Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hauāuru mā raki
Waikato Wind Farm
Connection to 220kV Main Grid
Undergrounding Study
Prepared for
Contact Energy Ltd
By
Energy Action Pty Ltd and
Electrix
March 2008
REPORT STRUCTURE
CONSOLIDATED
REPORT
(This document)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The scope called for an in-depth feasibility study of the benefits and
disbenefits of undergrounding a double circuit overhead transmission line,
each circuit of 600MVA.
The ratio of initial direct cost for single circuit underground cable versus
double circuit overhead line is 8.4 while for a double circuit cable the ratio Is
11.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
1
Site inspections were undertaken during January, 2008.
BECA and Wind Farm Group were represented and provided required
assistance during site investigations.
An overhead line design option prepared earlier for Contact Energy by BECA
was also reviewed.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
2
Terrain is subject to landslides and native soils exhibit characteristics of poor
thermal resistivity. Such conditions would require large quantities of imported
special cable bedding & backfilling at cable installation to provide for reliable
cable operation.
Excavated trench material (1.3 to 2 cubic metres per metre length of trench)
followed by importation of an equal quantity of special cable bedding and
backfill and road restoration materials would lead to a construction time in
excess of 30 months even by utilising two simultaneous construction teams
for a single cable circuit.
To underground the total 38.3km route at any cost seems totally unusual by
any industry practice.
A double circuit O/H line provides a redundancy level of “N-1”. (One circuit
capable of transmitting full load with the other out of service).
A cost comparison summary for a single & double circuit underground cable
installation and for a double circuit overhead line is given in Table 1.
An overhead line would result in least cost and least construction time. While
fault incidence with an overhead line would be relatively high repair times
would be short.
Visual impact, property easement issues and matters related to EMF could
raise some community concern even in a sparsely populated area.
An underground cable would incur much higher initial cost, longer construction
time and have major impact on community during construction.
Visual impact would be low, but contrary to public perception magnetic field is
higher than for an equivalent overhead line when measured at conventional
reference level; i.e. one metre above ground directly over a cable.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
3
Table 1: Cost comparison between overhead (O/H) transmission line and
(U/G) underground cable
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
4
still only a very small percentage of high voltage underground cable. Table 2
shows the relative percentages.1 .
Km of Network Km of %
U/ground
UK 3 029 71 2.3%
Belgium 267 - 0%
Portugal 4 409 - 0%
1
Commission of European Communities- Background Paper- “Under grounding of Electricity
Lines in Europe” – Brussels 10 December 2003
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 7
3 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................ 19
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
6
1. INTRODUCTION
The main transmission link to the Grid is proposed to be 220 kV. Current
plans are for the link to be a double circuit overhead transmission line on
tower construction.
CEN has received comments from some landowners whose properties will be
traversed by the proposed transmission line. Several landowners are opposed
to overhead cabling and want the company to instead install underground
cabling.
CEN is open-minded on this issue and has engaged Energy Action Pty Ltd
and Electrix to provide expert advice on the practicability of undergrounding
and comparisons (including benefits and disbenefits) between the two
alternatives – refer to APPENDIX “Scope for Undergrounding Study”.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
7
strength, maximum magnetic flux density, audible noise level, radio
frequency interference and easement width etc.
• Line security status
• Reliability
• Terrain conditions through which the route passes
• Environmental impact during construction and final solution
• Aesthetic and visual impact
• Life cycle costs which include initial capital costs, cost of losses,
maintenance and refurbishment costs
• Constructability and timing, including impact on local community during
construction
• Current technology and future upgrading.
The guideline cautions that cost estimates should be based on actual site &
environmental conditions as opposed to “ratios” that can only be a guide at
best.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
8
b) Initial capital cost of underground cable circuits in existing roadways in
existing conditions between Limestone Downs and Orton 220kV Switching
Station, route length 38.3km :
(*) The cost estimates do not take into consideration the cost to upgrade the
roads to meet cable installation conditions.
Lack of data associated with costs of civil works (access roads, bridges,
directional drilled ducts, etc) that will be necessary to meet cable installation
conditions in this type of terrain makes a budget estimate impossible without a
prior detailed civil engineering assessment. However, the cost would certainly
be significantly greater than that for option (b) above.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
9
2.2. Environmental issues
For the purposes of this study Visual and EMF (electromagnetic fields) issues
were considered in particular. Comparative observations are as follows:
• Underground cables exhibit minimal visual impact.
2.3. Reliability
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
10
Outage rates are measured by considering the number of outages per 100
circuit kilometres. Transpower prepared a report which highlighted the outage
rates for forced and planned outages. Since these figures are a record of the
10 year period between July 1992 and June 2004, they are considered
appropriate for this analysis. The results are as follows:
When considering underground cable outage rates, there is no data for New
Zealand since there is little 220kV cable installed. For the purposes of this
analysis, figures from the report “Commission of European Communities-
Background Paper- Undergrounding of Electricity Lines in Europe Brussels 10
December 2005” which indicate the following:
This figure was confirmed by a DISCAB Group on figures over the past 12
years and was presented at the ICF Congress in Barcelona. Other reports
including CIGRE and various American studies show varying rates from 1.4 to
4.1 faults per circuit kilometre.
For this analysis the rate of .072 has been used which equates to the
following expected outages for a 25 km long overhead line and a 38.3 km long
underground cable.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
11
From the above it is evident that underground cables have a better reliability
rate based upon forced outages but require more planned outages. In
addition there are reported data which indicate the reverse, depending on the
sample size, type of cable analysed etc. However for the purposes of this
report and based upon recent developments in cable technology, the figures
used are believed to be representative.
Another important factor to be considered is the repair time and how that
affects the availability of the circuit. It is a well known fact that the repair time
of overhead lines is significantly shorter than that for underground cables. In
addition some repair activities for overhead lines can be performed live and
thus the outage rate can be reduced.
Results for the last 10 years from Transpower’s records for overhead lines
show the following:
Studies conducted by consultants Meritec show the following repair times for
underground cables specific to New Zealand conditions:
Based upon the failure rate and the repair times, availability per unit can be
calculated. This is based upon the outage rate and the total number of hours
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
12
per year. Using the figures above, the following availability per unit is
expected.
This availability is based upon the fact that the underground cable option is a
single circuit system. Introduction of a dual circuit will significantly enhance
the system availability.
2.5 Efficiency
The losses for overhead line (4145kW) and for a single circuit underground
cable (4125kW) specific to this project are included in the NPV calculations in
Attachments 1 and 2.
2.6 Maintenance
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
13
Construction of the overhead transmission line is dependent on the resources
allocated. With 4 foundation crews, 4 tower erection crews and 2 large
conductoring crews, the line could be constructed within 12 months. However
due to the nature of the terrain, winter work would be significantly more
difficult and hazardous, particularly in the Limestone Downs area. It is
therefore suggested that an 18month construction period be allocated to
ensure that optimum productivity is achieved during the summer months.
Details of overhead line and the underground cable alternatives are discussed
in detail in the two attached reports focusing specifically on underground
cables (Attachment 1) and overhead lines (Attachment 2).
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
14
Table 2
Summary of Comparison Table of Overhead line option vs. Underground Cable
$367M
(+++) double
cct.
