of Upstream Oil and Gas Activities in the Rocky Mountain States



Similar documents
Air Quality Regulation of the Oil and Gas Production Sector in Colorado and Beyond. Garry Kaufman Holland & Hart LLP

DRAFT AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN GARFIELD COUNTY: COLORADO S MOST ACTIVE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT REGION

Addressing Air Emissions from Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Production. Joe Osborne Lauren Burge Group Against Smog & Pollution Pittsburgh, PA

Oil and Gas Air Quality Regulations and Permitting

Garry Kaufman Colorado Air Pollution Control Division May 14, 2014

Out in Front? State and Federal Regulation of Air Pollution Emissions from Oil and Gas Production Activities in the Western United States

Regulatory Impact Analysis

Highlights of Colorado s New Oil and Gas Hydrocarbon Emission Reduction Rules - Adopted February 2014

GAO FEDERAL OIL AND GAS LEASES

Emissions from Natural Gas Production in the Barnett Shale Area and Opportunities for Cost Effective Improvements

Comparison of State Severance Taxes on Oil and Gas Utah and Selected Oil and Gas Producing States

METHANE EMISSIONS MITIGATION OPTIONS IN THE GLOBAL OIL AND NATURAL GAS INDUSTRIES

AESTHETIC AND NOISE CONTROL REGULATIONS

Air Permitting in Colorado. Martha Hyder Wind River Environmental Group LLC September 2013

Colorado s Recent Efforts to Address Hydrocarbons from Oil and Gas Operations

NSPS Subpart OOOO: Applicability and Compliance Basics

THE BASICS Q: What is VOC? Q: What are flashing losses/voc emissions from hydrocarbon storage tanks? - 1 -

Assessment of Air Emissions Martin Marietta Materials Facilities on Highway 34, Weld County, Colorado Project No.:

REGULATORY ANALYSIS. February 11, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment

COLORADO REGULATION 7

Evidence of Emissions from Oil and Gas Drilling Operations in Northeastern Colorado

Emissions from Natural Gas Production in the Barnett Shale Area and Opportunities for Cost-Effective Improvements

Range A Pilot Study by Michael A. Levi by Gabrielle Petron et al. Accepted for publication in Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres

Ozone Precursor and GHG Emissions from Light Duty Vehicles Comparing Electricity and Natural Gas as Transportation Fuels

How To Make A High Co 2 Gas Blend

Modeling Transportation-Related Emissions Using GIS

Developing Colorado s s Oil and Gas Emissions Controls Overview of the Process and Requirements

Rule Overview Regulation No.3, 6 and 7

COLORADO AIR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT MODELING STUDY (CARMMS) 2021 MODELING RESULTS FOR THE HIGH, LOW AND MEDIUM OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS Final

Capturing Methane to Fuel Drilling Operations

Mike Hannah, Senate Finance Counsel Heather Fennell, Staff Attorney, Research Division NCGA Energy Policy Commission March 4,

3.0 THE 2002 BASE-YEAR INVENTORY. 3.1 Background and requirements

Company Name: City, State, Zip Code: Annual Report Summary

FAC 7.1: Generators. EPA Impacts on Emergency Gensets for 2015 Installations

Costs for Traditional Air Pollutants

Class II General Permit G35-C Registration to (Construct, Modify, etc.)

EPA Requirements for Diesel Standby Engines In Data Centers. Bob Stelzer / CTO / Safety Power Inc. For 7x24 Fall 2014 Conference. 1.

Lessons Learned from Natural Gas STAR Partners. Reduced Emissions Completions for Hydraulically Fractured Natural Gas Wells.

Industries. March Prepared for Environmental Defense Fund 257 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10010

Characterization of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Involved in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production Operations

POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF A STRICTER OZONE STANDARD

Economic and Air Quality Benefits of Electric Vehicles in Nevada

Policy Measures for Improving Air Quality in the U.S.

C E N T E R F O R S U S T A I N A B L E S H A L E D E V E L O P M E N T, I N C. F e b r u a r y 2 4,

Methods to Find the Cost-Effectiveness of Funding Air Quality Projects

Natural Gas Dehydrator Optimization

Calculating Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Flash Emissions from Crude Oil and Condensate Tanks at Oil and Gas Production Sites

HB , Clean Air/Clean Jobs Act

Drill-Right. best Oil & Gas Development Practices for Texas

Moving Targets: How Ever Changing Air Quality Regulations are Driving Process Decisions

How To Compare N.Dakota To North Dakota

Emission Reduction Techniques for Oil and Gas Activities. U.S. Forest Service 2011

Asphalt Roofing A Guide to Air Quality Regulations

Wyoming Energy Consultants Diamond Drive Casper, WY

Bill Barrett Corporation Reports Second Quarter 2014 Results and Reaffirms Expected 30% Growth in Oil Production for 2014

OIL AND GAS TAXATION COMPARISON

Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production, Transmission, and Distribution.

COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Stationary Sources Program / Air Pollution Control Division. PS Memo 14-03

The Status of Colorado s Oil and Gas Industry: Activity Continues to Reflect Colorado s Overall Share of Nation s Fossil Fuel Reserves

Air Quality in San Diego 2013 Annual Report

III. EXISTING & POTENTIAL AIR POLLUTION SOURCES

Control Device Requirements Charts For Oil and Gas Handling and Production Facilities

Transforming America s Energy Future. Kentucky. Energy Statistics. Developed by

FINAL UPDATES TO REQUIREMENTS FOR STORAGE TANKS USED IN OIL AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION AND TRANSMISSION

Colorado Oil and Gas Emissions Rules

The proposed Project would be constructed in portions of Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.

Bureau of Air Overview

STATE OF MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT

Instrument Gas to Instrument Air Conversion Protocol October 2009 SPECIFIED GAS EMITTERS REGULATION OCTOBER Version 1.0.

Texas Natural Gas: Fuel for Growth. Michael J. Economides, PhD Professor, University of Houston and Philip E. Lewis, P.E.

October 8, WHP Waste Heat-to-Power Fuel and Emission Free Power

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Emissions Banking and Trading Programs. Office of Air Air Quality Division

Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection

Green Fleet Policy PURPOSE

Point Source Emission Inventory For Non-Electric Companies in Georgia

First to US Market with trucked compressed natural gas delivered to companies beyond the pipeline. Bennington presentation by NG Advantage LLC

Arkansas Natural Gas Severance Marketing Costs

Section 1 Source Identification. Section 2 - Certification

State of New Jersey. General Permit. For. Boilers and Heaters [Individually Less Than 10 MMBTU/HR]

RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL NATURAL GAS AND LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG) COMBUSTION

NOTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE TESTING FOR GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITIES (GDFs) NESHAP 40 CFR, Part 63, Subpart CCCCCC (Sections

Leaking Profits. The U.S. Oil and Gas Industry Can Reduce Pollution, Conserve Resources, and Make Money by Preventing Methane Waste.

ATTAINMENT PROJECTIONS

Tracing Back the Smog:

Denver/NFR Air Quality Modeling to Support Ozone SIP Development

Comparison of Emission Calculation Methodologies for the Oil and Gas Industry. Presented by: Leanne Sills

BEFORE THE COLORADO AIR QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION

(Adopted July 7, 1989)(Amended December 7, 1990) (Amended May 13, 1994) FUGITIVE EMISSIONS OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Fixing the Leaks: What Would it Cost to Clean Up Natural Gas Leaks?

Alberta Research Council (ARC) Enhanced Coalbed Methane (ECBM) Recovery Project in Alberta, Canada

Colorado. Congressional Statistics: Disability Insurance for December Social Security. $1.6 billion (estimated)

Air emissions reduction strategy

Addition of general construction conditions applicable to the portable emergency turbine because they were omitted from the original Part 70 Permit.

The Role of Natural Gas in Texas and America CEA Meeting August 24 th, 2010

Natural Gas Monthly. May Office of Oil, Gas, and Coal Supply Statistics U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585

Economic Update as of June 30, 2016

Natural Gas and Greenhouse Gases. OLLI Lectures November 2014 Dennis Silverman Physics and Astronomy UC Irvine

Tesoro Savage Vancouver Energy Distribution Terminal August 2013 Application No Page 2-162

Refuse and Recycling Applications: The Natural Gas Solution

CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS GREEN FLEET POLICY

Transcription:

AC Comprehensive Emissions i Inventory of Upstream Oil and Gas Activities in the Rocky Mountain States t Amnon Bar-Ilan, Ron Friesen, John Grant, Alison Pollack, Ralph Morris ENVIRON International Corporation Doug Henderer Buys & Associates Kathleen Sgamma Western Energy Alliance Tom Moore, Lee Gribovicz Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP)

Overview History of oil and gas EI development Current effort Temporal and geographic scope Source categories Methodology Results

