Upload
anyanwu-eugene
View
26
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Greenhouse Gas and Energy Efficiency Report
Project Gbaran Phase 3A – Abasere ProjectOriginating
Company SCiN Engineering Design Office
Document Title Greenhouse Gas and Energy Efficiency ReportDocument
Number GBU3A-SEDO-ABAF1-PX3363-00001
Document Revision R02
Document Status Issued for ReviewOriginator /
Author Harold B.
Security Classification Restricted
ECCN EAR 99
Issue Date 25-April-16Revision History is
shown next page
Rev #
Date of Issue
Status Description
Originator Checker Approver
R03 7-Mar-16 Issued for Review Harold B. Akinloye B. Anumba C
R02 7-Mar-16 Issued for Review Akinbote A.J
Akinloye B. Anumba C
R01 15-Dec-15 Issued for Review Akinbote
A.J.Akinloye B. Anumba C
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 1 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 2 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT/APPROVAL RECORD
PartyRef Indicator Name Sign Date
Guidelines:1. Please consider using hyperlinks to Livelink rather than embedding
large documents.2. Fonts must not be altered from the standard styles.3. Graphs to be without borders.4. Use non-breaking spaces between numbers and units
Ctrl+Shift+Space5. Special Characters such as degree (°C) refer to: http://www.alt-
codes.net/ 6. Maps to follow Shell mapping standards.7. Figures & tables to be incorporated in the text, with attachments if
a larger figure will benefit (reference attachment in caption). Captions below figure using the Insert Caption command.
8. Units are Oil field Metric. If Oil field standard units are used (e.g. ft and psi, then the metric translation must be put straight afterwards e.g. 1000ft [305m])
9. Use m3 rather than bbl/ft3
Revision Philosophy:a. All FEED documents for review shall be issued at R01, with
subsequent R02, R03, etc as required.b. All documents approved for issue, or approved for design shall be
issued at A01with subsequent A02, A03, etc as required. (Management of Change is required for A02, A03, etc).
c. All Detailed Design documents for review shall be issued at D01, with subsequent D02, D03, etc as required.
d. All documents approved for construction shall be issued at C01with subsequent C02, C03, etc as required. (Management of Change is required for C02, C03, etc).
e. All approved “As Built” documents shall be issued at Z01, with subsequent Z02, Z03, etc as required. (Use versions Z01.1, Z01.2, Z01.3, etc to review “As Built” document to Z02).
Revision HistorySSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 3 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Rev No Date of issue Reason for Issue / ChangeR01 13-Nov-15 Issued for Review Comments
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 4 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Table of Contents1. INTRODUCTION 7
1.1. Background 71.2. Objectives 71.3. Abasere Project Overview 71.4. Work Scope based on Basis for Design 81.5. Report Scope 91.6. Connections to Adjacent facility 9
2. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND ENERGY USE 102.1. Production Forecast 102.2. Mass, Energy and GHG Balances 102.3. Greenhouse gas emission forecast and CPF energy use 11
3. CONCLUSION 134. ABBREVIATIONS 145. ATTACHMENTS 156. REFERENCES 16
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 5 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
TablesTable 1: Overall emissions forecast and energy consumption 6Table 2: Abasere GHG forecast 11Table 3: Abasere energy consumption 12
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 6 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
FiguresFigure 1: Abasere Project Scope – Overview 8Figure 2: Overview of Design Scope 9Figure 2.1: Abasere production forecast 10
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 7 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
1. Introduction2. abbreviations
AG/AGG Associated Gas / Associated Gas Gathering
ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable
ARP Asset Reference Plan
BCOT Bonny Crude Oil Terminal
BFD Basis For Design
BFG Bonny Fuel Gas
BNAG Bonny Non-Associated Gas
BPD Barrels Per Day
BYSEB Bayelsa State Electricity Board
CAPP Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers
CCS Carbon Capture and Storage
CDM Carbon Development Mechanism
CEI Carbon Emission Index
CGR Condensate Gas Ratio
CLP Crude Loading Platform
COT Crude Oil Tanks
CPF Central Processing Facilities
DCAF Discipline Controlled Assurance Framework
DRB Decision Review Board
EE Energy Efficiency