(- - -)
Life Cycle Cost Effective cost of the $66 M Life cycle cost including $298 M Life cycle cost including initial
investment brought back to initial capital cost; cost of single capital cost; cost of losses,
2008 costs (++) losses, maintenance, cct. maintenance and, faults expressed
refurbishment and, faults as a Net Present Value is far
expressed as a Net Present $387 M higher than the overhead line
Value is still lower than the double option
cable option cct
(- -)
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
15
2 Asset A measure of how reliable
Reliability and the system is based upon
Availability its availability
Failure rates Based upon current failure (-) This figure is based upon (+) Since 220kV failure rates are not
rates of existing equipment Forced the current Transpower Forced available for New Zealand, this
forced outage per outage recorded results of 220kV outage figure is based upon the
100km.yr rate transmission lines in New rate Commission of European
of.34 Zealand over the past 10 0.072 communities Background Paper –
per years. Auto recloses for failures Undergrounding of Electricity Lines
100km transient faults are not per in Europe- Brussels, December
/yr included in this analysis. 100km/y 2003. Cables
r
Repair times A measure of the time (++) Based upon Transpower (- -) Based upon research by MERITEC
taken to restore the circuit records of forced outage on 220kV cable repair times
to service under fault repair time of 1.808 hrs and ranging from 200hrs to 300 hrs.
conditions planned outage repair time
of 17.45 hrs. Overhead
lines can be maintained
using live line techniques
which further reduces the
repair times
Availability This is based upon the (+) Based upon P B Power (-) Based upon P B Power analysis on
measure of the circuits 0.996 analysis on historical 220kV .988 probable availability presented in
availability and is (p.u.) data as presented in (p.u.) Transpower Report -2005-
influenced by the circuit Transpower Report -2005- Comparison of Reliability of a
failure rate and repair Comparison of Reliability of 400kV Underground cable with an
times a 400kV Underground cable Overhead Transmission Line. The
with an Overhead figures indicate a slightly better
Transmission Line availability associated with the
overhead line configuration.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
16
3 Environmental A measure of the impact
Impact the which each option has
on the environment
During Each option has a different (+ +) Overhead line construction (- -) Under ground cable requires the
Construction impact on the environment requires the excavation of excavation of approx 500,000 m3
and local community approx 25 m3 of soil per (single circuit of route length 38.3
during the construction tower- total of 2100m3. km) which has to be disposed with
phase Construction impact on severe community impact.
local traffic is minimal An equal quantity of special fill is
required to backfill trenches
Project The length of time taken to (+) The overhead line can be (- -) Underground Cable is expected to
Duration complete the site works constructed over a 12 take more than 30 months to
month period complete a 38.3km route
Final condition The final condition of each (- -) Overhead lines are (+ +) Cable systems pose a minimal
option reflects the relative imposing structures on the visual impact. Land use within the
impact on the environment landscape and have a cable corridor is subject to
negative visual impact. easement restrictions.
Land use is restricted within
the easement which is
much wider than the cable
easement
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
17
4 Operational A measure by which the
operation and
maintenance of the options
affects the community
Magnetic and Overhead lines generate (-) There have been concerns (-) While there are some shielding
Electric Fields electric fields whereas expressed regarding options to minimise magnetic field
electric and magnetic fields generated by underground cables
underground cables do
and at this point research is the reduction factor is modest
not. When measured at inconclusive. The overhead
reference level (one metre transmission line complies
above ground line) with the ICNIRP & EU
magnetic field generated recommendation 1999 -
by underground cable is 100µT
higher than that produced
by an overhead line.
Noise Noise emission from the (-) Overhead transmission (+) Underground cables have no noise
transmission system lines emit noise especially emission
when there is a high
moisture content in the air.
The design specification for
the Franklin district is
42dbA
Climatic Weather impacts on the (-) Overhead lines are affected (+) Underground cables are not
Influence system by lightening, winds, snow influenced by weather
and ice
Total Rating 11 (+) 5 (+)
6 (-) 13 (-)
Net Result 5 (+) 8 (-)
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
18
3 CONCLUSIONS
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
19
• Flashover due to insulator contamination
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
20
• Contrary to public perception high voltage underground cables also
require easements, 6 metres wide, along the entire cable route for
the safe operation and access for maintenance & repairs. Easement
restrictions are more severe than those for overhead lines.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
21
4 APPENDIX - Scope for Undergrounding Study
Background
The transmission lines both for internal lines, interconnecting the substations
and for the main line are proposed to be 220 kV. Current plans are for the
internal lines to be single circuit on pole construction, and the external line will
be double circuit on tower construction.
CEN has received submissions from some landowners whose properties will
be traversed by the proposed transmission line. Several landowners are
opposed to overhead cabling and want the company to instead install
underground cabling.
CEN is open-minded on this issue and has undertaken to seek expert advice
on the practicability of undergrounding and comparisons between the two
alternatives.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
22
Scope of Study
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
23
and the optimal corridor is chosen to implement such an alternative.
The assessment should include, if possible, an assessment of
comparative ongoing maintenance costs, and possible incremental
revenue arising from lower transmission losses that might arise from
the selection of one or other alternative.
Waikato Wind Farm - Connection to 220kV Main Grid - Undergrounding Study – March 2008
24
Report
Hauãuru mã raki
Waikato Wind Farm
Connection to 220kV Main Grid
Undergrounding Study
Prepared for
Contact Energy Ltd
By
Energy Action Pty Ltd
March 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................2
2. UNERDGROUND CABLE ROUTE OPTIONS BASED ON SITE
INSPECTIONS ......................................................................................................2
2.1 Option 1: Cross country (Green Field) route .........................................3
2.2 Option 2: Installing cables in existing roadways ..................................5
3. REVIEW OF OVERSEAS TRENDS IN HIGH VOLTAGE UNDERGROUND
CABLING PRACTICES ........................................................................................7
4. COSTS AND CHARACTERISTICS PERTAINING TO 220KV
UNDERGROUND CABLE OPTIONS ...................................................................9
4.1. Cost and basis for calculation ..................................................................9
4.2. Cable losses ...............................................................................................10
4.3. Availability...................................................................................................12
4.4. Reliability and repair times ......................................................................12
4.5. Efficiency.....................................................................................................13
4.6. Maintenance – XLPE insulated cables ..................................................13
4.7. Electromagnetic field (EMF) ....................................................................14
4.8. Easements...................................................................................................15
4.9. Reactive power compensation – Critical length of cable circuit .....16
5. CONSTRUCTION TIME FRAME – CASE STUDIES...................................16
5.1 Single circuit: Orton 220kV Switching Station (along Otuiti Rd) to
OH/UG transition point near Fleming Rd., 8.7 km route length ...................16
5.2 Double circuit: Orton 220kV Switching Station (along Otuiti Rd) to
OH/UG transition point near Fleming Rd., 8.7 km route length ...................17
5.3 Orton 220kV Switching Station – Limestone Downs 33/220kV
Substation – 38.3km route length ......................................................................18
6. REFERENCES.............................................................................................18
7. APPENDICES ..............................................................................................19
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
1
1. INTRODUCTION
The main transmission link to the Grid is proposed to be 220 kV. Current plans
are for the link to be a double circuit overhead line on tower construction.
CEN has received submissions from some landowners whose properties will be
traversed by the proposed transmission line. Several landowners are opposed to
overhead cabling and want the company to instead install underground cabling.
CEN is open-minded on this issue and has engaged Energy Action Pty Ltd and
Electrix to provide expert advice on the practicability of undergrounding and
comparisons (including benefits and disbenefits) between the two alternatives.
The high cost of underground cables determines that, at the initial planning stage,
the shortest possible route is considered. In this case this is a direct line, cross
country, between Limestone Downs and Orton.
