NON-PIPELINE TRANSPORT OF NATURAL GAS Jón Steinar Gudmundsson TPG4140 NATURGASS NTNU September 16, 2010
Associated Gas Problem World-wide, oil fields cannot be developed unless the associated gas problem can be solved ( stranded oil ) The term stranded gas is used in situations where the oil/gas field is remote or located in deep water The term marginal gas is used in situations where the oil/gas field is too small to justify a gas pipeline
Associated Gas Solutions Gas-to-Flare (burning) Gas-to-Well (injection) Gas-to-Liquid (LNG, MOH etc.) Gas-to-Wire (electricity) Gas-to-Tank (CNG) Gas-to-Solid (NGH)
Non-Pipeline Technologies CNG GTL GTW LNG NGH Compressed Natural Gas Gas-to-Liquid (incl. MOH) Gas-to-Wire (DC and AC) Liqufied Natural Gas Natural Gas Hydrate
CAPACITY-DISTANCE DIAGRAM Gudmundsson and Mork (2001) 10,0 PIPE LNG Capacity (BCM/year) 1,0 CNG, GTW, NGH ALL GTL 0,1 100 1000 10000 Distance (km)
Quick Chemistry Lesson Methanol CH 4 + H 2 O (steam) CO + 3H 2 CO + 2H 2 CH 3 OH Ammonia CH 4 + H 2 O (steam) CO 2 + H 2 3H 2 + N 2 2NH 3 Urea 2NH 3 + CO 2 CO(NH 2 ) 2 + H 2 O
Size and Technology Hove et al. (1999) Non-Pipeline Technology Nominal Plant Capacity Field Size LNG Syncrude MOH NGH 3 MTPY 20,000 bbl/d 2500 MTPD 1.6 MSm3/d 2.75 TCF 1.36 TCF 0.54 TCF 0.38 TCF
Norwegian Fields and Plants Field Name Ormen Lange Hammerfest LNG* Reserves (gas, LPG, cond.) 400 BCM (=14.1 TCF) 190 BCM (=6.7 TCF) Plant Size (gas prod.) 20 BCM/year 4.3 BCM/year 1 Sm3 = 35.314 ft3 * Feed flow 6.9 BCM/year, Products 6.0 BCM/year, LPG 0.2 MTPY, Condensate 0.7 MTPY (Heiersted 2005)
Natural Gas Resources BP (2001) and Hove et al. (1999) World reserves 150 TCM (=5295 TCF) 38% in FSU, 35% Middle East, 9% OECD and 18% other regions 80% new gas fields less than 0.25 TCF (=7 BCM) in size Assuming 20 years, gives delivery 0.35 BCM/year (=12.5 BCF/year)
Natural Gas Monetisation Routes 5 TCF field size,, 600 MMscfd (=6.2 BCM/year) Klein Nagervoort (2000) Non-Pipeline Technology Global Demand Plant Size Plant % Global Demand MOH 30 MTPA (corrected) 6 MTPA 20% LNG 100 MTPA 4 MTPA 4% GTL 3,000 MTPA 3 MTPA 0.1%
Shell Middle Distillate Synthesis Process Klein Nagervoort (2000)
FPSO Overview of Alternatives
FPSO + Methanol UT-769
FPSO + Methanol Separation Gas Steam TCR reforming Choke Manifold Desulphurisation Methanol Synthesis Stabilisation/ Distillation Water Crude oil Crude Methanol Grade AA Methanol Produced water treatment Crude Oil Storage tanks Methanol Storage tanks Oil Water Gas Discharge To shuttle Tanker
Process, Marine CNG Load - $10% 54 bar 27 o C compress refrigerate 200 bar 10 o C 200 bar 5 o C 15.5 knots Sail - $85% Discharge - $5% expand scavenge heat 47 bar 5 o C 10 bar -30 o C
Pipe, CNG and LNG, 400 MMscfd 3.00 T ariff, $/mmbtu 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 LNG One Train Ship 1 Ship 3 Ship 2 Ship 1 Compression & Marine Ship 2 Continental Shelf Pipeline CNG Conservative Tech CNG Achievable Tech Ship 10 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Distance, Kilometers
Pipe vs. CNG T ariff, $/mmbtu 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 4 5 $55,000 per dia.inch.mi, 900 miles No intermediate compressor stations 30" pipeline Two 30" pipelines Standard CNG Carriers (Cons) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 DCQ bcmy
Hydrate Equilibrium Curve 200 Pressure [bar] 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1 m 3 of hydrate Methane Natural gas 180 Sm 3 of gas 0 5 10 15 20 25 Temperature [ C]
Capital cost of NGH and LNG chains for 400 MMscf/d production and transport over 3500 nautical miles. Million US dollars mid-1995. Chain LNG NGH Difference Production 1220 (51%) 792 (44%) 428 (35%) Carriers 750 (32% ) 704 (39% ) 46 (6% ) Regasification 400 (17%) 317 (17%) 83 (21%) Total 2370 (100%) 1813 (100%) 557 (24%)
PIPE, GTL, LNG, NGH Capex vs. Distance
NGH Slurry on FPSO
NGH Slurry on FPSO Process Flow Diagram
NGH on FPSO Transport Cost vs. Distance Hove et al. (1999)
CONCLUSIONS 1. There is a need for non-pipeline technologies that can capture stranded gas and transport to market. NGH technology is being developed for this purpose and is increasingly recognised as an attractive alternative. Several groups are developing NGH technology world-wide, including NTNU in Norway. 2. LNG technology is recognised as the technology of choice for largevolume, long-distance transport of natural gas. However, about 80% of the natural gas resources yet to be developed world-wide are too small for state-of-the-art LNG technology and about one-half of these (40% of total) are stranded. 3. The cost of transporting stranded gas to market using non-pipeline technologies has been estimated in the range 1.5 to 3.0 US$ per million BTU (ca. 1.5-3.0 US$/GJ), depending on scale of development and distance to market. CNG and NGH are competing in similar stranded gas situations.