EMP Energy Management Plan
FCV Flow Control Valve
FDP Field Development Plan
FEED Front End Engineering Design
FLB Field Logistic Base
FPSO Floating Production Storage and Offloading
GES Global Environmental Standards
GFC Generic Fitting Count
GHG/EEMP Green House Gas & Energy Efficiency Management Plan
GJ Giga-Joule
GLR Gas Liquid Ratio
GOR Gas Oil Ratio
GP Gas Plant
GRF Gas Receiving Facility
GT/GTG Gas Turbine/ Gas Turbine GeneratorSSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 8 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
HC Hydrocarbon
HIPPS High Integrity Pressure Protection System
HP High Pressure
HSE Health Safety & Environment
IAP Integrated Activity Plan
JV Joint Venture
KPI Key Performance Indicator
LGSP LNG Gas Supply Plant
LHV Lower Heating Value
LOF Life of Field
LP Low Pressure
LTO License to Operate
LVDR Leaking Valve Detection and Repair
MMSCFD Million Standard Cubic Feet Per Day
MOP Maximum Operating Pressure
NFA No Further Activity
NLNG Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas
NNF Normally Non-Flow
NPA New Process Area
NPV Net Present Value
OGGS Offshore Gas Gathering System
ORP Opportunity Realisation Process
OU Operating Unit
PFI Proposals for Implementation
POPM Process Operating Procedures Manual
PP Power Plant
PSV Project Screening Value
PV Present Value
PVRV Pressure-Vacuum Relief Valve
RACI Responsible Accountable Consults InformRFM Remote Field ManifoldSCEI Shell CO2 Emission IndexSCiN Shell Companies in Nigeria
SPDC Shell Petroleum Development Company
STBPD Stock Tank Barrels Per Day
SYMP Soft Yoke Mooring Platform
TQ Top Quartile
UEEI Upstream Energy Efficiency Index
VRU Vapour Recovery Unit
WHRU Waste Heat Recovery UnitSSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 9 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
WIP Water Injection Plant
XHP Extra High Pressure
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 10 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
3. SUMMARY
GHG Emissions for the Abaere Field Development Project over the 10 year forecast period are
estimated at 35,510 tonnes of CO2eq, when average production is about 24,000 stbpd (net
condenstate) and 400 MMSCFD. Imported power generation accounts for 82.1 % of the total
emissions, and is the major source of emission in the project. Fugitive emissions from valves and
flanges account for 14.8 % of the total GHG emissions. Venting at Abasere due to routine
maintenance depressuring accounts less than 3.1 % of the total GHG emissions.
Over the forecast period, the total emissions and energy intensities are 0.8 kg CO2 equiv. and 0.013
GJ per Tonne of hydrocarbon produced respectively. Also the SCEI and UEEI are 43 and 0.52
respectively. These are generally low compared to peer facilities in the group. Regarding GHG
emissions and energy consumption therefore, this project is considered ALARP.
In addition there are other design considerations or elements, which either have direct impact on
emissions or are implemented in order to enable accurate measurement and analysis of energy use
and GHG emissions. These include;
1. Use of HIPPS instead of relief valve as ultimate safeguard for overpressure protection of
downstream facility to avoid relief vent load at Abasere Field.
2. Depressuring philosophy to depressurise the Abasere flowlines at Gbaran CPF where it will
be flared.
3. Installation of PZA-HH on the Slugcatcher at Soku LGSP to reduce demand on installed relief
valve. This reduces relief events and consequently reduces flaring emissions at the Soku
LGSP.
4. Provide Vent Gas Meter at the RFM to measure and Monitor venting incidents, frequency
and flow rates
5. Provide individual fuel gas meters for each gas engine power generator to measure the fuel
gas consumed by individual gas engines.
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 11 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
The purpose of the Group Global Environmental Standards (GES, Ref. 3) is to establish a baseline for
continuous improvement as required by the Group HSE Commitment and Policy.
For Greenhouse gases the GES (section 1) states:
“All major installations shall manage GHG emissions, taking into account the carbon value, to
maximize the business opportunity by:
Implementing 5-year greenhouse gas (GHG) management plans which capture the inherent
value of GHG emission reduction opportunities within the installation according to the relevant
market.
Quantifying GHG emissions at a frequency suitable for the relevant legal framework, but reporting
at least annually.