The sheer size and complexity of 220kV underground cable circuits pose greater
installation challenges in comparison to other longitudinal infrastructure projects
including gas and water pipelines. (refer to Appendix 5)
The countryside is essentially rural in nature with very few dwellings along the
38.3 km road route.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
3
Composition of the ground is an overburden (soil) which may contain volcanic
ash and weak alluvial deposits prone to landslides [Photo No. 3].
Land slides
Photo No. 3
The overburden (soil) has a high thermal resistivity. This would present a barrier
to heat flow (from the cable to ambient air) and could lead to the cable becoming
overheated and fail unless the cable is bedded and back-filled with a thermally
stable mix such as a weak sand/cement mix or similar.
Note: Underground HV power cables of voltage above 132kV are only of single-core
construction.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
4
A single core 220kV cable, rated 600MVA, would have a diameter of
approximately 120mm and weigh approximately 25 kg per metre.
Normally this type of cable is installed in a trench one metre deep and one metre
wide (for a single circuit) or around 1.6 metre wide for double circuit.
Contrary to existing roadways (which were constructed on ridge tops) the cable
corridor may require bridges, directional drilling, ducts & micro tunnels.
In summary, the green field sites are totally unsuited to installing underground
cables except at exorbitant cost.
The shortest road route between Limestone Downs and Orton comprises
sections of Baker Rd., Wairamarama Onewhero Rd., Matakitaki Rd., Highway 22;
and Otuiti Rd.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
5
In particular, Baker Rd. [Photos 4 & 5], Wairamarama Onewhero Rd. and
Matakitaki Rd. are totally unsuitable for excavation of the required size cable
trench and installation of large capacity power cables without road upgrading.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
6
There are issues with:
• Extended road closures for many weeks or even months continuously, with no
alternative routes available for other road users, during excavating 700 meter
long sections of trench at a time, installing cables, back-filling & reinstating
the area.
• The composition (high thermal resistivity) of the native ground (beneath the
gravel) – requiring vast quantities of special cable bedding to be obtained and
transported to site – (further road closures).
Even if road widening was undertaken significant traffic disruption and public
inconvenience could still be expected during cable installation.
The situation is substantially improved closer to Orton where roads are wider and
generally sealed.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
7
a) Use of polymeric insulated cables, including polyethylene (PE) and cross-
liked polyethylene (XLPE) in lieu of paper insulated pressure assisted
cable types.
Significant savings in manpower and installation & maintenance times are
achieved through the use of polymeric cables.
The absence of impregnating fluid in paper insulated fluid-filled cable has
eliminated the possibility of potential environmental issues arising out of
fluid leaking from faulty or damaged cables.
b) Introduction of pre-fabricated joints and terminations specific to polymeric
cables - reducing complexity of installation and time.
Laborious application of taping insulated layers in jointing operations has
been replaced with assembling of pre-fabricated and pre-tested
component parts.
e) Special laying methods for use in unstable ground conditions for example
flexible troughing and bedding materials.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
8
4. COSTS AND CHARACTERISTICS PERTAINING TO 220KV
UNDERGROUND CABLE OPTIONS
Prysmian provided cost estimates and technical data for supply and installation of
single and double circuit underground 220kV cables – refer Appendices 2 and 3.
Recent projects tend to suggest that the cost of civil works equates to the cost of
cable and accessories especially in difficult environments.
(*) The cost estimates do not take into consideration the cost of necessary road
upgrades to meet cable installation conditions. It is estimated that the cost of
such road upgrades could be in the vicinity of half the “Initial Costs” stated above
albeit that a separate civil engineering review of road upgrades is required.
b) Cost of single or double circuit underground cable through green field sites
was not undertaken due to lack of data associated with costs of civil works
(bridges, directional drilled ducts, etc) that will be necessary to meet cable
installation conditions.
In addition to the abovementioned total undergrounding options between
Limestone Downs & Orton a partial undergrounding option in the vicinity of Orton
was also evaluated refer cost estimated (c) & (d) below.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
9
c) Initial capital cost of single circuit underground cable in predominantly
sealed roads (Orton 220kV Switching Station to Orton Transition Point, route
length 8 km): M$NZ58
n j
1
NPVug := Ci.ug+ ( )
Co.ug+ Cf.ug ⋅
1+i
j=1
6
NPVug = 297.853 × 10
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
10
DOUBLE CIRCUIT 2 X 400 MVA
6
Ci.ug := 367 ⋅ 10 Initial Investment for Underground Cable ($
NZ)
6
C o.ug := 1.137 ⋅ 10 Operational costs for underground Cable
including losses and maintenance per annum
($ NZ)
3
Cf.ug := 20 ⋅ 10 Fault costs for underground Cable per annum
($ NZ)
i := 5 % Capitalisation Index
n j
1
NPVug := Ci.ug + ( )
Co.ug + Cf.ug ⋅
1+i
j=1
6
NPVug = 386.853× 10
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
11
4.3. Availability
Outages of underground cables are generally caused by third party damage, bad
workmanship during cable installation & jointing or manufacturing defects.
Outages to underground cables are usually extensive and require significant
repair time before they can be restored to service.
The incidence of underground cable faults is low, but outages are of long duration
due to repair times involved refer to example below:
Example:
Considering the most likely condition i.e. third party damage to one of three single
core cables in a cable circuit – the following actions are involved:
o Fault location and site assessment
o Mobile plant & personnel, excavate fault location & assess damage,
cut & cap cable
o Excavate trench & two joint bays
o Concrete joint bay slabs and install joint bay cover
o Transport to site cable & joints
o Lay & joint cable
o Bedding, back-filling, mechanical protection of cable & joints
o Electrical tests
o Reinstate area
Total time to repair a single fault, assuming availability of spares and local 220kV
jointers is estimated at 200 to 300 hours.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
12
4.5. Efficiency
For underground cables, in addition to Ohmic losses, there are other component
losses dependent on cable configuration (single-core cables) and type of
bonding system of cable metallic sheaths or/and screens.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
13
4.7. Electromagnetic field (EMF)
The single-core cables could be installed in trefoil, flat or “L” touching or spaced
formations.
Magnitude of EMF [mG] [mG]
1000
One circuit Single Circuit
600MVA/1420A
Reference
100
10
1
-20 -18 -16 -14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0.1
The trefoil touching formation produces the lowest level of magnetic field.
In case of double circuit the forward phase sequence phase sequence (R-Y-B /
B-Y-R) generates smaller magnetic field than (R-Y-B / R-Y-B) phase sequence.
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
14
In this case, if the two circuits are in close proximity, the magnetic field intensity is
smaller that that produced by a single circuit.
1000
One circuit
two circuit
Reference 100
10
1
-2 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0 8 6 4 2 0
0.1
x - axis [m] - Distance from the median axis
Magnetic field magnitude produced by a double cable circuit carrying
400MWA (360MW) /1050A
4.8. Easements
• High voltage cables require easements, 6 metres wide, along the entire
cable route for the safe operation and access for maintenance & repairs.
Easement conditions apply.
o No inflammable materials
o Unrestricted access
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
15
4.9. Reactive power compensation – Critical length of cable
circuit
From that evaluation it is concluded that the capacitive charge has no noticeable
impact on cable rating capacity.
