0
360 DEGREE ASSESSMENTFLNG FORUM 2010:24 MARCHPRESENTED BY MUKES GUPTA – MD CANADOIL ENGINEERING     © 2010 Canadoil Group ...
SIMPLIFIED LNG PROCESS BLOCK DIAGRAM (TYPICAL)                                     (       )
360 DEG ASSESSMENT – WHY LARGE SIZE FLNG?              PROBABLE FUTURE SOLUTION ….MG’S IDEA MAR 2010!                 FLOA...
IDEA OF FLOATING GAS TO LIQUID PLANT TO AVOID ENERGY WASTE IN                          QLIQUEFACTION & REGASSIFICATION
FLOATING POWER PLANT 220 MW……….CASE STUDY
FLOATING POWER PLANT (FPP) IN COMBINATION WITH FCNG                     (   )
BARGE MOUNTED FLOATING POWER PLANT
FLOATING POWER PROJECT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN………
Transportation of Natural gas     T       t ti    fN t lPipelines vs Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)•    Pipelines are conveni...
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)       Li   fi d N t l G (LNG)• Liquefied gas is transported over long distances e.g.,     2500...
Estimate of LNG Cost Reductions                                      1970 s vs.                                      1970’...
COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG)                       (   )  Advantages  •   Simplicity  •   Inexpensive onshore facilities  ...
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)      C        d N t l G (CNG)• Compressed gas (1500 to 2500 psi and 0 to ‐ 40 F)• Two technol...
CNG T    Transport        Courtesy Enersea
CNG Cargo Containment SystemCNG Cargo Containment System               Courtesy Enersea
An Example Calculation for the CNG             p                 Process• Assume two standard volumes of CNG that are to b...
Transportation of the gas     T       t ti    f th90% of the investment involved is in shipping of the gas. 90% f th i    ...
Estimated number of ships       E ti t d     b    f hiFactors for determining the number of ships: loading rate of the gas...
Cost of transportation        C t ft          t ti• For voyage distance of 2500 miles• C t f CNG t  Cost of CNG transport:...
Comparison of CNG and LNG       C     i     f CNG d LNGSize of investment for a 500MMscf/d plant                          ...
Typical cost components for LNG projectT i l      t         t f LNG       j t                Unloading                  11...
Typical cost components for CNG projectT i l      t         t f CNG       j t                       Unloading             ...
Comparison of LNG and CNG       C     i     f LNG d CNG                   Price of the delivered gasLNG value chain per MM...
Comparison of LNG and CNG       C     i     f LNG d CNGCNG value chain per MMBTUExploration and Production: $0.5‐1.0/MMBTU...
Comparison of gas prices      C     i     f       iDistance   LNG  CNG (Case I) CNG (Case II) miles   $/MMBTU $/MMBTU     ...
Comparison of CNG and LNG       C     i     f CNG d LNGAdvantages of CNG over LNG• Requirement of lower throughput of gas ...
Comparison of CNG and GTL     C     i     f CNG d GTL• GTL (Gas‐to‐liquids) technology converts natural gas   into hydroca...
Role the GTL technology can playR l th GTL t h l             l
Gas to Liquids                G t Li id• The Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis (F‐T synthesis) is one   of the most important tech...
Project Constraints                            P j tC t i t                  LNG         GTL              CNG             ...
