishoped

thatanapplicationwillbesubmittedduringNovember2012,

withtheconstructionworksstartingin2013.

YourComments

Wewelcomeyourcommentsontheproposalonissuesincluding:

• thedesignandcolourofthecladding;

• thelocationofthesharedfootpath/cycle-way;

• theuseof thesurplusEasternPowerNetwork land foras

longasitisnotneededforelectricitydistribution.

Contactus

Ifyouhaveanyqueriesorcomments,pleaseemailusat:

[email protected]:

UKPowerNetworks

LeightonBuzzardSubstationEnquiry

c/oStrategyandRegulation,1stFloorNorth

EnergyHouse

HazelwickAvenue

Crawley

WestSussexRH101EX

Appendix 2Planning Timeline Summary

Smarter Network Storage - business model consultation | 61

Planning Timeline Summary

June

12

Jul 1

2A

ug 1

2Se

p 12

Oct

12

Nov

12

Dec

12

Jan

12Fe

b 13

Mar

13

Apr

13

May

13

Jun

13

May

12

Plan

ning

Enq

uiry

initi

ated

with

Cent

ralB

eds

31/7

Pre-

App

Guid

ance

requ

este

dfr

omCe

ntra

lBed

s

16/8

Supp

ortin

gle

tter

from

Cen

tral

Bed

s

2/8

Pre-

Plan

ning

Advi

ceM

eetin

g

30/8

Full

Pre-

Appl

icat

ion

Advi

cere

ceiv

ed17

/9Pl

ace-

Mak

ers

Mee

ting

8/2

Full

Plan

ning

App

Subm

itted

13/5

Dra

ftD

ecis

ion

Not

ice

8/4

s106

Mee

ting

with

Pla

nnin

gof

ficer

s

7/6

Not

ice

ofG

rant

ofP

lann

ing.

2n

dSt

atut

ory

Appl

icat

ion

resp

onse

dead

line

5/4

1stS

tatu

tory

Ap

plic

atio

nRe

spon

sed

eadl

ine

27/3

Requ

estt

ow

ithdr

aw&

resu

bmit.

Ap

plic

atio

nre

subm

itted

18/3

EAF

eedb

ack

onfe

ncin

gad

just

men

ts30

/4Re

subm

issi

onre

spon

sefr

om

EAa

nd

sugg

este

dco

nditi

ons

26/2

EAF

eedb

ack

ona

pplic

atio

n

16/1

0UK

PNre

spon

ds

toc

once

rns

rais

ed

7/11

Loca

lRes

iden

tsCo

nsul

tatio

n

21/1

1Lo

calC

onsu

ltatio

nPe

riod

Ends

4/10

Furt

her

Guid

ance

from

Cen

tral

Be

ds

29/1

1Ta

rget

edU

KPN

resp

onse

sto

re

side

nts

29/1

1Ce

ntra

lBed

sco

mm

ents

on

UKPN

resp

onse

s

22/5

Pre-

App

Guid

ance

requ

este

dfr

omE

A

31/7

Pre-

App

Gui

danc

ere

ceiv

edfr

omE

A

16/1

Site

Sec

urity

Ass

essm

ent

19/1

2Tr

affic

Man

agem

ent

Stud

y

22/8

Geo

tech

nica

lSu

rvey

s

20/8

Arch

eolo

gica

lSu

rvey

s10

/8Ab

oric

ultu

ral

Surv

ey

4/6

Ecol

ogic

al

Stud

y

24/7

Floo

dRi

skA

sses

smen

t

17/7

Back

grou

ndN

oise

Surv

ey

23/6

Topo

grap

hica

lSu

rvey

6/7

Cont

amin

atio

nA

sses

smen

t

Plan

ning

St

udie

s

Com

ms

with

LPA

,co

mm

s w

ith E

A

and

UKP

N

Act

iviti

es

{ {01/0

5/20

1210

/06/

2013

Appendix 3Original Building Layout Design for 8 MW/24MWh


Original Building Layout Design for 8 MW/24MWh

Appendix 4Final Building Layout Design for 6 MW/10MWh Project

Final Building Layout Design for 6 MW/10MWh Project


Appendix 5Future Potential Building Layout Designfor 8 MW/17MWh Project


Future Potential Building Layout Designfor 8 MW/17MWh Project

Documents

Smarter Network Storage - Distribution Network Operator · PDF file7.1 Building Exterior Civil Design 42 ... Although such substation sites are typically classified ... Smarter Network