The graphs show a distribution of power flows for each of our Future Energy Scenarios, in addition to the boundary power transfer capability and NETS SQSS requirements for the next twenty years. ​

Each scenario has different generation and demand so produces different boundary power flow expectations. From applying the methodology in the NETS SQSS for wider boundary planning requirements (as discussed in chapter 2), we determine for each scenario:

• The economy criteria - solid coloured line

• Security criteria - dashed coloured line

• Current boundary capability – solid black line

Due to the NOA being published after the ETYS, the boundary capability line (red line) is prepared from the 2020/21 (previous year’s) NOA optimal path released in January 2021 which uses the 2020/21 FES and ETYS data. This is the best information available at the time of publication and will change annually and over time as the network, generation, demand and more importantly the NOA optimal path changes. More information about the NOA methodology can be found here. The 50%, 90%, Economy RT and Security RT are calculated from the 2021/22 FES and ETYS processes. Where the NOA transfer capability is not available, there is a black line that provides the current ETYS 2021/22 transfer capability​.

Note: Boundary capability line is affected by the generation and demand profiles within each FES background. Therefore, the graphs are provided for indicative purposes only and cannot be directly compared. ​

The calculations of the annual boundary flow are based on unconstrained market operation, meaning network restrictions are not applied. This way, the minimum cost generation output profile can be found. We can see where the expected future growing needs could be by looking at the power flows in comparison with boundary capability.​

On each graph, the two shaded areas provide confidence as to what the power flows would be across each boundary:

• The darker region shows 50% of the annual power flows

• The lighter region shows 90% of the annual power flows​

From the regions, we can show how often the power flows expected in the region split by the boundary are within its capability (red line). If the capability of the boundary is lower than the two regions over the next 20 years, there might be a need for reinforcements to increase the capability. However, if the line is above the shaded regions, it shows that there should be sufficient capability here and that potentially no reinforcements are needed from a free market power flow perspective until the shaded regions exceed the capability (red line).

Wider boundary B13 is defined as the southernmost tip of the UK below the Severn Estuary, encompassing Hinkley Point in the south west and stretching as far east as Mannington. The southwest peninsula is a region with a high level of localised generation and demand.​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2021/22 optimal path which uses the 2021 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021. The ETYS and NOA methodologies for this boundary are different and can result in different transfer capabilities.

The current boundary capability is limited to 3.4GW due to a voltage compliance constraint at the Indian Queens substation​.

It can be seen that until new generation or interconnectors connect there is very little variation in boundary requirements, and that the current importing boundary capability is sufficient to meet the short-term needs.​

The large size of the potential new generators wishing to connect close to boundary B13 is likely to push it to large exports and require additional boundary capacity.​

Boundary B14 encloses London and is characterised by high local demand and a small amount of generation. London’s energy import relies heavily on surrounding 400kV and 275kV circuits.​

The circuits entering from the north can be particularly heavily loaded at winter peak conditions. The circuits are further overloaded when the European interconnectors export to mainland Europe as power is transported via London to feed the interconnectors along the south coast.​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in black) is based on the ETYS transfer capability using FES 2021/22 data, shown below.

The current boundary capability is limited to 11.6GW due to a thermal constraint on the Grain–Kingsnorth and Grain–Tilbury circuits.

As the transfer across this boundary is mostly dictated to the contained demand, the scenario requirements mostly follow the demand with little deviation due to generation changes.​

The boundary requirements are close to each other across all four scenarios for security and economy required transfer. In both criteria, the required transfer is above 90% flows, meaning planning for these values covers all possible flows.​

Boundary SC1 runs parallel with the south coast between the Severn and Thames estuaries.​

At times of peak winter GB demand, the power flow is typically north to south across the boundary, with more demand enclosed in the south of the boundary than supporting generation.​

Interconnector activity can significantly influence the boundary power flow. The current interconnectors to France, the Netherlands and Belgium connect at Sellindge, Grain and Richborough respectively​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2021/22 optimal path which uses the 2021 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021. The ETYS and NOA methodologies for this boundary are different and can result in different transfer capabilities.

The current boundary capability is limited to 4.87GW due to a voltage constraint at the Ninfield 400kV substation

The interconnectors to Europe have a significant impact on the power transfers​ across SC1. A 2GW interconnector such as IFA can make 4GW of difference on the​ boundary from full export to full import mode or vice versa.​

The biggest potential driver for SC1 will be the connection of new Continental interconnectors. With their ability to transfer power in both directions, boundary SC1 could be overloaded much more than normal with conventional generation and demand.​

Across all four scenarios in the FES, the SQSS security required transfer follows a generally flat pattern, whereas the economy required transfer moves from exporting to importing in around 2023. The volatility of interconnector activity can be seen in the required transfers as the requirements swing from power flow south and north.​

The SQSS calculation of required transfers does not place high loading on the interconnectors so the transfers are not seen to peak at very high values.​

Boundary SC1.5 is a new boundary created between SC1 and SC2 to capture issues to the west of Nursling. The boundary crosses over the double circuits between Nursling – Mannington, Bramley – Fleet and Cleve Hill – Canterbury.​

At times of peak winter GB demand, the power flow is typically north to south across the boundary, with more demand enclosed in the south of the boundary than supporting generation.​

Interconnector activity can significantly influence the boundary power flow. There is a new interconnector connecting at Chilling this boundary captures.​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2020/21 optimal path which uses the 2020/21 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021/22.