Worldwide areas of interest for application of CNG technology
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (PHOTOGRAPHS; ARTICLES & PRESENTATION….)·   ABS·   Shell·   FPC·   Technip·   FlexLNG·   QG·   ConocoPhil...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Mg 360 deg assessment

369

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
369
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Mg 360 deg assessment"

  1. 1. 360 DEGREE ASSESSMENTFLNG FORUM 2010:24 MARCHPRESENTED BY MUKES GUPTA – MD CANADOIL ENGINEERING © 2010 Canadoil Group  © MG www.canadoilgroup.com
  2. 2. SIMPLIFIED LNG PROCESS BLOCK DIAGRAM (TYPICAL) ( )
  3. 3. 360 DEG ASSESSMENT – WHY LARGE SIZE FLNG? PROBABLE FUTURE SOLUTION ….MG’S IDEA MAR 2010! FLOATING POWER PLANT FCNG FLOATING PIPE TO CARRY CNGCOPY RIGHT  2010 ©………….  MUKESG@CANADOILENGINEERING.NET
  4. 4. IDEA OF FLOATING GAS TO LIQUID PLANT TO AVOID ENERGY WASTE IN QLIQUEFACTION & REGASSIFICATION
  5. 5. FLOATING POWER PLANT 220 MW……….CASE STUDY
  6. 6. FLOATING POWER PLANT (FPP) IN COMBINATION WITH FCNG ( )
  7. 7. BARGE MOUNTED FLOATING POWER PLANT
  8. 8. FLOATING POWER PROJECT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN………
  9. 9. Transportation of Natural gas T t ti fN t lPipelines vs Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)• Pipelines are convenient and economical for onshore  p transport of natural gas • Offshore, as the water depth and distance increase pipeline  transport of gas becomes difficult.  transport of gas becomes difficult• LNG for offshore transport of gas.• LNG is liquid at 260 oF and atmospheric presure LNG is liquid at –260  and atmospheric presure,  transported in specially designed ships. • 25% of the trade movement of natural gas in 2002 was as  25% of the trade movement of natural gas in 2002 was as LNG. (BP Statistical Review, 2003)
  10. 10. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Li fi d N t l G (LNG)• Liquefied gas is transported over long distances e.g.,  2500 miles and more.  2500 miles and more LNG Technology• Capital intensive Capital intensive• Onshore and transportation needs• Good demand market is essential• Steady and large supply of reserves Steady and large supply of reserves
  11. 11. Estimate of LNG Cost Reductions 1970 s vs. 1970’s vs Today 2.53 0.49 30% decline of costs 1.54 1 54 0.50 1.80 into pipeline 0.40 1.00 0.40Lique-Lique- Trans- Trans- Regas- Regas- Total Lique- Lique- Trans- Trans- Regas- Regas- Totalfaction act o po tat o portation ification faction portation ification Source: McKinsey & Company / El Paso $/MMBtu—2,500 $/MMBtu 2 500 mile voyage
  12. 12. COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS (CNG) ( ) Advantages • Simplicity • Inexpensive onshore facilities • Can start with very modest transporting needs • Energy efficient E ffi i t • Can exploit isolated supply sources  • Suitable for small demand markets Example: A 1200 MW plant requiring around 125 MMscf/d would be  well suited   for CNG import rather than LNG, which would require a  well suited for CNG import rather than LNG, which would require a generating capacity of 5000 MW (!) of gas‐fired generation (if all used  for that purpose).
  13. 13. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) C d N t l G (CNG)• Compressed gas (1500 to 2500 psi and 0 to ‐ 40 F)• Two technologies for CNG transport Two technologies for  a. The Cran & Stennings approach b. The Enersea approach  b The Enersea approachExample:  Consider the transportation of 300 MMscf of gas as  CNGUsing the Cran & Stennings approach Actual volume of CNG: 1 76x106 ft3 Actual volume of CNG: 1.76x10Using the Enersea approach Actual Volume of CNG: 1.2x106 f 3 A lV l f CNG 1 2 10 ft
  14. 14. CNG T Transport Courtesy Enersea
  15. 15. CNG Cargo Containment SystemCNG Cargo Containment System Courtesy Enersea
  16. 16. An Example Calculation for the CNG  p Process• Assume two standard volumes of CNG that are to be  transported• Calculate the actual volume of natural gas that would be  stored at a range of pressures and temperatures.• Estimate the compression and refrigeration needs p q• Estimate the number of ships required• Calculate the final unit price of the gas delivered• Optimum condition is chosen by minimizing the final unit  p y g price of the gas delivered 
  17. 17. Transportation of the gas T t ti f th90% of the investment involved is in shipping of the gas. 90% f th i t t i l d i i hi i f thLoading and unloading is possible and easy with small facilities.
  18. 18. Estimated number of ships E ti t d b f hiFactors for determining the number of ships: loading rate of the gas, distance for  which the CNG is transported and the time required for a ship to make one  complete cycle.  l t l Distance No. of ships miles 1000 4 1500 5 2000 6 2500 7 3500 8 to 9 5000 11 to 12
  19. 19. Cost of transportation C t ft t ti• For voyage distance of 2500 miles• C t f CNG t Cost of CNG transport: $1.86‐$2.43/Mscf  t $1 86 $2 43/M f (depending on pressure and temperature)• Published Cost of LNG transport: $1.89/Mscf • A th di t As the distance decreases CNG becomes more  d CNG b attractive than LNG 
  20. 20. Comparison of CNG and LNG C i f CNG d LNGSize of investment for a 500MMscf/d plant  CNG                       LNG CNG LNGReserves:                     Modest                   LargeProcessing cost:        MM$30 40            MM$750 2000Processing cost: MM$30‐40 MM$750‐2000*Transportation costs: MM$230/ship MM$160/shipUnloading costs:        MM$16‐20Unloading costs: MM$16 20 MM$500‐550 MM$500 550Total investment:       $1‐2 billion** $2‐3 billion*** Depending upon the location of the production site** Depending upon the number of ships used for the transport of the gas. Depending upon the number of ships used for the transport of the gas.
