Analysis says gas FPSO feasible,

CNG possibly economic export option

12/02/2002








Economic analysis of use of a floating production, storage, and offloading (FPSO) vessel to produce a dry-gas reservoir indicates
that such use is technically feasible.
Moreover, this analysis indicates that, of three transportation optionspipeline, LNG, and CNGshipping by CNG exhibits the
best return on investment under a simplified payback analysis.
FPSO's acceptance
The FFPSO vessel has become an accepted solution for oil production in deepwater or remote offshore areas. Today's FPSO
applications primarily deal with oil production, while associated gas is reinjected where there is no gas-pipeline infrastructure
available. A few of these vessels process associated gas to recover NGL but still reinject the residue gas.
Continued technological developments in gas-utilization processes, expanding discovery of reserves in remote and deepwater
locations offshore, regulatory requirements, and market pressures are combining to make recovery of associated gas in remote
locations both technically and commercially possible.
The result will inevitably be a combination of traditional oil-production
facilities and gas-utilization facilities on a single hull. Some producers
already consider this option technically feasible.
But what about remote dry-gas discoveries? Such gas fields, no matter their
sizes, are often not being produced. A potential means of production would
be a pure gas FPSO (GFPSO).
A generic GFPSO would in essence be a floating gas production and
conditioning facility. Being a movable and reusable asset, this concept could
unlock many gas reserves that might otherwise remain stranded under
conventional project-development scenarios.
The GFPSO's principal export products would be pipeline-quality gas, an
LPG liquid, and a C5+ condensate liquid. While conventional shuttle tankers
can transport the two liquid products, transportation of the residue gas
remains the primary economic challenge.
Offshore gas can be transported by one of four generic methods:
1. Gas transmission to shore in gaseous phase by pipeline.
2. Volume reduction through either liquefaction or compression
(LNG, CNG) followed by marine transportation.
3. Conversion to other products by changing the "methane molecule"
(methanol, synthetic crude: gas-to-liquids, or GTL), followed by marine
transportation.
4. Conversion to another form of energy such as electric power and
transmission by a subsea cable to shore (gas-to-watts, or GTW).
Obviously, the simpler the required facilities, the lower the probable capital
cost.
On this basis, the first two generic methods listed offer the most likely transportation options for the gas product from a GFPSO.
This article examines the relative configuration and economics of a GFPSO using pipeline, CNG, or LNG as the gas-product
transportation method.
Options
This article looks at facilities that process 400 MMscfd of produced gas. This volume is selected because, as will be seen later,
the weight of topsides facilities necessary to produce this rate "fits" on commonly available hull sizes.
The facility is assumed to be in deepwater, nominally 800-1,000 m. The produced gas to the facility is assumed to be relatively
rich gas (see accompanying box for composition).

Click here to enlarge image

Table 1 shows overall material
balances for 400 MMscfd of produced
gas. The pipeline-quality gas product
will have an approximate gas heating
value (GHV) of 1,058 btu/std. cu ft
for all three transportation options.
The product rates are used to calculate revenues and
costs from each transportation option. Shrinkage for
liquid recovery and fuel use reduces the available
export-gas volume. LNG suffers additional shrinkage
due to a lower overall thermodynamic efficiency and
the need for refrigerants.
Fig. 1 presents the GFPSO processing
scheme for the pipeline and CNG
options. Production facilities will
include well-fluid cooling followed by
hydrocarbon liquids, water, and gas
separation. Gas conditioning will
include dehydration and NGL recovery
followed by compression.
The basic export products are pipeline
quality gas, LPG mix, and stabilized
condensate. The NGL liquid products
are exported via shuttle tankers and
their storage will be provided on the
GFPSO.
Pipeline
Pipeline export is usually the simplest
transportation option for gas. Pipeline
construction is expensive, however,
becoming more expensive with water
depth and of course distance from
shore.
Deepwater pipelines become limited in size as lay stresses in deep water reduce the pipe size that can be installed by existing lay
barges. In some areas, bottom profiles at deepwater locations also reduce applicability of a pipeline solution.
This article makes the assumptions for the pipeline option shown in the accompanying box.
The export gas enters the pipeline directly from the GFPSO compression train at about 3,000 psig and 110 F. Some modification
to the GFPSO flare and relief system may be needed if relief of the pipeline volume is to be considered during shutdown
scenarios.
A GFPSO that transports residue gas by pipeline requires no equipment or technologies not currently in use on oil production
FPSOs.
Compression
CNG as a gas transportation option has been receiving much industry attention with at least four firms offering schemes. All of
these use specially equipped CNG ships to shuttle gas under high pressure from the production location to an onshore receiving
infrastructure that could be a plant or pipeline.
No CNG ships have been constructed to date. All of the CNG technology firms are actively seeking a project that can support
construction of one or more CNG vessels.
CNG as a transportation option for this article treats the CNG transportation cost as a tariff. The number of CNG ships required
will vary with the distance to shore and reliability requirements and is reflected in a higher tariff for longer distances. Inlet
pressure to the CNG ship is assumed to be 3,000 psig.
Allowance is made for infrastructure at the receiving location for offloading the gas either into storage or an existing pipeline
infrastructure.


Click here to enlarge image


Click here to enlarge image


Click here to enlarge image