NON-PIPELINE TRANSPORT OF NATURAL GAS - NTNU

NON-PIPELINE NON PIPELINE TRANSPORT OF
NATURAL GAS
Jón Steinar Gudmundsson
TPG4140 NATURGASS
NTNU
September 12, 2012

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
Non Pipeline Technologies
� CNG Compressed Natural Gas
� GTL Gas-to-Liquid (incl. MOH)
� GTW Gas-to-Wire (DC and AC)
� LNG Liqufied Natural Gas
� NGH Natural Gas Hydrate

Capacity (BCM/year)
CAPACITY-DISTANCE CAPACITY DISTANCE DIAGRAM
10,0
1,0
0,1
Gudmundsson and Mork (2001)
PIPE
100 1000 10000
Distance (km)
ALL
LNG
CNG, GTW, NGH GTL

Khalipour et al. 2009, IPTC 14083

NGH
Size and Technology
Non-Pipeline
Technology
LNG
Syncrude
MOH
Hove et al. (1999)
Nominal Plant
Capacity
3 MTPY
20,000 bbl/d
2500 MTPD
1.6 MSm3/d
Field
Size
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)
1 Sm3 = 35.314 ft3
Plant Size
(gas prod.)
20 BCM/year
4.3 BCM/year
* 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, size,
600 MMscfd (=6.2 BCM/year) BCM/year
Non-Pipeline
Technology
MOH
LNG
GTL
Klein Nagervoort (2000)
Global
Demand
30 MTPA
(corrected)
100 MTPA
3,000 MTPA
Plant Size
6 MTPA
4 MTPA
3 MTPA
Plant %
Global
Demand
20%
4%
0.1%

Shell Middle Distillate Synthesis Process
Klein Nagervoort (2000)

FPSO
Overview of Alternatives

FPSO + Methanol
UT-769

Oil
Water
Gas
Choke
Manifold
Water
Separation
Produced water
treatment
FPSO + Methanol
Gas
Discharge
Crude oil
Desulphurisation
Steam
TCR reforming
Crude Oil Storage tanks
Methanol
Synthesis
Stabilisation/
Distillation
Crude Methanol
Methanol Storage
tanks
Grade AA
Methanol
To shuttle
Tanker

54 bar
27 o C
Process, Marine CNG
compress
refrigerate
Discharge - $5%
200 bar
10 o C
15.5 knots
200 bar
5 o C
expand
scavenge
heat
Load - $10%
Sail - $85%
47 bar
5 o C
10 bar
-30 o C

T ariff, $/mmBtu
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Pipe, CNG and LNG, 400 MMscfd
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

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
Pipe vs. CNG
$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 quilibrium Curve urve
Pressure [bar]
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Methane
1 m 3 of hydrate
Natural gas
0 5 10 15 20 25
Temperature [°C]
180 Sm 3 of gas

STANDARDIZED PELLETS
Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding

Capital cost of NGH and LNG chains for 400 MMscf/d production and
transport over 3500 nautical miles. Million US dollars mid-1995. 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

Images of NGH carriers
Source; 2001-03 JRTT/Phase-1, Conceptual design on NGH carrier

Natural Gas
Water
Natural gas sea transport chain with NGH pellets
NGH formation Storage Tank
Storage Tank
Pelletizer
NGH Carrier
Load Unload
Re-gasification
Powdery Pellets
Pellets to fire
Natural Gas
Water

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 considered an attractive alternative. Several groups have
worked on developing NGH technology world-wide (NTNU was the first,
now Mitsui of Japan has pilot-scale production and transport).
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 the scale of development and
distance to market. CNG and NGH are probably competing in similar
stranded gas situations.