Blog

The decommissioning of an energy generation site is admittedly complex, time consuming and inherently hazardous. But as power stations worldwide reach their end of life – and economic and environmental pressures force others to close – such decommissioning projects are not only inevitable, but essential.

Richard Vann, managing director of RVA Group – and past president of both the Institute of Demolition Engineers and Institute of Explosives Engineers – recently explored the biggest challenges within this specialist arena with Energy Engineering. Read his thoughts from the article below…

1. Decommissioning is not simply the reverse of construction

The first obstacle should actually be one of the easiest to address and it comes down to mindset. The safe, cost-effective and environmentally efficient decommissioning of an energy asset is not simply the reverse of its construction. Demolition is an engineering-driven discipline and, whilst some will view it as a ‘unwelcome evil’, it is a part of the asset lifecycle and requires a very specific skill-set.

Many energy operators fail to dedicate the level of time, skills and resources truly required, but cutting corners will probably put lives, the environment and the commercial integrity of the project, at risk.

2. Bringing assets to a ‘known state’

Rarely are two structures the same in any industrial sector, and energy generation is no exception. Power stations throughout the country have been built at varying times, with different configurations and using multiple construction techniques. Some boilers are suspended, for instance, whilst others have been erected from the ground up. This site diversity is challenging in itself, but in the absence of detailed plans, the nature of that challenge escalates significantly.

It’s in the DNA of a demolition professional to problem solve but gathering information about the presence, location and type of hazardous insulation materials (HIM); attracting secure bids from the tendering demolition companies; and bringing assets to a ‘known state’ is far from straightforward, especially if drawings are non-existent, some structures have only been partially cleaned and the knowledge of site personnel has been lost.

Aside from appointing a competent team, the key advice here is to allow sufficient time and other resources at the outset of a project, to assess the level of residual product, any loss of containment and the structural integrity of the assets that remain.

3. Awareness of all options

Energy firms are experts at running power stations, but they’re not decommissioning specialists, and nor should they be expected to be. They cannot therefore know all possible routes that the project could go down.

The preparation of a costed feasibility and options study addresses this knowledge barrier and empowers operators to make informed decisions. Often commencing with a series of management workshops, it is an exploratory process which helps to uncover the key issues associated with a plant, project and site, before providing a clear view as to the true opportunity or liability of the works. The resulting report then usually highlights a number of technical, costed conclusions and recommendations as to the most appropriate route map for the assignment.

Elements of some smaller stations may be carefully dismantled for sale and re-erection elsewhere, particularly with rotating equipment for instance. Whilst there are cases where enhanced monetisation of an asset has been achieved, as the numbers of closed stations increases, it is rare in the energy sector to complete such deals. The sale for reuse avenue should always be a ‘plan B’, and rarely can be relied upon as the ultimate end of life route.

4. The presence of on-site services

Mothballed or partially closed sites will inevitably have power distribution grid infrastructures on site, which must often remain in-situ and undisturbed. Their location is likely to determine what else has to stay, which decommissioning methodologies can be used and the sequential roll out of works throughout the project.

The rerouting of utilities is sometimes essential, which is an achievable yet complex and arduous task. The time required to successfully execute this diversion exercise should not be underestimated.

5. Respect the role of technology

Demolition equipment has continued to advance over the years which means long reach excavators can reach newfound heights and drones can often provide a helpful inspection aide before people have to enter any vessels or work at height themselves.

The challenge surrounds knowing what to use and when, as limitations may be placed on whether a drone can fly in proximity to high voltage power lines or other sensitive equipment, for instance.

6. Demand is outstripping supply

For one of the first times in the history of the decommissioning profession, there is the risk of demand outstripping supply – an issue now being felt on a global scale. The number of projects coming to the fore is unmistakeable, due to mounting commercial pressures, ageing assets, geographical market shifts, stricter environmental and legislative compliance requirements, technical innovation and many other less tangible influences. Admittedly this is not just a trend being witnessed in the energy sector, but the matter of who is available to undertake the work is unquestionably one of the largest challenges currently faced by power station owners.

Great care and attention should therefore be taken to assemble a competent supply chain of decommissioning consultant, contractor, and specialists, where relevant.

7. Cost

The number of site owners that now favour a cost- rather than quality-led approach to decommissioning, is thankfully dwindling. The supply chain selection criteria is far more multifaceted than simply the bottom line impact of the chosen project team and methodological route map.

