On the opposite side of the Road from Inverkip power station there are two large box type Vents around fifty yards apart at on the verge of the Main Road(grid Ref NS 199 709). I would assume tht these are connected with the underground resorvoir as mentioned in the SESCO main site detail of the above mothballed facilty.If these vents are indeed connected to the plants resorvoir then why two then agian why have vents for such a short connection.Any takers.Oh and incidentally cannot see the vents on the OS map for the area.
greenock - kif you are referring to the concrete water tank it is quite a bit higher up the hill than the vented buildings and cannot be associated with it. For some reason I have it in the back of my mind that they might be local substations.
You may notice there are no pylons between the power station and the sub station further up the hill. The two vents are access to the main bus bars/cables which carry the electrical supply from the station to the sub station. If my memory serves me correctly the electricity is generated at 23 kV stepped down and supplied to the sub station where it is converted to 500 Kv for distrubution through the national grid. The pipes from the fresh water holding tank may also come through the same access tunnels of this i'm not sure but would doubt this cause water and electricty don't realllly mix that well. Worked at Inverkip from 1976 till 1985 have been in the tank and the access tunnel.
The concrete holding tank was full of fresh water. Supplied at that time by the water board another public utility before nationalisation. The tank was not intended to supply the station with drinking water etc this was supplied through the normal mains water supply which would go to any commercial or domestic premises. The tank was a supply of water to support the three main boilers and three auxilluary boilers. To fill from empty or top up. The water was fully treated in the water treatment plant(situated between turbines 2 and 3) before use. This involved filtering and treating with chemicals before being used in the boilers(basicaly a DI plant). All very strictly controlled and monitored by chemists. When the tank was first filled with water cracks appeared in the concrete causing great concern to the contractor NPG and the SSEB. The tank was reinforced and the max level dropped(somebody maybe got the numbers wrong). Keep in mind the capacity of water contained in each of the boilers was enoromous(use that term cause i forget the numbers). To give you an example. The boilers are not constructed from the floor up they are suspended from the roof of the boiler house(the large buildings nearer the river). When they are filled with water they drop 24 inches due to additional weight of water thermal expansion etc. A fatality occurred during hydraulic testing of one of the boilers(think it may have been Unit 1). After hydraulic testing the boiler was being drained of water. A fitter was sent to remove an access door from the main steam drum which under normal circumstances would have a pressure behind it of 180 BAR when the boiler was in service. The doors are desinged in such a way that the pressure inside the vessel assists in the sealing from inside out rather than outside in(hope that makes sense). In this situation the reverse happened and an enormous vacuum was created due to the draining operation. The fitter removed the two holding dogs and hit the door with a hammer to break the seal. When the seal was broken it sucked him inside trapping his shoulder and upper torso. On site emergency services were called but the fitter died at the scene. Think he was employed by Clarke Chapman part of NPG at the time. A tragedy at the time felt by everyone. One of only two fatalities during the construction of the site. Hope this is of interest to you all. If you have any specific questions i will do my best to answer.
Another note the fifth flue in the chimney is not for emergency generators it's for the auxilluary boilers. Used for trace heating,oil pre-heating and general running of the station.
Ouch, that'd be a bad way to go. I guess it explains the warning signs:
I didn't know that the boilers were suspended, but it makes sense - there aren't massive supports on the ground floor for them. I thought they were suspended on the boiler level, though.
That notice brings back memories. Boiler level starts very near the roof of the building. There are basically 4 levels within the station 18m level 25m level 35m level 50m level all accessed by a very convenient lift. Only for personnel and lighter equipment. To accomodate the lift of heavier equipment there are hoist wells with electric winches. Boiler level starts at 50m plus in fact very near the roof of the building. The picture you have posted is situated on the 50m level near the steam drum access door where the chap was killed. The boiler is suspended above this level 55m plus. You may notice the CC Ltd in the bottom left of the picture. The notice was posted by Clarke Chapman Ltd.Very surprised it is still there all these years later. Used to float safety valves at 55m level noise was unbearable superheated steam at 180 BAR and temp 500c quite exciting.
Sounds fun There were several of those signs, on each of the steam drum doors - some of the doors had big locking bars over the dogs, I presume this was an extra safety feature.
The one bit I've never been able to find is the tunnel where the HV cables led to the substation. Is there even a tunnel, or are they just buried cables?
