RWE Acquires 4.2-Gigawatt UK Offshore Wind Development Portfolio From Vattenfall
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release from RWE.
These three bullet points, act as sub-headings.
- Highly attractive portfolio of three projects at a late stage of development, with grid connections and permits secured, as well as advanced procurement of key components
- Delivery of the three Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone projects off the UK’s East Anglia coast will be part of RWE’s Growing Green investment and growth plans
- Agreed purchase price corresponds to an enterprise value of £963 million
These two paragraphs outline the deal.
RWE, one of the world’s leading offshore wind companies, will acquire the UK Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone portfolio from Vattenfall. The portfolio comprises three offshore wind development projects off the east coast of England – Norfolk Vanguard West, Norfolk Vanguard East and Norfolk Boreas.
The three projects, each with a planned capacity of 1.4 gigawatts (GW), are located 50 to 80 kilometres off the coast of Norfolk in East Anglia. This area is one of the world’s largest and most attractive areas for offshore wind. After 13 years of development, the three development projects have already secured seabed rights, grid connections, Development Consent Orders and all other key permits. The Norfolk Vanguard West and Norfolk Vanguard East projects are most advanced, having secured the procurement of most key components. The next milestone in the development of these two projects is to secure a Contract for Difference (CfD) in one of the upcoming auction rounds. RWE will resume the development of the Norfolk Boreas project, which was previously halted. All three Norfolk projects are expected to be commissioned in this decade.
There is also this handy map, which shows the location of the wind farms.
Note that there are a series of assets along the East Anglian coast, that will be useful to RWE’s Norfolk Zone development.
- In Vattenfall Selects Norfolk Offshore Wind Zone O&M Base, I talked about how the Port of Great Yarmouth will be the operational base for the Norfolk Zone wind farms.
- Bacton gas terminal has gas interconnectors to Belgium and the Netherlands lies between Cromer and Great Yarmouth.
- The cable to the Norfolk Zone wind farms is planned to make landfall between Bacton and Great Yarmouth.
- Sizewell is South of Lowestoft and has the 1.25 GW Sizewell B nuclear power station, with the 3.2 GW Sizewell C on its way, for more than adequate backup.
- Dotted around the Norfolk and Suffolk coast are 3.3 GW of earlier generations of wind farms, of which 1.2 GW have connections to RWE.
- The LionLink multipurpose 1.8 GW interconnector will make landfall to the North of Southwold
- There is also the East Anglian Array, which currently looks to be about 3.6 GW, that connects to the shore at Bawdsey to the South of Aldeburgh.
- For recreation, there’s Southwold.
- I can also see more wind farms squeezed in along the coast. For example, according to Wikipedia, the East Anglian Array could be increased in size to 7.2 GW.
It appears that a 15.5 GW hybrid wind/nuclear power station is being created on the North-Eastern coast of East Anglia.
The big problem is that East Anglia doesn’t really have any large use for electricity.
But the other large asset in the area is the sea.
- Undersea interconnectors can be built to other locations, like London or Europe, where there is a much greater need for electricity.
- In addition, the UK Government has backed a consortium, who have the idea of storing energy by using pressurised sea-water in 3D-printed concrete hemispheres under the sea. I wrote about this development in UK Cleantech Consortium Awarded Funding For Energy Storage Technology Integrated With Floating Wind.
A proportion of Russian gas in Europe, will have been replaced by Norfolk wind power and hydrogen, which will be given a high level of reliability from Suffolk nuclear power.
I have some other thoughts.
Would Hydrogen Be Easier To Distribute From Norfolk?
A GW-range electrolyser would be feasible but expensive and it would be a substantial piece of infrastructure.
I also feel, that placed next to Bacton or even offshore, there would not be too many objections from the Norfolk Nimbys.
Hydrogen could be distributed from the site in one of these ways.
- By road transport, as ICI did, when I worked in their hydrogen plant at Runcorn.
- I suspect, a rail link could be arranged, if there was a will.
- By tanker from the Port of Great Yarmouth.
- By existing gas interconnectors to Belgium and the Netherlands.
As a last resort it could be blended into the natural gas pipeline at Bacton.
In Major Boost For Hydrogen As UK Unlocks New Investment And Jobs, I talked about using the gas grid as an offtaker of last resort. Any spare hydrogen would be fed into the gas network, provided safety criteria weren’t breached.
I remember a tale from ICI, who from their refinery got a substantial amount of petrol, which was sold to independent petrol retailers around the North of England.
But sometimes they had a problem, in that the refinery produced a lot more 5-star petrol than 2-star. So sometimes if you bought 2-star, you were getting 5-star.
On occasions, it was rumoured that other legal hydrocarbons were disposed of in the petrol. I was once told that it was discussed that used diluent oil from polypropylene plants could be disposed of in this way. But in the end it wasn’t!
If hydrogen were to be used to distribute all or some of the energy, there would be less need for pylons to march across Norfolk.
Could A Rail Connection Be Built To The Bacton Gas Terminal
This Google Map shows the area between North Walsham and the coast.
Note.
- North Walsham is in the South-Western corner of the map.
- North Walsham station on the Bittern Line is indicated by the red icon.
- The Bacton gas terminal is the trapezoidal-shaped area on the coast, at the top of the map.
ThisOpenRailwayMap shows the current and former rail lines in the same area as the previous Google Map.
Note.