Forecasting GHG emissions 10 years ahead at least annually.”
For Energy use and Efficiency the GES (section 10) states:
“Energy use and energy efficiency shall be actively monitored at all major installations and 5-year
Energy Management Plans shall be in place that describes the continuous improvement process to
maximise the efficiency of energy use and throughput.
A demonstration of how energy efficiency considerations have been included in the design of the
project shall be made for new and modified major installations.”
This document describes the combined 5-year greenhouse gases (GHG) management plan and 5-
year Energy Management plan for Abasere Field Development assets at Abasere RMF for the year
2017 in response to this standard.
1.2 Objectives
The key GHG and EE management objectives at the Definition phase of a project are:
To define and specify the selected development option, including the measures selected to
minimise the GHG emissions and reduce energy consumptions.
To optimise the GHG and EE management at an equipment and system integration level.
To specify the GHG and EE requirements for long lead equipment.
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 12 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
1.3 Asset & Activities description
The GHG & Energy efficiency Management Plan for the Abasere Field Development Project covers
the following facilities:
Flowlines, Production Headers, Bulk line Remote Manifold, Pig Launcher, Instrument Air Package,
Corrosion Injection System, Well Equalisation System and Gas Engine Power Generators. These
facilities are owned and operated by SPDC under the Land 2 East Asset (PEL2) Area. Other facilities
which are located at the Soku LGSP include the Pig Receiver and the Slugcatcher.
1.3.1 Project OverviewGbaran Phase 3A Abasere Field development is an integrated oil and gas development which aims to develop 0.835Tcf of gas and ~29MMbbls of condensate & oil reserves at Abasere field in order to meet SPDC’s commitment to sustain NLNG gas supply obligation and support oil growth. The development is tranched such as to progress into FEED/Define with Tranche-1 (gas development), while the oil will be for a subsequent phase of development (Tranche-2) to allow for evolving a secured oil evacuation concept and carry out further appraisal to shore up the oil volume/economics.
The Abasare work scope is totally green field. It comprises of two well locations; Abasere-001 and Abasere-004. Three NAG wells will be clustered at the Abasere - 001 location and two wells at the Abasere-004 location. The five development NAG wells will be hooked-up via 6-inch flowlines to the Abasere NAG remote manifold to be located near the Abasere – 004 well cluster. The wells will be commingled at the manifold and bulk flowed via a new 12-inch x 17.7 km bulkline (Design Capacity 180MMscfd/d) to the existing Zarama Remote NAG manifold. The NAG production from both Abasere and Zarama fields will be co-mingled at the Zarama manifold and transported via the existing 20-inch x 10.2 km Zarama NAG bulkline to the Gbaran CPF. This bulkline (Design capacity 670MMscf/d) is already tied to the Zarama slug-catcher installed at Gbaran CPF.It is envisaged that Zarama NAG may already be on compression before the Abasere field development On-Stream date; therefore, the design cases will incorporate the flexibility to operate the Abasere NAG wells for an arrival pressure of both 105barg and 40barg at the Gbaran CPF.
1.3.2 Process Overview
The surface facilities for the Kolo Creek Deep Field Development include a remote field manifold and
bulkline and end facilities to gather production from 7 Kolo Creek Deep wells into the Soku LGSP.
The facilities, schematically shown in Figure 1.1, include:SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 13 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Seven (7)Flowlines
Three (3) Production Headers
Three (3) Bulk Flowlines
One (1) Manifold
One (1) Pig Launcher
One (1) Bulk line
One (1) Pig Receiver
One (1) Slugcatcher Vessel
Gross Liquid to the Soku LGSP Condensate Stabilization system
Wet Gas to the Soku LGSP gas treatment system for export to NLNG.
Notes1. There are 3 Production Headers2. Each Production Header has 2-3 flowlines from F1 & F2 wells3. Each Production Header has a secondary flowline to the Manifold
Figure 1.1– Kolo Creek Deep Process Flow Scheme
The base case production forecast is shown in Figure 2.1. The facility has been designed for a gross
liquids export of 46,000 bpd (24,000 stbpd condensate) and gas export of 400 MMscfd (Ref. 24).