I have been down the access door from the vent side. I can't remember exaclty whats down there but the fact there is access tells you there is equipment down there otherwise why the access. There may be cable joints monitoring equipment down there. As for accees from the power station to the to the substation i think this is unlikely(never heard of it in my time there). Note of caution!!! A power station not only produces electricty it consumes it in vast amounts approx 30MW plus.. In order to get one unit on load there are countless pumps,valves,electric motors,pre-heaters in use etc before the station starts producing electricity. The cables in question are probably live i would not recommend any unauthorised intrusion into this area. It's more dangerous than the staion itself. If there is a fault on any of the cables you won't need to find the fault it will find you with deadly results.
I have been down the access door from the vent side. I can't remember exaclty whats down there but the fact there is access tells you there is equipment down there otherwise why the access. There may be cable joints monitoring equipment down there. As for accees from the power station to the to the substation i think this is unlikely(never heard of it in my time there). Note of caution!!! A power station not only produces electricty it consumes it in vast amounts approx 30MW plus.. In order to get one unit on load there are countless pumps,valves,electric motors,pre-heaters in use etc before the station starts producing electricity. The cables in question are probably live i would not recommend any unauthorised intrusion into this area. It's more dangerous than the staion itself. If there is a fault on any of the cables you won't need to find the fault it will find you with deadly results.
The thing about the flues puzzles me - I don't remember there being a fifth flue, and there definitely isn't one in the middle:
The access hatch to the roof of the chimney is right in the middle as well, so it's not possible that it was removed - is it possible that it fed into one of the four main flues instead?
The fifth flue can be seen clearly in the aerial views, but the description is difficult to pass in a few words (oddly enough, I'm looking at better phrasing at the moment as there is a revised page in hiding pending completion.)
Although it is indeed centrally mounted, it is not in the geometric centre of the stack, but is located on the circumference, between two of the main boiler flues - if that makes more sense
There are five flues in the chimney. They are clearly visible on Google Earth. The capped off flue was for boiler 4 planned but never constructed. The other three larger flues were for boilers 1,2,3 which were operational. The smaller flue was for the auxilluary boilers. The auxilluary boiler house is situated at the base of the chimney on the landward side.Although these boilers were smaller they were still a coniderable size maybe the size of a large detached house. All the boilers in Inverkip were fired from cold on propane gas. The gas storage tanks are visible again on Google earth to the seaward side of the chimney for obvious reasons BOOM. The main boilers then switched to heavy oil when the furnace temperature had reached the correct temperature. The auxiluary boilers ran on Diesel. Each of the main flues are lined with individual fire bricks. The chimney had to be flailed every year(dependant on service). This involved building a scaffold at the top of the flue and placing a beam across. A cable was then passed down through the centre of the flue with a weight and chains attached. A motor spun the cable and centrifugal force made the ends of the chains contact the lining of the chimney the cable was hoisted as it spun to the chimney top. After this had been carried out an SSEB engineer had to inspect the inside of the chimney to make sure no damage had been caused. This involved being hoisted up the inside of the chimney in an open top cage(bucket as it was called) this was done with one of the steeplejacks in attendance. Not a popular job. Funny story ! It took some considerable time to ascend from the base of the chimney to the top in a bucket. After completion of one of these inspections the bucket arrived under the beam at the top of the chimney. The steeplejack hoisted himself up onto the beam using the cable for assistance and offered his hand to the engineer to take the same route. Taking the stairs took a fraction of the time it did to descend in the bucket. The engineer flatly refused and insisted on descending in the bucket (any non trained steeplejack would). So off they went back down the chimney in the bucket. Another point may be of interest. The steeplejack companyy who carried out this very dangerous and skilled task were based in Fife they had the contract for all of Scotland. The foreman(who i had worked with at Inverkip) was killed later that year at Peterhead Power Station.
Interesting information TankCore. I am sure many of us had no idea of the scale of the plant involved nor of the complexity of lighting the boilers. I had rather assumed that they would be started by spraying the oil over a heated electriic element.
Yes they are the emergency generators. If my memory serves me correctly there are three of them. There are three of everything point being one in service,one in standby,one out for maintenance. Manufacutred by British Polar. All prime movers and main equipment are coloured to match the equipment associated with the main boilers and turbines. Green Unit 1 Blue Unit 2 Orange Unit 3. If my memory serves me correctly.
The foreman(who i had worked with at Inverkip) was killed later that year at Peterhead Power Station.
Was that the fatality that took place at the top of Peterhead's chimney some years ago?