- North Walsham station is in the South-West corner of the map.
- The yellow track going through North Walsham station is the Bittern Line to Cromer and Sheringham.
- The Bacton gas terminal is on the coast in the North-East corner of the map.
I believe it would be possible to build a small rail terminal in the area with a short pipeline connection to Bacton, so that hydrogen could be distributed by train.
There used to be a branch line from North Walsham station to Cromer Beach station, that closed in 1953.
Until 1964 it was possible to get trains to Mundesley-on-Sea station.
So would it be possible to build a rail spur to the Bacton gas terminal along the old branch line?
In the Wikipedia entry for the Bittern Line this is said.
The line is also used by freight trains which are operated by GB Railfreight. Some trains carry gas condensate from a terminal at North Walsham to Harwich International Port.
The rail spur could have four main uses.
- Taking passengers to and from Mundesley-on-Sea and Bacton.
- Collecting gas condensate from the Bacton gas terminal.
- Collecting hydrogen from the Bacton gas terminal.
- Bringing in heavy equipment for the Bacton gas terminal.
It looks like another case of one of Dr. Beeching’s closures coming back to take a large chunk out of rail efficiency.
Claire Coutinho And Robert Habeck’s Tete-a-Tete
I wrote about their meeting in Downing Street in UK And Germany Boost Offshore Renewables Ties.
- Did Habeck run the RWE/Vattenfall deal past Coutinho to see it was acceptable to the UK Government?
- Did Coutinho lobby for SeAH to get the contract for the monopile foundations for the Norfolk Zone wind farms?
- Did Coutinho have a word for other British suppliers like iTMPower.
Note.
- I think we’d have heard and/or the deal wouldn’t have happened, if there had been any objections to it from the UK Government.
- In SeAH To Deliver Monopiles For Vattenfall’s 2.8 GW Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Project, I detailed how SeAH have got the important first contract they needed.
So it appears so far so good.
Rackheath Station And Eco-Town
According to the Wikipedia entry for the Bittern Line, there are also plans for a new station at Rackheath to serve a new eco-town.
This is said.
A new station is proposed as part of the Rackheath eco-town. The building of the town may also mean a short freight spur being built to transport fuel to fire an on-site power station. The plans for the settlement received approval from the government in 2009.
The eco-town has a Wikipedia entry, which has a large map and a lot of useful information.
But the development does seem to have been ensnared in the planning process by the Norfolk Nimbys.
The Wikipedia entry for the Rackheath eco-town says this about the rail arrangements for the new development.
The current rail service does not allow room for an extra station to be added to the line, due to the length of single track along the line and the current signalling network. The current service at Salhouse is only hourly during peak hours and two-hourly during off-peak hours, as not all trains are able to stop due to these problems. Fitting additional trains to this very tight network would not be possible without disrupting the entire network, as the length of the service would increase, missing the connections to the mainline services. This would mean that a new 15-minute shuttle service between Norwich and Rackheath would have to be created; however, this would interrupt the main service and cause additional platforming problems. Finding extra trains to run this service and finding extra space on the platforms at Norwich railway station to house these extra trains poses additional problems, as during peak hours all platforms are currently used.
In addition, the plans to the site show that both the existing and the new rail station, which is being built 300m away from the existing station, will remain open.
. As the trains cannot stop at both stations, changing between the two services would be difficult and confusing, as this would involve changing stations.
I feel that this eco-town is unlikely to go ahead.
Did RWE Buy Vattenfall’s Norfolk Zone To Create Green Hydrogen For Europe?
Consider.
- Vattenfall’s Norfolk Zone is a 4.2 GW group of wind farms, which have all the requisite permissions and are shovel ready.
- Bacton Gas terminal has gas pipelines to Europe.
- Sizewell’s nuclear power stations will add security of supply.
- Extra wind farms could be added to the Norfolk Zone.
- Europe and especially Germany has a massive need for zero-carbon energy.
The only extra infrastructure needing to be built is the giant electrolyser.
I wouldn’t be surprised if RWE built a large electrolyser to supply Europe with hydrogen.
Wrightbus To Provide Hydrogen Buses For Sizewell C Nuclear Plant
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the sub-heading.
Ballymena bus manufacturer Wrightbus is providing four hydrogen buses to the Sizewell C nuclear power site as part of a pilot scheme.
These first three paragraphs outline the scheme.
If successful, up to 150 buses could be ordered, making it one of the largest hydrogen bus fleets in the world.
Construction of the plant is to begin next year and multiple vehicles will be needed to move workers to and from the site.
Sizewell C will test the performance of four double-decker buses.
As I used to live in that area, I know the buses are bad and this will surely help.
Is Sizewell C Needed?
I am generally pro-nuclear, but I am not sure if building a large nuke at Sizewell is the right action.
Consider.
- East Anglia has 3114 MW of offshore wind in operation.
- East Anglia has 6772 MW of offshore wind under construction, with Contracts for Difference or proposed.
- Vattenfall are considering abandoning development of their large wind farms off the Norfolk coast, which are proposed to have a capacity of 3196 MW.
- If the two Vattenfall wind farms don’t get built, it is likely that East Anglia will have around 6700 MW of offshore wind capacity.
- Sizewell C has a proposed nameplate capacity of 3260 MW. Some might argue, that to back up East Anglia’s offshore wind power, it needs to be larger!