But still some clients – perhaps understandably – try to squeeze the financial parameters of the assignment. If these fiscal pressures risk compromising EHS standards, the outcome can be catastrophic.

8. H and S

Health and safety challenges are certainly not new, but they remain a constant priority when executing decommissioning projects large and small, particularly as assignments grow in complexity. Power station and even nuclear decommissioning projects are coming to the fore at a rate never before seen in the industry, so, quite simply, a robust EHS mindset needs to take precedence, irrespective of the wider pressures highlighted within this feature.

9. Environmental pressures

The adoption of proactive measures to protect the environment is becoming a global priority. When it comes to decommissioning works, there should therefore be no impact on the surrounding community and the project should now achieve a >97% recycling rate as standard.

10. CSR reputation

When a power station closes, the industry, media and general public will watch what happens next with a great degree of interest – if not scrutiny. So, linked to the previous point, energy firms must respect their duty of care to the surrounding neighbourhood, employees past and present, and the wider community. The ‘cost’ of liability – whether that is trespassing on a poorly maintained redundant site, a loss of containment, or worse – is immeasurable.

Not only is it ethically crucial that energy firms demonstrate a strong CSR stance – failure to uphold such an approach would have a vast impact on brand reputation too.

If you’re interested in speaking to someone at RVA Group about the contents of this article, or you’d like some decommissioning advice for your own project, get in touch via our website or call 020 8387 1323.

With decommissioning now a seemingly common practice in the oil and gas sector, it is imperative that site owners and operators acknowledge the complexities involved with projects of this nature. Where do the key decontamination challenges lie, what role does technology play and what insight can be gleaned from the analysis of both historic and current sector assignments? RVA Group’s managing director Richard Vann recently shared his thoughts on the topic with industry journal Tanks & Terminals – if you missed the issue, you can read the article in full below…

There can be no denying the hiatus in oil production that swept across many parts of the globe with force, around three years ago. Multiple refineries and storage facilities closed or downsized – either as part of planned strategic decisions or because there was no other commercially viable solution to maintain operations.

The shutdowns, whilst numerous, were managed differently, on a case by case basis. Some assets were mothballed in order to safely postpone any further decision making, at least for the short term. For other terminal owners, the priority was to move towards a safe but swift decommissioning project at the earliest possible opportunity.

Of the dismantling and demolition works that commenced, some schemes of course reached completion. Others however were limited in extent due to mounting commercial pressures, with tanks and terminals having now deteriorated to varying degrees as a result.

In the past 6-12 months, decommissioning specialists have been engaged to re-start a number of these paused projects, particularly in central Europe. So, the peak level of site closures may have long passed, but the volume of decommissioning work either recently or currently underway, is now significant.

The decommissioning drivers

The aforementioned hiatus arose, of course, because of basic economics. Oil prices fell – due to both political, as well as supply and demand influences. The uncertainty of what the future would bring consequently made it difficult for many oil, gas and petrochemical facilities – already working on tight margins – to sustain production.

Plant inefficiency is, of course, another catalyst for decommissioning activity. Terminals naturally start to reach the end of their design life and, as regulatory frameworks begin to dictate more frequent inspections and maintenance regimes at this point in their chronology, the scenario can soon become financially unmanageable. EHS (environment, health and safety) considerations also rise as plant conditions worsen, which represents a corporate and social responsibility burden that many operators are – understandably – unwilling to bear.

Deciding on a decommissioning plan

A feature for Tanks in Terminals in 2017 importantly drew attention to the fact that decommissioning should not be viewed merely as an extension of normal operations, or the reverse of construction and commissioning. It is an entirely different exercise that requires a comprehensive skill-set in order to undertake these inherently hazardous exercises safely, with minimal environmental impact, and to ensure the most commercially robust solution for the business during this potentially difficult period.

External specialists who take on such projects on a daily basis, can therefore provide a value-adding resource to help support operators with the industry’s decommissioning assignments. This involvement should be sought as early as possible, as sector- and discipline-specific knowledge could shape the entire direction of ‘what next’.

A feasibility and options study is a logical starting point for all involved. Often commencing with a series of management workshops, this exploratory process helps to uncover the key issues associated with a plant, project and site, before providing a clear view as to the true opportunity or liability of the works. The findings documented in the resulting report will then usually highlight a number of technical, costed conclusions and recommendations as to the most appropriate route map for the decommissioning assignment.