A time line outlining actual installation works shall be prepared once detailed local
site conditions are established; however, the following guidelines apply for a large
capacity, single circuit underground cable installation:
The main activities & estimated times are as per Table following table:
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
16
Construction activities and time estimates
The main activities are as for Section 7.1 with estimated total time 18 months
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
17
5.3 Orton 220kV Switching Station – Limestone Downs
33/220kV Substation – 38.3km route length
Total time: 33 months utilising two construction teams – taking into account the
following issues with this route:
6. REFERENCES
1. Electric Cables Handbook (BICC Cables)
2. Underground Transmission Systems Reference Book – Power
Technologies, Inc
3. Rating of Electric Power Cables – George J Anders
4. General Guides for the Integration of a New Underground Cable System in
the Network CIGRE SC21
5. Maintenance for HV Cables and Accessories CIGRE TB 279 - Working
Group mB1.04
6. Construction, Laying and Installation Techniques for Extruded and Sel-
contained Fluid-filled Cable Systems – CIGRE TB 194 Working Group
21.17 /October 2001
7. Comparison of High Voltage Overhead Lines and Underground Cables –
CIGRE Report JWG 21/22-01
8. Budget estimate to supply and install 220kV cable (Prysmian)
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
18
9. Cable technical information including losses (Prysmian)
10. Magnetic Field In HV Cable Systems Without Ferromagnetic Component –
CIGRE Technical Brochure 104
7. APPENDICES
Waikato Wind Farm – Undergrounding Study - Attachment No. 1 To Consolidated Report – March 2008
19
Appendix 1
The transmission lines both for internal lines, interconnecting the substations and
for the main line are proposed to be 220 kV. Current plans are for the internal
lines to be single circuit on pole construction, and the external line will be double
circuit on tower construction.
CEN has received submissions from some landowners whose properties will be
traversed by the proposed transmission line. Several landowners are opposed to
overhead cabling and want the company to instead install underground cabling.
CEN is open-minded on this issue and has undertaken to seek expert advice on
the practicability of undergrounding and comparisons between the two
alternatives.
The company is not an electricity lines business and is not therefore constrained
by any New Zealand statutory regulation governing the pricing aspects of its
transmission lines. Instead CEN operates in a competitive market for the pricing
of its daily offer of electricity generation. CEN does not have any material
existing investment in overhead transmission assets, nor an inventory to support
such infrastructure.
The company requires an in-depth study of the benefits and disbenefits of
underground transmission lines versus overhead lines. The study should
address the following matters.
Scope of Study
• Analyse the preferred route in the context of terrain, geotechnical and any
other issues that would impact upon the practicability of underground
cabling of 220kV circuits;
• Consider whether a more efficient and lower cost route could be adopted
for an undergrounding project such as, for example, burying cable along
existing roading networks;
1 INTRODUCTION
Further to our assessment of December 2007, we have been asked to consider a revised requirement, for
only one circuit, between Limestone and Orton, of which approximately 8km would consist of underground
cables.
The specified ratings for this circuit are:
• single group of cables carrying 600MVA
or
• two groups of cable each capable of carrying 400MVA.
We have assumed installation conditions the same as those that have been specified for other projects in
New Zealand.
When assessing the number of sections of cable, we have assumed nominal lengths of approximately
500m and the need to have a balanced cross-bonded system.
4.1 Conductor
Copper, Milliken construction, complying with IEC 60228 Class 2, with oxidised wires where required to
reduce the skin effect for conductors larger than 1600mm².
4.3 Insulation
Extruded cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) suitable for operation at a maximum conductor temperature of
90°C. The insulation would be made of dry cured extruded cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE), extruded
simultaneously with the semi conductive conductor and core screen (triple head extrusion).
4 220kV TERMINATIONS
We do not know what terminations would be required but we assume that they would be outdoor sealing
ends.
A drawing of a typical outdoor sealing end, with a polymeric insulator, is shown at the end of this document.
5 220kV JOINTS
The buried joints would have sectionalising insulation to enable the cable cleats to be cross-bonded, and
would be installed on reinforced concrete bases.
The GRP casing of the joint would be filled with a compound suitable for the prevailing conditions, e.g. the
depth of the water table.
A drawing of a typical joint is shown at the end of this document.
7 LOSSES
Nominal Nominal
Item Description Thickness Details Diameters
(mm) (mm)
1 Conductor - Copper Milliken 43.5
2 Binder - - -
3 Conductor Screen - Semi-Conducting Compound -
4 Insulation 19.5 XLPE 87.0
5 Insulation Screen - Semi-Conducting Compound -
6 WaterblockingTape - - -
7 Wires 1.075 98 Copper Wires 94.8
8 Equalising Tape - Copper -
9 Waterblocking Tape - - -
10 Metallic Sheath 1.2 Welded Aluminium 98.4
11 Oversheath 5.0 Polyethylene & Graphite 110.6
B X X S X X S X X S X X S X X B
B X X S X X S X X S X X B
B X X S X X S X X S X X B
In simple terms:
Metallic or polymeric (plastic) gas or water pipes are transported to site and laid
in manageable sections (and manageable weights) and welded, or otherwise
connected together, as trench excavation progresses.
Trenches are narrow and, other than a bedding comprised of sand (to protect the
outer surface of pipes) there are no special trench excavation or back-filling
requirements.
Similar installation conditions to those for gas & water pipes may apply for lower
voltage underground distribution cables and communications cables (whether
electric or fibre optic). These are often laid in ducts.
Trenches are narrow (the width of a small back-hoe bucket) and other than for
sand bedding there are no special trench excavation or back-filling requirements.
In the case of extra high voltage underground power cables (including 220kV)
there are factors that impose significant differences in installation & maintenance
requirements to those for water or gas pipes or lower voltage circuits namely:
Soil samples taken from site in the Limestone Downs – Orton area are estimated
to have a high thermal resistivity – meaning the soil will impose a barrier to heat
wanting to escape from the cables to the surface. This shall be confirmed by
thermal resistivity test on site & in laboratory prior to proceeding with the project.
Well accepted practice, world wide, is to improve this situation by bedding and
covering the cables with a controlled medium comprised of a weak mix of sand
and cement. (Refer diagram below)
Cables of this size and voltage are not manufactured in New Zealand. Each
cable drum, containing around 700metres of cable and weighing up to 20 Tones,
would require to be transported from Auckland on multi-wheeled vehicle to sites
at 700 m intervals, there to be “craned off”, winched/pulled into position (in the
cable trench), then to be bedded & covered with protective concrete cable covers
and special backfill and then to be jointed in a controlled environment in what is
known as a “joint bay” comprising a tented enclosure of the size, and with
features, as shown below. The duration of works associated with Joint bays
(construction and cable jointing) could be as long as 3 to 4 weeks.
Joint bay (4m x 12m) in roadway Interior of joint bay prior to jointing
(Would exceed width of Baker Rd.
in places)
Cross bonding systems include surge arrestors and other equipment mounted in
underground link boxes that require testing at regular intervals (usually annually).
For that purpose that equipment is located within pits as shown below which, for
ready access and safety to testing staff, are located away from trafficable roads
in footpaths – see below.
In these situations there would be no alternative but to install link pits together
with joint bays and pits for optic fibre cables (if fibres were to be part of the cable
installation) in road ways.
Appendix 6
The current rating of high voltage (HV) underground (U/G) power cable circuits is,
primarily, influenced by the environmental factors and cable losses.
Both factors are fully considered for determination of cable type and installation
particulars by taking into consideration the economic aspects related to the cost of
materials, installation of cable and accessories, running cost (whole life cost),
capitalised cost of losses and ancillary equipment such as bonding, condition
monitoring systems and compensating equipment.
a. Environmental Factors
The most specific factors which have a greater impact on cable current rating or
loading capacity are as follows:
• Soil thermal resistivity (TR) under the most severe climatic conditions in
respect to water (humidity) content
b. Installation Particulars
Extra high voltage (EHV) power cable circuits (including 220kV) are
manufactured in form of single-core cables which could be installed in trefoil or
flat formations.