The total power requirement for the Kolo Creek RFM (Phase 1 and K2S) is supplied from the two (2)
new replacement gas engine power generators at the manifold. These gas engine generators are
rated at 280 KW each. The primary fuel gas source is the tee-off fuel gas line (via the Kolo Creek
Scrubber) from the Gbaran CPF to BYSEB Fuel gas supply line.
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 14 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
1.4 Link to other Asset plans
This plan is aligned with the following asset plans and processes with the interdependencies
illustrated in Figure 1.2 below:
Asset Reference Plan (input/output);
Medium and long-term Integrated Activity Plan (Input);
HSE Plan (output);
Business Plan (output),
Operating philosophy (input/output)
GHG/EMPMaster Plan
OperatingPhilosophy
IAP (MT,LT)
ARP
HSE Plan
Business Plan
GHG/EMPMaster Plan
OperatingPhilosophy
IAP (MT,LT)
ARP
HSE Plan
Business Plan
GHG/EMPMaster Plan
OperatingPhilosophy
IAP (MT,LT)
ARP
HSE Plan
Business Plan
Figure 1-2: Relationship between GHG/EMP Plan and existing Business Processes
1.5 Regulatory framework
Nigerian Law does not directly regulate greenhouse gas emissions or energy efficiency. However,
there are laws governing the flaring of gas, which remains the largest source of greenhouse gas
emissions in SPDC’s operations. There have been penalties in place since the early 1990s for the
flaring of gas. Future regulation will be far more stringent; Nigeria’s parliament is debating legislation
that will outlaw flaring with effect from the end of 2010. Shell also has a commitment to eliminate this
practice as soon as possible.
1.6 Applicable Standards, Manuals and Methodology
The following documents are related to this Energy and GHG Management Plan:
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 15 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
The Global Environmental Standards (GES).
The EP-GES (EP2005-0161-ST).
The HSE Performance, Monitoring and Reporting (PMR) standard.
The Guideline on Energy Efficiency (EP2005-0161-GL-01)
The Investment Decision Manual (IDM)
EP guidance to carbon management functional support
CO2 Projects Screening Values (PSVs)
The GHG Abatement Masterplanning methodology
1.7 Plan Update Process
This GHG/EEMP is a live document and therefore shall be updated yearly. Update shall coincide with
the business planning and capital allocation processes. Preliminary or working draft version shall be
issued prior to commencement of the business planning cycle and a final version, which will be
signed off by responsible Asset Manager, shall be issued upon regional leadership endorsement of
the business plan.
Preparation of this first issue of the document has been led directly by the Regional CO2 /Energy
Management team; in future the Asset will be responsible for updating the plan annually, in line with
the business planning cycle.
1.8 Communication of plan
In order to be effective, this plan will be communicated to stakeholders by adopting different
communication modes for different stakeholders. Simple stakeholder mapping indicates the following
as key stakeholders:
This document shall be communicated to:
SPDC Land 2 East Asset (PEL2) Manager and Leadership Team
SPDC Swamp 1 East Asset (PES1) Manager and Leadership Team
Gbaran CPF Company staff and contractor staff (involved in operations)
Soku LGSP Company staff and contractor staff (involved in operations)
Joint Venture Partners and Regulatory bodies
1.9 Governance, Accountability & Assurance
Since this plan is focusing on existing assets, the focus is on reducing GHG emission and improving
the utilisation of energy. Table 1.1 below specifies the governance of the GHG/EEMP for a producing
asset. Consequently, all the activities listed in the RACI table (Table 1.1) during the project phase
(opportunity maturation and realisation phases) shall be included in the Operations Readiness and
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 16 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Assurance (OR&A) plan, with principal accountability being either the Business Opportunity Manager
(BOM) for maturation phase or Project Manager for the realisation phase.