- Norfolk and Suffolk no large electricity users, so are Vattenfall finding they have a product no one wants to buy.
- National Grid is developing four interconnectors to bring power from Scotland to the Eastern side of England, which will back up wind power in the East with the massive Scottish pumped storage, that is being developed.
- National Grid and their Dutch equivalent; TenneT are developing LionLink to connect the UK and the Netherlands to clusters of wind farms between our countries in the North Sea.
- Kent and East Anglia have several gas and electric interconnectors to Europe.
- Sizewell is well-connected to England’s grid.
These are my thoughts.
Energy Storage At Sizewell
Consider.
- Sizewell is well connected to the grid.
- It has the sea on one side.
- It could easily be connected to the large offshore wind farms, thirty miles out to sea.
If large energy storage could be built on the Sizewell site or perhaps under the sea, then this energy could be recovered and used in times of low wind.
Perhaps the technology of the STORE Consortium, which I discussed in UK Cleantech Consortium Awarded Funding For Energy Storage Technology Integrated With Floating Wind, could be used.
In this system, energy is stored in 3D-printed concrete hemispheres under the sea.
A Small Nuclear Reactor Cluster At Sizewell
Rolls-Royce are proposing that their small modular reactors will have a capacity of 470 MW.
Perhaps a cluster of seven small modular reactors at Sizewell, with a building schedule matched to the need to back up wind farms would be better and easier to finance.
I also feel a cluster of SMRs would have less risk and would be less likely to be delayed.
Where Is Generating Capacity Needed In The UK?
These areas already have large amounts of offshore wind in operation or proposed to be built before 2030.
- Celtic Sea
- North Wales
- Liverpool Bay
- Cumbria
- Scotland
- Scotland’s Offshore Islands
- North East England
- Humberside
- Lincolnshire
- East Anglia
- Thames Estuary
- Kent
- Sussex
Amongst the back up for these wind farms, there are only two modern nuclear stations; Sizewell B and the still-to-open Hinckley Point C.
If you look at a map of England and its power generation, there is a tremendous gap of capacity South of a line between Hinckley Point and Brighton, with little or no offshore wind and no nuclear.
There is probably a need for a large nuke near Weymouth.
Alternatively, perhaps several SMRs could be built underneath places like Salisbury Plain, Dartmoor and Exmoor!
Conclusion
We probably need the nuclear electricity from another Hinckley Point C-sized nuclear power station, so that we have adequate back-up for offshore wind.
But I am not sure that Sizewell is the right place to build it.
UK Consortium To Develop Mobile Hydrogen Refuelling For Construction Sites
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on H2 View.
These first two paragraphs outline the project.
A UK consortium has secured over £3m ($3.7m) in government funding to develop mobile hydrogen refuelling for construction sites.
The Ryze-led consortium, made up of iGAS, Wrightbus, Skanska, Mace Dragados and Sizewell C, has been awarded £3.2m ($3.99m) from the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero’s Red Diesel Replacement Programme to develop and demonstrate a new suite of production-ready hydrogen refuelling equipment suitable for construction sites.
It appears to be a very comprehensive project and everything will be tested in a working quarry.
Having recently had a diesel-powered truck outside my house, that was clearing up the mess left by a dead tree, I feel that the health benefits of zero-carbon construction sites could be immense.
Sizewell C
I find it interesting that Sizewell C is part of the consortium.
Does this mean, that all construction on Suffolk’s new nuclear power station will use hydrogen and electric power, to lower the carbon footprint?
In Ryze Hydrogen’s Suffolk Freeport Hydrogen Vision Takes Shape, I gave this quote from this article on S & P Global.
Ryze Hydrogen plans to install a 6 MW electrolyzer at the Sizewell nuclear site in Suffolk as a launchpad for mass production of low carbon hydrogen in and around the future freeport of Felixstowe, company founder Jo Bamford told S&P Global Platts March 3.
As Sizewell C is to be built by a consortium led by EDF Energy and the French company operates Sizewell B, will the Sizewell electrolyser be built first and powered by Sizewell B, so that the hydrogen can be used to lower the carbon footprint of Sizewell C?
The Zero-Carbon Toilet
In Cadent’s Hydrogen-Hybrid Solar Toilet, I describe how Cadent are looking after their workers on a site in London.
These ideas will inspire a lot more.
Angus Peter Campbell: I’m In Two Minds About The Renewable Energy Revolution
The title of the post, is the same as that of this article in the Aberdeen Press and Journal.
This is the sub-heading.
The debate (argument) between development and environmentalism is as old as the hills.
In the article, Campbell puts all sides of the arguments over the Coire Glas pumped storage hydro-electric scheme, and the article is very much a must read.
I feel that this 1500 MW/30 GWh scheme should be built, as like Hinckley Point C and Sizewell C, it takes a large bite out of the new energy storage capacity that is needed.
But if we do build this large project, we should think very hard about how we do it.
These are a few thoughts.
Low Carbon, Disturbance And Noise During Construction
High Speed Two are doing this and I wrote about it in HS2 Smashes Carbon Target.
I do subject though, that increasingly large construction projects can go this way.
Electric Trucks, Cranes And Other Equipment
High Speed Two and big mining companies are increasingly using electric mining trucks, cranes and other equipment.
As this sort of equipment, also provides a better environment for workers, I suspect we’ll see more electric equipment.
