Eco-design 2015-17-06 - SPE presentation - PML · 2017-07-16 · 4 Why ? ¾Our society is increasingly concerned with environmental performance ¾In energy sector : For national O&G

Eco-design studyAn innovative service for management of sustainableprojects

C.HERAUD / PM.LETANNEUX17 juin 2015

The Society of Petroleum Engineers1

2

Content

Context

Study case of an offshore project at conceptual phase

Conclusion and way forward

The Society of Petroleum Engineers

3

Context

Why ?

For What ?

And How to develop the best environmental design ?


4

Why ?

Our society is increasingly concerned with environmental performance

In energy sector :

For national O&G companies, the environmental well-being of the local communities is a part of the “social contract”.

For stockmarket listed O&G companies, the Dow Jones Sustainability™ Indices (DJSI) may have a direct impact on the sharevalue.

In both cases, Environment is a significant component of Corporate Social Responsibility.

In the meantime, the amount of environmental regulation increases continuously and the sensitivity of local communities and their awareness are growing.


5

Why ?

CLIENT’s PROJECT

COMPLETION

REPUTATION

FINANCINGPERMITTING

The demonstration of the environmental performance is mandatory for the project completion


6

Why ?

Technip commitment is to support its Clients to take the best options and accelerate the project execution

7

For what ?

Our projects impact multiple receptors through different length and time scales


How ?

By an eco-design approach :

assessing the project throughout its whole life cycle

quantifying the impacts though a multi-factor methodology

implemented at the earliest stage of the project


9

Study Case

Offshore Project at the Conceptual Development Stage


10 The Society of Petroleum Engineers

The FPSO Life CycleFunctional unit : Production of oil and gasSpatial boundary : from the well head – to FPSO export linesTime period : from construction to dismantling, including 15 years of operation

Functional unit : Production of oil and gasSpatial boundary : from the well head – to FPSO export linesTime period : from construction to dismantling, including 15 years of operation

MAINTENANCE

FABRICATION

TRANSPORT

PRODUCTION

CONSTRUCTION (yard)

DISMANTLING

11*Each category is stated in a specific unit

Health & environmentalimpact category

Resource & release inventory

Health & environmentaldamage category

A multifactor impact assessment

A quantified impact is allocated to each

consumed resource and each pollutant released


12

A reliable impact quantification

LCA is recognized and concept has been developed by UNEP (United Nations Environment Program)SETAC (Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry) ISO (in ISO 14040:2006 and 14044:2006 )

LCA commercial softwaresSimaPro, GaBi, TEAM…

LCA emission databases updated continuouslyEcoinventBUWALMEEUP …

LCA Impact assessment methodsCML 2001Eco-indicator 99IPCC 2007...


13

Utilities and Living Quarter

Production phase : blockflow assessement

FPSO

Oil system

Export pumpsExport pumps

CompressorCompressor

SeparatorSeparator

N2, Air productionN2, Air

production

Cooling and seawater systems

Cooling and seawater systemsFlareFlare

Hull and LQHull and LQ

Power generationelectricity

Heat

Gaseous emission Liquid discharge Waste generation

Chemicals

ReservoirOil &Gas

Oil & Gasexport

Fuel Gas

Subsea System

Gas system

compressorscompressors

SeparatorSeparator

Gastreatment

Gastreatment

Produced water treatmentand reinjection system

Water to reservoir / to sea


14

Energy allocation

Electricity

Heat BP/HP

Fuel gas

Gaseous emissions

Need to allocate to each energy consumer an environmental impact

Use of Exergy to compare the different energy production systemsExergy is a thermodynamic parameter that gives a quality level of the energy and indicates to what degree energy is convertible to other forms of energy

Typical energy allocation of a Power generation system

1 MW of energy Typical CO2 emissions (kg/h)

Electricity 290

HP steam (1,07 t/h) 200

LP steam (1,24 t/h) 196


15

Impact of fabrication phase

Main findings

Hull (HU) 70% of the weight -> 50 % of the overall impact

Instrumentation (IN) 1,5 % of weight -> between 12% and 33% on average with a peak at 72% of the impacts

Main findings

Hull (HU) 70% of the weight -> 50 % of the overall impact

Instrumentation (IN) 1,5 % of weight -> between 12% and 33% on average with a peak at 72% of the impacts

Mainly made of steel

ResourcesResources

Ecosystem qualityEcosystem quality

Climate ChangeClimate Change

Human healthHuman health

4% 4% 4% 4% 5%

72%

15% 18% 20%13%

33%

12%19%

30%

7%

12%

8%

17%

8%

17%

18%

11% 11%

9%

12%

7%

11%

8%

7%

10%

60% 58%49%

62%

37%

59%44%

37%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Other Equipment (OE)

HVAC (HV)

Architectural (AR)

Safety (SA)

Piping (PI)

Hull (HU)

Structure (ST)

Electrical (EL)

Instrumentation (IN)

Painting (PA)

Mechanical (ME)


16

Impact of production phase

Main findings

Process and (process) utilities contribute to 98% of environmental impacts80% of environmental impacts whatever the categories come from the electricity production/consumption

