lng_tech_2.ppt

8/11/2019 lng_tech_2.ppt

1/28

LNG Technology

By Laura Donnelly

Energy Technology and Policy

November 25, 2008


2/28

Capital and Operating Costs

of LNG chain

Exploration & Treatment & Shipping Storage & Distribution

Production Liquifaction Regasification & Marketing15-20% 30-45% 10-30% 15-25%


3/28

LIQUEFACTION

Cool Gas to -260oF

1/600thof gaseous volume

30-45% LNG chain costs Costs driven by:

Train number and capacity

Compressor drive efficiency New Technology: Offshore Production

Darwin Liquefaction Facility

http://content.edgar-online.com/edgar_conv_img/2007/03/30/0000950152-07-002894_L25400AL2540013.JPG


4/28

Train Size

Train capacity has grown an average of 3

million tons/year

Facilities with capacities of 7.8 and 9.6 million

tons/yr will come on stream soon (Qatar and

Russia)

Increasing train capacity, as opposed to # of

trains, can reduce costs by 25%


5/28

Compressor Drive Efficiency

Gas Turbine Improvements Increase in efficiency from 28% to 40% in last 40yrs

Decrease in fuel consumption (i.e. cost) by 60-70%

Aeroderivative Turbines

Advantages: increase thermal efficiency by 25% andtotal plant efficiency by 3%, less downtime to replace

Disadvantages: expensive, high maintenance

Currently, industrial gas turbines are used to drive thecompressors

Electric Drive Alternative Use of smaller turbines in a combine cycle power

plant to produce electricity to run liquefaction plant

Improve efficiency, cut emissions


6/28

Offshore

LiquefactionFloating Production Storageand Offloading (FPSO)

http://braxtonlng.com/LNGFPSOs.aspx


7/28

TRANSPORTATION

LNG shipped in large vessels with cryogenic

tanks

10-30% LNG chain costs

Costs driven by:

Vessel capacity

Tanker Propulsion New Technology: Ship-to-Ship Transfer (STS)


8/28

Vessel Capacity

First LNG tankers: 27,400 cubic meters (cu m)

In 2007, vessels averaged 266,000 cu m

Decrease in costs by 45% from early 1990sdue to increase in vessel capacity

Limitations: restrictions on import vessel size,

maximum capacity of regasificationequipment


9/28

Tanker Propulsion

Boil-off gas (~0.15%/day)

Vent to atmosphere

Burned

Reliquefied

Three Propulsion Options:

1. Steam Turbine

2. Dual-fuel diesel engine (DFDE)

3. Heavy fuel diesel engine


10/28

Tanker Propulsion


Vent to atmosphere

Burned

Reliquefied


1. Steam Turbine




11/28

Tanker Propulsion


Vent to atmosphere

Burned

Reliquefied


1. Steam Turbine




12/28

Tanker Propulsion


Vent to atmosphere

Burned

Reliquefied


1. Steam Turbine




13/28

Ship-to-Ship Transfer

Emergence of Offshore regasification and liquefaction

New vessels may now have capability to transfer or

receive loads

http://www.thedigitalship.com/powerpoints/norship05/lng/Trym%20Tveitnes,%20HOEGH.pdf


14/28

REGASIFICATION

Facility costs can range from $100 million for asmall plant to $2 billion for state-of-the-art

greenfield plant (usually found in Japan)

Costs driven by Storage

Gas Composition Control

New Technology: Offshore Regasification


15/28

Storage

1/3 plant capital costs

Storage capacity dictates volume of gas plant canhandle

Can usually only process 70-75% capacity load

Increasing storage can increased capital costs 10-20%

EIA, Global LNG Status and Outlook 2003


16/28

Composition Control

Composition of gas delivered to regasificationplant can vary significantly depending on source

Compounds, such as propane, butane andethane, can often be left in the LNG in order toreduce liquefaction costs

These compounds raise the heating value (HHV)of the gas, which many countries do not have theinfrastructure or equipment to handle, the US

included Industrial equipment accounts for 60% of natural

gas use, and is typically the most sensitive tonatural gas quality


17/28

Composition Control

Technologies to reduce the HHV

Injection of inert gas (usually Nitrogen) into vaporizedgas

Can increase end-user NOx emissions

Restrictions placed on amount of inert gas that can bepresent in fuel

Increase in capital and operating expenditures to runinjection process, with no increase in value of fuel

Natural Gas Liquids Recovery (NGLR) Remove the mid-range (propane, butane, ethane)

compounds before or after regasification

Profit from petrochemical sales > profit from high HHV whenpresent in gas


18/28

Offshore Regasification

US to build two Offshore plants, one already underconstruction

Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU)


19/28

Conclusions

To keep the LNG market growing and meet

increasing natural gas demands, it is most important

for future technology to address:

Compressor Efficiency Ship-to-Ship transfer

Offshore Regasification

Increasing cost effectiveness will allow companies toproduce gas in harsher environments to help meet

demands (deep sea, artic conditions)


20/28

Questions?


21/28

US Natural Gas Imports Projected to 2030

(Pipeline vs. LNG)

Energy Information Administration,Annual Energy Outlook 2006


22/28

LNG demand as of 2003

Source: Gas Techology Institute, IEA 2003 Natural Gas Information


23/28

LNG Demand in 2025

EIA International Energy Outlook 2004


24/28

Why is demand increasing?

Increased installation of Combine Cycle power

plants for increased efficiencies

Environmental concerns: Natural gas iscleaner than petroleum and coal

Worries over the abundance of conventional

fuel supplies: natural gas reserves to last 30yrslonger than oil


25/28

Wartsila Diesel, 2008

Liquefaction Terminals


26/28

Wartsila Diesel, 2008

Regasification Terminals


27/28

Regasification Plant in Sabine, TX

to receive LNG from Qatar (2009)

ExxonMobile Corporation: Form 8-K, current report


28/28

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Documents

lng_tech_2.ppt