Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM-GS-809-0720 � incur significantly longer and more frequent outages due to the intensive maintenance regimes that would be required to maintain the existing assets in service (whilst recognising that this approach is almost certainly unlikely to be successful); � not align with Transend’s policy to utilise dead tank circuit breakers when replacing 110 kV live tank current transformers and circuit breakers; and � not align with the recommendations made in the respective asset management plans for the primary and secondary assets. 7.1.4 CONCLUSION Although this option may have lower initial capital cost, it is not the preferred option because it does not ensure the reliable operation of Knights Road Substation. 7.2 OPTION 2: REPLACE SELECTED ASSETS IN-SITU 7.2.1 SCOPE The scope for this option includes the replacement of the following assets in 2014: � in-situ replacement of assets that are known to present a significant safety risk, including post insulators, voltage transformers and current transformers; � replacement of the existing live tank circuit breakers with dead tank units with integral current transformers; � replacement of voltage transformers in-situ; � replacement of multi-piece post insulators with new units in-situ; � replacement of all droppers with aluminium conductor and compression fittings; � replacement of the identified protection and control schemes; and � implementation of revised maintenance practices. The capital cost of this option is $7.44 million ($June 2007). 7.2.2 BENEFITS The benefits for this option are that it: � allows Transend to achieve the capital expenditure objectives; � addresses the safety and performance issues associated with the 110 kV assets identified in section 4 of this document, in particular the 110 kV voltage transformers and post insulators; � addresses other performance, reliability and design issues identified in section 4; and � reduces the ongoing maintenance requirements and costs associated with the site. 7.2.3 DRAWBACKS The option has the following drawbacks: � higher initial capital cost than option 1. 7.2.4 CONCLUSION This option is technically viable. © Transend Networks Pty Ltd 10 of 13
0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM-GS-809-0720 7.3 OPTION 3: STAGED REPLACEMENT OF SELECTED ASSETS IN-SITU 7.3.1 SCOPE The scope for this option is essentially the same as option 2, but implemented using a staged approach based on transmission circuit criticality. This option includes: � initial replacement of assets that have an assigned transmission circuit criticality rating of four or five (three bays); and � initial replacement of other assets that are known to present a safety risk, including post insulators, voltage transformers and current transformers; and � deferred replacement of the remaining 110 kV assets by up to three years (two bays). The capital cost of this option includes an initial $1.55 million ($June 2007) to replace critical assets and to address safety issues followed by a deferred capital cost of $6.36 million ($June 2007) to replace remaining 110 kV assets three years later. 7.3.2 BENEFITS The benefits for this option are that it: � allows Transend to achieve the capital expenditure objectives in the mid-term; � addresses the safety issues associated with the 110 kV assets identified in section 4 of this document; � defers capital expenditure associated with replacing the 110 kV disconnectors; � defers capital expenditure associated with lower criticality assets for up to 3 years; � addresses the performance issues identified in section 4 of this document, with the exception of those transmission circuits that have a criticality less than four; and � reduces the ongoing maintenance requirements and costs associated with the site. 7.3.3 DRAWBACKS The drawbacks for this option are that it: � results in a higher overall capital cost than option 2, primarily due to the use of live tank circuit breakers, contractor remobilisation and increased internal costs; � does not align with Transend’s policy to utilise dead tank circuit breakers when replacing 110 kV live tank current transformers and circuit breakers for two 110 kV bays; and � will need additional transmission circuit outages to undertake the works. 7.3.4 CONCLUSION This option is technically viable. © Transend Networks Pty Ltd 11 of 13
Page 1:
APPENDIX 5 Transend, Renewal capita
Page 4 and 5:
Renewal Capital Expenditure TNM-GR-
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Figure 4 - Overview of the Reyrolle
Page 16 and 17:
Table 3 - Circuit criticality ratin
Page 18 and 19:
Figure 6 - Capacitive voltage trans
Page 20 and 21:
Current transformer make / type Mod
Page 22 and 23:
1.6.5 Protection and control Renewa
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33: CONTENTS 0BInvestment Evaluation Su
Page 34 and 35: 0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM
Page 38 and 39: 5 CUSTOMER CONSULTATION 0BInvestmen
Page 40 and 41: � implementation of revised maint
Page 42 and 43: Table 1 - Summary of economic analy
Page 52 and 53: 7.3 OPTION 3 - STAGED REPLACEMENT O
Page 62 and 63: 4.8 BUS CONDUCTOR AND FITTINGS 0BIn
Page 64 and 65: 6 BENEFITS The direct benefits of r
Page 66 and 67: 7.2.3 DRAWBACKS The option has the
Page 68 and 69: Figure 2 - Option 3: single line di
Page 70 and 71: This option includes: � installin
Page 73 and 74: INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY 0BInv
Page 75 and 76: 1 BACKGROUND 0BInvestment Evaluatio
Page 77 and 78: 4.1 CIRCUIT BREAKERS 0BInvestment E
Page 81: � reduced burden on spare parts m
Page 85: 0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM
Page 90 and 91: � replacement of the 110 kV Meado
Page 96 and 97: � reduced burden on spare parts m
Page 104 and 105: 4.2 VOLTAGE TRANSFORMERS The 110 kV
Page 106 and 107: 4.3 CURRENT TRANSFORMERS 0BInvestme
Page 110 and 111: The drawbacks for this option are t
Page 113 and 114: INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY 0BInv
Page 115 and 116: 1 BACKGROUND 0BInvestment Evaluatio
Page 119 and 120: 4.1.2 TUNGATINAH SUBSTATION 0BInves
Page 121 and 122: 4.3.2 TUNGATINAH SUBSTATION The 110
Page 123 and 124: Tarraleah-New Norfolk No. 1 110 kV
Page 125 and 126: � the possibility of a 220 kV con
Page 127: Table 2 - Summary of Transend’s c
Page 132 and 133:
0BInvestment Evaluation Summary TNM
Page 134 and 135:
3.2.2 110 KV BUS BAR PROTECTION SCH
Page 136 and 137:
5. CUSTOMER CONSULTATION 0BInvestme
Page 138 and 139:
Table 3 - Summary of NPV cost analy
Page 140 and 141:
CONTENTS 0BInvestment Evaluation Su
Page 142 and 143:
� loss of back-up protection func
Page 144 and 145:
Page 147 and 148:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY TITLE
Page 149 and 150:
1 BACKGROUND 0BInvestment Evaluatio
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
INVESTMENT EVALUATION SUMMARY TITLE
Page 155 and 156:
1 BACKGROUND 0BInvestment Evaluatio
Page 157 and 158:
Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Transmission
Page 159 and 160:
CONTENTS Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Tran
Page 161 and 162:
1 BACKGROUND Burnie-Waratah 110 kV
Page 163 and 164:
2.3 MAINTENANCE Burnie-Waratah 110
Page 165:
Burnie-Waratah 110 kV Transmission
show all

Transend - Appendix 5 Renewal capital expenditure - Australian ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?