(Peterhead was more fortunate than Inverkip, originally planned to use North Sea oil, price rises meant in a change to gas, piped directly from the Brent Field, which would otherwise have been flared off as waste because the Mossmorran processing plant was still to be built then - 1980 -and by 1984, oil became economic again. It has also been upgraded on numerous occasions, and is now very efficient (reported at 57% versus a typical 37%), but plans to run it on hydrogen and install carbon capture were dropped a couple of years ago, as the government then failed to make any serious commitments).
I was working up there at the time (no, not at the power station, in the town) and used to go touring the area in my down time.
Work was in progress at the top of the chimney, and one of the workers was killed in an accident. Unfortunately, the weather closed in at the same time, and it was not possible to recover his body for some days. I had already been along the road and shot some pics, and also viewed the workers by binoculars (before the mist rolled in), and had been impressed by how small they were in comparison to the top of the stack, 183 metres high.
Just after the accident, it was no longer possible even to see most of the chimney above the station, let alone the top, so no-one could even attempt recovery or investigation, and there were many onlookers to be seen at the roadside as I drove to and from the town each day. It was also reported in all the local news reports until the weather cleared and the body could be recovered safely.
Not sure of the year when the accident at Peterhead happened. But i would have thought late seventies early eighties. When working at Inverkip the steeplejacks used to go to the Wemyss Bay Hotel(stable bar) at lunch time for a few pints and spot of lunch. On returning to the station a senior SSEB engineer approached them with his H &SE hat on and commented i smell drink from your breath i hope you weren't drinking at lunchtime. Reply was in a broad Fife accent. Aye Ken wie had a few pints there's nae way you would go up a big chimney like that when yie were sober. Howls of laughter from all present engineer shook his head and walked away.Just a funny(but true) story not to take away any of the bravery or professionalism of these guys. They looked at converting Inverkip to gas but the design of the boiler furnace was not suitable. Something to do with calorific value and fuel to air ratio. Pity it never never materialised it was a great place to work.
It occurs to me that some of the disicussion in this thread might explain one of the rather strange stories associated with the power station, viz. the readying of the Gastor and Nestor for sea. Given the info about the gas pre heating of the Inverkip boilers it is clear that the Inverkip engineers would have had the skills and experience in maintaining the equipment necessary to handle largescale, high pressure gas installations and would have been ideally qualified to carry out such work on the ships. Given also the size of the diesel standby generators they would also have had the skills and experience to prepare cold layup engines for use. These facts could explain the apparently strange choice of the power station at the time.
TankCore also talks about the station was considered for conversion to gas. I always thought that gas powered stations were actually gas turbine powered as indeed at least some where but how common were gas fired boiler stations? Has another one of my illusions been shattered?
Note that the Inverkip work on the LNG tankers was only to reactivate them, and make safe for the trip to the French shipyard that was actually awarded the refit contract. "We" only got some crumbs.
There are different types of power station, and gas can be used in various ways, it is merely the fuel, and how it is used on the scale of a power station is determined by its cost at any given time.
If it's cheap, it can be used as an alternative in a suitably equipped station with boilers that can use either oil or gas. In relative term, these would be expected to be relatively large stations in terms of generating capacity, in order to make them thermally efficient, and therefore economic for the fuel being used. They would - at the time - be more expensive than traditional coal fired stations, and only brought on line to make up for seasonal variations and demands.
As you note, gas turbines can be used, however these are generally smaller and more expensive to run, so tend to be kept in standby, ready to be activated to meet unexpected demand, as their small size and lack of boilers mean they take relatively little time to bring on line, but only when needed because of their cost.
In Scotland, we have the best of all, as we have hydro, which can be turned on in minutes, or even seconds if already spinning and ready to placed online to meet a planned peak demand, and better still, there is out pumped storage - soaking excess base load at quiet times, and returning it when needed.
Did you know that pumped storage was actually part of the nuclear power system? Put in place to allow nuclear power stations to operate continuously, storing their output when not needed as it was generated, and returning it to the grid when needed.
Wonder if any of the No-Nukes Green Loonies ever thought of attacking Scotland's pumped storage hydro power stations in order to scupper the nuclear power plan?
In the summer, when we were in Wales, we went to the Dinorwic pumped-storage hydro power station - it really is an impressive place. It can go from zero to 1,320MW in 12 seconds...
