Feasibility Study
A feasibility study allows us to analyse how successful and practical a project is likely to be, looking at the 4 key aspects; economic, technical, operational and schedule feasibility.
The four aspects of a feasibility study:
- Economic Feasibility
Looking at what the projects associated cost benefits & savings will be along with determining the timescales for an acceptable return on investment for the business. - Technical Feasibility
To assess the risks and solutions, so considers the size of the proposed facility, its location, pollution issues and capacity. - Operational Feasibility
Reviewing the control measure of how well the proposed solution or system resolves any problems along with taking advantage of improvement opportunities determined during the definition phase. - Schedule Feasibility
Validation of the estimation on timelines and whether the project has enough resources to deliver the project to the desired plan.
What are the advantages to carrying out a feasibility study?
- Cost effective approach
Spending a small amount of capital at the Front End of a project, to see whether the project is viable prior to further project development & execution.
Sectors we do this in. Feasibility work is usually the first thing we do for a client, whether that is a chemical capacity increase, an energy project heading for a funding gate, or a line constraint in FMCG manufacturing. See all the sectors we work in.
How we approach it
We start with the plant as it actually is, not as the drawings say it should be – gathering site data, utility usage and operational requirements, and reviewing the constraints that will shape any solution. We speak to the people who run and maintain the asset, not only the project sponsor, because the constraint that kills an option is often operational rather than technical.
We then develop more than one concept-level option rather than defending a single preferred answer. Each is taken far enough to be judged properly: preliminary layouts, process flows, outline equipment selection and first-pass calculations. Options are screened against consistent criteria – safety, cost, constructability, scalability and schedule impact – so the pros, cons and risks read side by side. This is the point where changes are cheapest, so it is worth being honest about the options that do not work.
Where the real question is the distance between how a facility operates now and a standard it needs to meet, we run a GAP analysis alongside the study, reviewing documentation, procedures and physical assets against the target requirements – obligations such as DSEAR, ATEX or PUWER, internal standards, or your own performance targets. Gaps are categorised by type, severity and impact, and actions prioritised on risk.
What you get
- Project objectives covering technical goals, business drivers and regulatory considerations
- An assessment of existing conditions: infrastructure, process limitations, utilities and space constraints
- Concept-level design options, each with preliminary layouts, process flows and outline equipment selection
- An option comparison matrix setting out the pros, cons and risk factors of each route
- First-pass engineering calculations, footprint assessments and a utilities review
- High-level capital and operating cost estimates (CapEx and OpEx) per option, with long-lead items identified
- Indicative timelines and resource plans, plus a risk review covering safety, environmental, technical and constructability issues
- A written report with a clear recommendation, and a prioritised action plan where a GAP analysis forms part of the scope
When clients typically call us
- A capital scheme has been proposed internally and the board wants evidence before releasing significant funding
- There are several credible technical routes to the same outcome and the team cannot agree which one to back
- Production is constrained and it is not yet clear whether the answer is a debottleneck, an equipment upgrade or a new line
- An audit or change in requirements has raised doubt about whether an existing installation still meets the standard expected of it
- A funding gate, grant application or parent company approval needs an independent technical and cost case behind it
- Space, tie-ins and the cost of a shutdown are making an apparently simple option look much harder on a live brownfield site
Frequently asked questions
How many options will you look at?
As many as the decision warrants. We would rather carry three or four options to a consistent level of detail than take one deep and find later that a cheaper route was never tested. The list is agreed with you before engineering starts.
What is the difference between a feasibility study and a GAP analysis?
A feasibility study asks whether a proposed change is workable and worth doing. A GAP analysis asks where you fall short of a requirement and what it would take to close that shortfall. They are often run together, as the answer to the second defines the scope of the first.
Will the report stand up to scrutiny from our board or funders?
That is what it is written for. Findings, assumptions, cost basis and risks are documented so the recommendation traces back to evidence rather than opinion.
Do we have to use Projex for the next stage?
No. The deliverables are written so they can be handed to whoever takes the work forward, including your own team. If you do continue with us, the study feeds straight into a FEED study without repeating work you have paid for.
Related: Part of our engineering consultancy services. See also FEED studies, project due diligence and EPCM partner services.
Talk to us about your project. Request a call