Whilst in many cases opportunities are limited, it may be possible to dismantle some assets for resale, for example. This is far from a straightforward exercise, as the decontamination, laser scanning, match-marking, physical separation, preservation, precise cataloguing and packing of the plant is often required, so that it can be meticulously reassembled.

The need for decontamination

Technical decommissioning articles commonly home in on the demolition phase of a project, with a great degree of attention quite rightly focusing on the complex methodologies involved with safely bringing a refinery’s varied structures to the ground. But it is crucial to pay equal thought to a more imminent phase of works – decontamination.

Given the time that may have lapsed since a tank, for example, was first mothballed, decommissioning teams face a significant hurdle when it comes to completing the decontamination of such a partially-cleaned structure. It is almost inevitable that the knowledge of the site’s own personnel will have long been lost, which means it is difficult to establish the known state of all assets. This is often the initial priority. It is highly likely that residual product may still be present and the longer a plant has been left, the greater the risk of hazardous atmospheres or a loss of containment. The potential for both safety and environmental issues to manifest is therefore very real.

As is the case with many strands of business activity, technological advancements are fuelling innovation in this respect. Drone technology, for instance, is aiding the safe inspections of tanks and terminals, during these initial planning and surveying stages.

As a general rule, the greater the degree of structural dilapidation, the higher the level of risk associated with vessel entry. So, it is far safer to remotely assess the integrity of a terminal that has not been sufficiently maintained for years, via a piloted drone, than it is for personnel to manually inspect the asset.

Structures can quickly become overgrown with moss and other foliage, for example, and the consequences associated with concealed holes in walkways or detached staircases, could be catastrophic if these hazards remained unidentified. Drones help to circumnavigate this problem, by determining safe access points and work areas for next-step on-site operatives.

This methodology is also relatively inexpensive; quick, as there is no need to erect any scaffolding or other fixed access equipment; and convenient, as it provides a ‘birds-eye’ picture of structures, however complex, without the need for excessive manpower on the ground. Any ethical decommissioning specialist would agree that it is far better to lose a dozen drones than it is for a single person to cut their finger.

If drones are flown over and/or within an even partially operational site, added precautions should of course be taken. Potentially explosive atmospheres must be clearly zoned, as it is likely that flights will only be permitted within predefined distances. Limitations may also be placed on whether the drone can fly inside a structure, if it could represent a possible source of ignition. To the extent of RVA’s knowledge there are not currently any ATEX-rated drones in the market, but manufacturers will surely move quickly to address this gap.

This is not to say that this technique will completely negate safety challenges, of course – drone inspections represent just one aspect, of a single phase, in a potentially lengthy project. But the anticipation of these and other such challenges, is key to being able to comprehensively manage them.

Decommissioning in practice

RVA has encountered a number of very different decommissioning projects in this sector, each with their own feasibility study outcomes and therefore each with their own defined course of action thereafter.

Fifteen years ago, for example, Total engaged RVA to specify the decommissioning works for three road and rail terminal distribution depots – Leeds, Langley and Sunderland (UK). Health and safety plans were carefully drafted for all, with the latter site subsequently sold to another operator. At Leeds and Langley, the sites were shut down and dealt with promptly, with the work carried out soon after and RVA adopting visiting roles thereafter to oversee the project.

When Murco’s refinery in Milford Haven (UK) closed in 2014, RVA was brought in to specify all work ahead of the site’s demolition. The day before the demolition was due to begin, the plant was sold to a company in Pakistan, with RVA later re-engaged to write the alternative dismantling specification. With this project, it was agreed that RVA’s involvement would cease when the contractor was engaged, but the piecemeal decommissioning, disassembly and export of the entire refinery is currently underway, with a reported completion date of Autumn 2018.

In the case of Petroplus, RVA produced a feasibility and options study for an 8.5-acre site in Teesside (UK) – the output of which was then used to formulate a detailed specification for the refinery decommissioning and dismantling works. Petroplus was placed into administration before the project could be executed, but the groundwork has been done for future use.

Fast forward to the present day and two costing studies are currently being undertaken by RVA on terminals in Europe. These will act as strategic management tools that will enable the site owners to make informed decisions about the best course of action for their redundant sites.

Reactive support

There are some instances where decommissioning activities are not pre-planned of course. In the case of Buncefield (UK) – when a catastrophic escape of petroleum caused a mass explosion which overwhelmed 20 storage tanks in 2005 – RVA was appointed by Amec post-trauma, to develop the required specification of work.