Hydrogen Trucks And Construction Equipment
Hydrogen could play a big part and rightly so.
It is ideal for heavier equipment and one of its biggest advocates and developers is JCB.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a decision about an onsite electrolyser being made soon.
Low Carbon Concrete
There are various methods of making low- and zero-carbon concrete, some of which incorporate carbon dioxide into the material.
Use Of Loch Lochy And The Caledonian Canal
I wouldn’t be surprised if just as the Thames in London was used in the construction of Crossrail and the Northern Line extension, Loch Lochy and The Caledonian Canal will be used to take out construction spoil.
There’s certainly a lot of ways to be innovative in the movement of men and materials.
Conclusion
The construction of Coire Glas will make an epic documentary.
Suffolk: Sizewell C To Explore ‘Innovative’ Waste Heat Lido
The title of this post, is the same as that, of this article on the East Anglian Daily Times.
This is the sub-heading.
The developers of the new Sizewell C nuclear power station have expressed an interest in an “innovative” plan to use waste heat from the plant to heat a new lido.
And this is the first paragraph.
Creating the outdoor pool was one of a number of ideas contained within the Leiston masterplan – a blueprint for transforming the Suffolk town – and now the Sizewell C company has pledged to explore the proposal with the town council.
This map shows the town of Leiston and the Sizewell power stations site.
Note.
- Leiston is in the South-West corner.
- The power station site is in the North-East corner.
I have a few thoughts.
Pink Hydrogen
Pink hydrogen is zero-carbon hydrogen produced using nuclear power.
The production of hydrogen is already part of the plans for Freeport East, which I wrote about in Ryze Hydrogen’s Suffolk Freeport Hydrogen Vision Takes Shape.
In that article, I said this.
This would mean that Sizewell’s 6 MW electrolyser could be producing around a thousand tonnes of hydrogen per year or 2.6 tonnes per day.
The more efficient high temperature electrolysis can be used, using some of the waste heat from the nuclear power station. I wrote about this in Westinghouse And Bloom Energy To Team Up For Pink Hydrogen.
I also suspect that it may be more efficient to use seawater to produce the hydrogen.
Could high temperature electrolysis be used at Sizewell?
District Heating
The waste heat can also be used for district heating.
A Train Service To Ipswich
This Google Map shows the railway through Leiston, which is currently used to bring fuel to Sizewell B power station and remove waste.
Note.
- The railway starts in the North-West corner of the map.
- The green dot in that corner marks Leiston cemetery.
- The railway then goes East before turning to the South-East corner of the map.
- In that corner, there are two sidings for loading and unloading the flasks.
Surely, Leiston also needs a new railway station, with at least an hourly service to Saxmundham, Wickham Market, Woodbridge and Ipswich. And possibly even Aldeburgh!
This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the route of the Aldeburgh branch.
Note.
- The North-South yellow line is the East Suffolk Line.
- Their were three stations; Leiston, Thorpeness Halt and Aldeburgh.
- Leiston station was in the North of the town.
The intact section of the branch is shown in yellow.
There would be no need for any electrification, as Stadler, who built Greater Anglia’s Class 755 trains, are the masters of battery-powered trains and could convert these trains to battery operation. Recently, one of the smaller metro trains, that Stadler are building for Liverpool, ran for nearly 90 miles on battery power alone, which I wrote about in New Merseyrail Train Runs 135km On Battery.
An hourly train service would double the frequency of the train service between Saxmundham and Ipswich.
Does the Leiston masterplan include a train service?
And if it does, does it terminate at a new Aldeburgh station?
Conclusion
Integrating development around a nuclear power station could be a way of levelling up.
It would bring electricity, heat, a rail link and jobs to an area.
Will Rolls-Royce use these benefits to sell one of their SMRs to those living around a site?
Low Carbon Construction Of Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station
Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station is going to be built on the Suffolk Coast.
Wikipedia says this about the power station’s construction.
The project is expected to commence before 2024, with construction taking between nine and twelve years, depending on developments at the Hinkley Point C nuclear power station, which is also being developed by EDF Energy and which shares major similarities with the Sizewell plant.
It is a massive project and I believe the construction program will be designed to be as low-carbon as possible.
High Speed Two is following the low-carbon route and as an example, this news item on their web site, which is entitled HS2 Completes Largest Ever UK Pour Of Carbon-Reducing Concrete On Euston Station Site, makes all the right noises.
These three paragraphs explain in detail what has been done on the Euston station site.
The team constructing HS2’s new Euston station has undertaken the largest ever UK pour of Earth Friendly Concrete (EFC) – a material that reduces the amount of carbon embedded into the concrete, saving over 76 tonnes of CO2 overall. John F Hunt, working for HS2’s station Construction Partner, Mace Dragados joint venture, completed the 232 m3 concrete pour in early September.
The EFC product, supplied by Capital Concrete, has been used as a foundation slab that will support polymer silos used for future piling works at the north of the Euston station site. Whilst the foundation is temporary, it will be in use for two years, and historically would have been constructed with a more traditional cement-based concrete.
The use of the product on this scale is an important step forward in how new, innovative environmentally sustainable products can be used in construction. It also helps support HS2’s objective of net-zero construction by 2035, and achieve its goal of halving the amount of carbon in the construction of Britain’s new high speed rail line.
Note.
- Ten of these slabs would fill an Olympic swimming pool.