Activity Asset Manager
Regional CO2
Focal Point
Asset Support Engineer
Development
EngineerHSE
Regional Economics
Team
Develop and update Energy & GHG Management Plan
AccountableConsult
(Develops first issue)
Responsible Consult Consult Consult
Economic evaluation of identified opportunities
Accountable ConsultResponsible
(minor projects)
Responsible (major projects)
Inform Consult
Select opportunities for implementation Accountable Consult Responsible Consult Consult Consult
Prepare IPs / seek carbon management functional support
Consult ConsultAccountable
(minor projects)
Accountable (major projects)
Inform Inform
Develop, implement and monitor Implementation Plan
Accountable ResponsibleResponsible
(minor Projects)
Responsible (Major projects)
Consult Inform
Forecast GHG emissions and Energy consumption
Accountable ConsultResponsible
(minor Projects)
Responsible (Major projects)
Consult Inform
Emissions Target setting Accountable Responsible Responsible Inform
Responsible
Consult
Assurance Responsible Accountable Consult InformResponsi
bleInform
Table 1-1: Roles and Responsibilities for GHG and Energy Management Plan
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 17 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
2.0 baseline assessment of Greenhouse Gas Emission and energy use
This chapter describes and quantifies direct and indirect sources of GHG emissions associated with
expected production activities to be performed in this asset. It takes inventory of the energy usage
within the asset boundary limit, on how the energy demand will be satisfied and the associated
emissions. It also includes a 10 year forecast for GHG emissions. As detailed vendor equipment data
is available, the accuracy of the forecasts should be +/- 10%.
This section seeks to describe the expected operation and its performance with respect to GHG emissions and energy efficiency,
2.1 Production Forecast
The base case production forecast is tabulated in Table 2.1 and shown in Figure 2.1. See Appendix 4.1
Year 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Gas (MMsc
fd)20.51 48.45 59.16 76.07 88.33 97.95 106.32 11.66 140.44 151.64
Condensate
(stbpd)781.35
1945.22
2356.17
2964.48
3355.64
3609.16
3783.68
3942.04
3386.64
3326.31
Table 2.1: Production forecast for Abasere Field Deep wells producing to Soku LGSP
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 18 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Figure 2.1 – Abasere Field Production Forecast
This data shall be updated annually to cover for 10 years.The graphical overview of the production system limits, energy and emissions streams, are shown in
Figure 2.2. All power will be imported from Gbaran CPF.
Figure 2.2: Mass and energy balance
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 19 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Soku LGSP
Figure 2.2 – Graphical overview production, energy and emissions streams for Kolo Creek Deep
Project
2.2 Heat integration
There no heating or cooling duties on the facilities. Heat integration is therefore not possible.
2.3 Rotating equipment load list
The rotating equipment load list is shown in Table 2.2. See Appendix 4.2. The table shows the
required energy, losses and efficiencies, under normal operating conditions. Note that Mechanical
has not defined all the columns at this phase.
These are fixed drive rotating equipment for utilities; hence the Variable Speed Drives (VSD) losses
are not applicable. The pumps and compressor efficiencies are 75% and 80% respectively. There are
no opportunities to further optimise this system.
Table 2.2 – Rotating equipment load list for Kolo Creek Deep Project
2.4 Electrical load list
The electrical load list for the Abasere Field Project is presented in Appendix 4.3. This forms the
basis for the energy efficiency calculations.
2.5 Greenhouse gas emissions and intensity
The greenhouse gas emissions are summarised in Table 2.3. The direct emissions are essentially
limited to operational venting, as there is no on-site power generation or heating. The indirect
emissions from the power imported from an open cycle power plant dominate the total emissions. The
greenhouse gas emission intensity is estimated at 0.8 kg/Ton of hydrocarbon produced. The intensity
is low compared to other plants, since there is no artificial lift , no oil treatment and no gas treatment
in Kolo Creek Deep Well Development Project. See Appendix 4.4.
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 20 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Parameter Units Total
Forecast Period Years 10
Total direct emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 780
Combustion emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 0.00
Flaring emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. N/A
Venting emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 136.11
Fugitive emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 643.89
Total indirect emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 3584.12
Total emissions Tonne CO2 equiv. 4228.01
Total hydrocarbon production Tonne HC 8,857,445.0
Total direct emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0004929
Combustion emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0000
Flaring emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0000000
Venting emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0000151
Fugitive emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0000727
Total indirect emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0004046
Total emissions intensity Tonne CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.0005
Total emissions intensity kg CO2 equiv. / Tonne HC 0.49
Table 2.3 – Greenhouse gas emissions summary for Abasere Field Project
Combus-tion
emission
82.1%
Venting3.1%
Fugitive14.8%
Abasere Forecast (2022-2031) GHG Emissions Breakdown
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 21 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Figure 2.3 – Emission Point Source distribution for Abasere Field Project
2.6 Energy consumption and intensity
The energy consumption and intensity over the forecast period is shown in Table 2.4. The energy
intensity is 0.013 GJ/Tonne HC produced. This energy intensity is low because there is no direct oil
and gas treatment. However, if the power required at Gbaran CPF to treat the gas to export quality
and to stabilize the condensate to stock tank quality is taken into account, the energy intensity will
increase.