The reactivation of the LPG tankers at inverkip would not have been project managed by the the staff at inverkip. It would have been executed by them under work instructions and direction from the ship owners or contractors employed by them. This in no way detracts from the skills of inverkip power station staff who in the main were multi skilled. Having come in the main from a shipyard background. A power station is like a ship only much bigger. It has all the same prime movers back ups etc as a power station only on a smaller scale. I think that the attraction of Inverkip as a location for reactivation was more probably due to it's location and suitability as a deep water berth. Inverkip was used in the main as a peak load station coming on mainly in the morning to assist the hydro stations. There is a popular myth that hydro energy is electricty generated for nothing apart from the capital cost of the equipment. This is not the case there is only so much potential energy stored in the way of water in the highlands of scotland. The generators in a hydro station are also pumps when reversed. So they generate elecricity during peak demand but consume elecricity when pumping the water back into the loch where it came from. How good was it when this was all owned directed and balanced by one publicly utility. Now it's all privatley owned by various competing companies where the prime objective is profit more the than the common good Resultant disaster. Power cuts have not happened yet but we are not far away. Watch this space.
The preceding post about hydro electric power stations is somewhat misleading, and needs to be clarified.
Only the pumps and generators of a pumped-storage hydro electric power station are reversible. Those of a conventional hydro electric station are much simpler, and therefore cheaper.
There are only two pumped storage schemes in Scotland, but almost 70 conventional hydro stations, where the water to drive the generators is obtained from an area which will have been dammed and flooded to provide the necessary capacity. A number of the conventional hydro electric stations were orginally built to serve aluminium smelters.
There are also smaller "run of water" schemes, where the power of a running river is captured using a weir or very small dam to create the necessary head of water to drive the generator(s).
A number of such small systems were installed to supply small communities which were too far from normal power lines, and a number of Scottish estates also installed their own small systems.
Until recently, it was considered that the extant hydro electric schemes had exploited all the potential sites where conventional systems could be installed, but the push for renewable has lead to a re-appraisal of Scotland, and a number of new sites are now being planned in readiness for approval applications.
Existing conventional hydro electric schemes (such as Sloy near the head of Loch Lomond) are also to be considered for upgrading to pumped storage - in response to the eternal problem of the holy god of wind power. This is being touted as a means of collecting and storing the energy that is lost when the wind blows at the wrong time, and wind turbines churn out energy that nobody can use (you can't just throw a switch and turn of a coal fired power every few minutes), and return when the same wind turbines are doing their impression of sculpure, and not producing any energy when there's no wind.
I'm not following developments at the moment, but you can read some notes on the subject from July, which contain a number of links to related articles: Busy time for renewables Hopefully at least some of the projects referred to will have moved on over the past almost six months.
I must say that in more than two decades, I have never hear anyone express the thought that hydro electricity cost nothing other than the cost of the equipment, so I don't think it's a "popular" myth, but it is certainly a myth. Although in the same time, I've heard many mention that nuclear was going to be "too cheap to meter"
Privatisation is not the problem - government pandering to the environmentalists and climate lobby in the hope of winning popularity is, as it has lots of talk, taxes, and punitive measures to cut consumption, but no joined up thinking for future energy as old existing schemes are decommissioned. It's own advisors are predicting blackouts...
But don't worry too much. Ed (cloud cuckoo land) Milliband (yes, he who is torpedoing Digital Britain) says renewable and nuclear will be meeting all our needs by 2016, so everything is fine: BBC NEWS | Politics | No power cuts danger - Miliband
By the way, my roof is in one terrible state - I think most of the damage is being done as those flying pigs have to land for rest every so often
Turning back to Inverkip, as noted, the technology involved in reactivating the tankers is much the same as for the station, and I was most impressed by whoever thought of bidding for (and winning) the work.
Nowadays gas fired stations are generally Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGT), these use a large gas fired turbine to turn a generator, the hot exhaust gas from the turbine are used to generate steam in a Heat Recover Steam Generator (HRSG or more simply a boiler!) and drive a separate steam turbine. Note the “gas” in a gas turbine refers to the hot gases used to turn the machine, these are generated by burning a fuel which confusingly can be a gas or a liquid ie you can get diesel powered gas turbines!
Peterhead was commissioned in 1980 with 2 conventional boilers and 2x660MW turbines, with the boilers being fired by either gas or oil, when it was first built it burnt NGLs from St Fergus which were later routed to Mossmorran (as Apollo stated), it did burn fuel oil for a while but like Inverkip the timing was poor making it expensive to run, latterly it burnt gas from a variety of sources including the Miller field which was piped in direct. In 1989 2x115MW Open Cycle Gas Turbine generators ie simple turbine and generator sets were added, these were more flexible to run and were fuelled by gas or diesel.