Main findings

Process and (process) utilities contribute to 98% of environmental impacts80% of environmental impacts whatever the categories come from the electricity production/consumption

ResourcesResources




6% 5% 5% 4% 5% 5%

36% 42% 42% 49% 43% 42%

17%21% 20%

22%18% 20%

21%16% 17%

13%17% 17%

16% 12% 13% 10% 13% 13%3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

HULL & LQ SYSTEM

UTILITY SYSTEM

FLARE SYSTEM

PRODUCEDWATER SYSTEM

OIL SYSTEM

GAS SYSTEM

SUBSEA SYSTEM


17

Fabrication phase versus Production phase

Main findings

Higher impact of the production phase

Main findings

Higher impact of the production phase

95% 94%

70%78%

25%

5% 6%

30%22%

75%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall impact ofFabrication phase

Overall impact ofProduction phase


18

Best Available Techniques for production phase – 3 process cases

System Optimum Case Base Case Worst Case

POWER GENERATION Low NOx Turbines Classical Gas Turbines

GAS Recycling of fuel gas from Tri Ethylene Glycol regeneration unit Venting of fuel gas from TEG regeneration unit

OIL

Heat Recovery Unit for crude oil heater No Heat Recovery Unit

Recycling of oil storage Vent Flaring of oil storage vent

FLARE Recycling of flare sweeping gas sweeping gas Flaring

PRODUCTION Production reduction in case of compressor upsets No reduction of the production


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

OPTIMUMCASE 1

BASE CASE 1

WORSTCASE 1

19

impacts comparison of the 3 process cases

Venting of TEG regeneration

fuel gas

Classical Gas Turbine

sweeping gas flaring

Flaring of oilstorage vent

Main findingsMajor benefits of the implementation of Dry Low Emissions gas turbines and fuel gas recycling Minor benefit of heat Recovery Unit implementation

Main findingsMajor benefits of the implementation of Dry Low Emissions gas turbines and fuel gas recycling Minor benefit of heat Recovery Unit implementation

ResourcesResources




20

Impact of operating philosophy

Main findings

Production decrease / stopping in case of Gas Compressor upsets (less than 2% per year) will reduce the yearly environmental impact of around 20%.

Main findings

Production decrease / stopping in case of Gas Compressor upsets (less than 2% per year) will reduce the yearly environmental impact of around 20%.

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Abioticdepletion (fossil

fuels)

Global warming(GWP100a)

Human toxicity

Photochemicaloxidation

Acidification

EutrophicationOPTIMUM CASE 1

BASE CASE 1

ResourcesResources




21

Impact of methanol consumption

Main findings

Methanol fabrication increases the environmental impact on eutrophication, acidification and photochemical oxidation between 10% and 20%.

Main findings

Methanol fabrication increases the environmental impact on eutrophication, acidification and photochemical oxidation between 10% and 20%.

ResourcesResources




107%

102%

119%116%

121%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%Fossil fuels depletion

Global warming(GWP100a)

Photochemical oxidationAcidification

Eutrophication

Production phase ‐ BaseCase 1

Production phase +Methanol injection ‐Base Case 1


22

Conclusion and way forward


23

An innovative service for management of sustainable project

Address the potential impacts during all Facility life cycle from construction to end-of-life

Address the global impacts of the Facility on Climate change & ressource depletionand regional impacts on ecosystemquality & human health

Quantify the major contributors and identify opportunities for process and energy efficiency improvement

MAINTENANCE

FABRICATION

CONSTRUCTION

PRODUCTION

TRANSPORTATION

DISMANTLING

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

OPTIMUMCASE 1

BASE CASE 1

WORST CASE1

ResourcesResources





24

To take the best design option of Conceptual phase

Associated to safety, availability and CAPEX/OPEX criteria, it provides a sound and quantified means to determine which are the Best Available Techniques (BAT) / ALARP design applicable to the project

It assists our clients to anticipate and control the project risks :Project delaying due to re-enginneering or permitting CAPEX/OPEX increases and financing issuesConflicts with local communitiesAnd also, prove its Corporate Social Responsibility approach

The improvement of energy efficiency and production availability have positive impact on project profitability as well as on its environmental performance

Technip’s Clients are able to take the best options to secure theirproject objectives


25

The environmental issues shall addressed at each project’s step

FEED EPC Start up

Technical Assistance

Take the best design options

Conceptual

Impact modelling and & EIA performance

Prove the Environmental Management of the project


What are the other benefits of the eco-design approach ?

Challenge our design habits

Boost the Engineer expertise

Encourage all disciplines to become key players to protect the environment

Give meaning to Technip people’s job


27

Technip Best in class

Technip HSED department in Paris is ready !

2 references and a SOW is ready-to-use

Internal skilled engineering capability

Low price study

We believe that the approach presented above will position TECHNIP as an environmental conscious and competent engineering and that it will constitute a strong differentiator


Thank you

Documents

Eco-design 2015-17-06 - SPE presentation - PML · 2017-07-16 · 4 Why ? ¾Our society is increasingly concerned with environmental performance ¾In energy sector : For national O&G