Parameter Units Total
Forecast Period Years 10
Electric power consumption over forecast period million GJ 0.53
Hydrocarbon production over forecast period million Tonne 8.85
Energy intensity GJ/Tonne of HC 0.013
Table 2.4 – Energy consumption and intensity for Abaere Field Project
2.7 Conversion Factors
The conversion factors used for the above assessments are shown in Table 2.5.
Parameter Units Value
Generated power to CO2 emissions kg CO2 equiv. / MWh 663.12
Lower heating value of gas MJ/m3(st) 37.85
Flare gas to CO2 emissions kg CO2 equiv. / m3 (st) 2.47
Vent gas to CO2 emissions kg CO2 equiv. / m3 (st) 11.49
Condensate volume to HC mass Tonne HC / bbl 0.117
Gas volume to HC mass Tonne HC / m3(st) 0.00081
Table 2.5 – Conversion factors use for Abasere Field study
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 22 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
3.0 DEMONSTRATION OF ALARP IN FEED
3.1 GHG Emissions & Energy Use ALARP Assessment
Regarding the low total emissions and energy intensities obtained from sections 2.5 and 2.6 above,
the Abasere Field Development Project can be considered ALARP with respect to GHG emissions
and energy consumption. This conclusion is largely based on the following assessment.
22.32.42.52.62.7
3.2 Abasere Key Performance Indicators
Based on the Group CO2 Benchmarking Methodology, the Abasere scores amongst the first quartile
for the key performance indicators as calculated in the result table shown below. See Attachment
5.2.
Table 3.1 – SCEI & UEEI KPIs for Kolo Creek Deep Project
The K2S SCEI and UEEI are 43% and 0.52% respectively. This simply implies that the facility emits
only 43% CO2/ton HC produced (i.e. 3,251 ton CO2 equiv./ton HC) of the site specific standard SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 23 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
emission (i.e. 7,592 ton CO2 equiv./ton HC) permissible for such facility in the Shell group. On the
other hand it shows that the facility consumes only 0.52% energy/ton HC produced permissible for
such upstream facility in the Shell group. These very low CO2 emissions and Energy Efficiency
indices further indicate that the K2S project is ALARP regarding these KPIs.
Further benchmarking against peer facilities performance in the EPG region is presented in Appendix
4.4. (Ref. 8).
3.3 Optimization of K2S GHG Emissions
The emissions sources with potential for optimisation and the measures taken to eliminate or reduce
them to ALARP within the project are given in the table below:
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 24 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Source of emissions Measures that were incorporated or were considered to reduce GHG emissions within chosen concept
Maintenance Venting
Operational Venting
Flowline/Pipeline Depressuring
Slugcatcher Relief
Shutdown/Start-up Flaring
During routine maintenance of facilities at the RFM, the flowlines and/or Manifold need to be depressurised. The flowlines and production headers are sectionalized in order to minimize the inventory of gas vented per maintenance session, This eliminates the need to depressurise entire manifold during partial maintenance session.
Implementing HIPPS rather than a relief valve system in design for over pressure protection of carbon steel facilities downstream of the FCV eliminates potential operational vent load at the RFM.
Potential emissions from flowlines/pipeline depressuring to vent at the RFM is reduced by the operational philosophy to depressurise all facilities only to Soku LGSP where it is flared instead.
Installation of PZA-HH on the Slugcatcher at Soku LGSP will reduce demand on installed relief valve. This reduces relief events and consequently reduces flaring emissions at the Soku LGSP.