Oil and Gas Production in the Rocky Mountains Boom in oil and gas production in this region over the last ten years driven by record prices for crude oil and natural gas Colorado gas production in 1996: 572 billion cubic feet Colorado gas production in 2006: 1.2 trillion cubic feet Activity supported by large fleet of equipment at thousands of individual well sites Partial inventory of this equipment through state permitting databases Wide state to state variation in Wide state-to-state variation in permitting thresholds and source categories permitted

History of Oil and Gas EIs WRAP Phases I & II Represented the first regional inventories for the western U.S. to address oil and gas area sources not previously inventoried Regionally consistent t inventory methodology for oil and gas area sources for all of the western states Activity and emissions data obtained primarily through limited participation of industry, other regionally-specific studies and literature Base year of 2002 with future year projection for 2018 Focused primarily on NOx and SOx emissions for regional haze p y g issues, with focus on compressor engines and drilling rigs

History of Oil and Gas EIs Other Regional Studies Ozone precursors study for San Juan and Rio Arriba counties in northwest New Mexico Direct survey data from oil and gas producers Considered major NOx and VOC source categories Wyoming state-wide inventory of oil and gas sources WRAP Phase I and II, and regional studies limited in scope Did not cover all source categories Did not apply consistent methodology to a broad region (NMED, WY studies) Previous studies demonstrated the need for high quality equipment, activity, emissions data directly from the major oil and gas companies

Current Phase III Effort Considers every major oil and gas production basin in the Rocky Mountain states, including New Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota Considers all major oil and gas source categories and all major criteria pollutants: NOx, VOC, CO, PM, SOx Updated, regionally consistent methodology which combines state permitted sources databases with direct industry survey for unpermitted and exempt sources Makes use of latest oil and gas production and well statistics from commercially available IHS database Most detailed d oil and gas emissions i inventory to date

Phase Phase I and III II Source Categories Large Point Sources (Gas plants, compressor stations) Drill Rigs Wellhead Compressor Engines CBM Pump Engines Heaters Pneumatic Devices Condensate and Oil Tanks Dehydrators Completion Venting Lateral compressor engines Workover Rigs Salt-Water Disposal Engines Artificial Lift Engines (Pumpjacks) Vapor Recovery Units (VRU s) Miscellaneous or Exempt Engines Flaring Fugitive Emissions Well Blowdowns Truck Loading Amine Units (acid gas removal) Water Tanks

Geographic and Temporal Scope Scope of study includes the South San Juan (NM), North San Juan (CO), Denver- Julesburg (CO), Piceance (CO), Uinta (UT), Southwest Wyoming (WY), Wind River (WY), Powder River (WY), Great Plains (MT) and Williston (MT & ND) Basins To date 6 basin inventories have been completed remaining basins are the Williston, Powder River and Southwest Wyoming For all basins the boundaries of the basins have been aligned with county boundaries All basins are analyzed for tribal and non- tribal inventories (where applicable) Baseline inventories developed for 2006 with midterm projections to 2012 (for D-J Basin projections to 2010)

Basin Oil and Gas Statistics Well Count Oil Production (bbl) Gas Production (MCF) Spud Counts Basin total CONV CBM Total Oil Well Oil Gas Well Condensate Total CONV CBM Total D-J Basin 16,774 16,774 0 14,242,088 0 14,242,088 234,630,779 234,630,779 0 1500 Uinta Basin 6,881 6,018 863 11,528,121 9,758,247 1,769,874 331,844,336 254,219,432 77,624,904 1069 Piceance Basin 6,315 6,255 60 7,158,305 5,755,076 1,403,229 421,358,666 420,165,237 1,193,429 1186 North San Juan Basin 2,676 1,009 1,667 32,529 27,962 4,567 443,828,500 28,642,418 415,186,082 127 South San Juan Basin 20,649 16,486 4,163 2,636,811 1,002,060 1,634,751 1,020,014,851 520,060,869 499,953,982 919 Wind River Basin 1,350 1,330 20 3,043,459 2,563,912 479,547 198,190,024 197,166,868 1,023,156 98 Red figures are greatest value in each column, showing spatial variation in O&G E&P operations Wide variation in total production of gas and oil/condensate among basins Gas production activity is more significant than oil production activity in all basins oil production is in historic decline Spud counts are surrogates for where greatest exploration and production activity was occurring Spud counts are surrogates for where greatest exploration and production activity was occurring in 2006

Phase III Methodology Diagram Unpermitted sources surveys to O&G producers Combined survey responses for all participating companies Permit data from State databases and EPA permit data (Title V) or other permit data IHS database (oil and gas production and well and spud counts) Scaled-up unpermitted sources emissions for entire basin Complete oil and gas emissions inventory for entire basin