In 2000 3x250MW CCGT units with HRSGs were added as these are much more efficient than the conventional boilers. What makes Peterhead one of the most interesting stations in the UK and is perhaps unique in the world is that steam from the three CCGT units is fed into one of the original steam turbines thus it means it could generate much more steam then it could ever use but this gives it a high degree of flexibility depending on load and the cost and availability of fuels.
I think the proposed Hydrogen plant and CO2 capture scheme that Apollo mentioned was going to use the Miller field and pipeline. It was typical Government short sightedness which prevented it going ahead, we could have had a jump start on the rest of the world with a full scale pilot plant but once again we suffered from successive governments being incapable of producing a balanced long term energy policy.
As you’ll gather electricity generation in Scotland is a pet interest of mine and I’ve amassed a wealth of info on historical and current power stations which I’d be willing to share if anyone is interested. At the last count over 700 stations, private industrial and public with details of owners, locations, sizes, No of turbines, boilers etc and key dates. All I ask in return is that you let me know of any errors or additional info and don’t derive any commercial gain from it as a lot of the data is collated from various web sources. It’s in the form of spreadsheet so PM me an email address and I can forward you a copy. I also have a Google Earth KML file which was very kindly prepared for me by a poster on this site (he knows who he is) using his Google Earth wizardry, which people are welcome to as well.
I’m not sure if you are aware but there is a recently set up website called scotlandsplaces.gov.uk which allows you to crate and export google earth files created using searches of the RCAHMS database, this allows you to search a topic ie bunkers export it and it will plot all the listed bunkers on google earth with clickable links back to the detail and pictures on the RCAHMS web site. The search function is not great but it is a beta and comments are welcome. Personally I think it is great and if people can use it and make constructive criticism it will be a fantastic tool.
Should this thread not be renamed and become a Discussion Thread?
I am not sure whether they are in the process of demolishing the Kip oil tanks or whether they are renovating them. As you can see in the pics the seaward one appears to be totally stripped of paint. The middle tank is stripped to the south but I thought I saw the other side of it stripped yeaterday.
Inverkip is now being demolished - it's a slow process, but they've disconnected from the grid and are running on generator trucks, and now beginning to strip out. So they won't be renovating the tanks, they'll be preparing to cut them up...
Intriguing to see some slides of the Inverkip construction, now available in the pool, with more to be found on their Flickr home.
I have to admit that the initial thumbnail fooled me, and before I looked at the full-size version, had though that the demolition had suddenly taken a jump in the speed the work was being carried out at
There has been a lot of banging and crashing coming from the power station over the past few days. Externally it appears intact so I assume that it is the sound of the internal structure being demolished,
Does anyone have a date for the denolition of the chimney?
I would suspect the chimney demolition to be some way off, as this is potentially the most hazardous operation in terms of danger to those working below.
It will be interesting to see the method they choose, as a blow-down carries the risk of a mishap dumping a huge volume of spoil in the sea, which would upset the environmental folk.
Manual demolition would be time-consuming, and therefore costly by comparison.
Perhaps they will paint it brown, stick some plastic branches and leaves on it, and turn it into a camouflaged mobile phone mast and communications tower.
Seriously, if there was someone out there with a single imaginative brain cell in their head, they would add lifts and a viewing platform, and turn it into a viewing tower, to make a mint from tourists by selling the view from the top.
And 'we' in here already know just how good that view is
They're always carping on and on about increasing tourism to Scotland, but never actually doing anything to bring them in.
The Government cry is an aim is to increase tourism by 50% by 2015, but all we seem to get is more clone 'plastic' hotels, and higher prices through the addition of 'Value Added' tat, with the shameful aim of simply making more money from the faithful few that keep coming back, not attractions that encourage more people to come here.
They could make a mint from keeping the entire power station as a tourist attraction - just think of playing paintball in there
There's still a huge amount of stripping out to do before they get anywhere near demolition. I'd guess the crashing sounds were them demolishing the retaining walls around the oil tanks. They were half down a couple of weeks ago. I'm not sure how they're going to do the chimney, but however they do it they'll have to strip out the tonnes of insulation first - I'd be very surprised if the chimney wasn't the last thing to go.
There was quite a loud explosion the other day that came from the direction. I don't think I am hearing walls being knocked down, the sounds are more heavy metallic. It sounds like tanks or other machinery having their supports removed and then falling to the ground.
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Inverkip Power Station
Print Thread
Report to Moderator
Logged
Private message
There were several of those signs, on each of the steam drum doors - some of the doors had big locking bars over the dogs, I presume this was an extra safety feature.
as there is a revised page in hiding pending completion.)