  21. 21. Typical cost components for LNG projectT i l t t f LNG j t Unloading 11% Liquefaction 50% Shipping 39%
  22. 22. Typical cost components for CNG projectT i l t t f CNG j t Unloading 6% Compression and loading 5% Shipping 89%
  23. 23. Comparison of LNG and CNG C i f LNG d CNG Price of the delivered gasLNG value chain per MMBTU pExploration and Production: $0.5‐1.0/MMBTULiquefaction: $0.8‐1.2/ MMBTU.Shipping: $0.4‐1.5/ MMBTU*.Shi i $0 4 1 5/ MMBTU*Regasification and Storage: $0.3‐0.5/ MMBTU.$$1.00 as netback for the investors Final price of LNG: $3.00‐5.20/MMBTU.* For transport distances from 1000 miles to 5000 miles
  24. 24. Comparison of LNG and CNG C i f LNG d CNGCNG value chain per MMBTUExploration and Production: $0.5‐1.0/MMBTUExploration and Production: $0 5‐1 0/MMBTUProcessing and transportation: $1.08‐3.82/MMBTU*$1.00 as netback to the investor$1 00 tb k t th i tFinal unit price of CNG: $2.58‐5.82/MMBTU * For transport distances from 1000 miles to 5000 miles
  25. 25. Comparison of gas prices  C i f iDistance LNG CNG (Case I) CNG (Case II) miles $/MMBTU $/MMBTU $/MMBTU 500 3.55 2.72 2.72 1000 3.65 2.74-2.84 2.82-2.90 1500 3.75 3.06-3.10 3.15-3.26 2000 3.85 3.30-3.37 3.11-3.62 2500 3.95 3 95 3.44 3.90 3 44-3 90 3.50 3.98 3 50-3 98 3500 4.25 4.08-4.43 3.98-4.34 5000 4.65 4.84-5.49 4.70-5.43Case I: Transported Volume = 3.5×106 ft3Case II: Transported Volume = 5.0×106 ft3Price of gas: $0.75/MMBTU, Liquefaction: $1.0MMBTU, Regasification: $0.4/MMBTUUsage of water‐cooled compressor raises the unit price of the gas by0.01/MMBTU.
  26. 26. Comparison of CNG and LNG C i f CNG d LNGAdvantages of CNG over LNG• Requirement of lower throughput of gas for a project• I l Involvement of lower capital fl i l• Ease of deployment … faster implementation of a project• Ability to access stranded reserves and monetize them Ability to access stranded reserves and monetize them• Majority of the investment is in the shipping, making the assets movable  and reducing the risk involvedDisadvantagesInability to transport large volumes of gas such LNGDisparity in the volume transport hinders commercial possibility of CNG
  27. 27. Comparison of CNG and GTL C i f CNG d GTL• GTL (Gas‐to‐liquids) technology converts natural gas  into hydrocarbon liquids.  into hydrocarbon liquids• Impetus for the GTL technology: Clean fuel obtained  as product and easy transportation• Main products: Middle distillates like gasoline Main products: Middle distillates like gasoline,  kerosene, jet fuel,naphtha and diesel  
  28. 28. Role the GTL technology can playR l th GTL t h l l
  29. 29. Gas to Liquids G t Li id• The Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis (F‐T synthesis) is one  of the most important technologies for GTL.  of the most important technologies for GTL.• A main advantage of the F‐T products is the absence  of sulphur, nitrogen and complex cyclic hydrocarbons  of sulphur nitrogen and complex cyclic hydrocarbons resulting in almost no emissions of sulfur dioxide,  nitrous oxides and unburned hydrocarbons. nitrous oxides and unburned hydrocarbons• For 100 barrels of liquids 1 MMscf of gas is needed
  30. 30. Project Constraints P j tC t i t LNG         GTL              CNG LNG GTL CNGReserves              Large       Large     Medium to SmallInfrastructure       Large       Large             Small f llInvestment           Large      Medium*  Medium to LargeTransportation      Large      Medium*         Large* Depending upon the number of ships required.
  31. 31. Worldwide areas of interest for application of CNG technology
  32. 32. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (PHOTOGRAPHS; ARTICLES & PRESENTATION….)· ABS· Shell· FPC· Technip· FlexLNG· QG· ConocoPhillips· Saipem· DNV· Aker· Waller Marine· EnerSea Votrans· E & P (Brian)· Asim Deshpande & Michael Economides· CE & CG Team (Bill / Milind) & others
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×