The installation option is selected to correlate the cable type /conductor size with
the environmental parameters to get the required cable carrying capacity.
This type of cable configuration has the advantage of minimising the sheath
circulating currents induced by the magnetic flux linking the cable conductors and
metallic sheath or copper wire screens. This configuration is generally used for
cables of lower voltages (33 to 132kV) and of smaller conductor sizes
However, for EHV cable systems the trefoil formation is not appropriate for heat
dissipation because there is an appreciable mutual heating effect of the three
cables.
The cumulated heat in cables and cable trench has the effect of reducing the cable
rating and accelerating the cable ageing
In order to improve the natural heat dissipation from around the cable circuits the
three single-core cables could be installed in flat formation (Fig2). This
configuration allows for a significant increase of current rating of EHV cable circuits.
Fig. 2: Typical installation configuration of single-core power cables in flat
formation
2. Electrical Losses
Based on the location were they are generated and the generation cause the
electrical losses could be qualified as current and voltage-dependent losses.
For a simplified cable system (land cable circuit) the three main cable
component responsible for electrical losses are the conductor(s), the insulation
and the metallic sheaths or/and the metallic wire screens.
2.1 Conductor Losses
Conductors losses are ohmic losses, i.e. heat (Watt/meter) generated by the
current flowing in the cable conductor(s) and are calculated with the following
formula:
Wc = I2 Ra.c
The A.C. electrical resistance (Ω) is dependent, in addition to the D.C resistance
(Rd.c) on skin (ys) and the proximity (yp) effects which are responsible for the
uneven distribution of load current across the conductor cross sectional area, so
the Ra.c resistance could be defined as:
Proximity effect (yp) is generated by the magnetic field produced by the currents
flowing in parallel cable conductors of another cable circuit or other parallel
current carrying conductors. The associated magnetic field embraces that
conductor and at the same time it encircles the parallel conductors in close
proximity.
The effect is explained by the fact that when two conductors carrying alternating
current are parallel and in close proximity, the current densities on the inner area
(side facing each other) are smaller than the current density flowing in the outer
area (remote side) of the conductors due to the difference in magnetic flux
densities cutting the conductor’s cross area.
So, the A.C. conductor resistance is defined by the D.C resistance and the skin
and proximity factors as indicated by the following formula:
The calculation of skin (ys) and proximity (yp) effect factors is based on the
empirical formula given in the IEC 60287 Standard
The proximity effect factor (yp) is determined by the cable D.C. resistance,
system frequency, cable spacing and cable diameter while the ys is influenced
only by conductor d.c resistance and system frequency:
ys = ƒ (R’ , f)
yp = ƒ (dc , R’, s , f)
The skin and proximity effects could be ignored for small conductors carrying low
currents, however for high rating cables requiring large conductors these effects
are significant and it is essential to include design feature to compensate their
effect.
The “Milliken” or “Segmental” conductors, which consist of several individually or
alternated insulated sector shaped strands, provide the desired solution (Fig. 3).
Cable Cable
conductor Insulation
(Milliken)
Both, the charging current and dielectric losses are voltage-dependent and they
are generated in cable insulation at any time the cable is connected to the grid.
The charging currents are generated by the cable itself and produce a certain
amount of losses which, in combination with the system reactive power generate
losses reducing the flow of active/real power (MW).
The charging current charges and discharges the cable (capacitor) 50 times per
second. While the charging current is a reactive current the dielectric losses are
determined by real power currents.
The charging (IC) and resistive (IR) currents flowing through the cable insulation
are calculated with the following equations:
10
c=
18 ln Di
dc
C = cable capacitance
ω = 2πƒ
ƒ = system frequency
Uo = phase voltage
tanδ = dielectric power factor
R = insulation resistance
ε = dielectric constant
Di = insulation diameter
dc = conductor diameter
For high and extra-high voltage cables the dielectric losses (Wd) could be
relatively high and may have significant contribution to in determination of cable
ratings
The cable dimensions and the insulation dielectric constant are the basic factors
responsible for the size of capacitance.
Sheath losses are current-dependent losses and are generated by the induced
currents when load current flows in cable conductors.
The sheath currents in single-core cables are induced by “transformer” effect; i.e.
by the magnetic field of alternating current flowing in cable conductor which
induces voltages in cable sheath or other parallel conductors.
The sheath induced electromotive forces (emf) generate two types of losses:
circulating current losses (λ1’) and eddy current losses (λ1’’), so the total losses in
cable metallic sheath are: λ1 = λ1’ + λ1’’
The eddy currents circulating radially and longitudinally of cable sheaths are
generated on similar principles of skin and proximity effects mentioned in relation
to the conductor Rac resistance; i.e. they are induced by the conductor currents,
sheath circulating currents and by currents circulating in close proximity current
carrying conductors.
Cable
sheath
Eddy currents
in cable sheath
They are generated in cable sheath irrespective of bonding system of single core
cables or of three-core cables
The eddy currents are generally of smaller magnitude when comparing with
circuit (circulating) currents of solidly bonded cable sheaths and may be neglects
except in the case of large segmental conductors and are calculated in
accordance with formulae given in the IEC60287, which for simplification of this
document is not presented.
Circulating currents are generated in cable sheath if the sheaths form a closed
loop when bonded together at the remote ends or intermediate points along the
cable route.
These losses are named sheath circulating current losses and they are
determined by the magnitude of current in cable conductor, frequency, mean
diameter, the resistance of cable sheath and the distance between single-core
cables; i.e. the mutual inductance, calculated with the following equation:
Is = Es / (Rs2+ Xm2)1/2
Es = I Xm
Xm = ωM x10-3
M = 0.2 ln (2S/dm)
Where,
I = conductor current
Xm = inductive reactance per phase including the self inductance of the conductor
and the mutual inductance with other conductors.
M = mutual inductance between conductor and sheath
s = Cable spacing
dm = sheath mean diameter (m)
Is = circulating current
Rs = Sheath resistance
The actual calculation of circulating currents need to take into consideration the
magnetic influence of the conductor currents in all three single core cables
(conductors and sheaths), the mutual impedance between cable and sheath and
between all three cables.
In addition, for multiple cable circuits the aspect is further complicated by the
magnetic interference of circuits in close proximity. As a consequence the
calculation magnitude of induced voltages and circulating currents is done by
using specialised computer routines as indicated in the IEC60287. The cable
system and the interconnecting network represented by distributed parameters
(Impedances) and the hypothetical electrical occurrences (power frequency or
fast transients). The general model is quite complicated and requires some
computer programming and use of specialised software.
λ =I R
1
R S
2
S
(Eddy currents not included), quantity which is defined as
I C C
The general equation for calculation of current rating (100% load factor) is:
By computing this equation it can be defined ∆Θ, the cable conductor maximum
permissible temperature rise above the ambient in the following form:
∆Θ = (I2R + ½ Wd) T1 + [I2R (1 + λ1) + Wd] nT2 + [I2R (1+ λ1 + λ2) + Wd) n (T3 +
T4)
It is seen that the “Loss Factor or power loss factor – λ1” as generated by the
circulating currents in cable metallic sheath is impacting on the heat crossing the
anticorrosion jacket and soil thermal resistance before being dissipated in air.
