Developing rigorous ghg forecasts for e p operations ghg forecast tool
Download
1 / 20

Developing Rigorous GHG Forecasts For E&P Operations GHG Forecast Tool - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 286 Views
  • Uploaded on

Developing Rigorous GHG Forecasts For E&P Operations GHG Forecast Tool John Edwards Head of Projects Emissions Asset Business Accurate GHG Forecasts: Why ? Company Climate Commitments Monitoring Progress And Making Appropriate Interventions Emissions Markets

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Developing Rigorous GHG Forecasts For E&P Operations GHG Forecast Tool' - ostinmannual


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Developing rigorous ghg forecasts for e p operations ghg forecast tool l.jpg

Developing Rigorous GHG Forecasts For E&P OperationsGHG Forecast Tool

John Edwards

Head of ProjectsEmissions Asset Business


Accurate ghg forecasts why l.jpg
Accurate GHG Forecasts: Why ?

  • Company Climate Commitments

    • Monitoring Progress And Making Appropriate Interventions

  • Emissions Markets

    • Understand Future Cost Implications

    • Plan

    • Make Interventions

  • Increasing Focus On Carbon and Its Management.

    • Likely Carbon Will have A Cost In Most Places

    • Reputation

    • Responsible Corporate Behaviour


Bp ghg emissions from e p segment l.jpg
BP GHG Emissions From E&P Segment

Forecast

Commitment 1 in 1998

Reduce Emissions By 10% by 2010

Commitment 2 in 2002

Hold 2001 Flat To 2012………


Accurate ghg forecasts why4 l.jpg
Accurate GHG Forecasts: Why ?

  • Company Climate Commitments

    • Monitoring Progress And Making Appropriate Interventions

  • Increasing Focus On Carbon and Its Management.

    • Likely Carbon Will have A Cost In Most Places

    • Reputation

    • Responsible Corporate Behaviour

  • Emissions Markets

    • Understand Future Cost Implications

    • Plan

    • Make Interventions


How to produce accurate forecasts l.jpg
How To Produce Accurate Forecasts?

Flows Through Facility

No of Trains & Plant Loading

Performance Curve to give power requirement

CO2 ProfileCO2 Cost

Energy CostEnergy Metrics

Performance Curveto give energy requirement

No of Turbines & Loading

Fuel Gas Propertiesto give CO2



Model requires 3 input elements l.jpg
Model Requires 3 Input Elements

Modelling the installed equipment and its operational characteristics

Profiles of the flows that cause energy to be consumed in the major equipment

Operational factors: running standby capacity, ambient conditions, fuel composition, fuel / CO2 prices, miscellaneous not modelled issues e.g. flare, thermal loads, general power etc

  • Tool converts this data entry into

  • Equipment running and its loading

  • Equipment efficiency and its power requirement

  • Turbine loading and fuel requirement

  • CO2 emissions, energy requirement profiles and associated costs


Input screen examples l.jpg
Input Screen Examples

Separate Entry Tab For Each Unit Operation

Each compressor or pump characterised by peak throughput and peak power requirement

Driver can be motor or turbine from drop down list

Driver can drive any combination of compression stages


Flow profiles input tab l.jpg
Flow Profiles Input Tab

Gas Export and Interstage Flows

Gas Injection

Oil Export

Water Injection (2 Trains)

Flare

Vent

Diesel(for miscellaneous duties e.g. crane, fire pumps)

Period Usually annual for initial runs

Can amend inputs to give multiple scenarios in a year - increases accuracye.g. ambient temperature change, fuel change, equipment downtime etc.


Miscellaneous data l.jpg
Miscellaneous Data

  • Miscellaneous inputs e.g:-

  • loads not calculated in tool eg thermal requirements

  • ambient conditions

  • cost data


Output screen l.jpg
Output screen

Illustration of typical output screen for selected period

Traffic Light Performance

Visual Indication of Installed Plant

Number of Trains In Operation

Breakdown of Power Use By Operation

Report Options: Energy, CO2, Cost

Detailed Report by Period

Button for ChartsData Export etc


Confirmation of accuracy and application l.jpg
Confirmation of Accuracy and Application

  • Tool tested “blind” using historical production data to give forecast and compared with what was reported

  • Results very acceptable, within 5%, once main scenarios accounted for

  • Usually needed a couple of hours to produce the results if accessed the right people from the operation: process engineer / production planning

  • Once configured, very quick forecast updates available as production / operational changes are predicted.