After shutdown and restart-up of Kolo Creek inlet facilities at Soku LGSP, pipeline NAG stream need to be brought back to normal operating pressure of 101 barg. This may be achieved by depressuring/flaring the pipeline gas stream until the operating point is established. Failure to do so will result in surge into the plant at a rate in excess of the slugcatcher relief capacity. However, installation of FCV upstream of the Slugcatcher at Soku LGSP which controls both the NAG stream flow and pressure into the plant helps to re-pressurize the plant from potential upstream NAG pipeline MOP of circa 136 barg without requirement for excessive depressurization, relief and flaring at the Soku LGSP.
Table 3.2: Sources of emissions & Measures to reduce to ALARP.
Additional sources of emissions are fugitive emissions from piping valves and flanges hence there are no opportunities to further reduce GHG emissions at this stage.SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 25 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
3.4 Optimization of K2S Energy Consumption
The sources of energy usage with potential for optimisation and the measures that were considered and incorporated to reduce energy usage in the project are given in the table below:
Source of usage Measures that were incorporated or were considered to reduce energy usage within chosen concept
Hydrate Inhibition Pumps Hydrate Assessments indicate that there are no hydrate risks during normal operation due to very high upstream well FTHT. However, during black start up (after prolonged well shut-in), the potential for hydrate formation downstream of FCV is high. Hence, there may be need to design for higher capacity hydrate inhibition pump and higher capacity power generator.
To avoid this, FEED:- Recommends that back pressurising of flowlines from
Soku shall be the primary strategy for well start up with black start-up (and inhibition package) as back up.
- Designed a loopline from the Kolo Creek Phase I NAG Pipeline to the K2S Manifold to serve as alternative for back pressurising of flowlines during well start up.
- Designed lagging on the flowlines upstream of the FCV, besides other functions, also serve to retain much of the well FTHT within the well fluid, thereby operating outside the hydrate formation region and reducing demand on the inhibition pumps.
Corrosion Inhibition Pumps The corrosion inhibition pumps were sized on the maximum gas production per well (400 MMScfd). However, optimisation of the power requirement for these pumps was done in FEED by implementing flow logic from the pipeline’s gas meter which controls the corrosion inhibition injection line’s FCV based on calculated dosing rate per K2S production. This strategy ensures that the inhibition pumps’ power demand is proportional to production rather than on the maximum design rate.
Table 3.3: Sources of energy usage & Measures to reduce to ALARP.
The above energy consumption sources are the utility systems and are at the Kolo Creek RFM end. However, due to the high pressure (i.e. high energy) NAG fluid system under consideration, there are no requirements for pumps and compressors along the process path. Hence, there are no opportunities to further optimise energy use.
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 26 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 27 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
3.5 Assessment of GHG emissions Monitoring and Measurement in Design
Proper measurement and monitoring is critical for sound GHG emissions and Energy Management.
Table 3.4 below highlights the most significant design elements proposed for implementation to
improve process parameters necessary for GHG Emission and Energy management of the Kolo
Creek Deep project. .
Variable Design Element Comments
Vents Orifice Meter (Relief Vent Stack)
Orifice Meter (Closed Drain Vent Stack)
To record and build Kolo Creek RFM vent data.
See Attachment 5.3
Gas Engine Generators fuel gas consumption
Gas Meters Part of Vendor packages KOLS2-A-8101 A/B
To record and build Kolo Creek RFM fuel gas consumption data.
Gas Engine Power generation
Power Meters Part of Vendor packages KOLS2-A-8101 A/B
To record and build Kolo Creek RFM power generation data.
Flare gas Ultrasonic Meter (K2S Flare Sub-Header)
To record and build Kolo Creek Flare Gas data.
Table 3.4: GHG Emissions Monitoring and Measurement Design Elements
THESE PARAMETERS SHALL BE MEASURED, TOTALISED WHERE APPLICABLE AND
REPORTED THROUGH THE PAS.
3.6 Recommendations
The above assessment carried out was premised on the boundary depicted in Figure 2.2, preliminary
data available at FEED stage and assumptions in section 6.0. This boundary is based on the project
objective of filling identified ullage at the Soku LGSP in the coming years (Ref. 1). As such the impact
of the Kolo Creek NAG project on the Soku LGSP regarding GHG emission and Energy usage within
downstream processing plant is considered minimal. However for future update the following
recommendations are made:
1. A comprehensive GHG and Energy Management Plan for Soku LGSP should be
developed/updated with Kolo Creek Deep NAG facilities and production forecast integrated in
the computations.