- I first wrote about Earth Friendly Concrete (EFC) in this post called Earth Friendly Concrete.
- EFC is an Australian invention and is based on a geopolymer binder that is made from the chemical activation of two recycled industrial wastes; flyash and slag.
- HS2’s objective of net-zero construction by 2035 is laudable.
- It does appear that this is a trial, but as the slab will be removed in two years, they will be able to examine in detail how it performed.
I hope the Sizewell C project team are following High Speed Two’s lead.
Rail Support For Sizewell C
The Sizewell site has a rail connection and it appears that this will be used to bring in construction materials for the project.
In the January 2023 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled Rail Set To Support Sizewell C Construction.
It details how sidings will be built to support the construction, with up to four trains per day (tpd), but electrification is not mentioned.
This is surprising to me, as increasingly, big construction projects are being managed to emit as small an amount of carbon as possible. Sizewell C may be an isolated site, but in Sizewell B, it’s got one of the UK’s biggest independent carbon-free electricity generators a couple of hundred metres away.
The writer of the Modern Railways article, thinks an opportunity is being missed.
I feel the following should be done.
- Improve and electrify the East Suffolk Line between Ipswich and Saxmundham Junction.
- Electrify the Aldeburgh Branch Line and the sidings to support the construction or agree to use battery-electric or hydrogen zero-carbon locomotives.
Sizewell C could be a superb demonstration project for low-carbon construction!
Sizewell C Deliveries
Sizewell C will be a massive project and and will require a large number of deliveries, many of which will be heavy.
The roads in the area are congested, so I suspect rail is the preferred method for deliveries.
We already know from the Modern Railways article, that four tpd will shuttle material to a number of sidings close to the site. This is a good start.
Since Sizewell A opened, trains have regularly served the Sizewell site to bring in and take out nuclear material. These occasional trains go via Ipswich and in the last couple of years have generally been hauled by Class 88 electro-diesel locomotives.
It would be reasonable to assume that the Sizewell C sidings will be served in the same manner.
But the route between Westerfield Junction and Ipswich station is becoming increasingly busy with the following services.
- Greater Anglia’s London and Norwich services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Cambridge services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Felixstowe services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Lowestoft services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Peterborough services
- Freight services serving the Port of Felixstowe, which are expected to increase significantly in forthcoming years.
But the Modern Railways article says this about Saxmundham junction.
Saxmundham junction, where the branch meets the main line, will be relaid on a slightly revised alignment, retaining the existing layout but with full signalling giving three routes from the junction protecting signal on the Down East Suffolk line and two in the Down direction on the bidirectional Up East Suffolk line. Trap points will be installed on the branch to protect the main line, with the exit signal having routes to both running lines.
Does the comprehensive signalling mean that a freight train can enter or leave the Sizewell sidings to or from either the busy Ipswich or the quieter Lowestoft direction in a very safe manner?
I’m no expert on signalling, but I think it does.
- A train coming from the Lowestoft direction needing to enter the sidings would go past Saxmundham junction on the Up line. Once clear of the junction, it would stop and reverse into the branch.
- A train coming from the Ipswich direction needing to enter the sidings would approach in the wrong direction on the Up line and go straight into the branch.
- A train leaving the sidings in the Lowestoft direction would exit from the branch and take the Up line until it became single track. The train would then stop and reverse on to the Down line and take this all the way to Lowestoft.
- A train leaving the sidings in the Ipswich direction would exit from the branch and take the Up line all the way to Ipswich.
There would need to be ability to move the locomotive from one end to the other inside the Sizewell site or perhaps these trains could be run with a locomotive on both ends.
The advantage of being able to run freight trains between Sizewell and Lowestoft becomes obvious, when you look at this Google Map, which shows the Port of Lowestoft.
Note.
- The Inner Harbour of the Port of Lowestoft.
- The East Suffolk Line running East-West to the North of the Inner Harbour.
- Lowestoft station at the East side of the map.
I doubt it would be the most difficult or expensive of projects to build a small freight terminal on the North side of the Inner Harbour.
I suspect that the easiest way to bring the material needed to build the power station to Sizewell would be to do the following.
- Deliver it to the Port of Lowestoft by ship.
- Tranship to a suitable shuttle train for the journey to the Sizewell sidings.
- I estimate that the distance is only about 25 miles and a battery or hydrogen locomotive will surely be available in the UK in the next few years, that will be able to provide the motive power for the return journey.
In The TruckTrain, I wrote about a revolutionary freight concept, that could be ideal for the Sizewell freight shuttle.
In addition, there is no reason, why shuttle trains couldn’t come in from anywhere connected to the East Suffolk Line.
Zero-Carbon Construction
Sizewell C could be the first major construction site in the UK to use electricity rather than diesel simply because of its neighbour.
Conclusion
I shall be following the construction methods at Sizewell C, as I’m fairly sure they will break new ground in the decarbonisation of the Construction industry.
Could Greater Anglia Run A Comprehensive Service For East Anglia?
Consider.
- In the last fifty years, there have been direct trains between London Liverpool Street and Lowestoft stations.
- In the last forty years, there have been direct trains between London Liverpool Street and Peterborough stations.
- Greater Anglia currently run an hourly train between London Liverpool Street and Ipswich stations, with stops at Stratford, Shenfield, Chelmsford, Hatfield Peverel, Witham, Kelvedon, Marks Tey, Colchester and Manningtree
- Frequencies on both routes were not high and less than four trains per day (tpd), but they must have been a demand for these services.