Single core distribution power cables are normally installed with cable metallic
sheaths or metallic copper screens solidly bonded to earth at both ends.
However, in cases of high and extra high voltage single-core cables installed in
flat formation the circulating currents could be as high as the current in cable
conductors, i.e. several hundred Amps especially if the cable sheaths would be
solidly bonded to earth at both ends.
In order to minimise the sheath circulating currents the single-core cables are
very often laid in close touching trefoil formation. However, as the three cables
have a considerable heating effect upon one another the heat dissipation is very
poor.
In order to increase the rate of heat dissipation the obvious solution would be to
increase the spacing between cables, regardless if installed in trefoil or flat
formations, aspect which in return would have a direct effect of an increased
magnitude of circulating currents. A proper balance of cable spacing must be
identified to optimise the two effects; circulating currents and heat dissipation.
The solid bonding system does not have a limitation impact on cable systems of
MV of up to 33kV but with larger conductor sizes and higher voltages the impact
is significant and alternative sheath bondedind systems need to be used.
For particular cases of short HV cable circuits (few hundred metres) the
technique of sheath special bonding systems involves earthing the single-core
cable sheaths at one point only and insulating all other points of the sheath from
earth, so that the circulating sheath losses are eliminated and the single-core
cables can be spaced apart to reduce their mutual heating effect without
increasing sheath losses.
V V V
0 0 0
1 1 1
(m) (m) (m)
A C B
B A C
C B A
However, this is not the case, because when single-core cables are installed in
flat formation the voltages induced in the cable sheaths of outer cables are
higher than the induced voltage in the middle cable and the vectorial (phasor)
summation is not zero. As a consequence it is not possible to eliminate the
circulating currents in a cable circuit where only the cable sheaths are cross-
bonded. The imbalanced phasorial voltage (Fig.7) is generating a residual
voltage which, in return would generate circulating currents.
Smaller induced voltage
than in the 1st or 3rd
minor section
Imbalanced
difference
When the cable sheaths of transposed cables occupying the same position in
circuit configuration are straight connected the vectorial summation of induced
voltage would be zero if the system would be of balanced parameters: currents,
spacing and length (Fig.8).
Y Y
B B
By connecting in series the cable sheath of the three phases (120° phasor
displacement) the circulating currents could be eliminated; the phasor sum of
induced voltages could be zero if the geometrical data of cable circuit is uniform
along the three cable sections.
UB A U AB B
A B
U OA U BC
UA UC
O=C O C
However, it is evident that in practice the circulating currents can not be totally
eliminated. There would be all sorts of site limiting conditions to install the cable
sections at equal spacing and equal length and as consequence a loss factor - λ1
– in range of 3% for direct buried cable circuits and 5% for cable in ducts are
considered realistic figures (IEC 60287). Even larger losses may be tolerated
based on client acceptance of higher losses balanced against capital expenditure.
The sheath currents and the induced voltages vary as a function of bonding
system, as follows:
The special bonding system requires that the metallic sheaths and cable
accessories (joints, terminations and connections to CMS – condition monitoring
system) are electrically insulated with respect to earth (radial direction) and
between two adjacent cable sections (longitudinal direction).
The cross-bonding of cable sheaths is made in specially designed boxes,
generically denominated “Link Boxes” where the incoming bonding leads (single-
core or concentric conductor cables) are cross-connected.
Concentric bonding leads between link boxes and power cable joints are
designed to minimise the surge impedance between cable sheaths and SVL
protecting the bonding system.
The link boxes are equipped with sheath voltage limiters (SVL) designed to
protect the cable outer sheath (anticorrosion jacket), insulating flanges and
barriers in cable accessories and all other insulating components of bonding
system, against transient voltages propagated along the cable system.
The effect of specially bonding systems is visible when comparing the cable
rating of cables installed in solid and cross-bonded systems.
The current rating of cable system of 132kV and above could be up to 50%
higher for specially bonded cable circuits. The rating is influenced by the
following three factors:
• Reduction of circulation currents
• Increased spacing between single-core cables with direct response of
improved heat dissipation
• Reduction of eddy current losses with the increase of cable spacing
However it is recognised that the specially bonding system increases the capital
and running (maintenance) costs of the cable system. The cost of the bonding
system for an average 220kV cable system could be in range of 1 to 1.5% of
material cost for cable and accessories.
Nevertheless these costs are compensated by savings in cable size and the
number of accessories dependent of the length of cable sections (bigger cable =
shorter length) installed in the system and the maintenance costs could be
reduced by acquisition of reliable cable bonding system including cable outer
jacket, joints (insulating barriers), bonding leads, link boxes and sheath voltage
limiters (SVL).
Sheath
Voltage
Limiters
(SVL)
Post
insulators
The basic factors influencing the current rating capacity of underground (U/G)
power cable systems is govern by three major factors:
The calculation of losses and current carrying capacity are based on well
established international standards (IEC 60287 and IEC 60853) or national
standards.
However, as the fine details of cable construction are very specific to each cable
type produced by each manufacturer, an accurate calculation of losses and of
current rating are performed exclusively by cable suppliers using personalised
computer programs and softwares
In order to verify the accuracy of cable rating and magnitude of losses the cable
manufacturers carry out full scale trial experiments simulating hypothetical
installation and loading conditions.
4 Bibliograpfy
i. Rating of Electric Power Cables – Ampacity Computation for Transmission,
Distribution and Industrial Applications. IEEE Press Power Engineering by
GEORGE J. ANDERS
ii. Electric Cables Handbook – BICC Cables, by G.F. MOORE
iii. Underground Transmission Systems – Power Technologies Inc. (J.A.
Williams) & EPRI (RW Samm).
iv. IEC 60287 – Electric cables – Calculation – Part 1: Continuous rating
equations (100% load factor)and calculation of losses
APPENDIX 7
An underground (U/G) power cable has the capability to store and release
electrical energy with the voltage variation; it works as a shunt capacitance
generating a capacitive current which is in quadrature with the resistive or
load current
This effect is quantified by the fact that when intended to supply energy to a
resistive receptor (active load consumer) in a radial network, via a power
cable circuit, it is needed to inject a higher current at the source to
compensate for cable capacitance.
I ω CU 10
_ 6
=
C
where:
• Ic = charging current (A/km)
• = 2 f ; f = System frequency
• C = capacitance per unit length (µF/km)
• U = Applied voltage (V)
As the capacitance and the charging current increase linearly with the
length of the cable circuits the generated heat losses by the charging
current could be as high as its entire thermal rating capacity. In other words,
it could be said that for long and uncompensated cable circuits the entire
cable rating capacity could be consumed by the circulation of charging
current; i.e. no real power transmitted without overheating the cable.
The length of a cable at which its thermal capacity was consumed by the
charging current is called “critical length” and it is calculated with the
following formula:
I 3
L 10 (km)
3
=
C ωC U
where:
• C = capacitance per unit length (µF/km)
• = 2 f ; f = System frequency
• U = Line (phase to phase) voltage (kV)
• I = phase current (A)
(CIGRE WGB1-19/2004)
P L
= S
2
G
_ (ω. C. L. U . 10 2 _3
)
2
[MW]
Where
• PL = Active power at load receptor (MW)
• SG = Apparent power at injecting point (MVA)
• C = capacitance per unit length (µF/km)
• = 2 f ; f = System frequency
• U = Line (phase to phase) voltage (kV)
• L = Length of cable (km)
(CIGRE WGB1-19/2004)
It could be seen that the critical length “LC” is determined by the system
voltage and frequency and by cable rating which is determined by the
conductor size, environmental and installation conditions and cable
capacitance.