The Government authorised the use of Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) to extinguish the fire on the long-burning assets, but the foam itself added to the environmental impact of the disaster.

With buildings bent double, RVA therefore wrote the specification to deal with the safe dismantling of the unstable structures, as well as the cleaning regime required to sanitise the site of the foam, without disturbing the forensic evidence required to piece together the cause of the explosion. A reactive role was maintained over the 12 months that followed, as the distressed tanks and structures were carefully brought to the ground.

A competent supply chain

It is important to note that other heavy industries – beyond the realms of oil, gas and petrochemical refining – are currently experiencing operational challenges too. So, as further site closures are announced globally – necessitating even more decommissioning projects – finding a competent supply chain will become increasingly difficult.

However, there are a refined number of highly-equipped decommissioning consultants, project managers, decontamination specialists, demolition contractors and explosives experts, willing to travel throughout the world, to ensure these works are completed to the highest possible standard. All the site owner needs to prioritise, is their involvement.

If you would like to speak to RVA Group about the contents of this article, or you’re interested in decommissioning advice for your own project, please contact us via our website or call 020 8387 1323.

RVA Group’s operations director Ian Wharton has been awarded prestigious Fellowship status with the Institute of Demolition Engineers (IDE).

The Fellowship – which is granted by invitation only and is the highest grade of membership – marks Ian’s 24^th year in demolition project management. Having been a member of the IDE since 2003, the accomplishment represents his ongoing contribution to the profession, and his particular passion for ensuring EHS excellence remains the number one priority.

Commenting on the attainment, he said: “With more than 30 years in the process/chemical sector, in excess of 20 have been spent developing specialist knowledge and methodologies that ensure the safe and cost-effective executions of projects in the field of decommissioning, decontamination, dismantling and demolition. My experience spans roles on both the client and consultant side of inherently hazardous large-scale assignments, in the UK as well as overseas, and I feel extremely proud to have been recognised by my peers.

“Because IDE Fellowship is awarded at the sole discretion of the Council of Management, the achievement feels particularly significant. I am now the third member of the RVA team to become a Fellow which evidences the rich level of specialist demolition knowledge and engineering experience within the business.”

Alongside Ian’s senior responsibilities within RVA, he will continue contributing to and supporting the IDE with seminar deliveries, in a bid to promote the profession and strengthen supply chain dialogue on a global basis.

RVA Group is delighted to announce that there is a new face within our growing team of consulting engineers.

Jack Pierce joins the company with a varied technical, planning and management background. His career to date has seen him work throughout the UK and overseas, in roles including quantity surveying, maintenance coordination at the Seal Sands ConocoPhillips oil terminal and project engineering with a civils firm servicing the petrochemical sector. He is also an experienced rope access technician meaning he is more than familiar with EHS management in inherently high-hazard industries.

Jack has practical demolition, dismantling, contract management, CDM coordination, asbestos removal and high hazard plant maintenance skills – to name just a few other CV highlights – in addition to his wealth of professional qualifications.

He has been appointed into a project management position and is currently involved with RVA’s ongoing work at SABIC.

Commenting on Jack’s arrival, RVA Group’s managing director Richard Vann said: “It is not always easy to find great talent in the decommissioning supply chain. Jack possesses extensive experience and a much-needed skill-set that will enable him to provide a value-adding contribution to RVA’s complex projects.

“When we were acquired by EPH in late 2017 we already had a busy portfolio of work ahead of us. We have not only maintained this momentum – we’ve built on it. So, as we prepare to support clients with upcoming assignments throughout Europe and beyond, it is crucial that there are exceptional project managers within the team. We’re delighted to have him on board.”

RVA Group’s managing director was asked to pen a feature for International Construction recently, which explored demolition trends on an international scale. If you missed the write up, you can read it in full here…

As heavy industries continue to evolve worldwide, many assets naturally become redundant. The difficulty, for the operator, is deciding exactly what to do next with these often inherently hazardous structures.

Navigating the associated safety, environmental and fiscal challenges is not easy. However, armed with the right skill-set, experienced demolition professionals can help to ensure the effective clearance of such plant, irrespective of the project complexities that arise around the globe.

When RVA worked on a project for the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR), it was the team’s dismantling expertise that was sought.