- Greater Anglia promised to run a Lowestoft service, when they successfully reapplied for the franchise.
- Greater Anglia have 38 Class 755 trains, of which 14 are three-cars and 24 are four-cars.
- Class 755 trains can run in twoses and possibly threeses. (Suffolk dialect for twins and triplets!)
Could these elements be assembled to provide a comprehensive East Anglia service?
- A pair of Class 755 trains would leave Liverpool Street for Ipswich.
- They would takeover some of the paths of the hourly Liverpool Street and Ipswich service and run possibly about four or five tpd, according to demand.
- Between Liverpool Street and Ipswich the trains could stop at Stratford, Shenfield, Chelmsford, Hatfield Peverel, Witham, Kelvedon, Marks Tey, Colchester and Manningtree
- The services would splitgoing North and join going South at Ipswich
- One train would go to Peterborough with stops at Needham Market, Stowmarket, Elmswell, Thurston, Bury St. Edmunds, Soham, Ely, Manea, March and Whittlesea.
- The other would go to Lowestoft with stops at Woodbridge, Melton, Wickham Market, Saxmundham, Darsham, Halesworth, Brampton, Beccles and Oulton Broad South.
Note.
- The Class 755 trains would use electricity, where electrification exists.
- They would use diesel on lines without electrification.
- They would be able to hold 100 mph, so wouldn’t delay other trains.
- Seventeen towns would get new direct services to and from London.
- A Class 745 train is 236.6 metres long, whereas a pair of four-car Class 755 trains is only 161.4 metres.
- A three-train formation of Class 755 trains is only 5.5 metres longer than a single Class 745 train.
I am fairly sure no new substantial infrastructure would be required.
I have some further thoughts.
Example Timings
These timings to and from London are based on current timings of the Class 745 and 755 trains.
- Ipswich – 60 mins
- Stowmarket -70 mins
- Bury St. Edmunds – 88 mins
- Soham – 108 mins
- Ely – 117 mins
- March – 136 mins
- Peterborough – 158 mins
- Woodbridge – 75 mins
- Melton – 80 mins
- Wickham Market – 86 mins
- Saxmundham – 97 mins
- Darsham – 104 mins
- Halesworth – 113 mins
- Brampton – 119 mins
- Beccles – 128 mins
- Oulton Broad South – 138 mins
- Lowestoft – 146 mins
Notes.
- Times to and from Ipswich are based on typical services at the current time.
- I have assumed that there are no stops South of Ipswich.
- Saxmundham is the closest station to Sizewell and could be important in bringing in construction workers for Sizewell C.
I think some of the times like those to and from Bury St. Edmunds, Ipswich, Lowestoft, Saxmundham and Woodbridge could create popular routes.
Battery-Electric Trains
Consider.
- I wrote about Stadler’s expertise with battery-electric trains in Stadler FLIRT Akku Battery Train Demonstrates 185km Range.
- 185 km. is 115 miles.
- The Class 756 trains for Transport for Wales are similar trains to the Class 755 trains fitted with batteries.
- In Battery Power Lined Up For ‘755s’, I wrote about plans to put batteries in the Class 755 trains.
These sections of lines are not electrified on the routes I have talked about.
- Haughley Junction and Ely – 38 miles
- Ely and Peterborough – 30.5 miles
- Westerfield and Lowestoft – 38 miles
As there is electrification at Ely, Haughley, Peterborough and Westerfield and South to London, I am fairly certain the route could be run by battery-electric trains.
Electrification To Sizewell C
In the January 2023 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled Rail Set To Support Sizewell C Construction.
It details how sidings will be built to support the construction, with up to four trains per day (tpd), but the electrification word is not mentioned.
This is surprising to me, as increasingly, big construction projects are being managed to emit as small an amount of carbon as possible. High Speed Two is being built this way and I suspect Rolls-Royce’s SMR design will minimise carbon emissions during manufacture and construction. It will be very surprising if Sizewell C doesn’t follow High Speed Two’s example. After all, it may be an isolated site, but in Sizewell B, it’s got one of the UK’s biggest carbon-free electricity generators a couple of hundred metres away.
The writer of the Modern Railways article, thinks an opportunity is being missed.
I feel the following should be done.
- Improve and electrify the East Suffolk Line between Ipswich and Saxmundham Junction.
- Electrify the Aldeburgh Branch Line and the sidings to support the construction or agree to use battery-electric or hydrogen zero-carbon locomotives.
One of the collateral benefits of electrifying from Ipswich to Saxmundham Junction, is that it will make it easier for battery-electric Class 755 trains to work Ipswich and Lowestoft services.
- If the trains were to leave Saxmundham Junction going North with a full battery, they should be able to travel to Lowestoft and return.
- Battery-electric Class 755 trains could bring in workers from Ipswich or Lowestoft and further afield.
- It could even leave behind a zero-carbon branch line to Sizewell, Leiston and Aldeburgh, with two tph to Ipswich.
Sizewell C could be a superb demonstration project for low-carbon construction!
The Lowestoft-Great Yarmouth Conurbation
The Wikipedia entry for Lowestoft says this about the town.
The estimated population in the built-up area exceeds 70,000. Its development grew with the fishing industry and as a seaside resort with wide sandy beaches. As fishing declined, oil and gas exploitation in the North Sea in the 1960s took over. While these too have declined, Lowestoft is becoming a regional centre of the renewable energy industry.