The larger active current transmitted on cable the longer the critical length;
i.e. the charging current is of a lesser importance.
The calculated values of critical length and the loss of transmitted power, of
a 40km 220kV cable system, by using the above equations, are of some
significance for smaller cable sizes ( 300MVA rating) but for larger cables (
600MVA carrying capacity) the impact is small.
In Fig 1 is shown the typical critical length and the length at which the
current rating is reduced by 20% for major high voltage cables (138 to
500kV voltage steps) based on North American experience.
The voltage may rise, especially at low loads, due to charging current
flowing through cable series inductances (material polarisation) and through
system inductances (transmission lines and transformers); phenomenon
known as Ferranti effect.
The Ferranti effect is significant with long cables energised from one end.
QUALIFICATIONS:
• Diploma in Electrical Engineering, NSW University of Technology
• Post Graduate Studies in Protection Engineering.
• Management and business training in various Institutions including
Australian Graduate School of Management.
• Extensive experience in planning, design, asset management,
construction and maintenance of transmission and distribution voltage
underground cables and other network infrastructure.
LANGUAGES:
• English
• German – some capacity
EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
CAREER HIGHLIGHTS:
Specific highlights:
The design for this cable circuit includes provision for on-line
• Same as above.
Experience Head of Extra High Voltage Cable Department,
(cont’d) Electricity Ministry of Romania, Romania
11. “Preselection of cable type and cable manufacturers for the MetroGrid project in
Sydney Australia”. 2003 Jicable, Conference/Paper A.1.3.
12. “330 kV Cable System for the MetroGrid Project in Sydney ,Australia” - 2004
CIGRE Conference/Paper 302
14. “Condition Monitoring Systems for 330kV Cables Supplying, Sydney CBD” -
TechCon 2004 Conference Sydney
15. “Condition Monitoring System for TransGrid 330kV Cable” - Powercon 2004 –
Singapore
Prepared for
Name Date
Written by Jeff Carew 13/03/08
Reviewed by Michael Prance 13/03/08
Reviewed by Vanessa Ranjith 13/03/08
Approved By Joe Warren 13/03/08
CONTENTS
3. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................5
6.1 RELIABILITY
6.2 EFFICIENCY
6.3 MAINTENANCE
6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
6.5 TIMING AND CONSTRUCTABILITY
6.6 FUTURE PLANNING - UPGRADING THE TRANSMISSION CAPACITY
7. APPENDICES ........................................................................................................12
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Electrix has formed a relationship with Energy Action Pty Ltd for the purposes of
undertaking consulting work for the Contact Energy Waikato Windfarm. In this
relationship, Electrix has undertaken specific consulting services in relation to the
proposed overhead transmission line(s) which forms part of the overall consulting report to
be submitted by Energy Action Pty Ltd.
This report covers the section of works comprising the 220kV external transmission line
running between the substations located at Limestone Downs and Orton (Appendix A).
The transmission line will connect into the Transpower grid via a substation located at
Orton.
The most relevant aspects related to the design of overhead transmission lines include:
• Design Criteria (inter alia, number of circuits, route length, line rating, maximum
operating temp, nominal voltage, conductor type, earthwire system, structure
types, maximum electric field strength, maximum magnetic flux density, audible
noise level, radio frequency interference and easement width etc
• Line security status
• Reliability
• Terrain conditions through which the line passes
• Environmental impact of construction and final solution
• Rural nature of the project, aesthetic and visual impact
• Life cycle costs which include capital costs, cost of losses and maintenance costs
• Constructability and timing, including impact on local community during
construction
• Current technology and future upgrading
The scope of this study is to evaluate the construction options and cost of a proposed
double circuit overhead line along a proposed corridor
3. INTRODUCTION
The main transmission link to the Grid is proposed to be 220 kV. Current plans are for the
link to be a double circuit overhead line on lattice tower construction.
CEN has engaged Energy Action Pty Ltd to provide expert advice on the practicability of
undergrounding and together with Electrix to provide comparisons (including advantages
and disadvantages) between overhead lines and underground cables.
The overhead line proposal comprises a line length of approximately 25 km and 84 towers
carrying a dual circuit configuration. The route has been selected with the following criteria
in mind:
• To follow the most direct route and to minimise the visual impact by utilising the
terrain. For example towers are located in valleys and below ridge lines where
possible.
• To minimise the impact on areas of environmental, ecological or archaeological
significance
• To consider property boundaries, access routes and dwellings.
• To consider the constructability of the line and to minimise the impact on the local
community during construction.
Number of circuits 2
Route Length 25km
Line Rating approx 518MVA
Maximum Operating Temp 75 deg
Nominal System Voltage 220kV
Conductors Twin Goat ACSR @ 460mm spacing (initial design
basis)
Earthwire System Single overhead earthwire (probably SC/AC Skunk)
Possible OPGW
Structure Types Double circuit lattice steel tower, Standard
Suspension, Light Strain, Angle/Heavy Suspension,
Heavy Strain/Deadend
Maximum Electric Field Strength As per ICNIRP Guidelines
Maximum Magnetic Flux As per ICNIRP Guidelines
The route chosen at this stage of the analysis appears to meet all the criteria listed above.
A desktop analysis combined with site visits did not highlight any significant alignment
issues and therefore at this stage, the proposed alignment is the most effective. There
may be some lower level improvements to be made once final design commences.
The life cycle cost analysis for this study includes the following:
• Design costs
• Planning and consent costs
• Initial capital cost of project
• Operational costs including maintenance, and energy losses
• Fault costs
The Net Present Value is calculated over a 40 year period as this is the typical life cycle of
an underground cable. This cost analysis is relative (i.e. costs that are expected to be
similar for each option are not included in the study).
Design Costs
It is anticipated that the design costs of the overhead line will be similar to the design cost
of the underground cable and are thus not examined.
The planning and consent costs of the overhead line option will obviously have the
additional involvement of negotiations with stakeholders, in particular landowners with
towers on their properties. Public forums and notifications are expected to be more time
consuming, with more objections being raised. It is expected that an additional 2 people
for a period of 4 months will be required as compared to the underground option. This
equates to an additional 1300 man hours and a cost of $ 200K. This does not include the
opportunity cost of the lost time.
A comprehensive costing of the proposed overhead line has been performed. Based
upon Electrix’s experience in the construction of transmission lines, the following cost
breakdown will apply. Appendix B shows a more detailed breakdown of the costs.
These costs have been developed from actual construction cost as experienced by
Electrix over the past 5 years. Please note these prices are based upon a preliminary
design, typical foundation types and typical tower types as shown in Appendix E.
Detailed design and geotechnical information may have a significant effect on the final
pricing. All costs are at current prices and subject to final design.
Maintenance costs
Appendix D shows the calculation of losses for the transmission line based upon the
design criteria. If we assume the average generation will be 300MVA then the following
losses apply
Overhead transmission lines are subject to planned and forced outages. It is reasonable
to assume that a new transmission line should operate better than the current existing
lines in the grid which are nearly all 40 to 50 years old. The failures rates over the past 10
years are shown below
Actual sustained recorded forced outage rate for all Transpower 220kV lines1
Forced outage rate 0.34 per 100km/annum taking 1.808 hrs to repair
Planned outage rate 0.92 per 100km/annum taking 17.45 hrs to repair
By assuming that the rate for this particular case is similar to that of the aging Transpower
grid, then the costs would not be any worse.