2. Venting and flaring scenarios shall be identified, quantified and calculations updated
appropriately during detailed design.SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 28 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
3. Future updates should include recent modifications to the Soku LGSP consisting:
a. the Soku Condensate Spiking System
b. the Soku Flare Gas Reduction System
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 29 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
References
In addition to information received from the site visit, the following documents were utilized when writing this report:
1. Kolo Creek Deep Field Development to Soku Project (BfD), GBU-DMG-GEN-AA7704-0001.2. GUIOGP Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Management Plan - GBU-DMG-GEN-F08-
000053. EP Global Environmental Standards, EP2005-0161-ST.4. Identify, Assess, Select, Define and Execute - GHG and Energy Management Plan Template -
EP2005-0161-TO-805. Group Performance, Monitoring and Reporting Manual (PMR), Group HSE.6. API Compendium of Methodologies for GHG Emissions estimation, API.7. CAPP Guide on Calculating Greenhouse Gas Emissions, CAPP.8. CO2 Baseline Benchmarking Review, report GS. 08.50.988, July 2008.9. EP CO2 Emissions Benchmarking Study Report September 200710. Cost Premises for Surface Facilities (for BP09 Programme) SPDC-2009-04-0000007211. Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions, December 2003.12. Calculation tool for Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion, WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol,
July 2005. 13. Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil and Gas Industry, API
August 2009.14. K2S Heat & Mass Balance Sheet - K2S-TPEF-GEN-PX1216-00001-00015. K2S Relief Blowdown and Flaring Philosophy (Addendum) - K2S-TPEF-GEN-PX5534-00002-
00016. K2S Process Flow Scheme - K2S-TPEF-GEN-PX2366-00001-00117. K2S NAG Flowline HIPPS Header (Typical) - K2S-TPEF-KOLS2-PX2365-10002-00118. K2S NAG Fuel Gas Scrubber Tie-In - K2S-TPEF-KOLS1-PX2365-69001-001 19. K2S NAG Manifold Vent Stacks Tie-In - K2S-TPEF-KOLS1-PX2365-66001-00120. K2S NAG Bulkline Pig Launcher - K2S-TPEF-KOLS2-PX2365-10011-00121. K2S Soku LGSP Kolo Creek NAG Pig Receiver - K2S-TPEF-SOKG1-PX2365-10012-00122. K2S SOKU LGSP Kolo Creek NAG Pig Slugcatcher - K2S-TPEF-SOKG1-PX2365-11001-00123. K2S Electrical Load Schedule - K2S-TPEF-KOLS2-EA4329-00001-00024. K2S Pipeline Hydraulic Study Report - K2S-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 30 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
4.0 Appendices
4.1 K2S Wells Production Forecast
4.2 Mechanical Rotating equipment load list
4.3 K2S Electrical Load List
SSG-TPEF-GEN-PX8380-00001-000 R01 SSAGS GHG & EE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 31 of 34
This document is controlled electronically and is uncontrolled when printed
Projects & TechnologySCiN Engineering Design Office
Page 32 of 34RestrictedECCN: EAR 99 DeminimusThis document is made available subject to the condition that the recipient will neither use nor disclose the contents except as agreed in writing with the copyright owner. Copyright is vested in Shell International Petroleum Co. Ltd. © All rights reserved.Neither the whole nor any part of this document may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, reprographic, recording or otherwise) without the prior written consent of the copyright owner.
Greenhouse Gas and Energy Efficiency Report GBU3A-SEDO-ABAF1-PX3363-
00001 R02
5.0 ATTACHMENT
5.1 K2S GHG Emission & EE Baseline Calculation (9 pages)
5.2 K2S GHG Emission & EE KPIs Calculator (2 pages)
5.3 PMT Decision on Orifice Meters on Vent Stack.
Page 33 of 34Doc. no.: GBU3A-SEDO-ABAF1-PX3363-00001
The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document.
Greenhouse Gas and Energy Efficiency Report GBU3A-SEDO-ABAF1-PX3363-
00001 R02
Page 34 of 34Doc. no.: GBU3A-SEDO-ABAF1-PX3363-00001
The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document.