Whilst the Wikipedia entry for Great Yarmouth says this about the town.
Great Yarmouth, often called Yarmouth, is a seaside town and unparished area in, and the main administrative centre of, the Borough of Great Yarmouth in Norfolk, England; it straddles the River Yare and is located 20 miles (30 km) east of Norwich. A population of 38,693 in the 2011 Census made it Norfolk’s third most populous. Its fishing industry, mainly for herring, shrank after the mid-20th century and has all but ended.[3] North Sea oil from the 1960s supplied an oil-rig industry that services offshore natural gas rigs; more recently, offshore wind power and other renewable energy industries have ensued.
Wikipedia also said this about the population of the wider Great Yarmouth.
The wider Great Yarmouth borough had a population of around 92,500, which increased to 97,277 at the 2011 census.
Taken together they are one of the largest conurbations in East Anglia.
The main means of transport between the two towns is by road.
Surely, two towns of over 70,000 people, who are only a few miles apart need a rail connection.
Onward From Lowestoft To Great Yarmouth
If the comprehensive East Anglia service, I’m discussing is to be truly comprehensive, it must serve the Norfolk Broads and Great Yarmouth.
This would also improve the connectivity between two of the largest coastal towns in East Anglia, that I indicated in the last section.
This OpenRailwayMap shows a cunning plan proposed by Network Rail to connect Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth.
Note.
- Great Yarmouth is in the North East corner of the map.
- Two lines lead West from Great Yarmouth station, with the more Northerly route going direct to Norwich and the more Southerly one going to Norwich via Berney Arms and Reedham.
- Lowestoft is in the South East corner of the map.
- Two lines lead West from Lowestoft station, with the Northern route going to Norwich via Reedham and the Southern one going to Ipswich via Oulton Broad South.
- The route of a coastal railway connecting the two towns is also shown.
Network Rail’s cunning plan is indicated on this second nap from OpenRailwayMap.
Note.
- Reedham station is in the North-West corner of the map on the line to Norwich.
- To the East of the station is a triangular junction.
- The track from the North-East corner of the junction is the line to Great Yarmouth.
- The track from the Southern corner of the junction is the line to Lowestoft.
- Unfortunately, the South-Eastern leg of the junction was removed in 1880.
In Norfolk Rail Line To Remain Closed As £68m Upgrade Project Overruns, I said this.
Network Rail are talking about reinstating the Reedham Chord to create a more direct route between East Anglia’s largest North-Eastern towns. This is said about the Reedham Chord in Direct Yarmouth Services in the Wikipedia entry for Lowestoft station.
In January 2015, a Network Rail study proposed the reintroduction of direct services between Lowestoft and Yarmouth by reinstating a spur at Reedham. Services could once again travel between two East Coast towns, with an estimated journey time of 33 minutes, via a reconstructed 34-chain (680 m) north-to-south arm of the former triangular junction at Reedham, which had been removed in c. 1880. The plans also involve relocating Reedham station nearer the junction, an idea which attracted criticism.
This sounds a good plan to me.
- It would allow direct services between Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth.
- It would allow direct services between Ipswich and Great Yarmouth with a reverse at Lowestoft in about two hours.
- With possible charging at Lowestoft and/or Great Yarmouth, a scenic route could be created between Ipswich and Norwich for battery-electric Class 755 trains. If that doesn’t get people out of their cars then nothing will!
- Various leisure, tourism and work-related opportunities would be created.
Never in the field of railway engineering would such a small chord have given so much.
Sizewell C Issues
Sizewell C will be a massive project and I also suspect that like High Speed Two, it will be built in a manner that will be zero-carbon where possible.
We already know from the Modern Railways article, that four tpd will shuttle material to a number of sidings close to the site. This is a good start.
Since Sizewell A opened, trains have regularly served the Sizewell site to bring in and take out nuclear material. These occasional trains go via Ipswich and in the last couple of years have generally been hauled by Class 88 electro-diesel locomotives.
It would be reasonable to assume that the Sizewell C sidings will be served in the same manner.
But the route between Westerfield Junction and Ipswich station is becoming increasingly busy with the following services.
- Greater Anglia’s London and Norwich services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Cambridge services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Felixstowe services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Lowestoft services
- Greater Anglia’s Ipswich and Peterborough services
- Freight services serving the Port of Felixstowe, which are expected to increase significantly in forthcoming years.
But the Modern Railways article says this about Saxmundham junction.
Saxmundham junction, where the branch meets the main line, will be relaid on a slightly revised alignment, retaining the existing layout but with full signalling giving three routes from the junction protecting signal on the Down East Suffolk line and two in the Down direction on the bidirectional Up East Suffolk line. Trap points will be installed on the branch to protect the main line, with the exit signal having routes to both running lines.
Does the comprehensive signalling mean that a freight train can enter or leave the Sizewell sidings to or from either the busy Ipswich or the quieter Lowestoft direction in a very safe manner?
I’m no expert on signalling, but I think it does.
- A train coming from the Lowestoft direction needing to enter the sidings would go past Saxmundham junction on the Up line. Once clear of the junction, it would stop and reverse into the branch.
- A train coming from the Ipswich direction needing to enter the sidings would approach in the wrong direction on the Up line and go straight into the branch.