Assuming each outage requires a 10 man team to repair, the costs associated with
outages are:
The net present value is based upon the planning costs, the initial capital cost, the annual
maintenance costs and the fault costs. A capitalisation index of 5% is used with a term of
40 years. Appendix C has the detailed calculations
As can be seen from the above the overhead transmission line has a Net Present Value
of:
Net Present Value for Overhead Line
n 1
j
NPVoh := Ci.oh + Cfut.oh + ∑ (Co.oh + Cf.oh ) ⋅
1 + i
j=1
6
NPVoh = 65.990 × 10
6
Ci.oh := 31.961 ⋅10 Initial Investment for overhead line ($ NZ)
6
Cfut.oh := 12.8 ⋅10 Future capital replacement costs ($ NZ)
1
Transpower-Asset Development group-“Comparison of the reliability of a 400kV Underground
Cable with an overhead line for a 200km Circuit”.-2005
Page 8 of 23 13 March 2008
Rev 5
Waikato Wind Farm Project Overhead Transmission Line Evaluation
i := 5 % Capitalisation Index
6.1 Reliability
A measure of underground and overhead transmission line reliability is the rate at which
they fail or are subjected to outages. Outages can be forced (due to a problem on the
network), or planned. Overhead transmission lines are often subjected to transient faults
which are normally cleared via an auto reclose. These faults are not considered in this
analysis as they are normally cleared within a few seconds.
Outage rates are measured by considering the number of outages per 100 circuit
kilometres. Transpower prepared a report which highlighted the outage rates for forced
and planned outages2.
Since these figures are a record of the 10 year period between July 1992 and June 2004,
they are considered appropriate for this analysis. The results are as follows:
Due to the lack of data for New Zealand, figures from the report Commission of European
communities - Background Paper- Undergrounding of Electricity Lines in Europe Brussels
10 December 2005 are used for this analysis and, indicate the following:
This figure was confirmed by a DISCAB Group on figures over the past 12 years and was
presented at the ICF Congress in Barcelona. Other reports including CIGRE and various
American studies show varying rates from 1.4 to 4.1 faults per circuit kilometre.
2
Transpower-Asset Development group-“Comparison of the reliability of a 400kV Underground
Cable with an overhead line for a 200km Circuit”.-2005
Page 9 of 23 13 March 2008
Rev 5
Waikato Wind Farm Project Overhead Transmission Line Evaluation
For this analysis the rate of .072 has been used which equates to the following expected
outages for a 25 km long overhead line and a 38 km long underground cable.
From the above it is evident that underground cables have a better reliability rate based
upon forced outages (European figures), but require more planned outages. In addition
there are reports which indicate the reverse, depending on the sample size, type of cable
analysed etc. However for the purposes of this report and based upon recent
developments in cable technology, the figures used are believed to be representative.
Repair Times
Repair time is another factor to be considered under reliability. The repair of overhead
lines is significantly shorter than that of underground cables. In addition, “live-line”
maintenance can be performed on overhead lines, thus reducing the duration of the
outages.
Results for the last 10 years from Transpower’s records for overhead lines show the
following
Studies conducted by consultants Meritec show the following repair times for underground
cables.3 This is indicative for New Zealand conditions.
Based upon the failure rate and the repair times, availability per unit can be calculated.
This is based upon the outage rate and the total number of hours per year. Using the
figures above, the following availability per unit is expected.
3
Meritec Report, Repair Scenarios for 220kV and 110kV Cable Installations” November 2001
Page 10 of 23 13 March 2008
Rev 5
Waikato Wind Farm Project Overhead Transmission Line Evaluation
6.2 Efficiency
The efficiency of a transmission system is dependent upon the losses. For overhead
transmission lines, aluminium conductors are used mainly for weight purposes. Using a
dual transmission system greatly reduces the impedance of the circuit and hence the
losses.
In underground cables copper conductor is often used which has a lower electrical
resistance than aluminium. However, due to the fact that cables are buried, the heat
generated needs to pass through the soil to reach the surface where heat is dissipated.
Soil thermal resistivity plays an important part in heat dissipation and cable rating.
Appendix D shows the calculations of the losses associated with the overhead
transmission line.
6.3 Maintenance
As discussed above, repair time for overhead lines is measured in hours whereas repair
times for underground cables is measured in days. Overhead lines require a significant
amount of long term routine maintenance as well as ongoing unscheduled maintenance
which includes vegetation management, patrols, access maintenance, fault patrols,
climbing deterrent maintenance, minor steel replacement etc. The maintenance schedule
for an overhead line is typically as follows:
The total cost of the above work is estimated at $50k per annum
Overhead transmission lines are large structures and create a visual impact. This is
known as “visual” pollution and may form the basis of discontent for landowners and the
public. However, in this particular design every measure has been taken to minimise the
visual impact by keeping structures below ridgelines and out of sight where possible. The
route has been selected to minimise the impact on any natural bush, areas of
environmental, ecological or archaeological significance.
The terrain in the region is fairly remote, undulating and rural. Construction of a
transmission line through this terrain is constricted by access to the tower sites. In some
cases access will be only by helicopter due to the restrictions resulting from native bush
and the terrain.
The wind farm has the potential to increase generation capacity by 110MW from the initial
540MW. If this generation capacity is achieved, the transmission circuits will need to be
upgraded or catered for at the initial design stage.
The thermal ratings of existing overhead transmission lines can be increased (provided
that the static components of the line are appropriately rated) by re-tensioning the line to
allow a higher operating temperature.
Underground cables do not offer the same flexibility and any increase in thermal capacity
will have to be catered for during the initial design stage.
7. APPENDICES
Appendix A
6
Ci.oh := 31.961 ⋅10 Initial Investment for overhead line ($ NZ)
6
Cfut.oh := 12.8 ⋅ 10 Future capital replacement costs ($ NZ)
6
Co.oh := 1.233 ⋅10 Operational costs for overhead line including losses and
Maintenance per annum ($ NZ)
3
Cf.oh := 4.171 ⋅10 Fault costs for overhead line per annum ($ NZ)
6
Ci.ug := 367 ⋅ 10 Initial Investment for Underground Cable ($ NZ)
6
Co.ug := 1.137 ⋅10 Operational costs for underground Cable including losses and maintenance per
annum ($ NZ)
3
Cf.ug := 20 ⋅ 10 Fault costs for underground Cable per annum ($ NZ)
i := 5% Capitalisation Index
n 1
j
Cbe := Ci.oh + Cfut.oh + ∑ ( Co.oh + Cf.oh − Co.ug − Cf.ug ) ⋅
1 + i
j=1
6
Cbe = 46.137 × 10
n 1
j
NPVoh := Ci.oh + Cfut.oh + ∑ (Co.oh + Cf.oh ) ⋅
1 + i
j=1
6
NPVoh = 65.990 × 10
n 1
j
NPVug := Ci.ug + ∑ ( Co.ug + Cf.ug ) ⋅
1 + i
j=1
6
NPVug = 386.853 × 10
Voltage := 220 kV
Power
CircuitCurrent :=
Voltage⋅ 3
CircuitCurrent = 1.359 kA
3
CircuitCurrent ⋅ 10
PhaseCurrent :=
2
Amps
PhaseCurrent = 679.699
PhaseCurrent
SubconductorCurrent :=
2
1.1
TotalLoss := ( PowerLoss ⋅ 25 ⋅ 2) ⋅ + 10% For corona losses and conductor length
1000
TotalLoss = 4154.548 Kw