State New Mexico Colorado Utah Wyoming Montana North Dakota State Permitting Thresholds Emissions Thresholds (tons/yr) Notice of Intent Required for Facilities with Emissions > 10tpy Criteria Pollutants; Permits Required for Facilities > 25 tpy Permits Required for All Sources with Emissions > 2 tpy Criteria Pollutants Permits Required for All Sources with Potential to Emit (PTE) > 100 tpy Combustion Sources: Engines with HP < 200 (Equivalent to Approx. 1 tpy NOx) Permit Not Required; Oil and Gas Process Sources (Tanks and Dehydration): Variable Depending on Development Region but Not Less than 6 tpy VOC Emissions in Most Areas (Some Sources Require Permits at Any Emissions Levels in JPAD Area) Permits Required for All Sources with Potential to Emit (PTE) > 25 tpy Permits Required for All Sources with Potential to Emit (PTE) > 100 tpy Comments Due to technical issues with the permit data, only major source facility permits (> 100 tpy) were used in New Mexico Air Permit Emission Notices (APENs) used for all sources with emissions > 2 tpy Sources subject to NSPS or with HAPs emissions at 10 tpy for one pollutant or 25 tpy for combination of HAPs must be issued permits Wyoming permit data treated separately depending on the development region: the Jonah-Pinedale Anticline Development (JPAD) area; the concentrated t development area including seven Counties in SW WY; and state-wide development areas. Permit data available on facilities with actual emissions > 25 tpy Wide variation in permitting thresholds from state to state, in source categories permitted, and regional variations in state permit requirements within states

Estimation Methodology Drilling/Workover Rigs E drilling, rig = EF i HP LF 907,185 t drilling Drilling rig engine emissions factors assumed to be Tier 0 and fully deteriorated Engine-specific average load factor used throughout drilling event E E drilling, TOTAL = drilling S TOTAL S Typical rig composed of 3-6 engines, each with horsepower ranging from 300-1500 HP Average drilling time/depth provided by each survey respondent C bi d d illi i i i f ll Combined drilling rig emissions from all survey responses scaled to basin-wide emissions by ratio of total spuds in the basin to total spuds by all participating companies

Estimation Methodology Vented Sources E 1000 MW R Y venting = Vvented, TOTAL VOC VOC Applies to venting source categories such as pneumatic devices, fugitive emissions, and blowdowns/completions Total vented volume derived by summing total device count and vent rate per device, or total event count and vent rate per event E Total device or event counts summed from all survey responses E venting, BASIN = venting, TOTAL W W TOTAL Average VOC mass fraction of produced gas derived from natural gas composition survey request Combined venting emissions i from all survey responses scaled to basin-wide emissions by ratio of total wells in the basin to total wells owned by all participating companies (fugitives/pneumatics), or total gas production in the basin to total gas production owned by all participating companies (well blowdowns)

Results Criteria Pollutant Emissions Oil and gas production a significant source of NOx, VOC, CO emissions, particularly in rural counties NOx emissions primarily result from wellhead and centralized compression VOC emissions contributions from many different processes including tank flashing, dehydration and pneumatics SOx and PM emissions minor in most basins and primarily driven by drill/workover rigs (sour gas production in some basins) Emissions (tons/yr) Basin NOx VOC CO SOx PM D-J Basin 20,783 81,758 12,941 226 636 Uinta Basin 13,093 71,546 8,727 396 623 Piceance Basin 12,390 27,464 7,921 314 992 North San Juan Basin 5,700 2,147 6,450 15 52 South San Juan Basin 42,075 60,697697 23,471 305 574 Wind River Basin 1,814 11,981 2,840 1,792 37 Red figures are greatest value, showing spatial variation in O&G E&P emissions

Results NOx Emissions 50,000 45,000 Base Year (2006) Future Year (2012*) 40,000 ons (tons/ye ear) Emissi 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 D-J Uinta Piceance North San Juan South San Juan Wind River

Results VOC Emissions 160,000 140,000 Base Year (2006) Future Year (2012*) 120,000 ons (tons/ye ear) Emissi 100,000000 80,000 60,000000 40,000 20,000000 0 D-J Uinta Piceance North San Juan South San Juan Wind River

Results Example NOx Emissions Breakdown By Source Category Workover rigs 3% Dehydrator Other Categories 5% Exempt engines Workover rigs Flaring Heaters 5% Other Categories 3% Heaters 8% Drill rigs 12% Drill rigs 43% Compressor Engines 46% Wind River Basin Compressor engines 7 Piceance Basin NOx emissions i primarily il comprised of compressor engines (central and wellhead) and drill rigs for basins in which active drilling was occurring in 2006