- A train leaving the sidings in the Lowestoft direction would exit from the branch and take the Up line until it became single track. The train would then stop and reverse on to the Down line and take this all the way to Lowestoft.
- A train leaving the sidings in the Ipswich direction would exit from the branch and take the Up line all the way to Ipswich.
There would need to be ability to move the locomotive from one end to the other inside the Sizewell site or perhaps these trains could be run with a locomotive on both ends.
The advantage of being able to run freight trains between Sizewell and Lowestoft becomes obvious, when you look at this Google Map, which shows the Port of Lowestoft.
Note.
- The Inner Harbour of the Port of Lowestoft.
- The East Suffolk Line running East-West to the North of the Inner Harbour.
- Lowestoft station at the East side of the map.
I doubt it would be the most difficult or expensive of projects to build a small freight terminal on the North side of the Inner Harbour.
I suspect that the easiest way to bring the material needed to build the power station to Sizewell would be to do the following.
- Deliver it to the Port of Lowestoft by ship.
- Tranship to a suitable shuttle train for the journey to the Sizewell sidings.
- I estimate that the distance is only about 25 miles and a battery or hydrogen locomotive will surely be available in the UK in the next few years, that will be able to provide the motive power for the return journey.
In The TruckTrain, I wrote about a revolutionary freight concept, that could be ideal for the Sizewell freight shuttle.
Great Yarmouth Racecourse
Great Yarmouth Racecourse is one of my favourite racecourses and I believe it is one of the attractions in Great Yarmouth, that would benefit from an improved rail service between Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth, as it would almost double those with efficient public transport access to the racecourse.
The walking distance between Great Yarmouth station and the racecourse is walkable for many and I remember doing it since C died.
With the train connection to Lowestoft and perhaps a courtesy bus from the station, I wouldn’t be surprised to see that a Lowestoft-Yarmouth rail connection being very good for the racecourse. Especially as road traffic between the two towns can be not the best.
Finishing At Norwich
There are operational reasons to carry on to Norwich, where Crown Point, is the home base for the Class 755 trains.
But it would also link a lot of places that are dependant on tourism and are also heavily involved in East Anglia’s energy industry.
Onward From Peterborough To Lincoln
If the Lowestoft service can extend to Great Yarmouth, an extension of the Peterborough service to Lincoln via Spalding and Sleaford might be possible.
But with LNER also serving Lincoln from Kings Cross, I doubt the route would carry many passengers to and from London.
Conclusion
A service from London, that splits into two trains at Ipswich for Lowestoft and Peterborough has possibilities.
Sizewell C Nuclear Plant Campaigners Challenge Approval
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
These three paragraphs introduce the article.
Campaigners against the Sizewell C nuclear power station have written to Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng to legally challenge his decision to give the scheme the go-ahead.
The £20bn project for the Suffolk coast was given government approval in July.
However, the decision was against the advice of the Planning Inspectorate and those against the scheme said the consent was therefore “unlawful”.
I summed up my attitude to nuclear power in Sizewell C: Nuclear Power Station Plans For Suffolk Submitted, where I said this.
As a well-read and experienced engineer, I am not against the technologies of nuclear power.
But I do think, by the time it is completed , other technologies like wind and energy storage will be much better value. They will also be more flexible and easier to expand, should we get our energy forecasts wrong.
I wrote that in May 2020, which was before Vlad the Mad started his war in Ukraine. So our energy forecasts are totally wrong! Thanks for nothing, Vlad!
In Plan To Build £150m Green Hydrogen Plant At Felixstowe Port, I talked about ScottishPower’s plan to build a large electrolyser at Felixstowe.
The Port of Felixstowe has in the past talked of using electricity from Sizewell C to create hydrogen.
So is the port backing another horse or just playing safe?
Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station: Government To Take 20% Stake
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the first three paragraphs.
The government plans to take a 20% stake in a £20bn large-scale nuclear plant at Sizewell, the BBC has learned.
French developer EDF will also take a 20% stake in the Suffolk power station.
Ministers hope the confirmation of two cornerstone investors will encourage infrastructure investors and pension funds to take up the remaining 60%.
I used to live near Sixewell and the general feeling of local Suffolk people is not particularly against having nuclear power stations in their back yards.
There are several small points in favour of Sizewell C.
- Sizewell has been operating nuclear power plants safely since the 1960s.
- Leiston, which is the nearest town, has a very strong engineering tradition.
- Leiston also improved by several notches during the building of Sizewell B.
- The site is accessible by rail and possibly sea with the right ship.
- Nuclear fuel can be brought in and out by train.
- If they spent a small amount on the train service to Saxmundham, construction workers could come in by train.
- Sizewell C has been proposed to be used to generate hydrogen for Freeport East at the Ports of Harwich an Felixstowe.
- The power cable to take electricity from Sizewell C towards London is already built.
- Sizewell is much more convenient to get to from London, than other possible nuclear sites.
Overall, I feel that Sizewell is a good place for nuclear power station.
On the other hand, there are these points against the station.
- There will be at least 6.7 GW of wind farms built off the East Anglian coast before Sizewell C is completed.
- There may be substantial objection to the new power station.
- Large nuclear power stations are rarely built to time and on budget.
- I feel that if we go the nuclear route, that small modular nuclear reactors may be better.
I can understand why Governments like Sizewell as a nuclear power station site.