The global energy leader wanted to relocate a mothballed polypropylene manufacturing facility from Quebec, Canada, to Azerbaijan. But this demanding assignment required the decontamination, laser scanning, match-marking, physical separation, preservation, precise cataloguing and packing of the plant, so that it could be meticulously reassembled. Maintaining the operational integrity of every component was of course critical, as failure to correctly administer this process, could have resulted in this highly valuable manufacturing resource becoming nothing more than scrap metal.

Appointed by European Petroleum Consultancy (EPC), who ran the overall contract, RVA provided project management, technical engineering and EHS advice for the duration of the works.

Safety and environmental standards were paramount from the outset. Whilst most modern countries adhere to similar benchmarks in this respect, there are naturally varying international and even regional nuances to the law. Asbestos removal is regulated differently in Canada to the UK, for example. However, to ensure best practice and maximum peace of mind when undertaking such high-hazard projects, legislative parameters are only ever considered as setting the very minimum criteria. This is because the objective of any responsible demolition professional should be to exceed legislative compliance and ensure the highest achievable level of safety.

Canada was a new geographical territory for RVA and time differences added to the exacting nature of the project. With RVA engineers visiting Quebec – coordinating expertise with specialist engineers back in London – careful planning was essential to maintain efficient dialogue.

However, the effective execution of this complex six-month scheme resulted in 1,000 tonnes of equipment successfully making the 5,000-mile journey for reassembly in Baku.

On other occasions, the recovery of selected plant items, for transfer to an owner’s other site(s), is a by-product of a larger total site closure programme. This was the case for the clearance of a sucralose manufacturing plant on an 11-hectare site on Jurong Island, Singapore. Owned by Tate & Lyle, the client engaged RVA to oversee the decontamination, demolition and dismantling of the facility, prior to it being consigned to sister plants worldwide.

The project was bound by tight timescales, given a commercial driver for the client to exit the site in the most cost-effective way. The work was therefore planned sequentially with designated demolition areas handed over in a carefully phased manner. Potential sources of ignition were subject to strict controls, due to the nature of the chemicals housed nearby and the presence of some units which had to remain operational during the initial stages of the programme.

Here again, local standards were adopted as a regulatory compliance base for this project, however, global industry best practice was the non-negotiable the benchmark for the demolition contractor’s EHS regimes and technical methodologies. But delivering this approach can represent challenges – not least due to cultural differences and language barriers – so effective personnel relations, awareness training and communication were key.

Deciding on the optimum ‘next step’ for a site is far from a straightforward exercise, and a plan is usually devised following analysis of a costed feasibility study. The owners of Eggborough Power Station in Northern England first engaged RVA in 2015, for example, to help them explore the most efficient way to manage the decommissioning works of their 2000MW facility when it ceases generation in the near future.

Faced with various strategic options, the client has yet to decide the exact demolition approach for this major site. However, with eight cooling towers, one stack, significant levels of asbestos and the requirement for explosive demolition techniques as part of the overall scheme of work, the project will have to be carefully managed and executed by a competent team. With the current high level of coal fired power station decommissioning works underway or scheduled in the UK, the regulatory organisations are giving this sector a great deal of attention.

To talk to the RVA team about your own decommissioning, decontamination, dismantling and/or demolition project, please don’t hesitate to contact us.

RVA Group is delighted to announce that, following our annual external ISO audit, the team has once again passed its routine inspection with flying colours.

The success means that RVA will uphold its hat-trick of ISO9011, ISO14001 and OHSAS18001 recognition for another year.

Commenting on the news, RVA’s decommissioning specialist Mark Taylor said: “All three audits were passed with zero non-conformities or corrective actions to be implemented. This wouldn’t have been possible without the effort of RVA’s internal ISO team. They’ve worked tirelessly to ensure that the changes to our organisational structure over the last year have been correctly and effectively incorporated into the company systems and procedures that we rely on each day.

“As a result, we’ve recorded an accreditation clean bill of health.”

The news has come in the month that RVA celebrated 25 years in business and announced its acquisition by EP UK Investments – a sign that the company has some exciting times ahead.

Managing director Richard Vann concluded: “We’ve worked hard to develop a ‘fit for future’ programme that will equip our brand to thrive over the next quarter of a century. The ISO accreditation hat-trick is a key part of that.

“Overall, however, our holistic commitment to being the best in the industry has been recognised by EP UK Investments, and their purchase of the company means we now have even more resources at our fingertips, to fuel further success.”