Results Example VOC Emissions Breakdown By Source Category Oil Tank 20% Compressor engines Drill rigs Permitted Sources 2% Pneumatic devices 2 Venting - recompletions Venting - initial completions Venting - blowdowns 2% Truck loading of condensate liquid Compressor Engines 3% Glycol Dehydrator Other Categories Unpermitted Fugitives 9% Permitted Fugitives Condensate tank 9% Pneumatic pumps 12% Small condensate tanks 16% Pneumatic pumps Uinta Basin Dehydrator 28% Venting - Compressor Shutdown Artificial Lift Unpermitted Fugitives 3% Venting - Compressor Startup Pneumatic devices 14% Denver-Julesburg Basin Large condensate tanks 50% VOC emissions sources vary significantly from basin to basin tank flashing, dehydration and pneumatic devices are consistently large source categories in most basins

Results Example Permitted vs. Unpermitted NOx and VOC Emissions i Exempt engines 14% Heaters 3% Workover rigs 3% Venting - recompletions Unpermitted Fugitives 9% Venting - initial completions Venting - blowdowns 2% Permitted: All APENS sources 5% Truck loading of condensate liquid Small condensate tanks 16% Drill rigs 25% Permitted: All APENS sources 56% Pneumatic pumps Permitted: Regulation 7 Reports (Large Condensate Tanks) 50% Pneumatic devices 14% NOx Emissions D-J Basin VOC Emissions D-J Basin For the D-J Basin example both NOx and VOC emissions from unpermitted sources are approximately 45% of the basin-wide total emissions Unpermitted sources represent a significant contribution to total basin emissions even in Colorado where the permitting threshold is 2 tpy

Results Per-Well NOx Emissions 2.50 2.00 Base Year (2006) Future Year (2012*) Emissions s (tons/active well) 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 D-J Uinta Piceance North San Juan South San Juan Wind River

Results Per-Unit-Gas-Production VOC Emissions 400 350 Base Year (2006) Future Year (2012*) Em missions (tons/bcf to otal gas produ uction) 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 D-J Uinta Piceance North San Juan South San Juan Wind River

Inventory Findings Wide range of NOx, VOC emissions between basins for the six basins completed thus far indication that basin-level inventories are necessary to capture regional differences in activity and production levels NOx emissions per well are relatively consistent among basins, driven by the number of active wells and number/size of equipment differences in some basins are due to a combination of regulatory requirements for compressor engines and the relative level of activity of drilling rigs VOC emissions per well vary widely across basins highest values are for the D-J and Uinta Basins which have significant oil and condensate production, indicating that tank flashing emissions are significant for these basins SOx emissions are driven primarily by off-road diesel fuel use (declining in the near future with EPA diesel fuel sulfur rules) and sour gas production thus far only the Wind River Basin has significant sour gas production Inventories are capable of capturing significant unpermitted and unreported emissions for both NOx and VOC even in states where the permitting threshold is low

Related Future Work On-road & off-road mobile sources emissions associated with exploration & production activity, beyond drilling & workover rigs Piceance Pilot Project (P3) for Piceance Basin in northwest Colorado Tailpipe exhaust, fuel evaporative emissions and particulate from tire/brake wear and paved/ unpaved road dust generated from vehicular activity Activity types include employee access, management and equipment service traffic, light and heavy duty delivery vans, heavy duty construction equipment Piceance mobile source EI results to be compared against the point & area emissions to evaluate the significance of the mobile source emissions Project will provide unit operation factors to help improve estimates in other O&G basins in the Rocky Mountain west Sponsored by States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming, and funded through EPA s Energy Overtarget program

Related Future Work Update Phase III data from 2006 baseline to Phase IV 2009 baseline Triennial updates to keep inventories current for emissions trends/air quality planning Use of Phase III Oil & Gas inventory in regional analysis of potential control strategies for states impacted by O&G operations States will need to comply with increasingly stringent ambient air quality standards for ozone, particulate and other pollutants Bureau of Land Management (BLM) does O&G development review and leasing for minerals under both public & private lands Majority of western O&G operations are on public lands BLM typically conducts Environmental Assessments or Environmental Impact Statements under the National Environmental Policy Act Historically EA/EIS evaluations have been conducted in isolation, using emission inventories compiled for that particular project, without full consideration of the impacts of other projects in the region Use WRAP Phase III inventories and triennial updates, regionally consistent in calculation methodology and assumptions for periodic cumulative analyses of planned and leased energy development, to assist states and federal agencies with air quality planning