  • Future GHG forecast “error” will be due to differences in production / operational actuals v forecast, not GHG methodology


Initial lessons learned l.jpg
Initial Lessons Learned

  • Great value in having an accurate, consistent, robust, transparent model for ghg forecasting.

  • Concern about basing calculations on daily flows = annual flow / 365 when there were usually a number of periods in the year where the operating conditions would have influenced performance

  • Therefore needed scenario modelling and aggregation: Excel output

  • For some facilities we needed more functionality

    • e.g. interstage gas flow, spinning reserve etc

  • A lot of invaluable information being generated but not displayed.

  • Tremendous potential for option appraisal in facility design

  • Needed To Develop a “Mk 2” updated version


Who will use l.jpg
Who Will Use?

Initially GHG Forecaster

  • Designed to get a balance between simplicity and accuracy

  • Focus on use by Energy/ Environmental Engineer

    • Minimal training required

    • Can then do own options appraisal & sensitivity studies

  • Does not need Process/Mechanical Engineer to run

    • Already incorporated in model

  • Max ½ day population and running

    Updated Tool

  • Concept Developer

  • Project Development Team

  • Operations Engineer


Use of forecaster for option appraisal l.jpg
Use Of Forecaster For Option Appraisal

Option 1

Concepts & Options Appraisal

Production

Forecasts

BAT

Option 2

Option 3

Sensitivities

Plant & Ops Options

Different Gas Turbines

Spinning Reserve

Uncertainties

Production Forecasts

CO2 Trading Value

Fuel Price

Fuel Gas Composition

Days on Diesel

Technology Options

Power Import

CCGT

GT vs Motor Drive

No of trains

Outputs

Fuel & CO2 Cost

Energy KPIs

Plant Load Profiles

Emissions Profiles


Use of forecaster for option appraisal16 l.jpg
Use Of Forecaster For Option Appraisal

  • Example of a North Sea Facility:

  • Mature asset

  • 2 oversized turbine generators, both running for security of supply

  • Turbine driven gas export and “mid life” compression

  • EUETS trading exposure $1m

  • Asset model developed for GHG forecasting

  • Consider impact of :

  • Right size turbines: Power Generation

  • Single turbine operation: Power Generation

  • Change from Mars turbines to electric compression on LP (midlife compressors)


Base case current operation l.jpg
Base Case: Current Operation

Turbine 34% loaded

MP Compression stage on recycle: HP is OK

If motor driven soon able to turn of a train


Co2 emissions forecast l.jpg
CO2 Emissions Forecast

Saving Potential

Driver Change 15kTe/y

Motor Drives 22kTe/y

Single GT Op 23kTe/y

All Electric 62kTe/y

Saving From MP Compressor Shutdown


Analysis shows l.jpg
Analysis Shows

  • Single turbine generator operation would save $4m / year, worth investing up to $20m capex eg standby power from adjacent platform

  • Questionable decision to provide turbine driven mid life compressionMotor drive would save $3.8m / year, could spend up to $20m capex

  • Generally hard to justify driving different stages with single shaft over life of operation

  • An all electric platform would save $11m/y now in CO2 and fuel costs

Fuel Cost$7/mmBtu

CO2 Cost$29/ tonne


Conclusions l.jpg
Conclusions

  • Possible To Achieve GHG Forecasts Within 5% Of Actual Emissions- subject to production forecasts being correct - for conventional centralised, eg offshore, operations

  • Invaluable Having Consistent & Transparent Estimation Methodology

  • Forecast Updates Take A Few Minutes- ie converting throughput forecasts to GHG forecasts

  • Excellent Tool For Option Appraisal In Concept / Project Development- technology selection, driver selection, number of trains - inclusion of energy & CO2 costs enable quick viability assessment - enables a life cycle approach to project development

  • Has Application In Existing Operations Optimisation- standby plant operation, plan compressor re-wheeling, reducing running GTs - enables high level performance benchmarking

  • Off The Shelf Product Available To All E&P Companies - Tool released through PI Energy & Emissions


ad