The current boundary capability is limited to 5.56GW due to a thermal constraint on the Bramley - Fleet 400kV circuit​

The interconnectors with Europe have a large impact on the power transfers across SC1.5 as a 2.0GW interconnector can make 4.0GW of difference on the boundary if it moves from import to export.​

The volatility of interconnector activity can be seen in the wide spread of expected boundary flows depicted by the central darker band. Transfers (shown above) do not place high loading on the interconnectors, so the transfers are not seen to peak at very high values.​

SC2 is a subset of the SC1 boundary created to capture transmission issues specifically in the south part of the network between Kemsley and Lovedean.​

The relatively long 400kV route between Kemsley and Lovedean feeds significant demand and connects both large generators and interconnection to Europe. A fault at either end of the route can cause it to become a long radial feeder which puts all loading on the remaining two circuits which can be restrictive due to circuit ratings and cause voltage issues.​

Additional generation and interconnectors are contracted for connection below SC2 which can place additional burden on the region.​ The closure of Dungeness has contributed to voltage stability constraints in the region.

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2021/22 optimal path which uses the 2021 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021. The ETYS and NOA methodologies for this boundary are different and can result in different transfer capabilities.

The current boundary capability is limited to 4.0GW due to voltage stability constraints.

The interconnectors with Europe have a large impact on the power transfers across SC2 as a 2.0GW interconnector can make 4.0GW of difference on the boundary if it moves from import to export.​

The volatility of interconnector activity can be seen in the wide spread of expected boundary flows depicted by the central darker band similar to SC1.5.​

Transfers do not place high loading on the interconnectors, so the transfers are not seen to peak at very high values here either.​

The current and future interconnectors to Europe have a significant impact on the power transfers across SC3. The current interconnectors to France, the Netherlands and Belgium connect at Sellindge, Grain and Richborough respectively.​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2021/22 optimal path which uses the 2021 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021. The ETYS and NOA methodologies for this boundary are different and can result in different transfer capabilities.

The current boundary capability is limited to 7.72GW due to a thermal constraint.

The current and future interconnectors to Europe have a significant impact on the power transfers across SC3 with their ability to transfer power in both directions​.​

Across all four scenarios in the FES, the SQSS security required transfer follows similar patterns and is mainly lower compared to the economy required transfer. In general, the economy required transfer faces a decline over time, albeit it does not reflect the interconnectors uncertainties. The uncertainty of interconnector activity can be seen in the wide spread of the boundary flows depicted by the central darker band.​

Boundary LE1 encompasses the south east of the UK, incorporating London and the areas to the south and east of it.​

LE1 is characterised by two distinct areas. Within London, there is high local demand and little generation. The remainder of the area contains both high demand and high levels of generation.​ In particular, there are a number of gas power generators in the Thames estuary area and an interconnector to the Netherlands, while connected to the south east coast are a number of wind farms, interconnectors to France and Belgium, as well as nuclear and gas power stations.​

LE1 almost exclusively imports power from the north and west into the south east, and the purpose of the boundary is to monitor flows in this direction. With the existing and proposed interconnectors importing power from the Continent, power flows enter London from all directions, to the extent that flows across LE1 reduce and limited constraints are seen similar to those by B14 on the south coast boundaries.​

However, with increased number of interconnectors, and (in some scenarios) increased likelihood of them exporting power in future years, LE1 can become a high demand area, with any locally generated power feeding straight into the interconnectors.​

As such, the circuits entering LE1 from the north can become overloaded as power is drawn into and through London toward the south and east.​

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2021/22 optimal path which uses the 2021 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021. The ETYS and NOA methodologies for this boundary are different and can result in different transfer capabilities.

The current boundary capability is limited to 9.3GW due to a thermal constraint on the Rayleigh Main – Tilbury circuit.​

Across all four scenarios in the FES, the SQSS economy required transfer grows beyond existing boundary capability from 2023 and the expected power flows are less than the required transfer and the uncertainty of interconnector activity can be seen in the wide range of the boundary flows​

Boundary SW1 encloses South Wales is considered a wider boundary.

Contained within the boundary is a mixture of generation types including gas combined cycle, coal, wind and solar. Some of the older power stations are expected to close but new generation capacity is expected

Boundary flows and base capability

The capability line (in red) is based on the recommendations from the NOA 2020/21 optimal path which uses the 2020/21 FES and ETYS data as inputs. The 50%, 90% Economy RT and Security RT lines are based on FES 2021/22.

The current boundary capability is limited to 2.9GW due to a thermal constraint on the Imperial Park - Melksham circuits​.

South Wales includes demand consumptions from the major cities, including Swansea and Cardiff, and the surrounding industry.​

The SQSS boundary requirements are higher than the boundaries present boundary capability but the majority of the expected power flows stay within the capability. Therefore some constraints can be expected and some additional boundary capability may be beneficial.​