Specialist decommissioning, decontamination, dismantling and demolition consultancy RVA Group has today announced that the company has been acquired by Prague based Energetický a průmyslový holding (EPH) via its wholly owned subsidiary EP UK Investments Ltd for an undisclosed sum.

The news comes in the year that RVA celebrates a pivotal 25 years in business.

Richard Vann founded RVA in 1992 and the company has gone on to complete more than 700 projects worldwide. Clients include major international blue-chip brands including SABIC, ConocoPhillips and INEOS.

EP UK Investments has now acquired RVA’s full share capital including its wholly owned subsidiaries RVA Consulting Engineers Ltd and RVA Engineering Solutions Ltd. However, whilst this may represent a key strategic move for the company, operationally little will change.

Richard, who will maintain his role as managing director, elaborated: “At the end of 2016, we commenced a ‘fit for future’ programme which saw the recruitment of additional key personnel and the creation of further structure within our team. A significant investment was also ploughed into new cloud technology throughout the business, to increase the flexibility, security and continuity of our work.

“It was all about preparing RVA for the next 25 years and it is great that, in line with this succession planning strategy, an ideal window of opportunity has already opened up for us.”

“In practice, it’s business as usual – all legal entities, contractual obligations, RVA personnel and the services we deliver remain unchanged,” Richard continued. “However, the new ownership provides an excellent platform for RVA to confidently strengthen its team and expand further in the UK, Europe and beyond.

“I personally have many more goals to fulfil for the company, and I see EP UK Investment’s acquisition of RVA bringing these well within reach in the near future.”

With a comprehensive portfolio of power and energy assets worldwide, EPH’s decommissioning requirements will further add to RVA Group’s forward order book of work.

Adding further comment, EPH’s decommissioning manager Robert Bundil said: “We have worked with RVA people on a couple of projects and know they are excellent professionals who bring high value to their clients. EPH is a responsible owner of its energy assets not only during their operation, but is also committed to fulfil all legal and moral obligations after their closure.

“Having RVA on board gives us absolute confidence that we will be capable to carry out our decommissioning duties in a safe and professional manner.

RVA will continue providing its sector-wide support for other clients within the global chemical, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, power, energy, oil, gas and heavy manufacturing industries too. The company will also maintain its current headquarters in London.

To discuss the contents of this press release or obtain further information, please contact Katie Mallinson, managing director of Scriba PR, on T: 01484 489333 or E: katie@scribapr.com.

RVA Group’s EHS, Engineering and Compliance Manager Matthew Waller has been asked to present at Europe’s Decommissioning and Demolition of Conventional Power Plants Conference.

The event – which will take place in Berlin next February – will host a powerhouse of international speakers each invited to offer expert guidance on this challenging subject.

The phase out of traditional fossil fuel-fired facilities is now well underway, as Europe progresses towards its low carbon goals of 2030. But it is not always easy to know how best to manage such aged assets, especially given the need to consider EHS excellence, the cost-effectiveness of the project and associated regulatory pressures.

Matthew will therefore take to the stage to share as much advice as possible, in his 45-minute session entitled ‘Having it planned right from the start’.

The presentation will enlighten delegates as to the importance of the following preparatory phases of a power plant decommissioning project:

• Data gathering and preparing the plant
• Contractor selection
• The procurement process
• What details need to be included in the contract
• The project plan and the project team

His insight will draw on 12 years’ project management expertise, with the last nine years of his career spent at RVA. During this time he has proven a knowledgeable and value-adding member of the team, who has contributed to RVA’s safe, environmentally secure and cost-effective delivery of more than 700 decommissioning, decontamination, dismantling and demolition projects worldwide.

Commenting on the upcoming conference, Matthew said: “Such a project can represent a step into the unknown for many power plant operators, and given the inherently hazardous nature of decommissioning works, this is never an assignment they want to be approaching in an uninformed manner.

“Seeking expert external guidance is usually the recommended route for organisations to take, but even this part of the process can prove daunting. I therefore hope that my practical, straight-talking and advice-led session will leave delegates a little better equipped in terms of ‘what’s next’ for their sites.”

Europe’s Decommissioning and Demolition of Conventional Power Plants Conference will take place on 15-16 February 2018, with venue details due to be announced shortly. Further updates can be found at http://europe-dd-forum.eu as details of the event unfold, but pre-registration is already available.